Canadian Slavonic Papers

An Authoritarian Parliament: The Croatian State Sabor of 1942 Author(s): YESHAYAHU JELINEK Source: Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes, Vol. 22, No. 2 (June 1980), pp. 260-273 Published by: Canadian Association of Slavists Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40867719 . Accessed: 20/09/2011 13:05
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Canadian Association of Slavists and Canadian Slavonic Papers are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes.

http://www.jstor.org

YESHAYAHU JELINEK

An Authoritarian Parliament: The Croatian State Sabor of 1942

State On 10April1941theso-called Independent ofCroatia(Nezavisna or Nazi GerHrvatska NDH) came intoexistence. Drzhava Although of FascistItalywerethegodfathers thenewstate, creation its and many clash of Serbianand Croatian was made possibleby the constant The in nationalism the Yugoslavkingdom. Croatnational awakening a the datesfrom earlynineteenth (and earlier), century perhaps though of from the Croatian legal entity sortsled an uninterrupted existence calleda Sabor(orassembly), oneofthe was Middle Ageson. A localdiet, of symbols thisstatus. Croatian Liberation A radicalnationalist groupcalledtheUstasha Croatian controlled Movement Ustasha (or Revolutionary Organization) leaders livedin exileuntil of theNDH. The majority theUstasha April and Several in but Austria, Hungary. 1941, mostly Italy also inGermany, in hosted orrather ofitsleading stayed Yugoslavia. Italy personalities - sometwohundred-fifty hundred to five of in camps kept internment in branches Croatia, men.The Ustashahad secret its trained military The standard-bearerlocal of variedwiththeregion. whosepopularity but Croatian was however, not theUstasha thepowerful nationalism, Stranka HSS). The Ustashi or infilPeasantParty {Hrvatska Seljachka and its paramilitary of thisparty, tratedthe right wing troops.The theyoung secular numerous also counted radicals among sympathizers monastic inspite andincertain orders. of andclerical Still, intelligentsia, the Ustashawas farfrom and terroristic its propagandists activity, On it street. thecontrary,wasnotina position in dominant theCroatian vis--vis HSS. the to gainground Axis WhenYugoslavia collapsedin thefaceof theoverwhelming column"assistedthe enemy. Croatian"fifth a considerable forces, German the the welcomed invading Croatians willingly troops, accepting considWhile Ustashi the ofthenewstate. initially enjoyed proclamation The was exhausted. atrocities this erable support, goodwill quickly public of the NDH's population committed (above all against againstparts and the the as Serbsand Jews, wellas Croatians gypsies), bloody terror, of the and of positions gain and influence, primitive monopolization economic of behaviour the Ustashi, chaos, faltering arrogant public An and irritated Croats. everthe administration foodsupply all these

