Lukic: In the Kosovo case, there is not a single element that would prove Serbia's guilt

Lawyer Novak Lukic, a member of Serbia's legal team in the dispute with Croatia at the International Court of Justice over genocide, assesses that Kosovo's new announcement to prepare a genocide lawsuit against Serbia is politically motivated and lacks legal foundation, and that it is highly likely that Pristina would lose such a case.

"Such thinking and ideas are solely political, with political tendencies and intentions. Legally, if a lawsuit is filed, it would be practically impossible to prove. Many legal schemers, so-called experts, like to suggest that certain states file lawsuits and engage in massive, costly, and cumbersome disputes. It's highly unlikely that anything will come of this dispute," Lukic stated to Kosovo Online.

Regarding the possibility of the newly formed Institute for War Crimes in Pristina collecting evidence against Serbia in Kosovo's genocide lawsuit, announced last November by President Vjosa Osmani and Prime Minister Albin Kurti, Lukic says that investigating war crimes is a legitimate right, but politicians have begun to misuse the issue of genocide.

"Genocide has become much more of a political than a legal issue. Politicians like to use the term genocide, but genocide is a criminal offense. Individuals are responsible for genocide, and criminal responsibility is established for genocide. However, politicians everywhere, in the region, including here, and now in lawsuits before the International Court of Justice, like to use genocide for political purposes, they like to use terms like 'genocidal people,' and 'genocidal policy.' These terms are not legal; they have nothing to do with the criminal offense that needs to be established to speak of state responsibility," Lukic says.

He believes that the authorities in Pristina are using the genocide lawsuit against Serbia solely for political interests.

"They have a serious problem with their public regarding the proceedings before the Specialist Chambers in The Hague against significant political figures, and I assume that this terminology and ideas arise primarily due to internal political matters," Lukic believes.

When asked hypothetically how such a process would unfold, Lukic says that the International Court of Justice would be responsible for it, and since Kosovo is not recognized by the UN, one of the EU member states could represent its interests.

"However, the International Court of Justice does not establish criminal responsibility. To establish that a convention on genocide has been violated, which is their jurisdiction, they would have to engage in establishing criminal responsibility, and I think that's a mission impossible for anyone who enters such ideas without clear guidelines on criminal responsibility for genocide," Lukic says.

He emphasizes that Kosovo's complicating factor is that the Hague Tribunal Prosecutor's Office did not have any cases involving genocide.

"Especially since a serious analysis of crimes related to Kosovo was conducted before the Hague Tribunal. If the Hague Prosecutor's Office had arguments for genocide at the time, they would certainly have filed such a lawsuit because they liked to sue for genocide regardless of whether it would later be established in court. I don't believe that now there could be evidence significant enough to initiate a genocide lawsuit," Lukic believes.

Asked if such a lawsuit would have any similarities to Serbia's and Croatia's counterclaims, where he served as Serbia's legal expert, Lukic says that that judgment is the best indicator of the International Court of Justice's thinking.

"Neither country could provide evidence to support the genocide thesis against the opposing side's crimes, none reached the level of the seriousness of genocide crimes. The International Court of Justice is reluctant to engage in determining that. Hence, their only judgment where they relatively 'floated' was between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia because genocide was established against an individual at the Hague Tribunal. Then the International Court of Justice exclusively relied on the decisions of that court. In the case of Serbia and Croatia, or in the event of a lawsuit for crimes in Kosovo, there is not a single element that could help prove that genocide existed," Lukic concludes.

He says that Serbia could also file a genocide lawsuit against Kosovo, but it is a political issue, and the outcome, in his estimation, would be similar to Serbia and Croatia's counterclaims – dismissed.

"It's a political decision whether to engage in such a dispute for crimes committed by Albanians or the KLA against the Serbian population, but to reach the level of criminal offenses that would prove the severity of those crimes as genocide would indeed require incredibly large, significant, and strong evidence. It's not easy. Serbia had a very good argument regarding 'Operation Storm,' not only regarding the seriousness of those crimes but also because of Franjo Tudjman's words... But, despite that, those crimes from 'Operation Storm' didn't reach such a level that they could be said to be genocide because they were not the subject of the criminal offense of genocide before the Tribunal," Lukic concludes.