Click here for the NIJ Archive

 Issue No. 172. - May 3, 2000.
    Contents :
1. Albania/ Montengero: A MODEL FOR BALKANS
       By Slobodan Rackovic
       An intreview with dr. Zarko Korac
       By Zoran Mamula
       By Paulyuk Bykowski
5. Special addition: NEW AT TOL

Montenegro/Albania: A MODEL FOR BALKANS
By Slobodan Rackovic
Finally an encouraging news from hilly and turbulent Balkans:

Montenegro and Albania, two neighbouring states that are located at the centre of war zone in this part of south-eastern Europe, have established firm good neighbour relations after 50 years of living at each others throats. Special role in that reconciliation was played by national minorities from both sides of the border.
Montenegrin and Albanian foreign ministers Branko Lukovac and Pascal Milo (who was visiting Montenegro) have signed the Memorandum on understanding and political, economic and cultural co-operation between the governments of Albania and Montenegro.
According to the agreement Lukovac-Milo, two countries will form a joint committee which will oversee the realisation of agreed co-operation. As the two ministers have stated at the press conference, with that agreement starts a new era of relationships between two neighbouring countries since, as has been stressed, it was the first visit an Albanian foreign minister made to Montenegro in the last 50 years.
"Visit of my colleague Milo speaks well enough in itself, it speaks about the past as well as about the present. It took leaderships completely dedicated to democratic values, to respect of human rights and European standards to come to power in both countries to create conditions favourable to establishing top contacts between two neighbouring countries, two closest neighbours" - stressed minister Lukovac, while the Albanian foreign minister said that it was very important for two countries to start working together: "We would like to send a message of peace also to other countries in the region, to tell them that there is no other way for furthering peace and security in this part of Europe, but for co-operation. We will build firm mutual trust by concrete measures, which gives both sides the basis to believe that we are truly partners and that Albania is the true ally of Montenegro" - said Milo. He specifically remarked on the fact, very important due to many Albanians living in Montenegro, that Albania is completely respecting territorial integrity and sovereignty of Montenegro and that Tirana has no wish to occupy parts of that republic. Milo said that position of Albanians in Montenegro has significantly improved, adding that rights of Montenegrin minority in "the land of the eagles" were respected in the same way. Regarding minorities, there is much to be done on both sides - said Albanian foreign minister, adding that both Tirana and Podgorica expect such policy to be met with approval and support of the international community. He especially emphasised that co-operation between two neighbours will be also put to practice in Pact for stability in south-eastern Europe, with Albania and Montenegro offering a number of mutual economic projects. Regarding Kosovo, both sides stressed the need for strict implementation of UN Resolution 1244, although the ministers didn't hide that there had been conflicting viewpoints about the future of that part of Balkans during their talks. While Albanian side insists on the right of Kosovar Albanians to be independent, Montenegro thinks that Kosovo should remain integral part of Serbia (the UN Resolution mentions Kosovo only as part of FR Yugoslavia, not Serbia).
There was also agreed co-operation on sea traffic line Bar-Durres and vice versa, reactivating 10-year long disused railroad Podgorica - Skadar (Skhodra) and building roads, and soon another border pass Sukobinu - Muriqi, near Ulcinj, will be opened. To realise these goals, various ministers related to them will soon exchange visits, and minister Pascal Milo, when visiting Milo Djukanovic, asked Montenegrin president to visit Tirana soon, which was accepted. Prime ministers Ilir Meta and Filip Vujanovic will meet in Tirana at the celebration of laying out optical telecommunication cable between Montenegro and Albania.
Montenegro and Albania have made a giant step forward on their way to total normalisation of their relations, despite the fact that FR Yugoslavia, the formal member of which Montenegro still is, has been keeping its borders with Albania hermetically sealed since March 1997. Risking open conflict, even an armed one, with Belgrade, Montenegro completely opened its borders with Albania two months ago, and both countries removed visa policy. Since then, border traffic has increased significantly (although Yugoslav soldiers are doing their best to slow down or stop that process), economic and political co-operation between Podgorica and Tirana has improved. National minorities from both sides of the border communicate and trade without any impediments. Police authorities have made several joint actions to stop flourishing crime in the border zone, especially illegal traffic of drugs and arms, which increased the mutual trust.
Mutual respect for minority rights is a story in itself, which was emphasised by already mentioned Albanian minister Milo. While in the neighbouring Serbia Albanians are treated as second-class citizens, in Montenegro they have their representatives in the national parliament, government, police and judicial system, and position of Montenegrin minority in Albania has been rapidly improving. Cultural and sport associations of the minority groups are often visiting their mother states, which adds to a positive climate between Podgorica and Tirana. IN a word, national minorities have become a bridge which is linking the two countries, and not a destructive element, as was mostly the case in that part of the Balkans.
That was not always the case in the history of the two neighbours. Since 1948, when Yugoslavian and Albanian regimes clashed due to relationship with Moscow (then Tito's Yugoslavia turned its back on the USSR while Albania led by Enver Hoxha remained one of the mot loyal allies of it) until the present - Montenegrin - Albanian border was one of the most uneasy in Europe, with often armed conflicts between border patrols. It is believed that on that border during past half a century several thousand persons died, since antagonism between Belgrade (whose army is in the control of the border) and Tirana has continued until the present day, although during air-tight economic isolation of FR Yugoslavia Albania remained one of the rare exits for Montenegrin - Serbian federation.
Only when Montenegro distanced itself from Serbia during the last three years have there been created good conditions for co-operation between Podgorica and Tirana. Although still unrecognised, Montenegro has i n foreign politics and trade, opens diplomatic offices abroad and makes agreements with other countries, so Belgrade is jealously and with anger watching from distance as Podgorica gains more and more international prominence. Montenegro has recently removed the obligation of visas for all world countries while Serbia is becoming isolated more and more. Therefore Podgorica with more than 60 foreign offices is taking the initiative from Belgrade, which is also illustrated by the fact that many foreign media correspondent offices moved to the capital of Montenegro. Instead of being a black sheep as Serbian ally, Montenegro is more and more like a light at the end of the tunnel in this unstable region, that has for a long time been a huge burden for the international community.

