Talk:Konjic Municipality

Ethnic cleansing of Konjic municipality during the Bosnian War
Krusko Mortale questioned the statement in the text that Serbs were expelled by Bosniak (and Croatian) forces from Konjic during the war. I have gathered the information regarding this from the ongoing ICTY case with regard to war crimes allegedly committed at the Celibici prison camp. The ICTY indictment reads (paragraph 2 of the Background):


 * "Beginning in the latter part of May 1992, forces consisting of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats attacked and took control of those villages containing predominantly Bosnian Serbs within and around the Konjic municipality. The attackers forcibly expelled Bosnian Serb residents from their homes, and held them at collection centres. Many of the women and children were confined in a local school or in other locations. Most of the men and some women were taken to a former JNA facility in Celebici, hereafter referred to as the Celebici camp. There, the detainees were killed, tortured, sexually assaulted, beaten, and otherwise subjected to cruel and inhuman treatment. The majority of detainees were confined at Celebici from approximately May 1992 until approximately October of 1992, though some remained until December 1992."

So, based on this I believe it is warranted to include the statement of ethnic cleansing in the article. Regards Osli73 19:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear Mr. Osli. You showed me an indictment, not a judgement. Ethnic cleansing should be proven in order to be included in the article, as for example in Srebrenica case. Actually you wrote this: "Ethnic cleansing of the Serb and Croat population during the Bosnian War is the main cause of the demographic change." So you gave totally wrong information, even in the indicement it says that forces of Bosnian Muslims and Croats attacked and took control of Serb villages. Nothing about ethnic cleansing, not even in the indictment. But, as I said, if you want to includ this, give me judgement. Kruško Mortale 19:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Krusko, the indictment is about alleged crimes at the Celibici prison camp, so it is not trying to "prove" that ethnic cleansing happened. It is only background data to the indictment. However, if the ICTY Prosecutor has included the information in its indictment, that is as good a 'proof' of the events as you will get. We are describing a historical even here, not a legal case. It is an alltogether different case if we were claiming that an individual did so or so simply based on an indictment when there is a court case ongoing. Therefore I think the text should be added back. However, I am open to discussing the exact wording of it. Cheers Osli73 21:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear Mr. Osli, the idictment is not verified background data. The judgements are very different than indictments. The data should be verified by the judgement, but they are not. We don't know what actually happened, the judges are there to decide what is tha fact and what is propaganda. If you want to use this principle, then I could say lets use idictment against Serbia and Montenegro in Genocide case Bosnia vs. Serbia as a background data or in other cases regarding Bosnian War. Kruško Mortale 21:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Krusko, here is link to the ICTY judgement in the ICTY Prosecutors case against Delalic, Mucic, Delic and Landzo. Paragraph 138 of that judgment states that:
 * "The first area to be targeted was the village of Donje Selo and its surrounds. On 20 May 1992 the Joint Command - headed at that time by Omer Boric and Dinko Zebic - authorised this operation and forces of the TO and HVO entered the area201. According to eye-witnesses, Croat and Muslim soldiers moved through Viniste towards Cerici and Bjelovcina. Cerici, which was the first shelled, was attacked around 22 May and some of its inhabitants surrendered to the TO and to the HVO military police. Bjelovcina was also attacked around that time. Around 23 May, the TO arrested some people living in Viniste. The MUP also assisted in the arrest of persons and seizing of weapons in these areas. The Trial Chamber was further informed that some units from Tarcin and Pazaric participated in the operation to de-block the road at Donje Selo as well as the later one at Bradina, during which some casualties occurred."

Paragraph 139 goes on to state that:
 * "The Bradina operation was launched on 25 and 26 May 1992 after the failure of negotiations. Many witnesses have testified that the village was shelled in the late afternoon and evening of 25 May and then soldiers in both camouflage and black uniforms appeared, firing their weapons and setting fire to buildings. Many of the population sought to flee and some withdrew to the centre of the village. These people were, nonetheless, arrested at various times around 27 and 28 May, by TO, HVO and MUP soldiers and police."

Based on this I will amend the text accordingly. Regards Osli73 21:25, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I will read the judgement, it will take a while, when I finish I will give you my answer. Cheers. Kruško Mortale 21:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Krusko, I still think you are incorrect / unreasonable in demanding that all historical events described in articles must be backed up by court judgements. Certainly this is not the case in the vast majority of cases. Especially when it concerns general historical events, such as a war. However, I can see its use when it concerns living people (from a libel/legal protection point of view).

Regarding the text I added, I am completely open to reducing it in lenght. I feel it is now a bit too long compared to the rest of the article. Or perhaps some other material could be added. Also it would be good if some more info. on the developments in Konjic during the rest of the war could also be covered (the ICTY judgement only went as far as the end of 1992). Cheers Osli73 22:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know some of us were there in the camp.

Requested move

 * The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Konjic Municipality → Konjic — Konjic is both for the municipality and the town, no need to split them into two. — Matthew_hk   t  c  09:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Oppose It is frequently necessary to split the articles for the town and the municipality. It is better to start off with the division, rather than try to separate them later after the articles have become confusing. Not that a good article about a municipality can't have a section about the town in it, but such ideal articles seldom stay that way and editors crowd the town into the lead at the expense of the municipality until the result is a unhelpful jumble. --Bejnar (talk) 04:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.