The entire force apparatus of the state has been harnessed by the ruling elite, thus rendering it incapable of serving its primary purpose of the citizens’ service with the aim to preserve the order, enforce the law and improve safety.

By Bojan Elek (BCSP)
@BojanElek

Max Weber, the favourite and oft-cited sociologist of the Serbian Prime Minister, in his seminal work Politics as a Vocation, stipulates that the monopoly over the legitimate use of force is the key characteristics of the state. In this context, the use of force does not exclusively imply the use of physical force, but rather any action by the state that infringes upon or limits personal freedoms of citizens. However, the key distinction in this definition of the state is the legitimate use of force. Namely, the state cannot utilize the force apparatus at its disposal in a discretionary manner, but only for the legitimate purposes that are, at least in the well organised systems, laid out in the highest legal acts. In cases where the legitimacy is lacking, it cannot be said that the state uses force but rather commits violence. The most recent events from the last Sunday, characterised in the public as the coup d’état affair, point to the fact that the Government of the Republic of Serbia is indeed committing violence against its own citizens. This violence is committed both in the physical sense, but also against the common sense of the citizens.

What happened on the 29 of November afternoon?

If one was to judge these events based on the media headlines, statements made by the officials and the sequence of events that took place, all the evidence would point to the conclusion that it was a well organised theatre played a tragedy by its genre and the Theatre of the Absurd in its execution. The only effect of these actions was the intimidation of citizens. The screenwriters, actors and the director of this play are known only too well to everyone. However, what evidence is available to support the claim that, beyond reasonable doubt, the events that took place are actually not coup d’état, but rather an elaborate, organised play?

It is not necessary to elaborate in detail that, for this particular event to be characterised as a coup d’état, certain conditions have not been met. This includes the existence of detached centres of power, within the existing establishment and most often within the security institutions themselves, which aim to depose the legitimately elected government representatives and replace them with the new ones, avoiding the existing democratic procedures in the process. To the best of our knowledge this did not happen. In fact, the press conference of the Minister of Interior proved that the truth is exactly the opposite. Namely, both special and regular police forces stood firmly by the government representatives. Technically speaking, they stood in a cordon exactly behind them, but the point remains the same.

It is also not necessary to elaborate in detail the polygraph testing, or the threats and the spreading of panic via Pink television channels and the front pages of the daily newspaper Informer. The main indicator that proves the case at hand was indeed an organised and prepared play, well in advance, is the fact that none of the links in the chain of actors that participated in the affair failed to act accordingly. One can try to recall the last instance when all of the state institutions, including both the partisan and political elites, managed to react to a real security threat in such a synchronised and timely manner. It is worth remembering that they all failed to act during the terrible floods that hit Serbia in May last year. They all failed to act in March this year, when a military helicopter crashed bringing death to its crew of seven people. They all failed to act during last year when, at the Brankov Bridge, Luka Jovanovic was tragically killed by a driver. In this last case, only after Luka’s father started peaceful protest and after the general public started pressuring the authorities to take actions, the investigation produced some results. Even now, year and a half after the tragic case, the car that was driven at the time of the incident remains to be found.

On the other hand, on 29 of November afternoon, all of the actors in the play we had witnessed acted in a synchronised and effective manner. Their actions were reminiscent of much better organised societies where the law enforcement institutions do act accordingly in cases of real threats to the public safety and security of the country. Within a few hours, one polygraph testing took place, a person that allegedly followed the Serbian Prime Minister was questioned by the police, whereas the State Prosecutor’s Office reacted promptly, stating that they will do whatever it takes to prevent the destabilisation of the country. The expression of a unanimous support for the Prime Minister ensued by all Government officials, where the key message that was being sent, with conspicuously same wording, was that the destabilisation of the country is taking place (see photo below). The studio from which the special programme on the Pink television was broadcasted barely had enough space to accommodate all the government officials that wanted to express their support and instigate panic among the public. Even the Minister of Defence, acting outside of his competences as prescribed by the law, announced that the military will take care of the PM’s safety.