An intreview with dr. Zarko Korac
By Zoran Mamula
When on 10th January united Serbian opposition was formed, thus uniting all relevant anti-regime political parties, Serbian public hoped that the opposition, after ten years of internal clashes, will finally destroy Slobodan Milosevic's regime. That optimism was backed by the fact that the same umbrella joined former rivals and most prominent opposition politicians - leader of Democratic party Zoran Djindjic and head of Serbian reconstruction movement Vuk Draskovic.Opposition messages at the first meeting were holding general elections - not only local and federation elections that are according to Yugoslav constitution already scheduled this year, but also early parliamentary and presidential elections in Serbia, which are of course the most important since all authority in the Yugoslav federation remains within individual republic.However, when the authorities declined to hold republic elections, first cracks in opposition wall became transparent. Vuk Draskovic claimed that there was no point in participating in local and federal elections if the government hadn't decided to hold early and democratic elections in Serbia. On the other hand, Zoran Djindjic who is heading coalition Alliance for change insisted on participating in local and federal elections and on joint opposition candidates so that opposition parties could have kept the positions they have in all large Serbian cities. A recent demonstrations in the centre of Belgrade, supported by 100,000 demonstrators, somewhat eased the tensions between the two leaders , but already at the subsequent meetings existing differences erupted anew.
Dr. Zarko Korac, president of the Socialdemocrat Union and one of the leaders of the united opposition is summarising a four-month period of joint work . He begins with answering the question of why numerous opposition meetings haven't yielded any significant result.
KORACH:  When talking about the local political scene, one must have three facts in mind. The first one is the type of government headed by Slobodan Milosevic. He is the person whom not one event in the past decade, not even three-months long bombardment of Serbia, has persuaded to change his policy and the style of government. Obviously, he is not too sensitive to any kind of argument, not even to argument of force. The second fact is that Serbian opposition is extremely heterogeneous and it would be illusory to expect that these meetings would have made them more close. Due to its heterogeneity, the opposition cannot bring any serious decision without prior discussion, which can take months. And the third, perhaps the most important fact, is that the following election in Serbia are not just classic deciding for political programs of individual parties, but have characteristics of a referendum - in favour of Milosevic's regime or against it. Bringing opposition together on the 10th of January has a sense only from that aspect, the basic issue is will opposition succeed in fighting for fair and honest elections. Regular local and federal elections will be held in autumn, and there is a great pressure now on Montenegro to participate in the federal elections. The government in Podgorica has been rejecting them due to unsolved issues in the Yugoslav federation. Election victory would bring to opposition psychological and political advantage and also a possibility to pressure the government into holding early elections for Serbian parliament and Serbian president. United opposition is, therefore, a method of exerting pressure, it is not an active nor especially logical group. In it participate parties whose programs are completely opposite, like the party headed by general Momcilo Perisic and Rasim Ljaljic from Coalition Sandzak or my party and Democratic party of Serbia led by Vojislav Kostunica. But, when together, we offer a possibility for every Serbian citizen dissatisfied with Milosevic to find something for himself. This a joint venture with only one goal - to remove government.
Q : SPO leader Vuk Draskovic said recently that there was no sense in participating at local and federal elections if the opposition didn't also manage to persuade government to hold the elections in Serbia on which, as he said, depends the whole future of Yugoslavia. United opposition so far hasn't succeeded in that persuasion - is there a way to pressure Milosevic to back down?
