Mostar, 24. sijecnja 2004.(KTA)
 

OCEKUJEMO POSTENO RJESENJE NA DOBRO SVIH GRADJANA
 

Biskup hercegovackih biskupija mons. dr. Ratko Peric uputio je pismo Visokom predstavniku medjunarodne zajednice u BiH gosp. Paddy Ashdownu koje prenosimo u cijelosti:

Gospodine Visoki predstavnice!

Zahvaljujem Vam na susretu najavljenu za 23. sijecnja ovdje na Ordinarijatu. U vezi s naznacenom temom - razmjena misljenja o preustroju grada Mostara - zivo je zainteresirana za pravedan gradski preustroj i Katolicka Crkva u Hercegovini koja ima svoje sjediste u Mostaru. Ne samo zato sto kao Mostarsko-Duvanjska Biskupija ocekuje posteno rjesenje na dobro svih gradjana, nego i zato sto ona u ovome gradu ima gotovo trecinu svojih vjernika hrvatske nacionalnosti. zelio bih Vam ovom prigodom uruciti ovu promemoriju, koja sadrzi stav ovoga Biskupskog ordinarijata o tome pitanju, i ujedno peticiju da se u svojoj konacnoj odluci vodite nacelima istine, pravde i mira, odnosno autenticne demokracije."Bolesno tkivo". U ova pos ljednja dva-tri tjedna vise je puta izgovoreno iz krugova Medjunarodne zajednice, bilo od Vas osobno, bilo od Vasega zamjenika ambasadora Wernera Wnedta, i u dnevnim listovima objavljeno, da je Mostar: "poseban slucaj", "bolesno tkivo", "crna rupa", "specijalan polozaj" grada u cijeloj BiH. I da bi grad s novim preustrojem opcina i uprave trebao konacno ozdraviti i rasti kao i drugi gradovi u BiH i u Svijetu.
Nije suvisno spomenuti da je u ovom gradu bilo "bolesna tkiva" i "crnih rupa" i prije nego je Medjunarodna zajednica dosla da nas daytonski modelira i neprestano revizionira. Samo dva podatka:
Prvi, u stotinu godina uprave gradom i opcinom, od 1890. do 1990. Hrvati, koji su izmedju tri nazocna naroda imali uvijek kakvu-takvu vecinu, nisu imali mogucnosti imati gradonacelnika iz svoga nacionalnog birackog tijela vise od tri-cetiri godine. Naglasavam: tri-cetiri godine u tih stotinu godina! Ne znam jesu li i toliko. Kako se ta bolesna pojava i crna pukotina odrazavala na ovaj narod, nece Vam biti tesko dokuciti. Posljedice su toga stanja danas ocite.
Drugi je podatak objavio jucer u zagrebackom Vjesniku dr. Ante Markotic, kompetentan strucnjak. Kako nam je bilo citati tu "bolesnu pojavu", nastalu iz laznoga preustroja gradskih cetvrti (izbaceni su iz gradskoga popisa: Cim, Ilici, Rodos, Vihovici i Vrapcici - vidi Statisticki zavod, knjige VIII., XI. i XIII. popisa stanovnistva iz 1953.) i lazna brojenja sve do posljednjega popisa, ja Vam ne mogu adekvatno objasniti.
Prema "stvarnom" stanju svih je stanovnika iz nacionalnih skupina bilo nesto vise nego prema "sluzbenom" brojenju, ali Hrvata je u "sluzbenoj statistici blizu 11.000 manje. Valjda ih je bilo nesto i medju "ostalima"! Znam da za "sluzbene politicare "stvarno" stanje ne znaci nista osim "sluzbene" statistike. Dakle:
Grad Mostar ima prema popisu iz 1991: a stvarno:
1991: * * * * * * and truly:

