FM: No link between ICJ decision, Mladić

Kosova-USA: "is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not."

Actually it is. Firstly Kosovo was a UN international protectorate when it declared independence; secondly it goes against the agreed UN Resolution 1244; and thirdly they abide by international law and UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.

....UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.
(kate, 29 March 2010 14:19)

"no threat from the sovereign state" huh? The international community went to war with Serbia over pancakes?

This is politics at its best. Two weeks ago when judge Shi Jiuyong announced his retirement, the Serbian government hoped the decision would come later because(judge Shi Jiuyong's retirement, and one vote less in favor of Serbia)could affect the outcome. Now, Mr. Jeremic says that delaying the decision may lead to arm twisting, which is harmful for Serbia. I think playing politics at the expense of people living in the region is unethical and can only lead to further tension between Kosovo and Serbia.

The minister added that he does not expect the ICJ's opinion to be in favor of the Kosovo Albanian authorities, assessing that, should this happen, "no international border will ever be secure".

There is no ifs& buts about it,that theadvisory opion will be in favor of Kosova/o and/or no opion at all on this matter, since the court can easaly say that;is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not.

"...He also said that there are announcements of ICJ delaying the decision, and that this is not good news..."

>>> Would be nice to hear bit more specified on this: who was precisely the source for example, to whom information was given and what was the given reason for possible delay.

"is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not."
Kosovo-USA

Oh please! Do you know what this world would look like if anyone could do as they please? It would be chaos. Just as Kosovo is today. Some countries recognized, most countries didn't. Kosovo today has no UN, no peace, NATO guarding churches and protecting people. That is what the illegal Kosovo UDI has ment so far. And you are saying that there shouldn't be any laws to follow? This certainly fits into the albanian agenda. Have loads of children, take over a territory and declare independence without interference from the outside world. Albanians come from a lawless state, Albania.

"..."no threat from the sovereign state" huh? The international community went to war with Serbia over pancakes?
(BalkanUpdate, 29 March 2010 16:17) ..."


>>> To correct your non-updated impreciseness: Nato is certainly not considered neither is representing "The international community".

BalkanUpdate: "no threat from the sovereign state" huh? The international community went to war with Serbia over pancakes?"

The war had ended almost 10 years earlier and a resolution had been drawn up with the UN. There was a new govt in Belgrade and Kosovo was an international protecorate at the time of the UDI. So no, there was no threat.

There is no ifs& buts about it,that theadvisory opion will be in favor of Kosova/o and/or no opion at all on this matter, since the court can easaly say that;is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not.
(Kosova-USA)
-
It is in their right. Considering that your delcaration was in fact illegal, a breach of the legal code 1244. Do you need to be continuously reminded??

RKA - As I am sure you know, 1244 is still valid and is the basis upon which the UN and subsequently EU operates in Kosovo.

...UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.
(kate, 29 March 2010 14:19)

Kate,

you just blessed the Declaration of Independence of Kosova.

Uran:
> Two weeks ago when judge Shi Jiuyong announced his retirement, the Serbian government hoped the decision would come later because(judge Shi Jiuyong's retirement, and one vote less in favor of Serbia)could affect the outcome.

Well... no.

"Seats on the ICJ are rigidly, albeit informally, allocated in two ways. First, each of the five permanent members of the Security Council has (unofficially) a permanent seat...." http://ilreports.blogspot.com/2008/08/icj-nominations-of-candidates-for.html

China is one of the 5, so a retiring chinese judge will be replaced by a... chinese judge.

So either a ruling will be handed down before the resignation (28th May) or after the 'election' of a successor (29th June).

If the latter is the case, then one could reasonably expect that proceedings would be further delayed while the new judge gets up to speed (which might be the true source behind the speculation of some elements of the media as noted above), although IMO, November is a bit far-fetched.

More likely to be before the end of May.

Oh please! Do you know what this world would look like if anyone could do as they please? It would be chaos. (Mikael C, 29 March 2010 15:42) Are you talking about all the chaos destruction murder Serbia and Serbs caused in Ex Yugo. Lets not forget the horrendous state that Republic of Bosnia is in that Srpska entity did to the people when it wanted. Which are still suffering because of the total Srpska Serbs Belgrade violence injustice imposed on Bosnia.