A : I don't think we will pressure Milosevic to hold early general elections in Serbia this year. He would hold them only if he were sure in his victory, and since he knows he will lose he avoids them. But I am certain that Milosevic, in case of defeat at federal and local elections to be held in autumn, will be forced to hold general elections already at the beginning of next year. Do not think that internal and external pressures leave no consequence on his regime. Many state officials might ask themselves: "Why should I have to take part in the barbarian end of Milosevic's rule?" Many people close to regime have profited greatly, they want to keep it after the changes and they also want to carry on with their lucrative undertakings. Therefore, there are many cracks in regime, but I do not expect that alone to create some kind of overthrow.
Q: You presided over past two meetings of opposition teams of experts who discussed joint election candidates. Public has an impression that there weren't any results since team members refused to discuss the matter with journalists. Are there any advances in those negotiations?
A: Of course there is some advance. The problem is that various parties have various ideas of opposition tactics. To form joint lists of elections candidates at this time or not. The main problem in opposition still is, and in my opinion cannot be solved fundamentally, rivalry between leader of Democratic party Zoran  Djindjic and president of Serbian restoration movement (SPO) Vuk Draskovic. All other opposition parties remain in shadow of their fight, which is mostly latent, but sometimes comes out into open. Their rivalry, of course, isn't enough to destroy united opposition, but has crippled us significantly. If Draskovic suggests something, you can rest assured Djindjic will refuse it, and same vice versa. When Djindjic suggested to make list of candidates, I was certain that Draskovic would refuse it and I was right. However, the fact remains that at the local elections with majority system the only chance for opposition to win lies in joint candidates and I think this time rational reasons will prove firmer than all other. But one should say that Milosevic's regime has, in a rather brutal way, been modifying election law according to a given moment. For example, apart from the local, all other elections are carried out according to proportional system so that for victory of opposition parties at federal or possible early Serbian state elections even two list of candidates will be enough, as was the case in Croatia, which is a very inspirational example for us in Serbia. However, situation in Serbia is different than the one that was in Croatia since HDZ peacefully turned over the power, and nobody is certain that Milosevic is ready to leave in case of election defeat. Another unfavourable factor is terror. There are brutal murders in Serbia every two or three days. In the last several years, chief of police, minister of defence and, recently, director of JAT (Yugoslav Air Company) were killed, and in such atmosphere of violence nobody is sure what consequences defeat of now ruling coalition would have.
Q: In Croatia and Slovakia a big role in the opposition victory was played by NGOs, which in various ways animated young people to vote. Until now, Milosevic was winning in Serbia mostly because voters below 30 refused to go to elections. How to persuade the young to vote here?
A: I think that the issue of young people in Serbia is reflected through the student movement "Resistance", They are very active, have their branches in almost all towns, their actions are humorous and effective, they are making the regime nervous, and they also show a great deal of political and civil courage since they don't quit their struggle to change the regime despite almost everyday arrests and bans of their gatherings. I think that "Resistance" will be very important in mobilising young persons to vote. Also, resistance to regime is spreading, "the ice is breaking in various places", I had a chance to see it personally since I travel around Serbia a lot - there is a general dissatisfaction with Milosevic's rule. Openly speaking, it hasn't yet reached the point where we could clearly see why is Serbia living in isolation and why is Yugoslav president indicted for war crimes. That question will have to be answered by the future democratic Serbia. However, most citizens refuse this regime because they are living in more and more poverty and without any perspective for getting better. The people realise that survival of the nation and state itself is at stake. According to all polls on public opinion, coalition of the left - SPS, JUL and Seselj's radicals will get, at best, 30 per cent of the general vote. In other words, the ruling coalition has no chance to win the decent elections, which Milosevic knows all too well and is therefore prolonging the elections, first announced for April. Now the regime doesn't mention them at all. Maybe situation in Serbia could be defined in this way: there is a great wish to change the government, but the question is - is there enough energy for such an undertaking?

