Kajganić rejected Čavić's report on revision: Izetbegović cannot be held responsible, no matter how much the cowboys and the troika try!

By: Rasim Belko

SIPA is collecting documentation related to the revision of the International Court of Justice's ruling on Bosnia and Herzegovina's lawsuit against Serbia. This was reported by the media on Friday, with a note that the investigation has not been opened, but that SIPA is acting on the order of the BiH Prosecutor's Office in the case registered under "Bakir Izetbegović and others".

It is clear to anyone even slightly informed that any potential court process in this case has not the slightest chance of success. Because, Bakir Izetbegović and Safet Softić have already been investigated by the BiH Prosecutor's Office based on a report regarding the revision of the ruling in the BiH lawsuit against Serbia.

And this was after the then leader of the People's Democratic Party, Dragan Čavić, filed a report immediately after the revision was rejected. However, Izetbegović and Softić were not the only ones under investigation by the BiH Prosecutor's Office regarding the revision. After the Association of Victims and Witnesses of Genocide reported the then members of the BiH Presidency, Dragan Čović and Mladen Ivanić, for "violation of the equality of citizens and people", for "abuse of position or authority", the then Chief State Prosecutor consolidated the case.

Thus, Čović and Ivanić (against the revision), as well as Izetbegović and Softić (initiators of the revision), found themselves in the same judicial basket.

Ultimately, all reports were rejected. In response to the appeal of the Association of Victims and Witnesses of Genocide after the rejection of the report, the then acting, and today Chief Prosecutor of Bosnia and Herzegovina, states that this is a case concerning international law, and that: "It must be borne in mind that decisions made by the BiH Presidency very often involve complex issues, meaning that a decision made can produce both favorable and unfavorable effects, in accordance with which members of the BiH Presidency have the authority to decide on the voting method regarding each specific issue based on their own assessment".

It is clear, therefore, that Ivanić and Čović had the option to vote on the revision of the ruling in accordance with their own assessment, just as Izetbegović had that option. However, it is not clear why Kajganić is promptly sending a proposal to SIPA to request documentation from the Presidency regarding Izetbegović's actions, when he has already acted on the same basis in that case.

There is no doubt that this is the same pattern of behavior as in cases of war crimes, when the judiciary of BiH, under the control of the Republika Srpska scum or Bosnian Chetniks, repeatedly repeats accusations for adjudicated events. And repeatedly expands the lists of those persecuted, so in Kajganić's latest campaign, besides Izetbegović and Softić, Dževad Mahmutović and Elvir Čamdžić are being sought.

The prompt action of Kajganić, his prosecutor's office, and Dodik's SIPA on an anonymous report from six days ago clearly indicates that there are some bigger sharks hiding in the background of the whole story. However, unlike the persecution of BiH defenders, which is timed from Belgrade, the persecution of the revision submitters is arriving as a judicial storm from Washington via FGR Sarajevo.

And here it is necessary to recall another important event from the time when the revision was current.

The news from February 23, 2017, reads: “Ambassadors of the Peace Implementation Council (PIC) Steering Board expressed concern about the serious political situation that has arisen in BiH as a result of the initiative to submit a request for the revision of the 2007 International Court of Justice ruling on the lawsuit of Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia and Montenegro for the crime of genocide. They expressed concern about the possible consequences this could have on the functioning of the Presidency, Parliament, and Council of Ministers of BiH and called for an improvement in the overall political atmosphere in the country”. Such a reaction from the PIC was initiated at the request of Russia, so the question arises whether the Quint, which manages the PIC, was protecting the state that committed aggression against BiH and aided genocide based on Hague rulings.

At that time, only Turkey opposed the stance of the PIC (which was instructed by the governments of the member states). The Association of Victims and Witnesses of Genocide reacted to this stance and filed a report against the PIC Steering Board, but the Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina never acted on it.

Because, it is quite clear that the BiH Prosecutor's Office only acts when ordered by Belgrade and Zagreb, or by the Marshall from Washington.

However, if the action on the report against Izetbegović and others for the revision of the ruling leads to judicial proceedings, it will finally be clear to the Bosniak leaders to abandon such a judiciary, regardless of the price. Not because of Izetbegović, but because of all those who have come or will come to the defendant's bench on the orders of the aggressor on BiH and their accomplice in Washington.

It is clear that this should have been done much earlier, just as it is clear that the fifth-column FGR troika should have been stopped the first time they attacked the state and Bosniaks for the sake of positions!”