Firstly Kosovo was a UN international protectorate when it declared independence; secondly it goes against the agreed UN Resolution 1244; and thirdly they abide by international law and UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.
(kate, 29 March 2010 14:19)

Even if it was a UN international protectorate, the leaders of Kosovo who declared independence were elected by Kosovo’s citizens and therefore they represented the majority of the population living in kosovo. Whether 1244 does not allow for declaration of independence is up for a debate (hence the ICJ opinion) but in my personal opinion it does not prohibit the declaration. And thirdly, I am surprised that out of all the people you Kate are saying that ‘…they are under no threat from the sovereign state’? Well, recent history shows us the opposite. The removal of autonomy by Milosevic and then the state-run ethnic cleansing and deportation in 1998-1999 are clear evidence that the sovereign state [Serbia] did threaten Kosovo and especially the Albanian population in Kosovo.
You don’t have to believe what I say, just follow the link:
http://www.icty.org/sid/10070

As i have said many times, the ICJ will NEVER rule in favor of serbia. now the blgd regime is playing the game of saying: the icj will not rule in favor of kosova. please! it was serbia who brought the suit, and it is their's to lose.

and regardless of outcome, there is no return to colonial status. independence is a done deal and anything else is just denial. being related to serbia is simply a nationalist pipe-dream.

meanwhile no one, so far, has mentioned part 2 of the article: Mladic. who continues to be coddled and protected by these "democratic" authorities. the appropriate pressure needs to be brought to bear, and he needs to be in the Hague, pronto. end of story. no more lies and excuses.

thank you.

roberto
michigame

Could there be a link with a delayed ruling to November and elections in Bosnia(October)? Fear of Dodik utilizing the ruling?

"...You don’t have to believe what I say, just follow the link:
[link]
(blue and gold, 29 March 2010 18:32) ..."


>>> Among the rest I would like to point to you that for anyone using clear analitic mind that Hague "so called court" can be anything else but independent justice instance.
Instead it is highly politicized, morally compromised or better simply called, Nato court.
So adding of your "link" in the sense of any argumentation is irrelevant.

What Jeremic is trying to say...there are no connectins between anything that goes against Serbia's interest. For example..."No connection between Serbia's desire to join EU and recognising Kosovo/a's independence". No connection between Serbi becoming member EU and the Serbian right to block the entry of Kosovo/a in EU....no connection between Kosovo/a partecipation in international meetings and and Serbia's refusal to partacipate in such meeting without Kosovo/a "obeying" to Serbia's arrangements...

Kate,

Since when is 1244 known as "international law". You can't argue that Kosovo broke "international law" when Serbia itself has broken the following UN resolutions:

1160 (1998) of 31 March 1998, 1199 (1998) of
23 September 1998, 1203 (1998) of 24 October 1998 and 1239 (1999) of
14 May 1999.


Thank you!

Uran:
> Yet, the Serbian government came out and warned the public that an event like that may cause the ICJ to rule in favor of Kosovo.

Didn't actually see the above & if is as reported, then yes - the serbs are playing 'politics'... which I might add is pretty much a given no matter which side of the fence you're on.

In any event, my previous comment was solely concerned with the procedural aspects in the case given the retirement of the chinese judge & the possible ramifications arising thereof.

> It is fair to say that the Serbian government is terrified that the ICJ might rule in favor of Kosovo.

Only if they're absolutely paranoid. And regardless of the wishful thinking of those in the albanian camp below, ICJ will very probably rule in favour of the serbs.. real question is to what degree.

And that my 'friend', is called reality.

ps: my 'two cents' is on 9 to 6.

If the ICJ doesnt respect resolution 1244, than something is defintly wrong. If laws can easily be broken such as this one, then this is only a small example of what can happen next. :) Good luck

Peter,
You've proven my point that FM and Serbia is playing politics (I assume you did not get my sarcasm when I spoke about the seat being taken away). It is very easy to visit the ICJ website and learn that a judge is replaced upon its retirement, and no decision is made until the seat is filled. Yet, the Serbian government came out and warned the public that an event like that may cause the ICJ to rule in favor of Kosovo.
It is fair to say that the Serbian government is terrified that the ICJ might rule in favor of Kosovo. If one did not know better, one might assume that the Serbian government is preparing the public. But instead of being honest, they shift the blame to arm twisting and other nonsense. This, my friend is called POLITICS.