Croatian Sabor | 261 alienationbetweenthe rulersand the ruledtook the place of increasing the earlierelation. outlawedwiththeotherpoliticalgroupings, now The Peasant Party, whichit had lost duringthe state's first much of the prestige recovered weeks. Ustasha attemptsto lure HSS membersand followersinto its leaderof ranksbecamea losingbattle.Dr. Vladko Machek,thevenerated far the the HSS, spenthistimein detention from publiceye. Otherleaders The few of the HSS were eitherabroad, in prison, or in retirement. who joined the Ustasha were not able to gain right-wing personalities wishto mobilize This declining support,plus a frantic public sympathy. the masses behind the NDH and the Ustasha,gave birthto the idea of conveninga Sabor. The origins the Sabor lie in thetribalpast of theCroatianpeople, of whereit was a kind of popular assembly.During the Middle Ages, not it unlikein othermediaevalcountries, became the meeting place of the the of feudal"estates."1Sabors represented regions St. Stephan'sCrown of inhabitedby Croatians beforethe establishment the centralgovernmentof the Kingdomand laterof the Hapsburg Empire.The men who werenot necessarily The absolutisCroatians.2 in gathered the Assembly tic rulers in Vienna gradually reduced the Sabor's importanceand The whatever impact it had on the regionsit represented.3 nineteenth of saw some increasein theimportance theSabor, whichbecame century an assemblage of elected deputies of the existing political parties.The to vote was curtailed, however.Amongthe of number electors permitted elementsbelonging to the Sabor duringthe early twentieth political was the Partyof the Pure Right,a nationalistgroup and the century of ideological forerunner the Ustasha.4On 29 October 1918 the Sabor and itsprerogatives weretransferred Belgrade's to disbanded, voluntarily the territorialparliament of the Serb-Croat-Slovenian Skupshtina, kingdom.5 historical.One of its spiritual Croatian nationalismwas intensely based theCroatian the scholarand politicianAnte Starchevich, fathers, existence and development on historic and demand for unfettered constitutional rights allegedlyheld in thepast. He foundedthe Partyof whichlatersplitinto two the Right(i.e., historical-constitutional Right),
1. Stanko Guldescu, History Mediaeval Croatia (The Hague, 1970), pp. 153, 203. of 2. The Federal Archives(BA), Koblenz, Suedostgesellschaft (SOEG), File No. R63/ Nr. 336, Wochenbericht 149and 150,23 February1942,Ivan Orshanichin Nova Hrvatska. 3. Guldescu, pp. 197-220. in 4. Stanko Guldescu,"Croatian PoliticalHistory,1526-1918," FrancisH. Eterovich and Christofer Spalatin (eds.), Croatia (Toronto, 1964), p. 54. Srba Hrvatai Slovenaca(The Creationof drzhave 5. SrdzhanBudisavljevich, Stvaranje the State of Serbs, Croatians, and Slovenes) (Zagreb, 1958), pp. 133-41.

2621 Canadian Slavonic Papers politicalgroups. One of thesewas the Partyof the Pure Rightunderthe leadershipof Dr. Josip Frank; as a result,the Ustashiweresometimes called "Frankists."The Sabor played a role in the ideologyof Croatian nationalism; Croatian parties of the Yugoslav period demanded its of revival.In fact,the Serb-Croatian understanding 1939(the Sporazum) had stipulatedthe recreationof the Sabor in the future, but the fastthe carrying out of this promise. changingeventsprevented It was, therefore, naturalthattheUstashiwantedto rehabilitate only of the Sabor in order to gain the sympathy the populace, and thus to theirposition in the country.They hoped to recruitHSS strengthen into the ranksof the NDH's supporters, demonstrate to followers their to love forand attachment theCroatianpast,and to attract collaborators forthe sharing responsibilities. of own illegalstatus Beingaware of their in the country- after all, they owed their supremacyto foreign bayonets,the Croatian people neverhavingbeen asked to demonstrate in theirpreferences an election- the Ustashibelieved that the Sabor would legitimize theirrule and at the same time providea controlled outlet for the people to vent theirfeelings.Consequently,the Sabor Croatian supportfor the existinggovernment.6 would demonstrate In contrastwith the then-defunct Yugoslavia, where the Croatians had remainedunder-represented,7 Ustashirecreated historic the the voice of and therefore theirpeople's rights, deserved,so theybelieved,the trust of and recognition their brethern.8 tasksof theSabor Amongtheconcrete of was to be theratification the Roman Treatiesof 18 May 1941in which and an the NDH gave up partsof Croatianterritory invited offspring of the Italian Savoy dynastyto rule the state.9 The composition of the assembly was a headache to Dr. Ante Pavelich, the Poglavnik (leader or head) of the Ustasha, and to his entourage.Two laws, released by the Poglavnik,were to regulatethe Sabor's work: "The Ordinance on the Croatian State Sabor" of 24 and the "Ordinance on the Proceduresof the Croatian January194210 The first State Sabor" of 20 February1942.11 establishedthe formally Sabor, and provided criteriafor the nominationof deputies. It profor 6. The Institute Military 7 (A History VII), Belgrade,K 241,Politicalcircular-letter, February 1942. and and 7. The Skupshtinaprovedto be an imperfect corruptinstitution, a house of death for some outstandingHSS leaders. 8. KrakauerZeitung in (Cracow), 25 February1942;Deutsche Zeitung Ostland(Reval), 22 February 1942. 9. Neue Ordnung (Zagreb), 31 January1942;Donau Zeitung(Belgrade), 14 February 1942. 10. Zbornikzakona i naredaba NezavisneDrzhaveHrvatske(Collection of Laws and
Ordinances of the Independent State of Croatia), 11/1942, vol. II, no. 92, p. 93. 11. Ibid., vol. V, no. 196, pp. 211-15.

