This Commission of the Croatian Conference of Bishops (CCB) has already on two occasions, first in October 2009 and again in October 2012, warned Croatia and the international public of dual threats to justice and peace, which could occur in the determination of the boundary between the newly established democratic states: the first being material, which could occur if the rules and principles of international law are not respected, and the second procedural, if border disputes are not submitted to the International Court of Justice of the United Nations in The Hague as the most experienced and most competent international judicial instance for resolving border disputes between countries.

1. Respect for existing borders. The Republic of Croatia, since declaring its independence on June 25, 1991, and disassociating itself from the former Yugoslav Federation, has not shown any territorial pretensions whatsoever toward any of its neighbors, although Croatian citizens are well aware that the Croatian Triune Kingdom of 1918 brought large territories of its east and south, specifically eastern Srijem with Zemun and southern Dalmatia with Boka Kotor and Budva, to the common state. The Federal State of Croatia was deprived of these territories by the demarcation of boundaries instituted by the Yugoslav communist regime after the Second World War. Despite this, and even without mentioning these historical facts, Croatia has systematically and on principle respected the international legal principle of uti possidetis iuris, i.e., the status quo, which is applied when new states are formed or complex states are dissolved. According to this principle, the international community by the legal opinion of the Arbitration Commission of the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia, consisting of presidents of the constitutional courts of France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Belgium (Badinter Commission), on January 11, 1992, confirmed that the borders of the former Yugoslav republics would become internationally protected state borders, and that any changes in these borders by force would be legally invalid. Thus, the borders of the Republic of Croatia remain those borders that were determined in the former state after the Second World War and existed at the moment of the Croatian referendum on disassociation from and leaving the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

2. Neighbor’s pretensions and the dangers of arbitration. Despite centuries of good relations between our two nations, we must mention here that during the difficult years of war and aggression against Croatia (1991–1995) there were some official statements from the friendly country of Slovenia (parliament, government and individual ministers) in which territorial pretensions to the territory of the Republic of Croatia were expressed, especially with regard to the border in the Bay of Savudrija/Piran. When Slovenia became a member state of the European Union, we know that for years it blocked Croatia in its accession to the EU. In addition, it made the lifting of its blockade to Croatian accession to the EU conditional upon Croatia’s agreeing to resolve Slovenian territorial pretensions not before the International Court of Justice of the United Nations, as previously agreed upon, but bilaterally. Under pressure that Slovenia would otherwise impede Croatian negotiations on accession to the European Union, in 2009 Croatia agreed to ad hoc arbitration on the land and sea borders with Slovenia, although nearly all the land borders had been established by a joint commission of the two countries.

By agreeing to such arbitration, the recommendation to Croatia by the European Commission (cf. EU Negotiating Framework for the Republic of Croatia, 2005) for eventual border disputes to be resolved before the International Court of Justice of the UN in The Hague was abandoned. Also abandoned was an agreement between the Croatian and Slovenian prime ministers (2007) on recourse to the International Court of Justice of the UN. The arbitration procedure that began three years ago is now coming to an end, after both countries have presented their written and oral positions and arguments. During the past three years of arbitration, the Croatian side has refrained from making any comments.

3. Scandal of “pressure and lobbying.” In recent days, however, a recording of conversations between a Slovenian official and a Slovenian arbitrator was published, from which it was evident that the Slovenian side had been practicing prohibited “augmentation” of documents, lobbying arbitrators, reporting statements from individual arbitrators and exerting pressure in an attempt to influence the arbitrators for the benefit of the aforementioned Slovenian territorial pretensions to the sea. This violated one of the fundamental principles of international law, that contracts must be executed in good faith, thereby forcing the Republic of Croatia, in compliance with the law on international contracts and the principle of the rule of law, to terminate this contract on arbitration.

Due to the aforementioned events, which are unprecedented in arbitration cases between countries, as well as the flagrant violation of international law by the representative of the Republic of Slovenia, it is no wonder that these days the Croatian public is highly distraught, as are all citizens committed to peace and the spirit of good neighborly relations between the Slovenian and Croatian nations. Revealed and confirmed by resignations from office, the intolerable and scandalous pressures on the course of the arbitration have prompted the Government of the Republic of Croatia and the Croatian Parliament to discuss this matter thoroughly.

Since the Justitia et Pax Commission monitors social and ecclesial trends in our country from the aspect of justice and peace, we deemed it necessary and useful, at this time of scandalous and unlawful pressure on the arbitrators, to publish this statement with its Christian, civil and fundamental human considerations:

– The first consideration is the Christian incentive and activity for the benefit of lasting peace and good relations with neighbors. It is in the spirit of the evangelical golden rule: “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you” (Mt 7:12). Do not, therefore, do to others what you would not have them do to you.
– The second consideration is civil. By taking care of the land and Homeland given to us by Almighty God, with this statement we want to express support to those in authority to respect the adopted legislation, Constitution and international law in the exercise of their undertaken duties.
– The third motive and consideration is inspired by fundamental human concern for peace, truth and justice in Europe and the world, and especially the demands that injustice concerning the Croatian borders must not be accepted, there should be no “trade-offs” and blackmail must not win. This would be a dangerous precedent and example to many opponents of peace and justice in the turbulent areas of Europe, the Middle East, Africa and the world.

In Zagreb, July 28, 2015
Msgr. Vjekoslav Huzjak
Bishop of Bjelovar-Križevci
President of the Justitia et Pax Commission of the CCB