Q: Isn't there also the issue of the fear of changes. Do Serbian citizens fear that they will be even worse off after change?
A: Milosevic has made a good judgement that the only way to at least somewhat stabilise his regime is to take control of the media. Escalation of violence over independent media started in the moment when opposition asked for early elections. Milosevic is a model of outdated politician, practically belonging to a kind of policy that was used in some European countries during 20s and 30s. It is a nationalistic populism, emphasised chauvinism with racist elements, unlimited use of power, redrawing the borders and speeches about "life space". All these elements exist also in Milosevic's program, but in one element he is a modern politician - he understands the power of media. That is why his regime is trying to mute electronic media in cities where SPO and Democratic party are in power with high frequency concessions which they are unable to pay so that the government can revoke their license. The government in that way tries to force citizens to watch only state television where the y can see and hear that opposition leaders are "traitors and foreign agents" and that the state will fall apart if such opposition ever comes to power. Such moves often cause counter-effect - media are defended not only by their journalists but also by citizens themselves, who in several towns inside Serbia managed to prevent inspectors from the Ministry of telecommunications, literally with their bodies, to take away the transmitters from local TV and radio stations. However, the fact is that most citizens fear regime more and more due to increased repression.
They understand that in country in which more than 50 per cent of the population has no job, and most of those employed has a pay of less than 100 DEM a month, there is no perspective, but for the change of government, but they are afraid the regime is ready to use even the most brutal measures to prevent changes. There are two dominant emotions in Serbia - wish to change the government and fear. Sometimes one is primary, sometimes the other. My feeling is that slowly and painfully there is developing a civil movement for changes in Serbia, which is formed of NGOs, independent media, syndicates, students... There is an American expression - "to die of thousand bruises", when the man bleeds to death without noticing. Milosevic's regime is bleeding from too many places so that it can't heal all the wounds. Today violence is pointed at parties, tomorrow it will be turned to media or students, but that endless game of violence can also become inefficient. If you fail to make an effect with violence, next time it has much smaller impact on people. Use of violence without any result liberates people from fear of repression.
Q : No government in Serbia or Yugoslavia managed to solve the problem of Kosovo. The current government even went to war with NATO over Kosovo, but still had to accept arrival of international forces in the province. In your opinion, how to solve the Kosovo crisis?
A : International community, which undertook responsibility for Kosovo, has obviously brought a political decision not to discuss status of Kosovo until the change of regime in Serbia and within general stabilisation and democratisation in the Balkans. Pact for stability in south-eastern Europe is the first try to do something in that sense. I think the status of Kosovo will remain open for a long time until there are conditions to solve accumulated problems of Balkans in a more serious way. Evidently, the opposition doesn't have enough courage to say to Serbian citizens that Kosovo will never again have the same political status within Serbia as it had until UN resolution 1244. Most local politicians, not only from government, but also from opposition, say that Kosovo, according to this resolution, remains part of Yugoslavia. That is true, but nobody dares say that Belgrade will never again have control over Kosovo. I don't believe that even the greatest optimists among politicians think that Belgrade will ever again return its political and economic control over that province.
Nobody has enough courage to say to the people that Kosovo in future will somehow remain part of the state federation, but that it will be a special status with Kosovo having all internal authority. However, neither foreign politicians have courage to say something about the future of Kosovo more openly, maybe because it still unknown or nobody wants to. First there must come a drastic improvement in security situation in Kosovo, which is now very bad, especially for minorities, and then return refugees, as in the whole region of former Yugoslavia. And after the period of protectorate on Kosovo there will be there, I believe, some better people in power on both sides and find a solution. There are many examples in Europe, like South Tyrol, with goodwill that produced agreement about special status or a similar solution. Let me be very personal: if I were the president of Serbia, and Veton Suroi president of Kosovo, I have no doubt that we would come to some kind of solution. The problem is that chances for the two us to find ourselves in a position to decide on this problem are very remote.