Croatian Sabor | 263 law claimed Croatian "historical-constitutional" to be the Ordinance's the basis,and specified kindof personto be includedin theassembly.The members thelast Sabor;122) of wereto be invited:1) surviving following on HSS deputieselectedto the BelgradeSkupshtina 8 December 1938as well as life members of the Central Committeeof that party;13 3) membersof the Council of the Croatian Partyof the Right, surviving members theUstashaSupremeCommand of electedin 1919;14 ranking 4) of (Ustashki Glavni Stan, GUS);15 5) two representatives the German minority.16 The Ordinancefurther specifiedthat deputiescould be only such who "did not sin against the honourand the reputation the of persons Croatianpeople."17All deputieswerepromised parliamentary immunity oath untilthe termination of fromthe date of takingthe parliamentary thata Sabor constitution office.18 their Finally,theOrdinancestipulated valid up would be issuedby theend of 1942.The old Sabor Constitution, to 1918,would regulatethe sessionsuntila new one was promulgated.19 Pavelich'squest was to build a docile assemblywhichwould fulfill in harm.On 28 January thehopes invested it without causingunforeseen of 1941 he met with representatives the foreignpress in Croatia, and for of elaboratedhis principles the nomination deputies.20 Amongthose werepoliticianswho had leftthecountry, listedas ineligible Skupshtina deputies whom the Yugoslav authoritieshad appointed to the Royal Senate,and persons"elected" to the Skupshtina thoughtheypolled few whom the Belgrade"establishment" votes (all these were personalities in was the "honour was interested havingin theassembly).Most tricky and reputation"principlequoted above. It allowed Pavelich to omit
12. Elected on 16 December 1913 and abrogated on 29 October 1918. 13. In these elections a list headed by Dr. Machek polled 1,364,524 votes in all of Yugoslavia (44.9 per cent of all votes cast), and received sixty-seven mandates in the Skupshtina. The list was a coalition of five opposition parties. The governmental list polled 54.09 per cent of votes and got 306 mandates. Ljubo Boban, Machek i politika Hrvatske seljaehke stranke 1928/ 1941 (Machek and the Politics of the Croatian Peasant Party) (Zagreb, 1974), II, 367; Rudolf Horvath, "Ljetopis Hrvatske 1918-1942" (Croatian Annales), in Nasha Domovina (Our Fatherland) (Zagreb, 1943), I, 236. 14. The Croatian Party of the Pure Right ceased activity formally in 1918, and was reconstituted under the name of the Croatian Party of the Right in 1919. First Dr. Vladimir Prebeg and later Dr. Ante Pavelich headed the party. Boban, II, 445. 15. GUS was anchored in the Constitution of the Ustasha Croatian Revolutionary Movement of 1932. Emil Robert Gaertner, Kroatien in Suedslavien, historisch-politische Studie (Berlin, 1944), p. 193. 16. Since the Muslims were proclaimed Croatians by nationality, their delegation was not specified. The Muslims complained about the low number of their delegates. 17. Zbornik, 11/1942, vol. V, no. 196, pp. 211-15, paragraph III. 18. /bid., paragraph V. 19. Ibid., paragraphs IV, V, VII. 20. Neue Ordnung, 31 January 1942.