The war had ended almost 10 years earlier and a resolution had been drawn up with the UN. There was a new govt in Belgrade and Kosovo was an international protecorate at the time of the UDI. So no, there was no threat.
(kate, 29 March 2010 17:35)
And who do you think the UN is protecting Kosovo from? The fact that there has no movement by the UNSC to remove Kosovo from a protectorate status is testimony that the perception of Serbia's continual threat to the people of Kosovo exists 10 years post war.

Serbia does not have to respect ruling of ICJ over Kosovo if the ruling is in favour of Kosovo. ICJ has been asked for an opinion only.
But, in case ICJ rules in favour of Serbia: ALL STATES AND ENTIRE COMSOS WIL HAVE TO OBEY WHAT ICJ HAS RULED...
This is politics...
Imean, BG politics...
And guess what, many people believe in them (I mean, people livin next by BG parliament)..
Even in Vranje this is not something to be believed anylonger...
Seecomments in some other articles.
Most of posters, do not trust Serbian politician (Tadic & Co) for any other matter appart from Kosovo case...

If the ICJ doesnt respect resolution 1244, than something is defintly wrong. If laws can easily be broken such as this one, then this is only a small example of what can happen next. :) Good luck
(trudsaam, 30 March 2010 23:58)
It is not a question of whether the ICJ respects 1244 or any other international law. They are being asked their opinion on whether the UDI is in violation of any international laws, not to reiterate your interpretation.

Mr. Jeremic,

Why don't you tell us who are these voices that link the delay of the opinion with the capture of Mladic?
First noone has said so far that the ICJ opinion is going to be delayed beyond the already set expectation. Secondly, again there has been no link between this "delay" and Mladic capture.
Nice move on your part for keeping the Serb sheep into believing that your ministry is actually going to win this case.
This is complete fabrication. The only message you are trying to deliver by this made-up story is that the "capture of Mladic" is not going to delay your "sure" win at the ICJ.
My God you are becoming desperate.

The minister added that he does not expect the ICJ's opinion to be in favor of the Kosovo Albanian authorities, assessing that, should this happen, "no international border will ever be secure".

There is no ifs& buts about it,that theadvisory opion will be in favor of Kosova/o and/or no opion at all on this matter, since the court can easaly say that;is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not.

....UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.
(kate, 29 March 2010 14:19)

"no threat from the sovereign state" huh? The international community went to war with Serbia over pancakes?

As i have said many times, the ICJ will NEVER rule in favor of serbia. now the blgd regime is playing the game of saying: the icj will not rule in favor of kosova. please! it was serbia who brought the suit, and it is their's to lose.

and regardless of outcome, there is no return to colonial status. independence is a done deal and anything else is just denial. being related to serbia is simply a nationalist pipe-dream.

meanwhile no one, so far, has mentioned part 2 of the article: Mladic. who continues to be coddled and protected by these "democratic" authorities. the appropriate pressure needs to be brought to bear, and he needs to be in the Hague, pronto. end of story. no more lies and excuses.

thank you.

roberto
michigame

Kosova-USA: "is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not."

Actually it is. Firstly Kosovo was a UN international protectorate when it declared independence; secondly it goes against the agreed UN Resolution 1244; and thirdly they abide by international law and UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.

"is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not."
Kosovo-USA

Oh please! Do you know what this world would look like if anyone could do as they please? It would be chaos. Just as Kosovo is today. Some countries recognized, most countries didn't. Kosovo today has no UN, no peace, NATO guarding churches and protecting people. That is what the illegal Kosovo UDI has ment so far. And you are saying that there shouldn't be any laws to follow? This certainly fits into the albanian agenda. Have loads of children, take over a territory and declare independence without interference from the outside world. Albanians come from a lawless state, Albania.

There is no ifs& buts about it,that theadvisory opion will be in favor of Kosova/o and/or no opion at all on this matter, since the court can easaly say that;is not within their legal rights to decide who can declare Independence and who not.
(Kosova-USA)
-
It is in their right. Considering that your delcaration was in fact illegal, a breach of the legal code 1244. Do you need to be continuously reminded??

