One of the more frequent truth spins is that President Gjorge Ivanov made the pardoning decision because of great dangers for the country and that move was wise and right thing to do. Now, after the pardoning is completely withdrawn, the absurdness of that assertion, although obvious, continues with the aim to justify the “life and achievements” of the President of the Republic of Macedonia.
Author: Teofil Blazhevski
After Gjorge Ivanov completely withdrew the pardons of 56 persons, which happened on 6 June 2016, one of the main spins regarding the background of the decision for pardoning made on 12 April this year is still spinning around, and that is the survival of the country above all:
Spin: After a certain period, when this whole political crisis will be resolved for the interest of the citizens of the Republic of Macedonia, when we are going to be able to speak openly about all the details related to the sensitivity of this period, but also of the one ahead of us, the entire complexity of the statesman’s move made by the President Ivanov, as well as the legitimacy of his decision to place the country’s interests above everything else, can be depicted.
[Source: Republika, Date: 7 June 2016]
Counter spin: This truth spin is uttered by the university professor Tanja Karakamisheva – Jovanovska, who is teaching at the oldest and most prestigious faculty in the country, the Faculty of Law at the University “Ss. Cyril and Methodius” Skopje. She had several public appearances in the past two months, after Ivanov made the pardoning decision, with a goal to defend the decision’s legal grounds albeit plenty of her colleagues were asserting the opposite. But, although this time she brought out the same thesis, now an attempt is made for additional justification of the President’s move via the “sensitivity” of the moment.
The absurdness of the thesis, which is actually Ivanov’s original thesis stated at the moment when the first decision was made, and was also stated yesterday after the President fully withdrew his decision, seems more than obvious, and Truthmeter has published several articles on this topic. But now, we are going to add several new moments in order to de-spin this truth spinning, which continues in order to protect the “life and achievements” of the President.
So far, there hasn’t been any relevant indicators that the Republic of Macedonia has been jeopardized to the extent to put its survival under question. If there has been something like this, the Constitution and the laws would have been violated because that information is hidden and the authorities have not been included in its resolving, including the Parliament, even prior the dissolution in April, which must have been notified and must have held a session for a crisis with such proportions.
…When we are going to be able to speak more openly about all the details related to the sensitivity of this period, which is still ahead of us… then we shall understand… the “legitimacy” of the pardoning decision, Karakamisheva says.
So, we were not able to speak openly in the close past, i.e. the President could not tell the reasons in detail, but now, we still cannot, because “the situation” is still ongoing. This contradiction in just one sentence is more than obvious. If there were and if there are still such reasons that only Karakamisheva and the President Ivanov can perceive, then why Ivanov withdrew the pardons and he did that in phases, twice? Due to domestic and foreign pressure? Then what kind of President is he, “father of the nation”, when he withdraws his decision under pressure while there are serious reasons for making that decision in the first place?
There is only one truth. Ivanov withdrew his decision due to the inability to justify the reasons for it. We were able to notice that during the first explanation, and also a day after, when he admitted, in a conversation with several editors of national TV stations, that his decision wrecks the legal state, but the country was more important than the legal state.
Meanwhile, instead of preventing the crisis, it was actually prolonged for two whole months by the fact that the citizens protest every day, and also that the implementation of the Przhino Agreement was stuck in one of its most inherent parts, the work of the Special Public Prosecution Office. In fact, the EU ambassador in Macedonia, Aivo Orav, made a statement for these “unprecedented” situation and obstructions.
After the President announced that the pardoning of the politicians will be withdrawn, all occurrences related to the pardoning and its withdrawal were unprecedented. The pardoning deepened the crisis even more, and unfortunately the implementation of the Przhino Agreement was procrastinated, but there were delays in the investigation led by the Special Public Prosecution Office. I would like to remind that the timeframe for conducting an investigation by the Special Public Prosecution Office is 18 months.
At the same time, Macedonia was on the verge of stopping the processes of the Euro-Atlantic integrations, because the EU and NATO sent clear messages that if the pardoning remains in power it would mean promotion of selective justice and non-punishment i.e. non-rule of law, and if so, Macedonia does not have the chances to join these alliances.
NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in May stated:
NATO’s doors are still open, but it is vital for the leaders in the country to solve the issues, especially with the rule of law, including the withdrawal of the Presidential pardoning. It is important to have minimal conditions for normal democratic political life.
There is simply no need to remind you about the numerous requests by the EU and the US regarding the same issue, accompanied with the threat that the road to Brussels shall be blocked if the conditions for equal rule of law are not met.
There, this is the truth and the real reason behind yesterday’s decision of Ivanov to withdraw the pardoning, which on the other hand is showing the absurdness of the thesis that the reason for the making of the pardoning decision on 12th April was “the sensitivity of this period”.
Hence, we consider Karakamisheva’s statement as truth spinning.