2641 Revue Canadienne des Slavistes it personalities anybodyhe disliked.In practice, excludedall outstanding of of the HSS, Croatian ministers General Dushan Shimovich's government (27 March - 16 April 1941) and other Belgrade collaborators, to friendly the NDH (i.e., plus persons active against governments In the Axis governments).21 addition,some wereexcludedon the against In basis of Pavelich'sprejudices.22 orderto make the arbitrary selection seem plausible, the Poglavnik appointed the Presidentof the NDH's to but SupremeCourt,Dr. Nikola Vuketich, draw up thelistofdeputies, for selection.23 handed thejudge exactdirectives their Vuketich described his work in the followingwords:
as Such persons,who by myfreeunderstanding a juristsinnedagainst Stateof Croatia,or hurtthehonourand of theinterest the Independent of the reputationof the Croatian people afterthe resurrection their state, will not be included in the list [of designateddeputies].24

An analysisof the listof nomineesrevealsthatVuketich packed the The assembly with the Ustashi and their fellow-travellers.25 Ustasha members, includingseven Supreme Command sent some twenty-eight Doglavniks (AssistantChiefs,AssistantHeads), Poglavnik'sAdjutants, and Commissioners.26 According to the German General in Croatia, Edmund Glaise von Horstenau,the Sabor had 106 Ustasha members.27 this numberincluded veteransof the Partyof the Right, Presumably, ?nd HSS deputieswho had alreadyjoined the Ustasha, GUS members, Ustashi who belonged to none of these.28 of to in Glaise saysthat70 members theHSS wereinvited participate the Sabor.29Foreign sources claimed that a large numberof the HSS
21. US National Archives(USNA), Military D.C., 874.51/ Department, Washington, of 17 to 483, Dispatch No. 38, Berry the Secretary State,Constantinople, February1942; List (Osjek), 8 February1942;Die Neue Tag (Zagreb), 10 January1942;Edmund Hrvatski Paris, Genocidein Satellite Croatia (Chicago, 1960), p. 167. 22. For example, Dr. Stjepan Buch, the ideologistof Croatian National Socialism. Stjepan Buch, "Da li smo Hrvatsku mogli sachuvati?" (Could We Sustain Croatia?), HrvatskaRevija, X, nos. 2-3 (38-39) (June 1960), 222. 23. HrvatskiList, 7 February 1942; Donau Zeitung,3 February 1942. 24. Donau Zeitung, 11 February 1942. 25. "Sastav HrvatskogDrzhavnog Sabora" (The Compositionof the Croatian State Sabor), HrvatskiList, 8 February 1942. inter alia 26. Hrvatski List,8 February1942.GUS had been reorganized onlyrecently, at in order to adapt it to the Sabor. Some sources put its membership 26 or 27. Archives the RH 31III/2, No. 27. The Federal Archives, Military (BAMA), Freiburg, 0379/42, Bericht,25 February 1942. 28. For example,thelawyers DragutinHadrovichand Dr. Hifzija-Gavran Kapetanovich,thejournalistMesud Kulenovich(the last two wereMuslims),the Ustasha Major Ilja either withtheGUS or withthe Party the Right. and manyothersnot classified of Sertich, RH 31III/2, No. 0379/42,Bericht, February1942.Cf. Gert 25 29. BAMA, Freiburg, Fricke, Kroatien 1941-1944 (Freiburg, 1972), p. 68. Other sources put the numberat

