Added to the illustrious list of human rights activists, martyrs and visionaries, Vojislav Seselj; at least in the opinion of one protestor, who likened Mr. Seselj to Mr. Mandela. I suppose the late Slobodan Milosevic has dibs on Ghandi?
He was protesting the US/UN/globalists "murder" of Seselj, as a result of Seselj's decision to go on a hunger strike. As Katja on the Yakima Gulag Blog pointed out, Seselj was not exactly "suffering" in the Hague holding cells. In fact, I'm sure there are many people in Bosnia would be very grateful to get the sort of accommodations that Seselj and some of his bunkmates are given.
And of course, no matter what the UN detention unit does, it is pretty much damned if it does, damned if it doesn't. For that matter, there seems to be a great deal of confussion and some contradictory information over what the UN Detention unit is legally, morally allowed to do in cases of hunger strikes. However, there seems to be no doubt, whether Mr. Seselj is force fed (if that is even allowed-as there seems to be a bit of contradictory info on that matter), or whether he (and I honestly hope he doesn't) subcomes to his self-inflicted starvation; the SRS and their fellow travelers would lay the blame straight at the feet at the UN Detention Unit (and the UN, and the US, and the Papacy, and while were at it, probably our Aunt Sally as well).
Of course, I'm getting ahead of myself. There is also the possibility that Seselj will call off the hunger strike. I honestly don't think that you can predict what the man would do next; except it is usually something 'bombastic' and likely to grab media attention. He's a political showman through and through. And probably the best thing to do would be to ignore him, after all, what is a performer what out his audience? But Lord knows he is certainly quotable.
But while Seselj is front and center in this circus he has created, he is not the only person involved. There are also his family, and personally, I cannot understand the point of putting his own chidren through all of this anguish, just so he can make a point, or gain extra privileges while in detention. Besides his own family, there is also his UN appointed lawyers, or "spies" as Mr. Seselj likes to call them, as well as the judges who have to hear the case. And then there are also the victims. In my opinion, and perhaps this view is shared by no one but myself, the trial is in many ways as much about the victim as it is about the accused. The view has nothing to do with protecting legal rights of the accused, which absolutely must be protected, even, and perhaps especially, if the defendant is accused of horrific war crimes. The rights of a defendant must be vigorously protected, despite the fact that they themselves didn't protect the rights of others, and in almost all situations, made a mockery over what we call human rights. But the defendant isn't the only person who has rights. The victims have a moral right to speak their piece, to confront the person who is accused of victimizing them. And they have a right to at least try to get legal redress for their grievances. (Of course, I'm speaking from my own personal point of view than of any strictly legal right.) Will confronting Seselj, and possibly see him convicted, help in the long and torturous road towards "recovery"? -whatever that means, maybe, maybe not. Of course in a court of law the rights of the accused, triumph over the rights of the victims. And if Seselj has the legal right to carry on a hunger strike to the point where he dies; than there is nothing that can be done. But, I can't help but feel that these hunger strikes, and of course, Seselj is not the only Hague defendant who is carrying out such a srike, is a deliberate slap in the face of the victims. And is only serving to victimize them again and making mockery over the legal process.
Of course the people who have been effected by the crimes Seselj is alleged to have commited is not the concern of the protesters. To many of them, Seselj is seen as a hero for "defying" the West, or "defending" their rights and country. I wonder how their feelings would change if they found out, as newspapers had reported in the past, that Mr. Seselj, far from being the crazy racist he likes to play on TV, actually gets along very well with his Croat and Muslim roomates at the Hague prison? In fact the image of Seselj engaged in a sort of "inter-ethnic" brotherhood is quite touching, but of course, one would expect nothing less from Serbia's version of Nelson Mandela.