Croats: 21,795 * * * 32,600

Muslims: 25,929 * * * 28,169

Serbs: 14,142 * * * 17,287

Others: 13,999 * * * 15,074

Tu crnu rupu nitko ne zacepljuje, niti to bolesno tkivo itko zaljecuje, nego se samo dijagnosticira.
Daytonsko tkivo. Onda dolazi ratna 1992., ziva tragedija medju stanovnicima i narodima u ovome gradu. I nastupa nam daytonska 1995. godina. Ono sto nam osobito upada u oci jest cinjenica da Dayton - prema neumornu ponavljanju i medjunarodnih medija i medijatora - uzima grad Mostar kao paradigmu bolesti, nereda, nepravde u BiH i stavlja ga medju svoje prioritete. A ako cemo bas strogo pravno, i nije to tako. Zagrebacki profesor prava, dr. B. BAKOTIC priredio je Daytonski sporazum, I. svezak nesluzbenog teksta Daytonskoga sporazuma na hrvatskom jeziku, Zagreb, 1998. U uvodnoj biljesci, str. I., pise: "Naime, prije spomenutog Daytonskog sporazuma, u istom je mjestu, uz ostalo, 10. studenog 1995. potpisan Daytonski sporazum o uspostavi Federacije BiH s aneksom pod nazivom Usuglasena nacela za Prijelazni statut Grada Mostara (tekst na engleskom), koji nije sastavni dio ovoga Daytonskog sporazuma? (nas kurziv). Dakle, ni Mostar ni Prijelazni mu statut ne pripadaju tzv. Daytonskom sporazumu u strogom smislu rijeci. Ali prepustimo to pravnim strucnjacima, a vratimo se konkretnom "bolesnom tkivu".
Premda je Banja Luka prema popisu iz 1991. imala nesto preko 50% srpskoga stanovnistva, a danas ima preko 90% Srba - sto bi u ocima zdravih ljudi i lijecnika bilo "metastazirano tkivo" i "crna rupa" od barem 40% kratera, na egzistencijalnu stetu prognana hrvatskoga i muslimanskoga zivlja; premda je Sarajevo, o kojem je takodjer u Daytonu 12. studenoga 1995. potpisan sporazum, i kako to da Sarajevo ne ulazi u Daytonski sporazum poput Mostara" - prema popisu iz 1991. imalo preko 50% muslimanskoga stanovnistva, a danas preko 90% istoimenoga stanovnistva - sto je, ponavljam, znak takodjer "metastazirana tkiva" i "crnih rupa" od barem 40%, na stetu hrvatskoga i srpskoga pucanstva, to se Vas kao Visokoga predstavnika u BiH apsolutno nista ne tice. Vi, na zalost, kazete da niste kompetentni za to, kao da je Banja Luka u Velikoj Britaniji, a Sarajevo, iz kojega upravljate ovom zemljom, u Maloj Aziji. Vi ste jedino zaduzeni i kompetentni za grad Mostar, koji i danas, kao i kroz stotinu posljednjih godina ima hrvatsku vecinu, i kompetentni ste da ovdje donesete definitivno rjesenje i izlijecite "bolesno tkivo". Iz svih dosadasnjih naslucaja i nagovjestaja Vi, ako ne dodje do prihvacanja ponudjena Wintersteinova izvjesca i do rjesenja one samo 10% preostale "crne rupe" prema politickom sporazumu medju strankama i narodima, kanite izdati odluku o jedinstvenosti grada i o nemogucnosti prevlasti ijednoga naroda, odnosno o ukidanju paralelizama i ukidanju demokratske vladavine u ovoj lokalnoj samoupravi. To da moze i treba biti jedinstven grad i da ne treba suvisnih i stetnih paralelizama, sigurno ce se sloziti vecina hrvatskoga pucanstva. Ali da treba dokinuti tu stalnu i stabilnu hrvatsku vecinu u gradu i ne postovati demokraciju kao vladavinu vecine, to je, postovani gospodine Visoki predstavnice, stvaranje novoga "bolesna tkiva", otvaranje novih "crnih rupa" i proglasenje grada Mostara "posebnim slucajem - neizljecivim bolesnikom na Neretvi!
Ne mogu ni pomisljati da Vas i Vasusu strucnu skupinu s gospodinom N. Wintersteinom na celu, treba poucavati ikakvu pravnom rjesenju, jer nije u pitanju pravna logika, nego arbitrazna politika. Vi ste opremljeni, zaduzeni i poslani iz Svijeta da ovdje unesete europske standarde i vrhunske domete demokracije. Ili ste poslani da samo u Mostaru donosite arbitrarno rjesenje? Hrvati grada Mostara koji su stalno bili kvantitativno zakidani, ovim ponudjenim rjesenjima za reguliranje bitnoga pitanja u Statutu - izbornoga sustava s obzirom na sastav Gradskoga vijeca - smatraju da su sada i kvalitativno osteceni, jer ta rjesenja nisu uopce pravno odrziva niti u skladu s domacm pravnim sustavom, dapace suprotna su rjesenjima kakva se primjenjuju u lokalnim izborima u drugim gradovima i jedinicama lokalne samouprave u BiH. A pogotovo su suprotna odredbi Europske povelje o lokalnoj samoupravi. Kao da grad Mostar mora i dalje biti crna rupa. I je li to - sada otvoreno pitam - samo zato sto je u pitanju predmnijevana hrvatska vecina?