Croatian Sabor | 265 Severaldeputieswho were to nomineesrefused accept this invitation.30 handed the NominationDecree {Vjerodajnica)and accepted it initially did not show up duringthe sessions. Yet, even appearance in the Sabor later was not proofof supportforthergime.At leastfiveHSS members the TerritorialAnti-FascistCommitteeof Croatia {Zemjalsko joined Hrvatskeor ZAVNOH) oslobozhdenja vijechenarodnog antifashistichko and the ranksof Tito's partisans.Some of themconfinedtheiractivity in actions and commanded to politics;othersalso participated military troops.31 The Muslimsof Bosnia and Hercegovinawereanothergroup to be en represented masse. Out of the NDH's total populationof 6,300,000, therewere about 700,000 Muslims, 1,925,000Serbs, and 150,000Germans.32 Fifteen men representedthe Muslims in the Sabor.33 The obtained two numerous Serbs and the miniscule German minority each. Dr. Sava Besarovich,a veteran politician, and Dr. delegates who servedas a Vicebanus(Deputy LieutenantSvetislavShumanovich, the Serbs (or the General of a region) in Yugoslavia, represented of as The nomination thetwowas regarded an attempt ata "Orthodox"). Serbsin theNDH.34 The leaderof the withthepersecuted rapprochement ethnic Germans, BranimirAltgayer,and the economic chief of this their co-nationals.35 Ferdinand Gasteiger, represented The minority, and 65,000 Slovaks living in the NDH received no 75,000 Magyars delegatesin the Sabor. and wereincludedin members the 1918 Sabor survived of Eighteen wereamong thosenominatedto the Sabor, Eleven clergymen the list.36 but only seven took theirseats. These includedthe Primasof Croatia, had forbidden four ArchbishopMgr. Alojzje Stepinac.The Archbishop
in Brussler Zeitung der Niederlander Zeitung(Brussels),25 February1942;Deutsche eighty. (The Hague), 10 February 1942. 30. Public RecordsOffice (PRO), London, FO 371/44271,R8672/11/92,LaftanFord to M. Rose, 2 February1944,whichmentions refusals; USNA, OSS No. 21782, forty-four refusals. 10 June 1942, notes thirty-seven 31. Komunistichki pokret i socijalistichkarevolueijau Hrvatskoj(The Communist in and the SocialistRevolution Croatia) (Zagreb 1969),p. 239; USNA, OSS No. Movement the HSS Sabor deputiesassociated withthe 60125 of 28 January1944 reported following ZAVNOH: Franjo Borich,Nikola Hundrich,Pavao Krce, Tomo Vojkovich,and Antun Vukovich. "L'tat 'Oustacha' de Croatia 1941-45," Revued'histoire de 32. K. Meneghello-Dincic, la deuxime guerremondiale,XIX, no. 74 (April 1969), 51. 25 RH 31III/2, No. 0379/42,Bericht, February1942;Hrvatski 33. BAMA, Freiburg, List, 8 February 1942. 34. Die Neue Tag, 10 January 1942. 35.^KrakauerZeitung,25 February1942; Political Archivesto the German Foreign to 30 Office (PA), Bonn,Gesandschaft Zagreb,File 97, Gasteiger Altgayer, December 1942. 36. Adolf Dressler,Kroatien(Essen, 1944), p. 130.

