Ivanovic's murder shows Serbia, Kosovo must co-operate

The EU must take advantage of the momentum created by the joint investigation into the murder of Kosovo Serb leader Oliver Ivanovic to insist that Serbia and Kosovo prosecutors continue to work together to tackle serious crimes.

For the first time since Kosovo declared independence ten years ago, Serbia's prosecution and Kosovo have decided to co-operate formally by working on the investigation into the murder of Serbian political party leader Oliver Ivanovic, Who was shot dead last week in Mitrovica.

The movement, even unprecedented, is not surprising, considering the importance it has for both sides to find persons responsible for the murder, which caused shock and fear between Serbs and Albanians.

Options for Kosovo and Serbia to resolve the issue are great. Pristina must show that it is supporting rule of the law, following questions raised in recent months by political changes regarding Kosovo's border demarcation with Montenegro and the ruling coalition deputies' efforts to abolish The Hague-based new Special Court.

It must also show that it can implement the law in Serb majority northern Kosovo, where Ivanoviqi was shot, but where strong ties with Serbia mean Pristina has difficulty imposing its legal will.

Serbia, on the other hand, wants to share rumors and claims that Ivanovic's murder was political and that the traces of evidence lead to Belgrade. It also wants to show that it is still responsible for order and law in northern Kosovo, as the main Kosovo Serb party, the Serb List, which is backed by the Belgrade administration, insists.

But unusual co-operation in the investigation into Ivanovic's murder should be used by the European Union mediator in dialogue between Pristina and Belgrade aimed at normalising relations to strengthen co-operation between the two countries' judicial authorities.

This is especially important because the EU law rule mission in Kosovo, EULEX, which has so far managed requirements for legal assistance from Pristina to Belgrade and vice versa, is expected to end.

The mission will probably leave Kosovo this year or next, and its mandate has already been reduced, leaving it to the Kosovo prosecutor's responsibility for cases he would have handled.

Lack of co-operation between Pristina and Belgrade has led serious criminals to escape justice.

In 2015 B IERN reported that criminals convicted by Kosovo or Serbia should simply cross the other's border to escape prison sentences for crimes they committed, due to lack of co-operation between police and judicial system in both countries.

Among the darkest examples was the case of Lemma Xhema, who was sentenced to three years in prison for corruption, then fled to Serbia to wait for the statute of Restriction to expire. She later returned to her hometown of Kosovo as a free woman.

A similar case was that of Predrag Vulicevic, a Serbian citizen who was arrested in March 2015 by Kosovo police in the north of the divided town of Mitrovica, under an Interpol warrant issued by Serbian authorities.

Vulicevic had fled Serbia to avoid a three-year prison sentence for drug smuggling and other criminal acts. He was held in custody in Kosovo, but was later released, as Serbia never made a request for his extradition because it does not co-operate with the Kosovo police.

Even EULEX, while still having full mandate, found it difficult to investigate, arrested and deemed criminals who had connections in Pristina and Belgrade.

The situation was especially terrible when it came to prosecuting war crimes. Despite the fact that Kosovo and EULEX have issued more than 50 warrants for Serbian citizens through UNMIK, none of them have ever been extradited or arrested.

EULEX investigators completed investigations into the mass killings in the villages of Suhareka and Meja in Kosovo in 1999, but they could never capture the alleged authors, who are believed to be in Serbia Qaeda, and this was happening while Belgrade had a co-operation agreement with EULEX.

Since 2016, EULEX has no longer had the mandate to launch its cases. So, while new war crimes cases are being led by the Kosovo prosecution, co-operation with Serbia is blocked de facto.

This is clearly a very big problem when in 90 percent of cases for prosecutors in Kosovo and Serbia, victims are in one country and authors in another.

The Serbian war crimes prosecutor has issued no war crimes indictment in Kosovo over the past three years, while the Kosovo prosecution has managed to launch only cases against former Kosovo Liberation Army fighters, as they are the only suspects it can bring to trial.

Serbia insists it has universal jurisdiction to investigate all crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia, but Kosovo insists that, since it is an independent state, Belgrade prosecutors have no authority to investigate within its borders. Pristina authorities also say Belgrade rejects their bids for legal assistance, as they come from a state that Serbia does not recognise.

The EU has turned a blind eye to this issue as it is complex and politically sensitive. The task, at an easier first glance, such as the judicial integration of northern Kosovo into the justice system in Pristina, took Brussels years to implement. EU officials often stress regional co-operation as a key element in the EU accession process, but this should not simply mean co-operation on economic issues.

This also means that much tougher topics, such as organised crime and war crimes, should be part of the EU-brokered dialogue between Pristina and Belgrade, because, as indicated by Oliver Ivanovis's tragic death, these problems will not disappear if they are ignored and sooner or later, will return to persecute.

Thoughts expressed in the series of opinions are just those of the author and not necessarily reflect BIRN's views.