Ponudjenim prijedlogom da svaka sadasnja opcina daje jednak broj vijecnika, bez obzira na njezin "stvarni" ili "sluzben" broj stanovnika u gradu, ili se zeli zadrzati podijeljenost grada i ostaviti mogucnost stalne svadje u Vijecu da se ne bi grad slucajno razvijao i funkcionirao kao cjelina, ili se na neprihvatljiv i nedemokratski nacin zeli ne samo ograniciti, nego i sprijeciti demokratska volja eventualne hrvatske vecine u Gradskom vijecu na listopadskim izborima, iako su predvidjeni i ustavno regulirani mehanizmi zastite vitalnog interesa i jamstva da nijedan gradjanin nece biti zapostavljen? Ne znam zaista sto je posrijedi.
Vas eventualni odgovor o usporedbi opcinske ili gradske razine s drzavnom razinom, gdje se zasticuje konstitutivnost naroda u zemlji, u ovom slucaju ne vrijedi, jer jedno je zastita konstitutivnoga naroda na ra zini drzavne cjeline, a drugo su lokalne samouprave gradova i drugih jedinica. Ili onda promijenite citav sustav u zemlji i primijenite kriterije Mostara na Sarajevo i Gorazde, odnosno na Banju Luku i Brcko i sve druge be-ha gradove!
Prepadanja. Vi nas ne prestajete placiti, kao djecu, da necemo u demokratsku Europu ako ne prihvatimo te nedemokratske ponude kao rjesenje u ovom gradu, tj. da ne smije upravljati demokratska izborna vecina, da se ne smije priznati glasacka, biracka i vijecnicka vecina niti primijeniti demokratsko nacelo te iste Europe, kao da smo negdje u dubokim prasumama nekada kolonijalne Indije ili africke djungle, a ne u Europi iz koje preuzimamo demokratske kriterije.
Stari most. Isto tako neuvjerljivo nam djeluje neprestano prizivanje i posvjescivanje kakav ce izgled dati ovaj grad, ako svojevoljno ne pristane na Vase navjescivano rjesenje, kada sljedecega srpnja dodje Svijet na otvaranje Staroga mosta. Stari most, koji je na poseban nasin "bolesno tkivo" i "crna rupa" u ovome gradu, ne spaja hrvatsku i muslimansku obalu grada - uostalom i na jednoj i na drugoj strani nalazi se muslimanska vecina - niti je on duhovna kohezija ovoga grada, nego mnogo vise "kamen mali smutnje velike", pretvoren u politikantsku lopticu i domace i medjunarodne igre. Ako ovaj grad ne bude pocivao na demokratskim nacelima prihvacenima od svega kulturna i napredna svijeta, koja i od Vas s pravom i nadom ocekujemo, onda budite uvjereni da nece pocivati ni na pjesackom kamenom Starom mostu! Referendum. Mostarski Hrvati, koji kao katolici pripadaju ovoj Biskupiji, pozvani su da sljedece nedjelje, 25. u mjesecu, izicu na referendum i ocituju svoju demokratsku volju s obzirom na pitanje: Jesu li za grad Mostar kao jednu opcinu i jednu izbornu jedinicu i izborni postupak za gradsko vijece kao i u drugim jedinicama lokalne samouprave u BiH? Vi ste ocijenili da to nije mudar potez, nego, dapace, opasan, cak i posve beskoristan s Vasega politickog motrista. Upravo je cudno kako ne zelite cuti glas naroda, i to po svoj prilici vecinskoga naroda u ovome gradu, sto on misli, sto zeli i kako vidi svoj vlastiti polozaj u Mostaru. Ne mislite da jedna gradjanska tribina, makar i s Visokim predstavnikom, moze zamijeniti taj uhodani demokratski nacin ocitovanja vlastite politicke volje naroda? Ne mozemo ne podrzati takav demokratski oblik izrazavanja narodne volje u ovom presudnom trenutku i pitanju grada Mostara.
Isusov savjet. Gospodin Isus na jednom mjestu govori kako mudar covjek nece graditi kuzu na pijesku, nego na hridini, stijeni (Mt 7, 24-27), kao sto je i On sam sagradio Crkvu svoju na Stijeni - Petru. Ali ovdje u nasem slucaju, Vi nagovjescujete da kanite podici buducnost ovoga grada ne na liticama Neretve zdrave i opceprihvacene europske demokracije, nego na neretvanskom pijesku bratstvo-jedinstvene uravnilovke! Kako cemo se u takvoj eventualnoj odluci s Vama sloziti i kako cemo Vam biti zahvalni za takvo nedemokratsko rjesenje, dok istodobno "perete ruke" od "bolesna tkiva" u daytonskom Sarajevu i "crnih rupa" u Banjoj Luci - da poimence spomenem ta dva biskupijska sjedista " kao i u drugim "bolesnim" gradovima sirom BiH!