"..."no threat from the sovereign state" huh? The international community went to war with Serbia over pancakes?
(BalkanUpdate, 29 March 2010 16:17) ..."


>>> To correct your non-updated impreciseness: Nato is certainly not considered neither is representing "The international community".

Firstly Kosovo was a UN international protectorate when it declared independence; secondly it goes against the agreed UN Resolution 1244; and thirdly they abide by international law and UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.
(kate, 29 March 2010 14:19)

Even if it was a UN international protectorate, the leaders of Kosovo who declared independence were elected by Kosovo’s citizens and therefore they represented the majority of the population living in kosovo. Whether 1244 does not allow for declaration of independence is up for a debate (hence the ICJ opinion) but in my personal opinion it does not prohibit the declaration. And thirdly, I am surprised that out of all the people you Kate are saying that ‘…they are under no threat from the sovereign state’? Well, recent history shows us the opposite. The removal of autonomy by Milosevic and then the state-run ethnic cleansing and deportation in 1998-1999 are clear evidence that the sovereign state [Serbia] did threaten Kosovo and especially the Albanian population in Kosovo.
You don’t have to believe what I say, just follow the link:
http://www.icty.org/sid/10070

Oh please! Do you know what this world would look like if anyone could do as they please? It would be chaos. (Mikael C, 29 March 2010 15:42) Are you talking about all the chaos destruction murder Serbia and Serbs caused in Ex Yugo. Lets not forget the horrendous state that Republic of Bosnia is in that Srpska entity did to the people when it wanted. Which are still suffering because of the total Srpska Serbs Belgrade violence injustice imposed on Bosnia.

...UN guidelines which prevent a single ethnic group declaring independence of a province within a UN member state when they are under no threat from the sovereign state.
(kate, 29 March 2010 14:19)

Kate,

you just blessed the Declaration of Independence of Kosova.

Kate,

Since when is 1244 known as "international law". You can't argue that Kosovo broke "international law" when Serbia itself has broken the following UN resolutions:

1160 (1998) of 31 March 1998, 1199 (1998) of
23 September 1998, 1203 (1998) of 24 October 1998 and 1239 (1999) of
14 May 1999.


Thank you!

BalkanUpdate: "no threat from the sovereign state" huh? The international community went to war with Serbia over pancakes?"

The war had ended almost 10 years earlier and a resolution had been drawn up with the UN. There was a new govt in Belgrade and Kosovo was an international protecorate at the time of the UDI. So no, there was no threat.

Peter,
You've proven my point that FM and Serbia is playing politics (I assume you did not get my sarcasm when I spoke about the seat being taken away). It is very easy to visit the ICJ website and learn that a judge is replaced upon its retirement, and no decision is made until the seat is filled. Yet, the Serbian government came out and warned the public that an event like that may cause the ICJ to rule in favor of Kosovo.
It is fair to say that the Serbian government is terrified that the ICJ might rule in favor of Kosovo. If one did not know better, one might assume that the Serbian government is preparing the public. But instead of being honest, they shift the blame to arm twisting and other nonsense. This, my friend is called POLITICS.

Serbia does not have to respect ruling of ICJ over Kosovo if the ruling is in favour of Kosovo. ICJ has been asked for an opinion only.
But, in case ICJ rules in favour of Serbia: ALL STATES AND ENTIRE COMSOS WIL HAVE TO OBEY WHAT ICJ HAS RULED...
This is politics...
Imean, BG politics...
And guess what, many people believe in them (I mean, people livin next by BG parliament)..
Even in Vranje this is not something to be believed anylonger...
Seecomments in some other articles.
Most of posters, do not trust Serbian politician (Tadic & Co) for any other matter appart from Kosovo case...

What Jeremic is trying to say...there are no connectins between anything that goes against Serbia's interest. For example..."No connection between Serbia's desire to join EU and recognising Kosovo/a's independence". No connection between Serbi becoming member EU and the Serbian right to block the entry of Kosovo/a in EU....no connection between Kosovo/a partecipation in international meetings and and Serbia's refusal to partacipate in such meeting without Kosovo/a "obeying" to Serbia's arrangements...

