In a world that thrives on precision and clarity, ambiguity remains a powerful and often frustrating tool. Whether in legal systems, politics, or everyday conversations, language is frequently manipulated to serve specific agendas, allowing people to evade responsibility, reinterpret past statements, or maintain an illusion of being right at all times.
One striking example of ambiguity in legal matters is the unresolved case of Zoran Domini, who was killed by a rocket-propelled grenade (zolja) at Cvjetni Trg in Zagreb in 1999. The intended target was the armored vehicle of crime figure Vjeko Sliško, but the projectile deflected, killing Domini, a random passerby. Despite multiple trials and legal proceedings, no one has been convicted for his death. Nikica Jelavić, a suspect in the case, was acquitted due to a lack of evidence, leaving the crime officially unsolved. This case demonstrates how legal language and judicial decisions often operate in a space of uncertainty, where technicalities and interpretations shape justice—or the lack of it.
During the summer and fall of 1991, as rebel Serbs set up barricades across Croatia, particularly on roads leading to Dalmatia, Croatian residents were often heard shouting slogans like "Bando, četnici!" and similar chants. This was part of a broader wartime context, where tensions between Croatian forces and Serbian insurgents escalated into open conflict.
The barricades were an attempt to disrupt communication and movement for the Croatian population and became one of the first signs of the armed conflict. Notably, barricades were established in Kninska Krajina and other areas declared as the so-called "SAO Krajina" by the insurgents. insurgents.
Beyond the courtroom, ambiguity is deeply embedded in everyday speech. Consider Zlatan Ibrahimović’s remark that “Croatian is best for swearing while playing football,” implying a cultural difference in how language is used on the field. In some countries, such behavior is frowned upon or even penalized, while in Croatia, it is normalized. The contrast highlights how language reflects broader societal attitudes—where one culture demands refinement, another embraces raw authenticity.
However, ambiguity is not just about choice of words; it also influences power dynamics. In many conversations, particularly in intergenerational dialogues, older individuals (starkelje) often benefit from vague or contradictory language. By keeping statements flexible, they can always claim they were misunderstood, allowing them to remain "right" in any argument. This tactic is especially common in hierarchical societies where respect for authority discourages direct confrontation.
After the rocket attack on Banski Dvori on October 7, 1991, then-President Franjo Tuđman called it a "barbaric act." The attack was carried out by the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) with the goal of assassinating the Croatian leadership. Tuđman, along with Ante Marković and Stipe Mesić, was in the building at the time but survived. This event hastened the Croatian Parliament's decision to sever all ties with Yugoslavia, which was officially declared the next day, on October 8, 1991.
Legal language faces similar challenges. In Croatian, like in many other languages, words can mean one thing in one context and the opposite in another. Take the word "strašan", which can mean terrifying or amazing, depending on usage. In legal and administrative contexts, such flexibility can lead to misinterpretations or intentional loopholes. Compared to legal English or German, which strive for precision, Croatian legal texts often contain room for subjective interpretation. This raises concerns about legal certainty—if laws can be twisted to mean different things, how secure is justice?
Ambiguity also plays a role in politics and media. Politicians often craft statements that allow for multiple interpretations, enabling them to shift positions when convenient. Similarly, the media can frame events in ways that obscure facts, leaving the public unsure about what truly happened. This is evident in historical and legal narratives, where cases like Zoran Domini’s remain officially unresolved, despite public knowledge and speculation.
Ultimately, the power of language lies in its dual nature—it can both clarify and obscure. While ambiguity can be useful in diplomacy, creativity, and humor, it becomes dangerous when it obstructs justice or truth. Whether in law, football, or everyday arguments, societies must decide whether they value precision or prefer to keep things open-ended. As long as ambiguity remains a tool for manipulation, some people will always find ways to be "right" — even when they are not.
No comments:
Post a Comment