Postovani Lorde, Visoki predstavnice!

Uvjeren sam da zelite dobar i siguran zivot svakomu gradjaninu ovoga grada, kao sto to cesto isticete. Ali ne vjerujem da to zelite na racun hrvatske vecine gradjana Mostara. zelio bih vjerovati da cete u ovom pitanju imati i politicke hrabrosti i europske mudrosti da se opredijelite za pravedno i demokratsko rjesenje. Vidimo da je vrijeme doslo da se podje novim putem, mozda tezim za Visokoga predstavnika, ali sigurno boljim za Mostar, cijelu BiH i za sve ljude dobre volje, stoji u dopisu koji potpisuje biskup mons. dr. Ratko Peric.(kta)

Bishop's Letter to Hon. High Representative of BiH.

Mostar, 24 january, 2004

Honourable High Representative,

Thank you for the appointment you wish to make at this Chancery Office on 23 January. Regarding the announced theme - an exchange of thoughts on the reorganization of the city of Mostar - the Catholic Church in Herzegovina with its center in Mostar, is very much interested in a just organization of the city. This is not only for the reason that the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno expects an honest solution for the good of all the citizens, but also due to the fact that it has one-third of its faithful in the city who are of Croat nationality. I therefore submit this pro-memoria, which contains the position of the Diocesan Chancery on this question, and I also appeal to you, that in making your final decision, you may be guided by the principles of truth, justice and peace, as well as authentic democracy.

"Sick tissue". In these last two-three weeks, many statements were made by the International community, by you personally or by your deputy, Ambassador Werner Wnendt, published in the daily journals, that Mostar is considered a "particular case", "sick tissue", "black hole", "special status" city in all of B-H and in the world.

It is not superfluous to mention here that "sick tissue" and "black-holes" have been in this city even before the International community arrived to model us according to Dayton and constantly revise us. Consider two facts:

Firstly. In the hundred year history of the city and municipality, from 1890 to 1990, of the three national groups present, the Croats always had some kind of majority, yet they did not have the possibility of having a mayor from their national ranks for more than three or four years in that period. I emphasize: only three to four years out of a total of one hundred! IÂ’m not even sure if it was that long. It will not be hard for you to deduce how this sickness and black-hole affected our people. The consequences of that situation are quite clear today.

Secondly. Another fact was published yesterday in the Zagreb daily Vjesnik, by dr. Ante Markotiæ, an expert in the field. I cannot adequately articulate how difficult it was to read about the “sickness” which resulted in a false reorganization of the city districts (those thrown out of the city census were: Cim, Iliæi, Rodoè, Vihoviæi, and Vrapèiæi - see Statistièki zavod, volumes VIII, XI, XIII, population census of 1953) and false calculations made right up to the most recent census.

