"I was always in the front lines," says the former president of the Supreme Court, after she was released from prison to defend herself. I trust her. "More than Dubrovnik", someone will say.
This wording Vesne Medenica - that she was always in the front lines - there is something deeply unsettling, even creepy. What will the judge do in the "first battle lines". Is justice best seen from there, from the "front lines"?
You could expect a statement like this from a soldier on trial, a retired major or some war criminal trying to find "excuse" or "extenuating circumstances"... You can imagine hearing it from a criminal, who has spent his entire career in one way or another fighting and battle lines, but the referee is the last person you would expect to announce that he is a "front line" person in any context.
By itself, the act of judging/judging implies a kind of distance, a clear and rational, fair assessment - and such assessments are hardly possible from the "front lines". Namely, from the "first battle lines" it is difficult to be aware of the reality - the reality of the first battle lines is accelerated, unrepresentative, unfolds according to some other laws.
But the most terrifying thing about this statement is that it is - basically, true. Yes, she was in the "front lines" for decades, and precisely - as a soldier of one party and one regime. The fact that she was "in the front lines" led to her being in prison as a criminal. But she obviously doesn't realize that as soon as she started her "defense" by referring to military service. That alone is enough to make everything clear to you.
There are cries and invitations from all sides to elect the judges of the Constitutional Court, so that this mess of the "interim" does not come to an end.
Everyone is worried, but no one is doing anything to change things. This sick balance of (im)power seems to be spreading an epidemic of usurpation. You have a government that has been overthrown, city governments that have lost elections - and they are all, somehow, still where they are. And they have no intention of moving.
It is not a category that is popular or important today, but the real word is that such behavior in politics - dishonorable. And deeply fraudulent.
Politicians behave as if the entire current situation is the result of some astrological constellation, or that the origin of this confusion lies in some metaphysical spaces - and not that they are the creators of such para-reality. They and their decisions, whose purpose is to maintain the existing situation, and not in any improvement. That can't turn out well. A parody of institutions but also a parody of politics. In short.
But forget all that, at least for a month. Don't worry, even then, when that month passes, everything will be mostly the same, that is, just as bad. In the next month, everything takes on a slightly different look. And it's been like that since at least 1930, every four years...
It's always like that on the occasion of the World Cup in football, we're all a bit like Helena here - we measure time by the Championships. I believe that someone, certainly more than an astrological sign, for example, is determined by the first Championship they watched. With which matches and which masters did he "see through". My "sign" in that case would be Germany 1974, and for an eight-year-old the historical "master" with Spain (Katalinski!!!) was a spectacular introduction to the mystique of the event itself. And, clearly, my first hero was Johan Cruyff, master of masters.
The following days will be remembered by the masters and their skills. But, of course, you won't enjoy it enough if you let our dilettantes block your view.
Bonus video:
