DSS: Deal with EU legally invalid

Signing the SAA will bring economic benefits to Serbia for the next few years and when the time comes to actually join the EU it should be left up to the Serbian people to decide in a nationwide referendum if recognition of Kosovo becomes a requirement for EU entry.A simple yes or no vote by the people of Serbia with majority rule should determine this once and for all but this will not be the decisive issue for many years to come.Kostunica is an honorable man and while he himself has a right to vote no it really should be up to every Serb to vote when the time comes.The refernedum would simply ask the Serbian people 1.Serbia EU member/recognize Kosovo independence.2.Serbia non-EU member and never recognize Kosovo independence.Is everybody in agreement on this?

I guess DSS & SRS have to sacrifice something to join the SPS. And from this point of view I prefer the position expressed by Nikolic in his interview to Der Spiegel. He said that he saw no problems with SAA ratification because it will never be ratified by the EU.

Besides nobody said that SAA should be ratified by Serbia first. So the coalition may quite ratify the Agreement to become automatically valid only after it is ratified by all EU members. Then the ball will be on the EU side being impotent of working out a joint position over any problem. Then the Serbs may judje how eager the EU members are to see them inside the Union.

Also we have to remember under what conditions Holland and Belgium have withdrew their objections. So even the SPS will not dare to go on betraying Serbs to the "Tribunal".

Dave, it is not the DSS that are being vague it is the b92. This is not the b92's fault though because every news agency must rush to report the latest news and the details are long and boring.

What is missing here is some context.

From what I have read about the DSS's objection in this article, and other articles, is that the DSS is raising the legal principle of "Consensus Ad Idem"
Simply put (attack my vagueness, but brevity is a virtue that I desire). In order for a contract to be legally binding their must be a meeting of the minds between all of the parties and all parties (in this case, the EU and its members and Serbia) have to have an identical understanding of the terms of the contract. If a party knowingly enters a contract and pretends not to know the terms, this is referred to as Wilful Blindness or Contrived Ignorance. If it is evident that a party is wilfully blind, such a party can not later argue that it did not understand the terms of the contract.
What the EU and the DS have left vague is simply which Serbia is signing onto to enjoy the benefits of the SAA- what I mean by this is If some of the EU members believe a Serbia without Kosovo is signing the SAA, and the Serbian constitutional position is that Kosovo is part of Serbia there is a great confusion and consensus ad Idem is not possible until there are clarifications or changes of position that all parties agree to. Forging ahead and knowing that clarifications are missing is wilful blindness.

Some B92 readers pointed out recently that the SRS requirement that the EU clarifies its position on Serbian borders precipitated the collapse of the previous parliament, now unless this is done Serbia can not go forward unless its leadership renounces Kosovo, or the EU begins to honour Serbia's UN recognised borders. Neither of these things are likely to happen for the sake of the SAA.
It is also interesting to note, that if the Serbian parliament ratifies the agreement without consensus ad idem, they will do so knowingly and European countries who are trying to steal Kosovo can argue (reasonably) that this is Serbia's admission of an independent Kosovo because Serbia is knowingly entering into contracts without defending its claim over our Kosovo. There argument will be based on what they view as Serbia’s contrived ignorance and Kosovo’s unopposed adverse possession. How would our legal experts argue this European argument?
It was naive to think that Europe’s little bribes didn't come with strings.

We need to become a Russian province. It is the only way to preserve our borders, including KOSMET.

ah, yes DSS "legal experts" How will Serbia's citizens survive without their wisdom to protect them? We will soon find out.

why would you want Serbia to be a puppet state of Russia, if Russia really cared they wouldn't be buying "NIS" for dirt cheap and taking advantage of Serbia.

NIS should be sold for the highest price and for the funds to be put back into Serbia and the Serb people!

Can the DSS be any more vague? Complaining about supposed loopholes that impair the integrity of the agreement yet not providing a single example of what they are.

"According to the Vienna Convention, at the moment of ratification in the Serbian parliament, the contractual parties should absolutely agree about the text of the agreement. Furthermore, in order for the SAA to be ratified, the text of the agreement should fully comply with the Serbian Constitution."

This section above is utter fluff as essentially all their saying here is that the DSS is not in agreement with the wording in some fashion which is really meaningless without a specific objection. Which they probably are reluctant to give because that objection is still centered around the definition of what constitutes the state of Serbia that is does Serbia include Kosovo or not that's what this entire complaint by the DSS is about. The DSS wants the EU to specify what constitutes Serbia by territorial boundaries which the EU can not and will not be able to do as its members do not agree which is why they did not specify Serbia's territorial boundaries so that Serbia might be able to enter the EU before the end of the next decade (just look at Macedonia/FYRM & Greece, Cyprus & Turkey).

On June 12th 2008, the fate of nearly 500 million people will be decided by a country whose population totals only 4.2 million. The people of the Republic Of Ireland will be the only `citizens` of the European Union given the opportunity to have their say on what is potentially the most fundamental piece of legislation in the history of the `Old Continent`. All the other member states have simply ignored the wishes of their people and left ratification to be `rubber stamped` by their respective parliaments. However, it is necessary for all twenty seven member states to complete ratification before the `Treaty` becomes legally binding.

