„Sandzak and European Prospects“
Press conference of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia 

On July 16, 2010 the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia held a  press conference that rounded off the project “Grassroots Dialogues in Sandzak: Helping to Overcome Divides and Articulate the Region’s True Interests” realized in 2009-2010 with the assistance of the Delegation of the European Union – EIDHR. The output of the project’s last activity – a rounding off conference in Novi Pazar - the publication titled “Sandzak and European Prospects” was launched on the occasion.

The Helsinki Committee has been monitoring the situation of human rights in Sandzak for years. Recent developments in and about Sandzak and each and every regime’s discriminatory attitude towards the Bosniak minority indicate that the state policy for this part of Serbia has hardly changed in any substantial way. Sonja Biserko, chairwoman of the Helsinki Committee, Pavel Domonji, head of the organization’s Novi Sad branch, and Srdjan Barisic, sociologist of religion, addressed the press about the position of the Bosniak minority community, governmental minority policy and the burning issues related to the establishment of the Bosniak National Council. Apart from a number of reporters (Beta News Agency, Tanjug, Danas, B92, Vecernje Novosti, Radio Free Europe, etc.) representative of both non-governmental and governmental sector – Marko Karadzic, state secretary at the Ministry of Human and Minority Rights, and Petar Antic, deputy minister for human and minority rights, attended the press conference.

According to Sonja Biserko, the Islamic community and Bosniaks in Serbia have been looking forward for long for the official Belgrade’s more constructive policy. The Sandzak question is among the problems illustrative of the state’s incapability to solve domestic problems – and, in this particular case, to settle minority-related problems and the issue of regionalization.

“Because of the persisting dilemma about the type of state we want to live in and because of the regime’s inadequate EU oriented policy, a course that is being questioned all the time, Serbia has found itself torn between two concepts: the concept of an ethnic state and the value system suited to contemporary European civilization,” she said. 

The political elite’s attitude towards Sandzak deprives the region of long-term prospects, she takes. “We are all aware that exclusion of minority communities, particularly those that are territorially concentrated, from Serbia’s overall political, economic and cultural life practically resulted in segregation. The Sandzak question was internationalized because of the state’s disinterestedness or inability to solve it,” says Biserko.

According to her, the authorities must acknowledge mufti Muamer Zukorlic and the Islamic Community as the reality rather than create a climate of “radicalization” of the Bosniak minority just to prevent its constitution. “Like all other ‘new’ minorities in Serbia, the Bosniak minority did not have an adequate infrastructure. Hence, it was much easier to manipulate it and prevent it from getting constituted,” she said. 

Pavel Domonji addressed the recent elections for minority councils and the above-mentioned manipulation. “All minorities, Bosniaks especially, are upset by the arbitrariness of governmental bodies. When the Law on National Councils was adopted hardly any official failed to express his pleasure with the fact that this act was passed at long last, and all of them were praising Serbia as a regional leader of minority rights. From today’s angle, all they said was nothing but empty words,” said Domonji.

As Domonji put it, the effects of new, stricter rules for the constitution of the Bosniak Minority Council were twofold. “First, by introducing them /the rules/ the authorities put across a message that all minorities in Serbia are not bound by same rules. Second, the Bosniaks supporting Mr. Zukorlic were given the opportunity to react strongly, accuse the Ministry of discrimination and demand Minister Ciplic’s resignation.  In other words, eager to please his coalition partners Minister Ciplic only deepened the conflict in Sandzak,” he said.

“The Serbian government was turning a blind eye to Sandzak’s economic situation and this situation was certainly not playing into the hands of its coalition partners, on the contrary,” said Domonji and added, “Actually, more and more Bosniaks are now looking upon Mr. Zukorlic who, for his part, does all in his might to discredit his political opponents in Sandzak by accusing them of servility to Belgrade or favoring particularistic interests over the interests of Sandzak.”

 “As it seems, the Ministry is at lost what to do next to untangle this knot. They said first the /Bosniak/ National Council would be dismissed and new elections called. Then they said the deadline for the Council’s constitution would be extended so as reach some kind of agreement. Obviously, the Ministry would not like to have to cope with parallel institutions, with to national councils that would be permanently denying each other. Speaking of new elections, I suppose Mr. Zukorlic’s Bosniak Cultural Community and the council the Ministry would not recognize are not exactly eager to have them and would, therefore, appeal to Bosniaks to boycott them.”

