ZAGREB, June 16 (Hina) - Social Democrat (SDP) MPs walking out of the session, a break, and a series of rebuttals are the results of Monday's parliamentary debate on the government's proposal that the Penal Code include a provision to
punish the extolling of fascist states, the spreading of racism and xenophobia.
ZAGREB, June 16 (Hina) - Social Democrat (SDP) MPs walking out of
the session, a break, and a series of rebuttals are the results of
Monday's parliamentary debate on the government's proposal that
the Penal Code include a provision to punish the extolling of
fascist states, the spreading of racism and xenophobia. #L#
MPs of the ruling coalition's SDP walked out of the session when
independent MP Ivo Loncar said Josip Broz Tito had been one of the
biggest criminals in history and that those celebrating him today
should be punished.
SDP's Ivan Ninic said Loncar was insulting the leader of the anti-
fascist movement and many well-intentioned people who, fighting in
the national liberation struggle in WW2, created conditions for the
creation of independent Croatia.
Saying that he no longer wished to listen to insults, Ninic walked
out of the session, followed by his bench colleagues.
Mario Kovac of the Social Liberals said the contentious government
provision was an attempt to pander to voters, and announced his
party would move an amendment to equate red and black
totalitarianism.
Ivic Pasalic of the Croatian Bloc suggested punishing any
instigation to hatred, regardless of ideology. He found it absurd
that the law was tackling something that happened 60 years ago while
not punishing the emphasising of parastates such as the more recent
Croatian Serb rebels' Krajina.
Vladimir Seks of the Croatian Democratic Union said the law should
clearly ban the promotion of all totalitarian ideologies,
organisations, parties and movements, as well as the incitement to
hatred and intolerance towards anyone.
The opposition also objected to the government's intention to treat
possession of small amounts of narcotics for personal use as an
offence, saying it was bound to lead to widespread addiction,
overburden magistrate's courts, and increase the number of cases
with statutes of limitations.
MPs said the law did not define what constitutes drugs for personal
use, what is a minor amount, or how many times possession of drugs
can be treated as an offence.
The opposition also criticised the intention to extend statutes of
limitations.
It cautioned that the bill of amendments to the Penal Code was full
of imprecise definitions.
Most benches agreed the changes should go into force on January 1,
2004 and not this September 1.
(hina) ha