Q : Relations between Belgrade and Podgorica are worse than ever. From Djukanovic's and Milosevic's teams come fierce accusations, but, paradoxically, the government of Montenegro has so far decided to drop announced referendum on independence. Is Djukanovic defensive and can we, after economic embargo against Montenegro, expect a new Milosevic's action of bringing Montenegrin leadership in line?

A : I think that in Montenegro Milosevic won't do much more than he does now. He has his grip around small federal unit, international community exerts pressure on Montenegro to remain in Yugoslavia and thus practically does Milosevic's job. Finally, Djukanovic received economic aid for abroad and alleviated difficult economic situation in the country. But he is still in a very difficult position since a politician who cannot make serious political decisions risks to be defensive, and that is never fruitful in long term. I think Montenegrins wait for changes in Serbia, and only then will Montenegrin people decide whether it wants to live together with Serbia or not. There would be no risk of war with democratic government in Serbia and then Montenegro could, without any influence, decide on its fate. So, all of us who invested our political futures in the fall of Milosevic's regime  - Kosovar Albanians and Montenegrin citizens as well as Serbian democratic opposition must do the most to bring an end to the worst government in the Serbian history.

By Paulyuk Bykowski

Members of the National Organizing Committee of Chernobyl Road-2000 filed an appeal in the Moscow District Court in Minsk against the Minsk City Executive Council's prohibition of the mourning procession dedicated to the 14th anniversary of the Chernobyl catastrophe on April 26.
On April 10, several dozen Belarussian community representatives lead by corresponding member of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus Ivan Nikitchenka filed an application with the Minsk City Executive Council (MCEC) to hold the Charnobylski shlak-2000 (Chernobyl Road-2000) procession from Yakub Kolas Square along Frantisek Skorina Avenue to Independence Square for a meeting.
Separately from the National Organizing Committee, representatives of Zianon Pazniak's Conservative Christian Party, Belarussian People's Front (BPF), applied to MCEC to hold a procession on April 26 from Yakub Kolas Square to October Square, with a meeting on October Square.  Chernobyl Road-2000 marchers intended to meet on Yakub Kolas Square at 4:00 p.m., and Conservtive Christain Party supporters at 5:00 p.m.
City authorities refused to allow either group of applicants to hold a procession but agreed to the holding of a meeting on Bangalore Square.  Chernobyl Road-2000 organizers consider MCEC's changes in the format of the action illegal and applied to the court.  On April 21, they addressed authoritative international organizations concerning MCEC's prohibition of the traditional procession on the anniversary of the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.  In the document, they state that the authorities' actions are in violation of international conventions and agreements signed by Belarus, as well as national legislation. It was emphasized that Chernobyl Road-2000 would take place in any case, "although the authorities are once again preparing wide-scale provocation."  The Organizing Committee is calling on the international community to take the necessary measures so that the "provocation planned by the authorities" does not take place.
Regardless of the court decision, the opposition intends to gather on Yakub Kolas Square, proceed along the main street of the Belarussian capital with icons, a bell and portraits of those who died in the accident and then hold a meeting.  This  ncompromising stance threats a repitition of the situation on March 25, when law enforcement agents used force in their efforts to prevent a demonstration at the celebration of Freedom Day.
The newspaper requested that Chernobyl Road-2000 National Organizing Committee member Viachaslau Siuchyk comment on the current situation.  He is also vice chairman of the Renaissance Movement BPF and BPF Party, both of which are led by Vincuk Viacorka, and went on a 21-day hunger strike along with Professor Yury Khadyka while being held after a criminal case was initiated in connection with the organization of Chernobyl Road-96:
"Unfortunately, prohibition is the tradition decision of the city executive council, but I hope that there will still be some sort of negotiations and a new decision will be possible.  But it should be remembered that the majority of Chernobyl Roads held in our country were peaceful in character.  That includes those that were not sanctioned by the authorities, such as the first demonstrations, which took place under the communists and without their permission.
"Chernobyl Road-96 would have been peaceful if the power structures had not been ordered to stage a bloodbath.  One day before the demonstration, representatives of the opposition and power structures met in Gennady Karpenko's office and an agreement was reached that the demonstration would be held in the form that it took on the following day.  The authorities violated the agreement and there was repression and criminal cases.  All of that had serious repercussions throughout the world and the action practically put a halt to the Kremlin's occupational plans for Belarus for a certain time.
"Nonetheless, Chernobyl Road is first of all an action of mourning, without intentional political overtones.  The consequences of the Chernobyl tragedy, unfortunately, have not been fully comprehended by our society. It should be remembered that it was the first Chernobyl Roads that made our people aware of the truth about Chernobyl, which was being hidden by the authorities.
"A catastrophe can occur in any country, and it cannot be rules out that they would lie to the populace about the presence of risk in a democratic society as well, and hold May Day demonstrations and force people to consume contaminated food products by mixing them in with pure products up to the limit. 

"Belarussians will face the consequences of Chernobyl for a very long time still, and these consequences can be minimized only under a normal state regime.  Therefore, Chernobyl Road was, is and will remain a political action.  It is an action to save our people.  The prohibitions of the authorities (both the communists and those now) of the Chernobyl Road processions are completely logical although, at first glance, it would seem that the authorities themselves ought to participate in them."

