Response of the Police

In several cases, the police sought to protect Albanians and other minorities in the aftermath of Kosovo's declaration of independence, especially after the occurrence of a first attack against a particular individual or business. In most cases documented in this report, the premises of the victims with whom Human Rights Watch spoke were kept under observation by police patrols in the days or even weeks following a first attack.

While the deployment of police patrols after initial attacks to prevent further incidents is commendable, Human Rights Watch is concerned by the absence of a pro-active strategy to protect minorities. Given the experience of 1999 and 2004, it was not difficult to predict that the aftermath of Kosovo's declaration of independence might produce violence directed against minorities, and particularly ethnic Albanians. In most of the locations where trouble occurred, the numbers of ethnic Albanians was relatively small. Preventive deployments might have prevented trouble, especially where specific individuals and businesses had been previously attacked during 1999 and 2004, as was the case for some business owners in Novi Sad.

In one case, a victim explicitly stated that the police had said they were under instructions to act only if someone's physical integrity was jeopardized during the protests.[100] This allegation was dismissed by major general Mladen Kuribak, the head of the Uniformed Police Directorate, when Human Rights Watch met him on April 24, 2008, to discuss the policing of attacks on minorities. In this meeting and in subsequent written enquiries, Human Rights Watch asked about the reasons for not intervening when attacks took place during demonstrations, such as those on the flower shop and bakery in Novi Sad described above. Major general Kuribak said that there was no instruction from Belgrade's headquarters for police officers to remain passive in cases of attacks on property rather than individuals.[101] However, he said that during the demonstrations, when there are few police officers available, it was not feasible for them to intervene robustly in cases where property alone was attacked.[102] He reiterated this message in a letter in response dated September 19, 2008 to further enquiries from Human Rights Watch, explaining that the police did their utmost to ensure order during the demonstrations but that due to the extremely large number of protesters, there were insufficient officers available to protect every object at risk.[103]

Even if the police are given the benefit of doubt on this issue, at the very least the police presence at protests when vandalism occurred should have provided excellent eye witness accounts–by the police themselves–that could have contributed, where legally warranted, to charges against the alleged perpetrators.

In a letter to the police sent in August 2008 (see Annex 1), Human Rights Watch asked for further information in relation to the specific cases detailed in this report. The response did not contain any comment on specific allegations or information about the status of investigations into specific cases. It simply said that the police together with prosecutors had taken the necessary steps to establish the facts, had arrested people caught damaging property, and were continuing in their efforts to identify perpetrators.However, Human Rights Watch remains concerned that the police appear to have done little to identify or vigorously pursue perpetrators, despite in some instances being physically present when attacks took place.

Based on data provided by district prosecutors, it appears that police investigations failed to determine the identity of perpetrators in the vast majority of the attacks. According to the head of the Uniformed Police Directorate, as of April 24, 2008, 10 perpetrators had been convicted and fined for incidents arising from Kosovo protests and involving damaging property. In each case, the underlying act was qualified as a misdemeanor (an administrative offence) rather than a criminal offence.[104]  None of the 10 perpetrators was charged in relation to incidents documented by Human Rights Watch in this report.  In some cases, where investigations failed to identify suspects, formal charges were brought against "unknown perpetrators" were laid. In many of the cases cited in this report, it is not clear whether a complete investigation was conducted.

The failure to identify perpetrators, even in cases where security cameras or police witnessed the attacks, prevents victims from seeking legal redress through criminal charges or civil suits for compensation. This result in further hardship to the victims, allows individual perpetrators to escape punishment, and contributes to an atmosphere of impunity for attacks against minorities or their property.

According to an international official, "nothing happens [in Serbia] without a clear order from Belgrade."[105] In the light of this, it is critical for the police chiefs in Belgrade to clearly communicate to the municipal police forces (through the appropriate chain of command) that protecting minorities and thoroughly investigating offences against them should be a priority.