Amnesty for what?

Rilind Latifi, a Kosovar graduate of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, explains:

The Kosovo parliament last week rejected a draft law on amnesty required as a result of the agreement reached on April 19 between the prime-ministers Hashim Thaçi and Ivica Dačić.  The law is intended to facilitate integration of the Serbs in the north.  It offers them protection from legal action due to their resistance to Kosovo’s constitutional order since the 2008 declaration of independence, after which they burned customs points and erected multiple barricades blocking free movement (including for the EU rule of law mission, NATO’s KFOR, and the Kosovo police).  Serbia views the amnesty law as a tradeoff and precondition dismantling Belgrade’s governing structures in the north.

However, the initial draft of the law also covered deeds and offenses unrelated to the disobedience of the Serbs in the North.  Article 3 foresaw an exemption for offenses that included murder committed in a state of mental distress, light bodily harm, coercion, threat, theft, defamation, etc.  Article 5 was more targeted toward the Serbs in the north, granting full amnesty for criminal offenses of armed rebellion, endangerment of territorial integrity and constitutional order, smuggling of goods, and tax evasion (among others).

Civil society and parts of the opposition, mainly Vetevendosje! (Self-determination), opposed the draft law and campaigned for its rejection in parliament. The indiscriminate approach to including criminal offenses unrelated to Serbs’ behavior was seen as a way to exculpate corrupt politicians and their strongmen – even those that had not been convicted yet.  A large number of civil society organizations wrote an open letter to the EU and Embassies of the US, UK, France, Germany, and Italy cautioning against the draft law:

If the current draft Law on Amnesty is enacted, the pardon provisions will seriously hamper the entire work on fighting organized crime, corruption and financial crime…in short the entire investment for a just Kosovo in the last 14 years…If enacted…[it] will present the final blow to hard work of thousands of Kosovars and international partners in Kosovo who have been working on a state based on rule of law.

On July 4, the draft law received only 70 votes in favor, falling short of the necessary 80 votes (two thirds of the parliament). Vetevendosje!, two members from the ruling party, and a few other deputies voted against the draft law.

This led the Government to remove Article 3 and add a clause saying that offenses resulting in murder or bodily harm will not be subject to amnesty. The draft law is expected to be brought to the parliament for another reading and vote tomorrow.  The Government is under immense pressure from both the EU and the US to pass the law as soon as possible since it is seen as a key building block for implementing the agreement. The US Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip Reeker is calling for speedy adoption of the law.  The European Union’s Catherine Ashton is visiting Belgrade and Pristina this week.  She will call for swift passage of the law.

Civil society organizations have started a petition against the draft law on amnesty, signed so far by 3000 people. Ten thousand signatures are needed to send the petition to the president. Despite the removal of Article 3, many in civil society insist that the new draft law has undergone insufficient changes and is still ambiguous with regards to criminal offenses unrelated to the Serbs in the north.

It is worrisome that the international community insists on quick adoption of the law without letting public debate and discussion run its course. Citizens have serious concerns about the consequences of this law and more time is needed to dissect – and modify – all of its articles. Although the EU and the US claim that the rule of law is imperative for Kosovo, it seems that at times short-term stability goals take precedence over the need to build a functioning judiciary and democratic political system.

Although the law will most likely pass this week, civil society has scored a small victory in pushing the government to review its initial proposal and take into consideration well-founded criticism.