  370004, BAKU, AZERBAIJAN, Icheri Sheher, 4&6 2nd Mirza Mansur Str.
  Tel/Fax: (+99412) 972108
SPECIAL ISSUE - April 30,2000
On April 29 2000, the Democratic Congress of oppositional parties has tried to hold an unauthorised demonstration for free and fair elections in the country under the slogans "To make changes on the Electoral law", "To change the Central Electoral Commissions", and others in Baku, Azerbaijan.
Nearly 20 thousands of people of Azerbaijan gathered in the streets near the square "Fizuli". There was a clash between the police and demonstrators. The demonstrators and leaders of the oppositional parties were beaten and injured by the police. The demonstration was broadcasted by the local TV channel ANS, Space, and other foreign channels. Several members of the oppositional parties, local NGOs, and others were detained by the police. They are still kept under arrest. Let`s note that Ulvi Hakimov, president of the Azerbaijan National Democracy Foundation [ANDF], is also amongst the arrestees. We have got some of their names:
 1.    Fizuli Rajabov-member of the Popular Front Party
 2.    Gurban Gurbanov- the Popular Front
 3.    Arif Hajiev-Party Musavat
 4.    Vagif Hajibeyli- Party "Ahrar"
 5.    Ulvi Hakimov- the Popular Front
 6.    Kemala Salahova-the Popular Front
 7.    Khanlar Dadashov-Party Musavat
 8.    Elshan Mammadov-the Popular Front
 9.    Zaur Rajabov-Party Musavat
 10.   Mazahir Mammadli-Party Musavat
 11.   Tural Mammadov-Party Musavat
 12.   Yalchin Aliev-Party Musavat
 13.   Mehman Gafarli-non-party
 14.   Hikmet Kazimov-the Popular Front
 15.   Araz Rahimov-the Popular Front
 16.   Ismail Aydemirov- non-party
 17.   Panah Huseinov-  People`s Party,was beaten and taken to the hospital
 18.   Zakir Huseinov-Party Musavat
 19.   Akif Najafov-Party Musavat
 20.   Alisakit Guliev-the Popular Front
 21.   Imamverdi Garayev-the Popular Front
 22.   Ibrahim Bayramov-non-party
 23.   Namaz Ahmadov-non-party
 24.   Nadir Aliev-Party "Ahrar"
 There is no information about the fate of the arrestees, yet.
We shall give details about this demonstration in our next issues.
SPECIAL ISSUE - May 1 , 2000

As we informed, on April 19 2000, the Democratic Congress of oppositional parties tried to hold a demonstration at the central square of Baku for free and fair elections in Azerbaijan. There happened a clash among the demonstrators and police. The demonstrators were beaten and some were arrested.
Now we have got the information that on May 1, five arrestees detained at the 17th police station of Nerimanov district Police Department of Baku were charged with disciplinary rule by the Nerimanov district Court.
 1.    Ulvi Hakimov, member of the Popular Front Party, president of the Azerbaijan National Democracy Foundation [ANDF]- 3 days
 2.    Tural Mammadli- member of Party Musavat- 5 days
 3.    Tabriz Gasimov- Member of the People's Party of Azerbaijan-5 days
 4.    Yalchin Aliev- Party Musavat-5 days
 5.    Elshan Samadov- 5 days.
Then Elshan Samadov was charged with Article 188-3 and 189-1 and 2 of the Criminal Code of Azerbaijan Republic [Resistance to the police]. He was not allowed to contact with his lawyer and family. Sakit Mammadyarov, an investigator from the Yasamal district prosecutor, does not allow Mr. Samadov to contact with his lawyer. He has called a policeman Zaur Ahmadov as witness, as if Mr. Samadov beat him. Elshan Samadov wants to apply to the court with a claim that the deputies of the Azeri parliament, Mirmahmud Fattaiev and Gulamhusein Aliev, were witnessed that he did not beat anybody. Elshan Samadov is a member of the Popular Front Party.

It is expected that the detained at the 16th police station will also be charged with the disciplinary rules.

The information was given by Ulvi Hakimov, editor of the "Azerbaijan" bulletin, who is also under arrest now, from the 17th police station, by phone.


Dear Sirs/Ladies,
On April 29 2000, the Democratic Congress held a rally at the Fizuli square of Baku under the slogan "Free Elections". During that rally, Ulvi Hakimov, president of ANDF, advisor of the Popular Front chairman, was detained and charged for 3 days imprisonment by the Nerimanov district court of Baku city. Mr. Hakimov was released on May 2.