So, if the Irish vote is `NO` then the treaty will not be able to be implemented, at least for the present. But, if the Irish people swallow the massive `Pro Treaty` propaganda and vote `Yes`, then the fate of, and inevitable demise of the Nation States of Europe will be sealed. There will be no more serious obstacles left to Federalisation. The long dreamed of (by the Federalists that is) United States Of Europe will become a reality.

By the time €U decides to swallow Serbia as well, the intetions of this neo-liberal Frankensteins monster will be obvious even to the few remaining Sorosian dreamers.

So dream on, or go to your utopia now...

Marko,
I was very impressed with your legal knowledge and argument. However, I think it is an opinion that also manipulizes the facts inorder to give a biased version of the interpretation of facts.
In other words like the "DSS legal experts" you twist the law to validate your opinion.

Impressed:

You have challenged my motive, but not my argument,and that is both impresive and manipulative.

I would like to augment my argument a bit today with a real world example.

A politician that I am very much impressed with is the D.S.'s Vuk Jeremic (even though I think he is a member of the wrong party).

When he walks out on conferences (where the UDI authorities are attending as legitimate government representatives) he is not just doing so to be on television. He is doing it for the same reason that the head of the railway is insisting on property rights and other political figures are insisting on maintaining Kosovo's debt payments.

This reason is not to spite Albanians, it is to maintain without ambiguity Serbia's claim on Kosovo.

If we allow Serbia's claims on Kosovo to become in any way ambiguous, we will weaken our legal claim. In this sad time in Serbia's history, this legal claim is all we have and is therefore our best tool in preserving our nation’s right to exist.

At some point Western Europe will signal that it will be in the UDI leadership’s best interest to begin fresh negotiations with Belgrade. Because of western recognitions (which will never include the majority of the UN membership) the UDI leadership will come back to the table in a position of strength and Belgrade must be prepared with a very clear position.

Serbia needs to be a nation of laws more than Serbia needs the insincere friendship of western European powers.

On the contrary, I believe that in order to prosper, Serbia should become an unincorporated territory, an associateed free state of the US like Puerto Rico or a British colony, like Rhodesia. There might be yet another solution which can save us: become a new Israeli occupied Palestine and we'll see a raise of our standards of living right away! Russia has done no good and will be only bad to us.

ah, yes DSS "legal experts" How will Serbia's citizens survive without their wisdom to protect them? We will soon find out.

Signing the SAA will bring economic benefits to Serbia for the next few years and when the time comes to actually join the EU it should be left up to the Serbian people to decide in a nationwide referendum if recognition of Kosovo becomes a requirement for EU entry.A simple yes or no vote by the people of Serbia with majority rule should determine this once and for all but this will not be the decisive issue for many years to come.Kostunica is an honorable man and while he himself has a right to vote no it really should be up to every Serb to vote when the time comes.The refernedum would simply ask the Serbian people 1.Serbia EU member/recognize Kosovo independence.2.Serbia non-EU member and never recognize Kosovo independence.Is everybody in agreement on this?

Can the DSS be any more vague? Complaining about supposed loopholes that impair the integrity of the agreement yet not providing a single example of what they are.

"According to the Vienna Convention, at the moment of ratification in the Serbian parliament, the contractual parties should absolutely agree about the text of the agreement. Furthermore, in order for the SAA to be ratified, the text of the agreement should fully comply with the Serbian Constitution."

This section above is utter fluff as essentially all their saying here is that the DSS is not in agreement with the wording in some fashion which is really meaningless without a specific objection. Which they probably are reluctant to give because that objection is still centered around the definition of what constitutes the state of Serbia that is does Serbia include Kosovo or not that's what this entire complaint by the DSS is about. The DSS wants the EU to specify what constitutes Serbia by territorial boundaries which the EU can not and will not be able to do as its members do not agree which is why they did not specify Serbia's territorial boundaries so that Serbia might be able to enter the EU before the end of the next decade (just look at Macedonia/FYRM & Greece, Cyprus & Turkey).

why would you want Serbia to be a puppet state of Russia, if Russia really cared they wouldn't be buying "NIS" for dirt cheap and taking advantage of Serbia.

NIS should be sold for the highest price and for the funds to be put back into Serbia and the Serb people!

We need to become a Russian province. It is the only way to preserve our borders, including KOSMET.

Dave, it is not the DSS that are being vague it is the b92. This is not the b92's fault though because every news agency must rush to report the latest news and the details are long and boring.

What is missing here is some context.