2661 Canadian Slavonic Papers in of thattheir priests his diocese to participate theHouse, arguing parish He from dutieswould suffer politicalactivity. thusfollowedthefootsteps of his predecessor,ArchbishopMgr. Dr. Ante Bauer, who had acted similarlyduring the inter-warperiod.37By profession,lawyers and teacherswereconspicuousin the assembly.About ten participants were and Pavelich made effortsto include many described as workers,38 peasants. Not a single woman receiveda nominationto the House. distortedby guerilla and The Sabor's composition was further warfare.Several nominees could not be handed the counter-guerilla NominationDegrees. Otherscould not leave theirhouses forthe same reasons, if theywere alive at all.39In the end, the rosterincluded 205 but of in names,40 it mustbe assumed thattheactual number paticipants list to thesessionswas muchlower.Vuketich's continued changeafter the inauguration.Eleven deputies were found to be state and municipal employees, and were replaced.41Eleven others resigned because of "illness or old age" and Vuketichfilled the vacancies with peasant Three deputies "disappeared" and farmers(includingthe delegates.42 On stead.43 11 October 1942 estateownerBaron Rajachich)came in their the public learnedabout eightfurther resignations.44 Altogether thirtythreedeputies,or some 16 per cent of the House, were knownto have been replaced. The apprehensionof the authoritiesconcerningthe compositionof the assemblywas expressedin the Doglavniks' Council towardtheend of 1943,whenit was statedthateven partisanssat in the House.45There is thus no doubt that Pavelich'shopes and expectations the Sabor's compositionwere not fulfilled. concerning
37. RichardPattee,The Case of CardinalAloysius Stepinac(Milwaukee, 1953),p. 209; Paris, p. 167. of Office the PrimeMinister the DistrictLieutenant the to 38. AVII, K 182,Letter, of Vrhbosna District,6 March 1942; Letter,Presidiumof the Croatian State Sabor to the Vrhbosna District,17 March 1942. 39. Donau Zeitung,20 February1942; BAMA, Freiburg,RH 31III/2, No. 0379/42, Bericht,25 February 1942. 15 25 40. Donau Zeitung, February1942; Neue Ordnung, March 1942; FikretaJelichi Butich,Ustashe NDH (The Ustasheand theNDH) (Zagreb, 1977),p. 146,givesthetotalof 217. About 150 deputiesattendedthe sessions. The new membersincludedthe Ustasha Mayor of Zagreb Ivan Werner. 41. Donau Zeitung, 10 April 1942. 42. Donau Zeitung, 13 May 1942. 43. Nova Hrvatska(Zagreb), 11 October 1942. Iz dra Lovre 44. "Biljeshkese sjednica doglavnichkog vijecha 1943-1945. ostavshtine of Sushicha" (Protocols fromthe Meetings the DoglavnikCouncil. From the Naehlassof Dr. Lovro Sushich), HrvatskaRevija (The JubileeCollection, 1951-75),p. 172. 45. Text of the address is in Josip Biovich (ed.), Uz 30-Godishnjicu Hrvatskog of sabora, 942-1972 (The ThirtiethAnniversary the Croatian State Sabor) drzhavnog (Spain, 1972), pp. 15-17.

Croatian Sabor | 267 The Ordinanceof 20 February spelledout theway theSabor was to one noticesthedeference and paragraphs Amongtheinteresting proceed. The deputieswereobliged theobediencePavelichdemandedforhimself. to attendall sessions on pain of penalties, undercertainconditions yet The Sabor electedninecommittees could excuse themselves. (treasthey national economy and transportation, education, judiciary and ury, health,cooperativesand corporativism, appeals and petitions, religion, sessionswerenotto take and membership, a House Committee).Plenary place unlessat least one-halfof the deputieswere present;and upon a demandof tendeputiesor theSpeaker,thepubliccould be excluded.The had to apply in writing the rightto for deputies,but not the Ministers, fromreadingtheirspeeches. address the assembly,and wereprohibited Also, they had to address themselves exclusivelyto the agenda. The could fine unrulydeputies, or exclude them for a specified Speaker period. When a vote was to be taken, the deputies could favour or was necessary oppose, but could not abstain. The Poglavnik'ssignature for the validation of a law. timeon 23 February 1942 and closely The Sabor met for the first described above. It sat in thehistoric hall ofthe observedtheregulations ancient Sabor on St. Mark's Square in Zagreb. The Presidentof the SupremeCourt nominatedMarko Doshen - a senior deputy,Ustash member the Partyof the Right as temporary of and veteran Speaker. Doshen in turnnominatedthe presidiumwhichincludeda German,a office Notarywas brought of Serb,a Muslim,and a Croat. The historic back to servicethe Sabor, which sanctionedand made permanent the nomination.Afteran impressive opening full of pageantry temporary of invitation thePoglavnik theSabor, all thedeputies to and a ceremonial left a solemnmass in theancientChurchof St. Markor,alternatively, for in a local mosque. ArchbishopStepinac,who welcomedthe Poglavnik of celebrated festive a and thedeputieson the threshhold thechurch, T said the Deum prayer.In the mosque, the Zagreb Imam IsmetMuftich blessing{Dova) in frontof the Muslim deputies. the Pavelichinaugurated Sabor. He did notsay anything substantive words were saved for the closing in his ecstaticspeech: the important The Sabor fervently session on 28 December 1942.46 applauded him, and to Mussolini.Duringthe and however, senta warmmessageto Hitler deliveredreportson the workof their nextfivedays, various ministers offices;the deputiesexercisedtheirrightto remainsilent. Among the addresses was one by the ForeignMinister, Dr. Mladen Lorkovich.He referred the "Roman Treaties." None of those present to the protested Italian "diktat,"47in spite of strong adverse public sentiment.The
46. Buch, UrvatskaRevija, X, nos. 2-3 (38-39) (June 1960), 222. R 47. See PRO, FO 371/44271, 8672/11/92,LaftanFord to M. Rose, 2 February1944.