    Yesterday, at 4PM Ulvi Hakimov had to be released, but he was kept illegally for another 8 hours and released at 12 o'clock at night. This and hundreds of another facts must be denounced as an existence of police willfulness in Azerbaijan, the act of law-enforcement agencies against the Azerbaijani Constitution, laws, and international legal norms, and governance of Aliev regime by communist and administrative order methods.

The ANDF would like to express its deepest regards to all people, organizations, international parties, information and press agencies, our friends and partners, who are struggling for releasing of those detained at the April 29 rally and protecting the rights of people still kept under arrest.
At present, over 30 people are still kept under arrest at the police departments and temporary isolations. Amongst them are Panah Huseinov, chairman of the Azerbaijan People's Party, (arrested for 13 days), Arif Hajiev, secretary of the Party Musavat (13 days), and Vagif Hajibeyli, chairman of the Party "Ahrar" (10 days). The elementary rights of these persons were violated, they were not allowed to meet with their lawyers, to phone their families, were not given paper and pen for writing compliant, and were illegally sentenced without any trial. They have been really taken hostages by the current government. 

Besides reminding these facts, ANDF claims the immediate release of all detained by the anti-democratic regime of Heidar Aliev and aggressor government at the April 29 rally.
ANDF appeals to the international community and free people of the world and calls them to help people raised a struggle for democracy, free elections, and civil society in Azerbaijan, and put an end to the uncontrollability of the criminal government. Democracy and human rights are not a domestic affair of any country. Democracy is a guarantor of your and our freedom. For Your and Our Freedom! Let God helps us in this way!
"On April 29 2000, at 17.30 I was kept by the police in front of the Republic palace and taken to the 22nd Police station of Nesimi district", was said in the appeal of Arif Hajiev, secretary of the Party Musavat, detained during the April 29 rally, to the prosecutor general Zakir Garalov. In Mr. Hajiev`s words, a person, who did not introduce himself, at the Nesimi district court told him "I gave you 3 days arrest" after interrogation. Then, Hajiev was kept at the ward of Nesimi district police station 2 days without giving any explanation and announcing any sentence.
On May 1, he was taken to the temporary isolation ward in Garasheher: "While I asked the reason of my arrest several times, I was not answered. There was not announced decision about my arrest and explained my rights. In fact, I am taken hostage by the official bodies".
Arif Hajiev has asked the prosecutor general to take measures for restoring his violated rights, releasing him, and drawing to responsibility being guilty in this act.
    Panah Huseinov, chairman of the Azerbaijan People's Party, arrested during the April 29 rally, has appealed to the prosecutor general of Azerbaijan, Mr. Zakir Garalov. The appeal says that after being detained during that action, Huseinov was taken to the 22nd Police station of Nesimi district. A person, not introducing himself, informed about his 3 days arrest, but did not give any additional information.
Huseinov was not given any explanation about the reasons of his arrest, was not allowed him to meet with a lawyer and given a paper for writing an appeal. After a 2-days arrest in the ward,  Huseinov was taken to the temporary isolation ward in Garasheher: "I don't know, why I am taken here, for which period, and by which decision".
"Mr. Prosecutor, I have not been explained my rights during this period and provided my defense. I have to write this appeal on the paper, which I found by chance", says Mr. Huseinov and asks Mr. Garalov to prevent this willfulness and punish the guiltier.
Copyright (c) Azerbaijan National Democracy Foundation (ANDF) 2000

