Office of the President 5 Feb 2025
https://liberland.org/news/634-response-to-article-in-veernji-list-feb-3
This is the Liberland response to the article of Marinko Jurasić published in Večernji list on February 3.

We would like to thank Marinko Jurasić for the article published in Večernji list on February 3.

We firmly believe that Croatia has the right and duty to protect its borders, and we support its efforts in preventing illegal migration. However, the Croatian government's current approach to the Liberland question is both self-defeating and contrary to legal principles, particularly in relation to the ongoing border dispute with Serbia and from an economic perspective.

You can read about the case in question in the following series of our articles:

Hringur's Finger II
Hringur's Finger I

Legal Status of Gornja Siga

The presence of the Liberland community in no way interferes with Croatia's version of the larger border dispute with Serbia. In fact, it supports it. Croatia, wisely, does not officially claim this land. It does not lie within the borders of Croatia on any Croatian map, nor was it claimed by Croatia after eastern Slavonia was reintegrated following the UNTAES administration. According to Article 8 of the Croatian Constitution, any alteration of the national borders requires a decision of the Croatian Parliament. To date, no such decision has been made regarding the inclusion of Gornja Siga within Croatia’s territorial jurisdiction.

The recent exchange of diplomatic notes between Croatia and Serbia in 2023 has been incorrectly interpreted as legally binding. These notes do not constitute an international treaty and cannot justify the ongoing violations of private individuals' rights.

Croatia's Self-Defeating Approach

Furthermore, an accurate reading of Serbia's response in these exchanges indicates a strategic aim to establish the Danube as the definitive border. This would result in Croatia losing its claim over a significantly larger area on the left bank of the Danube—approximately ten times the size of Gornja Siga—to Serbian control.

In this context, Croatia's approach appears self-defeating, as it sacrifices a far more substantial land claim in exchange for asserting control over an uninhabited parcel where Liberlanders have peacefully settled.

Legal proceedings against individuals associated with Liberland further highlight this contradiction. Croatian courts have convicted individuals for minor infractions on Gornja Siga, despite acknowledging that Croatia’s territorial jurisdiction over the area remains unresolved.

The courts have relied on an ambiguous claim of "bilateral control," which lacks any solid legal foundation, as diplomatic notes exchanged between ministries do not constitute formal agreements capable of altering territorial claims.

Additionally, inconsistencies in judicial reasoning—such as citing an undefined "privileged supervision" without specifying its legal scope—demonstrate the lack of a clear, principled approach to the region. There are still dozens of ongoing cases.

Manifest Lack of Jurisdiction

Moreover, Croatian authorities have failed to prove jurisdiction in multiple legal cases. Courts have admitted that the territorial status of Gornja Siga remains disputed while simultaneously punishing individuals for activities carried out there.

This selective application of law undermines the fundamental principle of legal certainty, as enshrined in Article 14 of the Croatian Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.

The lack of clear jurisdiction also violates procedural fairness, as guaranteed by Article 29 of the Constitution and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which require that legal proceedings be conducted by a competent and impartial tribunal.

Finally, even the Croatian authorities do not provide a uniform conclusion related to the specific area and with regards to territorial jurisdiction of the Republic of Croatia over the happenings in Gornja Siga.

Namely, in the proceedings in front of the County State Attorney’s office Osijek number ND-92/2024, County Court in Osijek number R2-21/2024, Administrative Court in Osijek number UsI-1301/2023 and UsI-125/2024, Croatian authorities have elaborated a completely different standpoint than the one presented by judge Bertok mentioned in your article, and confirmed by High Misdemeanour Court of the Republic of Croatia, and this would be that the mentioned diplomatic notas do not constitute a bilateral international agreement and/or that there is no jurisdiction of Croatian state authorities to be engaged with regards to the happenings in Gornja Siga.

This was the exact reason why T.H.G. 's case has been brought in front of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia and is still pending.

Economic and Legal Opportunities for Croatia

If Croatian authorities were to assist the Liberland community—or at the very least, cease harassment—it would be a significant win for Croatia. The immediate result would be an influx of investment, employment, and tourism, revitalizing an area that has suffered from depopulation and economic stagnation for decades.

Recognizing Liberland does not have to be on the table for Croatia to benefit. A simple shift in policy, allowing for legal certainty and economic development in the region, would generate substantial growth. Once the rough treatment ends, Liberland's entrepreneurial community will bring prosperity not just to Gornja Siga but also to the surrounding Croatian municipalities. Infrastructure improvements, real estate investment, and tourism-based enterprises will all flourish if the Liberland community is permitted to operate freely.

Additionally, Croatia’s actions in prosecuting individuals for activities in Gornja Siga set a dangerous precedent of selective law enforcement. The legal argument that Croatia has jurisdiction based on an informal understanding with Serbia lacks foundation, as jurisdiction must be established through proper legal instruments, such as treaties ratified by the Croatian Parliament. Without such a treaty, enforcement actions in Gornja Siga remain legally dubious and could expose Croatia to potential litigation before European human rights bodies.

Conclusion

The Croatian government’s current stance on Liberland is not only legally tenuous but also economically unwise. The evidence from legal proceedings underscores that Croatia’s jurisdiction over Gornja Siga is not established in law. Persisting in arbitrary enforcement actions contradicts Croatia’s own constitutional and international legal obligations. Moreover, Croatia stands to gain far more from allowing economic activity in the region than from asserting control over an area it has never formally claimed.

Furthermore, continued legal harassment of individuals in Gornja Siga undermines Croatia’s credibility as a state governed by the rule of law. If Croatia truly wishes to protect its national interests, it should focus on securing its larger territorial claims rather than engaging in legally questionable enforcement actions against private individuals.

Liberland can thrive and prosper—with substantial benefits for Croatia—without prejudicing the ultimate resolution of the border dispute with Serbia. A pragmatic approach, rooted in legal clarity and economic foresight, will yield far greater rewards than the current strategy of obstruction and legal overreach.