According to the "true" state, the number of citizens from the national groups were higher than in the "official" census, yet in the "official" census, there are almost 11.000 less Croats. Maybe they wound up amongst the "others"! Knowing that for "official" politicians the "true" status doesnÂ’t mean anything, here are the "official" statistics:

The City of Mostar according to the census of

1991: * * * * * * and truly:

Croats: 21,795 * * * 32,600

Muslims: 25,929 * * * 28,169

Serbs: 14,142 * * * 17,287

Others: 13,999 * * * 15,074


This black-hole hasnÂ’t been closed up by anyone, nor has this sick tissue ever been healed, it is only diagnosed.

Dayton "tissue". In 1992 came the beginning of the war, a real tragedy for the citizens and national groups of this city. Then came 1995, the year of Dayton. That which we particularly find irritating, is the fact that Dayton - according to the unceasing statements of the international media and mediators - consider the city of Mostar as a paradigm of sickness, disorder, injustice in B-H and places it amongst its priorities. Yet if one wishes to be legally meticulous, then things aren’t exactly so. Dr. B. Bakotiæ, a professor of Law in Zagreb, prepared Daytonski sporazum, 1st volume of the unofficial text of the Dayton agreement in Croatian, Zagreb, 1998. In his introductory note on p. I, he writes: "Before the mentioned Dayton agreement, in the same city, amongst other things, on 10 November 1995 the Dayton agreement was signed on the establishment of the Federation of B-H with an annex titled Agreed principles for a Transitory Statute of the City of Mostar (English text) which is not an essential part of this Dayton Agreement (our italics). Hence, neither Mostar nor its Transitory Statute fall under the so-called Dayton Agreement in the strict sense of the terms. Yet we can leave this to the legal experts, and go back to the actual "sick tissue".

While Banja Luka according to the census of 1991 had a Serb population of just over 50%, and today is over 90% Serb – which in the eyes of healthy people and physicians would be considered "metastasized tissue" and a "black-hole" with a 40% crater, existentially harmful to the expelled Croat and Muslim populations; while Sarajevo (which also is a part of the Dayton Agreement of 12 November 1995, and yet in reality it does not enter into the Agreement as Mostar does?) according to the census of 1991 had a Muslim population of over 50% and today has over 90% of the same national group - which is, I repeat, a sign of "metastasized tissue" and "black holes" of at least 40%, existentially harmful to the Croat and Serb populations, and yet you as the High Representative in B-H absolutely couldn’t care less about it. Unfortunately, you have said that this does not enter your competence, as if Banja Luka were in Great Britain or Sarajevo the city you administer from in Asia Minor. You seem to be only empowered and competent for the city of Mostar, which today, as for the last hundred years, has had a Croat majority, and you are competent to bring definite solutions here and to heal the "sick tissue". From all the announcements and forewarnings made so far, if the proposed Winterstein report is not accepted and if a solution is not found for the remaining 10% of the "black-hole", according to the political agreement between parties and peoples, you intend to make a decision on the unification of the city and on the impossibility of the predominance of any national group, which means the elimination of parallelisms and the abolition of democratic governance at this local level. Most of the Croats would certainly agree that the city should and must be unified, and that excessive and harmful parallelisms are unnecessary. Yet eliminating the constant and stable Croat majority in the city and disrespecting democracy as the rule of majority, would be, honourable Mr. High Representative, the formation of new "sick tissue", the opening of new "black-holes" and the proclamation of the city of Mostar as a "particular case" - an incurable sick tissue on the Neretva!

I do not pretend to teach you or your expert team along with Mr. N. Winterstein on any legal solutions, because legal logic is not in question here, but rather political arbitration. You have been empowered, authorized and sent off from the World to introduce European standards here and the highest level of democracy. Or have you been sent out to bring an arbitrary solution only to Mostar? The Croats of the city of Mostar, who have always been quantitatively cheated, with this proposed resolution on the regulation of an essential question in the Statute - the election system with regard to the formation of the City council - believe that they are now being qualitatively deprived, since these solutions are not even legally viable, nor are they in accord with the local legal system. In fact, they are contrary to the solutions that are in force in local elections in other cities and localities, of the local self-governing bodies in B-H. They are also above all, contrary to the regulations of the European Charter on local self-governments. It seems almost as if the city of Mostar must remain a "black hole". And is all this - now IÂ’m asking frankly - only because the question involves the presupposition of having a Croat majority?

