SABOR ENDS EXTRAORDINARY SESSION, NO FINAL DECISION ON REFERENDUM

ZAGREB, July 18 (Hina) - Exactly at Tuesday's midnight Sabor Speaker Zlatko Tomcic declared the 14th extra-ordinary parliamentary session closed, according to the Constitution's deadline. The extraordinary session, which began on early Monday morning, had three motions on its agenda: a vote of confidence in the incumbent government, a motion for draft conclusions on the cooperation between Zagreb and the UN war crimes tribunal (ICTY) and a motion for organising a referendum on the same treatment of Croatian Homeland war veterans which troops of the victorious armies enjoyed after the Second World war. The last two items were proposed by the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ). The Ivica Racan Cabinet won the vote of confidence on early Monday morning. On Tuesday afternoon the Sabor adopted five conclusions on the cooperation with the Tribunal, and continued a session with a heated discussion for holding a referendum seeking the adoption of a law ensuring the same legal treatment for Croatian soldiers as that granted to the members of all liberation and anti-fascist armies. The debate was over on late Tuesday night some 10 minutes before the midnight, and Sabor Speaker then asked Vladimir Seks, a representative of the HDZ, which suggested this motion, whether he would like to give a final speech or MPs could immediately hold the vote. Before he started with his closing arguments, Seks was warned to take care about the deadline which would expire at the midnight, and was asked to spare a few minutes for the voting. During his speech Seks did not respect the time term and Sabor Speaker interrupted him a few seconds after the midnight declaring the session closed. Thus there was no voting on the last motion on the agenda of this extraordinary sitting. The decision is thus postponed, until further notice, on whether the referendum, based on 400,000 signatures collected by the headquarters for the protection of the Homeland War's dignity. The agenda of the 15th extra-ordinary session, which begins on Wednesday morning, has already been defined and it can be changed only with 76 signatures of MPs (a majority in the 151-seat parliament) or by agreement of all the parliamentary benches. It is highly unlikely that the HDZ will manage to collect 76 signatures of parliamentarians or that all the benches will agree on the additional item on the agenda as benches of two ruling parties SDP (Social Democrats) and HSS (Peasants' Party) wont's surely accept the change, said Mato Arlovic of the SDP upon the conclusion of the 14th extra-ordinary session. It is more probable that MPs will decide on that motion at the coming regular session, set for mid-September. Tuesday's parliamentary discussion on the motion whether the referendum should be called on the Homeland War veterans' rights so that they may be exempted from any criminal accountability for their acts in the war for independence had a heated introduction when Drago Krpina, an MP of Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), accused the state authorities of being responsible for the "unnatural situation in the country". In this context Krpina pointed to President Stjepan Mesic because, as Krpina claimed, he had testified before the UN war crimes tribunal (ICTY) against his homeland, and because he had equated Croatian soldiers with greater Serbian fascists and because he asserted that everybody should apologise to everybody. Krpina pointed to Premier Racan because, as this HDZ MP said, he described that last 10 years during which Croatia had been created, as an era of darkness and missed chances, and because he labelled disabled war veterans as public enemies who wanted to carry out a coup. Krpina singled out the president of one parliamentary party (Vesna Pusic of the People's Party, HNS), who according to him, accused her own motherland of having launched aggression against other country (Bosnia-Herzegovina). Krpina's statements also angered Snjezana Biga-Friganovic of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) who asked him why the HDZ had not signed a petition of the former Opposition asking the Hague tribunal to open an investigation and issue an indictment against Slobodan Milosevic for war crimes committed in Croatia and Bosnia- Herzegovina. She also asked Krpina to explain why the HDZ-led authorities sued Yugoslavia for genocide only in autumn 1999 a few months before the election (which the HDZ lost to the current ruling coalition), and added it was not natural that the HDZ-led government had not sent a single document to the Hague tribunal and that the incumbent authorities were now gathering documents on war crimes committed against Croatia in the early 1990s. At the proposal of the bench of the Croatian Peasants' Party (HSS), the debate was adjourned for two hours to defuse tensions caused by "the inflammatory speech" of Krpina. Later in the evening the parliament resumed the discussion. The HSS bench criticised Krpina over his speech and the headquarters for the defence of dignity of the Homeland War over its leaflets delivered to MPs, which the HSS representatives described as calls for showing intolerance and hatred. Ljubica Lalic of the HSS said that in the leaflets the headquarters asked for toppling the incumbent authorities and threatened to take leaders of the current authorities before courts for their treason. The headquarters labelled MPs as dwarfs of the ruling coalition, Lalic said and asked that association whether it thought the same about the people who elected the incumbent authorities. She also asserted that the aim of such claims was to destabilise Croatia. The leaflets delivered in front of the Sabor building, read that the acceptance of (ICTY's) indictments against two Croatian generals - Rahim Ademi and Ante Gotovina - presented the violation of Croatia's constitution. According to the leaflets, the headquarters accuses members of the ruling parties of betraying the Croatian national interests and violation of the Constitution and therefore they will be taken before courts. Vilim Herman of the Croatian Social Liberals (HSLS) bench, believes that the purpose of such labels and claims was to create a framework for not recognising the state institutions and the rule of law. According to Vladimir Seks of the HDZ bench, the speech of his party colleague, Krpina, was an expression of political differences and remarks which may be heard in the parliamentarism. Seks denied assessments that Krpina's speech might inspire hatred and jeopardise the highest values of the constitutional order and the rule of law. On behalf of the Social Democrats (SDP) bench, Mato Arlovic voiced disappointment over HDZ's failure to apologise for Krpina's speech. Arlovic regarded Krpina's statement that Croatia's President, Premier and Sabor Speaker were traitors as impermissible. Seks retorted saying that it was unacceptable that (Prime Minister Ivica) Racan labelled HDZ as those who brought Croatia into isolation and that he described this party as an aggressive minority which pushed the country in the quagmire of the Balkans. Ante Djapic of the Croatian Party of Rights/Croatian Christian Democratic Union (HSP/HKDU) bench regarded such political tones as the result of differences in views of parliamentary benches. According to him, such different political assessments were normal in discussions on the motion for the referendum which Djapic assessed as one of the most dramatic topics which the Sabor had discussed in the recent years. He also said there had been no graver situation than the current one the country was facing and therefore the referendum was necessary in order to avoid the further aggravation of the situation. On behalf of the SDP bench, Ingrid Anticevic-Marinovic said the draft decision on the referendum was illegal and contrary to the constitution as it would suspend a series of basic laws and discard the democratic principle about the guilt. i.e. penal code is impersonal and for its provisions it is not important whether the crime was committed "by a president, or a worker, by a general or a soldier,". In this way she explained that war veterans would be put above the law if they were exempted from criminal responsibility. In the continuation of the session representatives of the parliament's majority expressed opinions that the initiative for the referendum was not in line with the Constitution, which specifies the issues about which a referendum could be held, while representatives of opposition parties - HDZ, HSP and HKDU - insisted on organising the referendum. Seks of the HDZ reminded the Constitution regulated that a referendum could be held on all important issues, should 10 percent of the total number of eligible voters request that. (hina) ms