A couple of days ago, a photo appeared on the Telegram channel showing the president of the Council of the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) in the uniform of an officer of the infamous paramilitary formation of Hitler’s National Socialist Party – the SS.
The photograph, actually a photomontage, was posted by the president of the REM Council herself. After the turbulent reactions of the public, believe it or not, she stated that she did it herself, out of “pure provocation”.
The SS officer’s uniform is inevitably associated with the infamous Third Reich, so it would be interesting to see what consequences the REM president might have faced if she had pulled this bizarre stunt in Germany, instead of in Serbia. There, criminal law prohibits displaying signs and symbols of banned organizations; even the Nazi salute itself entails a fine and a prison sentence of up to three years, and violators of the ban may additionally face charges for inciting hatred. The term “displaying” refers to flags, insignia and uniforms. And if something like this was done in public and in front of a large number of people (as in the case of the president of the REM Council), it would further complicate the defendant’s position.
And what about Serbia? Serbia is not Germany, our Criminal Code does not contain such provisions. But can the action of the president of the REM Council still be assessed as legally impermissible and punishable?
Article 6 of the Law on the Prohibition of Manifestations of Neo-Nazi or Fascist Organizations and Associations and the Prohibition of the Use of Neo-Nazi or Fascist Symbols and Insignia establishes that prohibited propaganda material, symbols and insignia include: flags, badges, signs, drawings, graffiti, emblems, phonographic records, musical compositions, photographs, slogans and uniforms, or parts of uniforms. Violation of the ban foresees a fine of five to fifty thousand dinars.
However, objectively poor articulation of the norms of this law makes it possible to conclude that the aforementioned and other foreseen prohibitions apply only to members of neo-Nazi and similar organizations. In that context, it is possible that the misdemeanor court would conclude that the law does not refer to the president of the REM, so she wouldn’t face any punishment. However, whether the president of the REM Council would face a symbolic fine is not really the most relevant question here.
So let’s go back to the bizarre explanation of the bizarre move – “I did it out of pure provocation”. It remains completely unclear who she wanted to provoke – Jews, Roma, anti-fascists…? Hundreds of thousands of Serbian citizens who don’t like seeing their state officials in Nazi uniforms?
She didn’t make this meaningless explanation any clearer by adding: “…I like to provoke. I could have posted some Koraks and Petričić political cartoons, which are much worse.” She did not say what exactly is “much worse” in the works of famous caricaturists and artists, and obviously she has not heard of the age-old saying “Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi” – What Jupiter may do, a cow may not.
The very wording “much worse” shows that the president herself is aware that her move is bad, but it is allegedly justified by the fact that there are worse, “much worse” things. Even one of the most famous bots of the ruling party understood that her move was desperately bad, and tried to spread misinformation on Twitter that the video was “a montage by mentally disturbed people from the opposition”, and that the president published the montage “purely so that this satanization would be exposed”. This disinformation was debunked by Radio Free Europe with the information that Google image reverse search couldn’t find this alleged photomontage on the internet or any social network.
The president of the REM Council is neither a freelance artist nor a stand-up comedian nor a paid provocateur, but a person entrusted with an important state and social function and the responsibility that comes with it. She must know that her appearance in a Nazi uniform even at a private costume party would be too much, and that it is scandalous in front of an audience of millions. She must know that Nazism took millions of lives, which was and remains a terrifying trauma for the European continent. That the symbols of Nazism are generally unacceptable, that they cannot be paraded in any normal European state. And that those who use these symbols for exhibitionist, political or any other similar reasons, knowingly or not, actually reaffirm the Nazi idea.
That is why the state authorities who appointed the fabulous president of the REM Council had to react to the scandalous provocation. And the fact that they did not is a much bigger, worse and more dangerous provocation than even her scandalous exhibitionist move.
Translated by Marijana Simić
Peščanik.net, 14.12.2023.