Special addition : NEW AT TOL
    Transitions Online (TOL) ( is the leading Internet magazine covering Central and Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and the former Soviet Union. If you aren't already a member, fill out our registration form at <> to receive your free two-month trial membership. If you'd like to become a TOL member right away, go to <>. And if you're a citizen of a post-communist country, go to <> to sign up for a FREE annual
    Three more installments of the TOL Annual Surveys for 1999 exclusive overviews of individual countries in the region written for TOL by top local and Western analysts and edited by regional specialist Professor Peter Rutland of Wesleyan University. These valuable resources follow the fine tradition established by the OMRI/East-West Institute Annual Surveys. Both sets of reports, old and new, can be found in our expanded Country Files ( along with links and maps for the 27 countries in the post-communist world.
    Posted this week:
    SLOVAKIA: Stumbling Forward
    by Sharon Fisher
    "De-Meciarization" was never going to be easy. But despite several corruption scandals, unpopular austerity measures, and bickering within the coalition, Prime Minister Mikulas Dzurinda's   government remained relatively intact--albeit less popular. After getting the thumbs-up from the European Union at Helsinki, Slovakia is snapping at the heels of its sibling to the West, the Czech Republic. The question remains whether the Slovak people--especially in light of the growing popularity of Meciar's HZDS--can remain patient.
    GEORGIA: A Return to Eurasia?
    by Cory Welt
    Last year was one of big dreams and bitter disappointments  for Georgia. As the country struggled to enter the secure world of NATO, gain admittance into the EU, and pull its economy up by the bootstraps, less-than-democratic elections and corruption scandals sidetracked its progress. Meanwhile, a bloody Chechen war moved dangerously close to Georgia's borders, prompting Moscow to shorten its southern neighbor's leash.
    LITHUANIA: A Year of Political Turmoil
    by Terry Clarke and Brian Bartels
    With three governments  and a Russian-related economic crisis, Lithuania experienced a tumultuous year. But surprisingly, the turbulence did not shake the democratic foundations of the country. Though many questioned, for example, the extent to which firms should be privatized or the ethics of particular political parties, no one argued against the democratic system that provoked the political and economic ups and downs in the first place.
    MEDIA: The Media Stranglehold
    by Andrej Krickovic
    Franjo Tudjman's HDZ may have vacated power, but it has left a trail of slime on the Croatian media scene. Though still-loyal state television remains unwilling to give airtime to let the new government explain its policies, the recent appointment of a  prominent journalist to the position of general director may shake the station's power base. Among the other thorny issues is the collapsing newspaper distribution giant Tisak--the victim of wide-scale embezzlement--and the muddy ownership and financial woes of three of the country's dailies.
    OPINIONS: The "Island of Democracy" Sinks
    by L.M. Handrahan
    Kyrgyzstan's young democracy hasn't seen anything like this: countrywide protests and hunger strikes following the allegedly rigged February elections, and retaliatory arrests on the part of  the government. International reaction has been minimal, but the uprest gives the West a prime chance to buck its misguided policy of placing all its bets on one supposedly democratic leader. Otherwise, disgruntled protesters could turn to fundamentalism or another leader as bad as Askar Akayev.
    OPINIONS: Taming the Blair
    by Elena Chinyaeva
    Internationally, he's making friends and charming the media--the little matter of a brutal war in Chechnya aside. Still, Russian President-elect Vladimir Putin has yet to prove he can make the same waves on the homefront. Though Western leaders seem to be jumping on the bandwagon (saying Putin is "easy to talk to") Russians, though still optimistic, have yet to see him unveil a concrete plan to rid the country of corruption and strengthen the economy.
    compiled by our correspondents throughout the region
    Meciar is busted out ... Soccer hooligans storm Hungarian game ... Serbian diaspora says their money for the opposition is staying put ... Romanians protest guide to wife-beating ... Bulgarian government under fire for corruption ... Belarus denies signing arms deal with Iraq ... Wine and tobacco will go unprivatized in Moldova ... Kuchma blasts his new cabinet ... Putin says Russian economy is on the upswing ... Estonian hacker commits suicide ... Martial law may make a comeback in Lithuania ... Central Asian countries sign security deal ... Shevardnadze amnesties jailbirds ...
    TOL is seeking interns to spend the summer in Prague. Positions are available in the editorial, marketing, and web departments. Interested applicants should send a resume and cover letter to Luke Allnutt at:
    Nationalities Papers is the only journal in the world which deals exclusively with all nationalities of the former USSR, and also with national minorities in Eastern and Central European countries. The problems >and importance of over 140 million people are treated with the disciplinary and methodological contexts of Post-Soviet and Europe-Asia studies. Of central concern is the fate of the Balts, Ukranians, Jews, and the peoples of Central Asia and the Caucasus.
    Nationalities Papers, published on behalf of the Association for the Study of Nationalities, is an international and multidisciplinary journal with contributors and readers throughout North America, Western and Eastern Europe, the Far East, Japan, and the People's Republic of China.
    For further information or to request a sample copy, please contact Taylor
    & Francis Ltd at:
    Tel: +44 (0)1256 813000   Fax: +44 (0)1256 330245
    As part of its efforts to become self-sustainable and serve as a model for other nonprofit organizations, Transitions Online has begun offering interested advertisers the possibility to reach thousands of readers through our weekly electronic mailings and on our site. Check out our newly redesigned media kit ( and find out how to: instantly reach a diverse, international audience with a demonstrated interest in the post-communist world -- people guaranteed to want to hear what's new in products and services dealing with the region and increase your company or institution's exposure by targeting the English-speaking elite in all of the 27 countries we cover.