From what I have read about the DSS's objection in this article, and other articles, is that the DSS is raising the legal principle of "Consensus Ad Idem"
Simply put (attack my vagueness, but brevity is a virtue that I desire). In order for a contract to be legally binding their must be a meeting of the minds between all of the parties and all parties (in this case, the EU and its members and Serbia) have to have an identical understanding of the terms of the contract. If a party knowingly enters a contract and pretends not to know the terms, this is referred to as Wilful Blindness or Contrived Ignorance. If it is evident that a party is wilfully blind, such a party can not later argue that it did not understand the terms of the contract.
What the EU and the DS have left vague is simply which Serbia is signing onto to enjoy the benefits of the SAA- what I mean by this is If some of the EU members believe a Serbia without Kosovo is signing the SAA, and the Serbian constitutional position is that Kosovo is part of Serbia there is a great confusion and consensus ad Idem is not possible until there are clarifications or changes of position that all parties agree to. Forging ahead and knowing that clarifications are missing is wilful blindness.

Some B92 readers pointed out recently that the SRS requirement that the EU clarifies its position on Serbian borders precipitated the collapse of the previous parliament, now unless this is done Serbia can not go forward unless its leadership renounces Kosovo, or the EU begins to honour Serbia's UN recognised borders. Neither of these things are likely to happen for the sake of the SAA.
It is also interesting to note, that if the Serbian parliament ratifies the agreement without consensus ad idem, they will do so knowingly and European countries who are trying to steal Kosovo can argue (reasonably) that this is Serbia's admission of an independent Kosovo because Serbia is knowingly entering into contracts without defending its claim over our Kosovo. There argument will be based on what they view as Serbia’s contrived ignorance and Kosovo’s unopposed adverse possession. How would our legal experts argue this European argument?
It was naive to think that Europe’s little bribes didn't come with strings.

On June 12th 2008, the fate of nearly 500 million people will be decided by a country whose population totals only 4.2 million. The people of the Republic Of Ireland will be the only `citizens` of the European Union given the opportunity to have their say on what is potentially the most fundamental piece of legislation in the history of the `Old Continent`. All the other member states have simply ignored the wishes of their people and left ratification to be `rubber stamped` by their respective parliaments. However, it is necessary for all twenty seven member states to complete ratification before the `Treaty` becomes legally binding.

So, if the Irish vote is `NO` then the treaty will not be able to be implemented, at least for the present. But, if the Irish people swallow the massive `Pro Treaty` propaganda and vote `Yes`, then the fate of, and inevitable demise of the Nation States of Europe will be sealed. There will be no more serious obstacles left to Federalisation. The long dreamed of (by the Federalists that is) United States Of Europe will become a reality.

By the time €U decides to swallow Serbia as well, the intetions of this neo-liberal Frankensteins monster will be obvious even to the few remaining Sorosian dreamers.

So dream on, or go to your utopia now...

I guess DSS & SRS have to sacrifice something to join the SPS. And from this point of view I prefer the position expressed by Nikolic in his interview to Der Spiegel. He said that he saw no problems with SAA ratification because it will never be ratified by the EU.

Besides nobody said that SAA should be ratified by Serbia first. So the coalition may quite ratify the Agreement to become automatically valid only after it is ratified by all EU members. Then the ball will be on the EU side being impotent of working out a joint position over any problem. Then the Serbs may judje how eager the EU members are to see them inside the Union.

Also we have to remember under what conditions Holland and Belgium have withdrew their objections. So even the SPS will not dare to go on betraying Serbs to the "Tribunal".

On the contrary, I believe that in order to prosper, Serbia should become an unincorporated territory, an associateed free state of the US like Puerto Rico or a British colony, like Rhodesia. There might be yet another solution which can save us: become a new Israeli occupied Palestine and we'll see a raise of our standards of living right away! Russia has done no good and will be only bad to us.

Marko,
I was very impressed with your legal knowledge and argument. However, I think it is an opinion that also manipulizes the facts inorder to give a biased version of the interpretation of facts.
In other words like the "DSS legal experts" you twist the law to validate your opinion.

Impressed:

You have challenged my motive, but not my argument,and that is both impresive and manipulative.

I would like to augment my argument a bit today with a real world example.

A politician that I am very much impressed with is the D.S.'s Vuk Jeremic (even though I think he is a member of the wrong party).

When he walks out on conferences (where the UDI authorities are attending as legitimate government representatives) he is not just doing so to be on television. He is doing it for the same reason that the head of the railway is insisting on property rights and other political figures are insisting on maintaining Kosovo's debt payments.

This reason is not to spite Albanians, it is to maintain without ambiguity Serbia's claim on Kosovo.

If we allow Serbia's claims on Kosovo to become in any way ambiguous, we will weaken our legal claim. In this sad time in Serbia's history, this legal claim is all we have and is therefore our best tool in preserving our nation’s right to exist.

At some point Western Europe will signal that it will be in the UDI leadership’s best interest to begin fresh negotiations with Belgrade. Because of western recognitions (which will never include the majority of the UN membership) the UDI leadership will come back to the table in a position of strength and Belgrade must be prepared with a very clear position.

Serbia needs to be a nation of laws more than Serbia needs the insincere friendship of western European powers.