The war had ended almost 10 years earlier and a resolution had been drawn up with the UN. There was a new govt in Belgrade and Kosovo was an international protecorate at the time of the UDI. So no, there was no threat.
(kate, 29 March 2010 17:35)
And who do you think the UN is protecting Kosovo from? The fact that there has no movement by the UNSC to remove Kosovo from a protectorate status is testimony that the perception of Serbia's continual threat to the people of Kosovo exists 10 years post war.

"...He also said that there are announcements of ICJ delaying the decision, and that this is not good news..."

>>> Would be nice to hear bit more specified on this: who was precisely the source for example, to whom information was given and what was the given reason for possible delay.

This is politics at its best. Two weeks ago when judge Shi Jiuyong announced his retirement, the Serbian government hoped the decision would come later because(judge Shi Jiuyong's retirement, and one vote less in favor of Serbia)could affect the outcome. Now, Mr. Jeremic says that delaying the decision may lead to arm twisting, which is harmful for Serbia. I think playing politics at the expense of people living in the region is unethical and can only lead to further tension between Kosovo and Serbia.

"...You don’t have to believe what I say, just follow the link:
[link]
(blue and gold, 29 March 2010 18:32) ..."


>>> Among the rest I would like to point to you that for anyone using clear analitic mind that Hague "so called court" can be anything else but independent justice instance.
Instead it is highly politicized, morally compromised or better simply called, Nato court.
So adding of your "link" in the sense of any argumentation is irrelevant.

RKA - As I am sure you know, 1244 is still valid and is the basis upon which the UN and subsequently EU operates in Kosovo.

Uran:
> Yet, the Serbian government came out and warned the public that an event like that may cause the ICJ to rule in favor of Kosovo.

Didn't actually see the above & if is as reported, then yes - the serbs are playing 'politics'... which I might add is pretty much a given no matter which side of the fence you're on.

In any event, my previous comment was solely concerned with the procedural aspects in the case given the retirement of the chinese judge & the possible ramifications arising thereof.

> It is fair to say that the Serbian government is terrified that the ICJ might rule in favor of Kosovo.

Only if they're absolutely paranoid. And regardless of the wishful thinking of those in the albanian camp below, ICJ will very probably rule in favour of the serbs.. real question is to what degree.

And that my 'friend', is called reality.

ps: my 'two cents' is on 9 to 6.

Mr. Jeremic,

Why don't you tell us who are these voices that link the delay of the opinion with the capture of Mladic?
First noone has said so far that the ICJ opinion is going to be delayed beyond the already set expectation. Secondly, again there has been no link between this "delay" and Mladic capture.
Nice move on your part for keeping the Serb sheep into believing that your ministry is actually going to win this case.
This is complete fabrication. The only message you are trying to deliver by this made-up story is that the "capture of Mladic" is not going to delay your "sure" win at the ICJ.
My God you are becoming desperate.

Could there be a link with a delayed ruling to November and elections in Bosnia(October)? Fear of Dodik utilizing the ruling?

Uran:
> Two weeks ago when judge Shi Jiuyong announced his retirement, the Serbian government hoped the decision would come later because(judge Shi Jiuyong's retirement, and one vote less in favor of Serbia)could affect the outcome.

Well... no.

"Seats on the ICJ are rigidly, albeit informally, allocated in two ways. First, each of the five permanent members of the Security Council has (unofficially) a permanent seat...." http://ilreports.blogspot.com/2008/08/icj-nominations-of-candidates-for.html

China is one of the 5, so a retiring chinese judge will be replaced by a... chinese judge.

So either a ruling will be handed down before the resignation (28th May) or after the 'election' of a successor (29th June).

If the latter is the case, then one could reasonably expect that proceedings would be further delayed while the new judge gets up to speed (which might be the true source behind the speculation of some elements of the media as noted above), although IMO, November is a bit far-fetched.

More likely to be before the end of May.

If the ICJ doesnt respect resolution 1244, than something is defintly wrong. If laws can easily be broken such as this one, then this is only a small example of what can happen next. :) Good luck

If the ICJ doesnt respect resolution 1244, than something is defintly wrong. If laws can easily be broken such as this one, then this is only a small example of what can happen next. :) Good luck
(trudsaam, 30 March 2010 23:58)
It is not a question of whether the ICJ respects 1244 or any other international law. They are being asked their opinion on whether the UDI is in violation of any international laws, not to reiterate your interpretation.