The proposed solution that every existing municipality would have the same number of counselors, without regard to its "true" or "official" number of citizens in the city, leads to either maintaining the city divided and opening up the possibility of constant bickering in the Council so that the city could not possibly develop and function as a whole; or is it an attempt to not only limit in an unacceptable and undemocratic way, but to also suppress the democratic will of the eventual Croat majority in the City Council at the October elections?; even though there are mechanisms foreseen and constitutionally regulated that protect vital interests and guarantees that not a single citizen would be discriminated? I truly donÂ’t know whatÂ’s the matter about?

Your eventual response on the comparison of the municipal or city level with the national level, with the protection of the constitutive nature of the peoples of the country, does not apply in this case because the protection of the constitutive character of the national groups at the national level is one thing, while local self-governments and localities are another. Why not change the entire system in the country then and apply the criteria for Mostar on Sarajevo and Goražde, or on Banja Luka and Brèko and all the other cities of B-H!

Scare tactics. You do not cease to scare us, like children, that we will not enter into democratic Europe if we do not accept these undemocratic offers as a solution for this city, which means that the elected democratic majority cannot administer here; that the majority elected by the voters, electoral bodies and counselors cannot be recognized nor can the democratic principles of Europe be applied here; as if we were in the deep ancient forests of former colonial India or African jungles and not in Europe where we adhere to democratic criteria.

The Old Bridge. The constant recalling and reminding of what kind of image this city will provide if it does not agree to your proposed resolution when the World comes to Mostar for the opening of the Old bridge, likewise appears unconvincing. The Old bridge is a particularly "sick tissue" and "black hole" in this city, which does not join the Croat and Muslim sides of the city - in fact, on both sides of the banks there exists a Muslim majority - nor can it be considered a spiritual cohesion of this city, but rather a "little rock of great confusion", which has been transformed into a ball for local and international political games. If this city does not rest upon democratic principles accepted by the entire cultured and developed world, which we justifiably and hopefully expect from you, then rest assured it will not rest upon the rock of the Old pedestrian bridge!

The Referendum. The Croats of Mostar, who as Catholics belong to this Diocese, have been invited next Sunday, 25 January, to a referendum to express their democratic will regarding the question: Are they for the City of Mostar as a single municipality and a single electoral unit, and for an electoral process for the city council as in the other localities of local self-government in B-H? You have said that this is not a wise move, but rather a dangerous one, even entirely useless from your political view. It is strange though that you do not want to listen to the voice of the people, and most likely the voice of the majority of this city, what they think, what they want and how they see their own position in Mostar. You surely donÂ’t believe that a single municipal conference, even with the High Representative present, can change the established democratic way of expressing the peoplesÂ’ will in this decisive moment on the question of the city of Mostar?

JesusÂ’ counsel. Our Lord Jesus once said how a wise man will not build his home on sand, but on a rock (Mt 7:24-27), as he himself built his Church upon a Rock - Peter. Yet in our case, you are proposing to build the future of this city not on the Neretva bedrock of sound and accepted European democracy, but on the Neretva sands of parity based upon fraternity and unity! How can we agree with you on this proposal and how can we be grateful to you for such an undemocratic solution, while at the same time you are "washing your hands" of the "sick tissue" in Sarajevo and the "black holes" in Banja Luka - just to mention the two other Dioceses - as in the other "sick" cities throughout B-H?!

Honourable Lord and High Representative!

I am convinced that you would like every citizen of this city to enjoy a good and secure life, as you have often mentioned. Yet I do not believe that you wish this at the expense of the Croat citizens who are the majority of Mostar. I would like to believe that regarding this question you will have the political courage and European wisdom to choose a just and democratic solution. We can see that the time has come to start on a new path, possibly more difficult for the High Representative, but surely better for Mostar, all of B-H and all people of goodwill.
(Mons. dr. Ratko Peric, Bishop of Mostar (kta)

 

Copyright @2003 Hrvati AMAC