And yet, as Domonji put it, the Ministry’s attitude – which is surely unacceptable – cannot justify “strong rhetoric” used by Mr. Zukorlic and his circle. “Not long ago, they called Minister Ciplic “a white-collar Tchetnik in silken gloves” pursuing the policy of genocide against Bosniaks in Sandzak. You can reprimand Mr. Ciplic for making some discriminatory decisions, you can accuse him of legal and political violence, but you cannot, and that’s an absurdity, accuse him of genocide. One should refrain from such harsh allegations.”

Srdjan Barisic reminded of some developments indicative of the state’s attitude towards Muslims in Serbia. “Bajrakli Mosque was torched in March 2004; in June 2006, a group of Wehabits interrupted a concert by ‘Balkanica’ band in Novi Pazar; people were shooting each other outside Arab Mosque in November 2006; in 2007,  the police tracked down Wehabits’ camp; the police and Wehabits were engaged in an armed conflict in the village of Donja Trnava in April 2007; several policemen in full gear and boots stormed in the main mosque in Sjenica and assaulted to imams in October 2007; the police assaulted believers and imams in Tutin in March 2008; at the beginning of school years 2009 and 2010 the selection and recruitment of religious instructors in elementary schools in Tutin and Sjenica turned to be highly problematic; we had people wounded in Novi Pazar in February 2009; then there was a fist fight in the religious facility in Novi Sad in April 2009; in May 2009 the President of the Assembly of Islamic Community of Sandzak was wounded in Sjenica; and, in May 2009, the authorities banned a public meeting in Tutin.”

Judging by recent developments, said Barisic, the state has underestimated Zukorlic’s influence in Sandzak: in the earlier period, it used to interfere into Sandzak affairs through the Ministry of Religions and the Ministry of Education, and now it resorts to the Ministry of Human and Minority Rights. “Belgrade must listen to the messages coming now from Sandzak with all seriousness,” says Barisic, adding, “Zukorlic’s present harsh rhetoric is a logical outcome of the unyielding policy Belgrade has been pursuing for two years. The ongoing developments in Sandzak call for utmost attention. In my view, it is high time for Belgrade to come to its senses and realize that the developments over there are adverse both to the Islamic community and to all citizens of Serbia.” 

Addressing the press on behalf of his Ministry, Petar Antic, deputy minister of human and minority rights, said, “Such a stance /about the Ministry’s arbitrariness/ stem from insufficient information. The rules for the constitutive assembly of the Bosniak minority were not different from those for other minority communities. The rules were the same for everyone – the only difference was in the provision inserted in the case of the Bosniak minority but binding for all as well. And that provision derived from the Constitution. Namely, to make things clear, the provision stipulated verification of two thirds of mandates. It applied to other minority councils too.” 

To illustrate his point, Antic compared the provision with the same rule, contained in the Article 101 of the Constitution, applicable to the People’s Assembly of the Republic of Serbia the constitution of which necessitates two thirds of MP votes. “We have resorted to the same constitutional provision given that a minority national council is the highest representative body of a minority community,” he explained.

Antic denied that the rule had been changed from a simple majority to a two third majority overnight. “The rules, taken as a whole, give no mention to the issue. Therefore, we used a constitutional provision,” he said.

A provisional body will be firstly formed and then new elections called unless we reach an agreement on the matter, he added.

Participants in the conference commented that the elections for a minority council could not be compared with the parliamentary elections – for, unlike minority councils the parliament is a legislative body. Be it as it may, the change in the rules for the Bosniak minority should have been made in the case of other minorities as well, said some. 

Retorting to Antic, State Secretary Marko Karadzic said that despite the fact that he worked for the same Ministry he could not accept the explanation about “changing the rules in the midst of a game.” 

“I, who am fully involved in the matter, hardly understand what you are trying to say.  Then how could you expect people to understand you? How could you expect Bosniaks to understand what you’ve changed when you have not provided them a proper explanation?” said Karadzic.