Particularly problematic, albeit very effective, was the performance of the Minister of Interior at the press conference organised at the MoI’s premises. The problematic part was not the statement made by the Minister on this occasion, but rather the scenery that was used as a backdrop at the conference. Namely, exactly behind the Minister, fully equipped and in their uniforms, members of the following police units were standing still forming a cordon: members of the special police units, both Special Antiterrorist Units (SAJ) and the Antiterrorist Unit (PTJ which, by the way, ceased to exist based on the Article 3 of the Law on the Changes and Amendments to the Law on Police from July 2015, although their uniforms apparently remained); the members of Gendarmerie; and the members of the Criminal Police Directorate (UKP) who, just so that the audience of this play does not become confused, were clearly identified by wearing caps with UKP emblazoned over their foreheads, white letters on black fabric.

What kind of message was sent by this action of the Minister of Interior to the citizens? Was a terrorist attack taking place? Was the country seriously threatened by armed criminal groups? Was there any threat to the safety, public order or peace of such severity that the whole police force, fully armed and equipped, had to be mobilised? It is worth remembering that, after the terrorist attacks in Paris on 13 November, the French Minister of Interior felt that there was no need to line up members of French GIGN, fully equipped and with automatic rifles, behind himself when addressing the public. Finally, do Serbian citizens feel safer and secure after this performance took place before their eyes, on a Sunday afternoon, right around the lunch time?

The State in the service of political interests

The only reasonable way to interpret the last week events is in the light of the fact that the state as such has been completely privatised by the ruling parties and, instead of contributing to the common good and public interests, it is used as an instrument for achieving particular political gains— whichever and whatever these interests may be. The entire force apparatus of the state has been harnessed by the ruling elite, thus rendering it incapable of serving its primary purpose of the citizens’ service with the aim to preserve the order, enforce the law and improve safety. Through circumvention of the laws, institutions and existing procedures that were put in place as control mechanisms, the law enforcement agencies are being instrumentalised through an informal decision making process. This process is taking place within a clientelistic network comprised of public officials, partisan leaders, media owners, criminal groups and co-opted individuals placed at the top positions within security institutions. These informal networks, which decide about the fate of all the citizens, cannot be utilised or relied upon without causing devastating, long-term effects to the institutional development and democracy.

The SAJ, Gendarmerie and UKP have their specific role that is prescribed by law. Their role does not include serving as extras in a theatre play that is organised by the executive government with the sole purpose of instigating fear among the general public. Politics, and especially politicking, has no place in managing the work of security sector institutions. It is necessary to assure that the professionals with integrity, the best of the best, are at the position from which they can direct the work of police. It is crucial that the process of selection and appointment of the human resources within this institution is done in accordance with the standards of the highest quality. It is necessary to limit the influence of the Minister of Interior in the process of appointing and dismissing the top ranking police officers. It is quintessential to strengthen the control mechanisms, those within the MoI as well as the role of the Ombudsman and the National Assembly, including other relevant actors, with the view to ensuring that the security apparatus is placed under effective civilian and democratic control. The earliest opportunity to achieve this is to assure that the new Law on Police, which will enter the parliamentary procedure during this month and is expected to be finalised by the end of the year, is adopted. The latest version of the Draft Law on Police, as it currently stands, does not create the necessary preconditions for solving all of the problems listed above. This is why it is crucial, through the use of all available channels and legitimate means, to influence the process of its adoption, so as to assure that the best standards, which are proved to be working well in other countries, are incorporated into this act. The Law itself will not solve all the problems that are plaguing the Serbian police, but it is definitely necessary to at least create preconditions for a better functioning of this institution through adoption of an adequate legal framework.

Finally, when it comes to the coup d’état affair, the only irrefutable conclusion is that the citizens of Serbia are getting the short end of the stick. The short end of the same proverbial stick that has two ends. One end is firmly in the grip of the ruling party. On Sunday afternoon, through our TV screens that transmitted the press conference of the Minister of Interior, the other end of the stick has been wielded around in our homes and our living rooms. A classical attempt at scaring and frightening the citizens of Serbia was at work.

The article was originally published in online magazine Peščanik.