2681 Revue Canadienne des Slavistes and Religion,Mirko Puk, discussedthe situationof of Minister Justice the the various religiousdenominations, justifying Catholic proselytism of among the Orthodoxand the banishment the "Old-Catholic" faith. of describedin bright the Dr. Andrija Artukovich, Minister the Interior, and theanti-Jewish workof his office, measures.On colourstheterrorist the of 10 April,theSabor metagain in orderto celebrate first anniversary Croatian independence,and Pavelich gave one of his proverbialaddresses. The Sabor met only once more beforethe end of its term. some work was done outside the main hall. Several Nevertheless, and hoped to check thearbitrariness deputieswho accepted nomination the rule of violencewhichcharacterized Ustasha rgime.An opposition in member the of groupcrystallized the midstof thedeputies.A veteran HSS Partyof the Right,Dr. VladimirPrebeg,and some twenty-eight Pavelichand inquiredabout thefateof Dr. Machek members petitioned and otherjailed politicians.48 Theyasked to discuss the issue in a Sabor of voiced in the closed meetings variouscommitThe criticism meeting. inducedthe Poglavnikto reappearbeforethe House on tees particularly 28 February. He censured those of the Ustashi who, in his words, and the profaned Ustasha ideology;he promisedto purgethemovement, The Poglavnik criticizedthe the transgressors. to punish mercilessly and sabotage.49He referred also to inefficient officialdom, corruption, Dr. Machekand "manyothers"who were"in carefulisolation- but will no suffer harm."50A memberof the Party of the Right,Dr. Mirko of to movedsuccessfully abolishthevalidity all constitutional Koshutich, and legal acts, enacted between 1 December 1918 and 10 April 1941 The the Croatian nation and its independence.51 Sabor whichaffected act also approved the government's in creatingthe NDH and its later and on 13 March it was Pavelichsignedthislaw promptly, enactments. publishedin theCollectionof Laws and Decrees of theNDH.52 This was the only law promulgatedby the Sabor in the entireperiod. continuedto Afterthe abrogation of the House, the committees busieditself of witha law aimed work.Thus, theCommittee theTreasury The at an increasein thecollectionof taxesand duties.53 same committee of The discussedthestate'sbudgetin thepresence Pavelich.54 Committee 55 met on 1 July 1942. It and Transportation for National Economy
48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. Donau Zeitung, 1 March 1942; Jelich-Butich, 195. p. R See PRO, FO 371/44271, 8672/11/92,LaftanFord to M. Rose, 2 February1949. Donau Zeitung, 1 March 1942. Vol. VIII, No. 283, p. 302. Zbornik,11/1942, BA, SOEG, R63/65, 23 April 1942. BA, SOEG, R63/337, 27 June 1942. BA, SOEG, R63/337, 24 June 1942. Donau Zeitung, 15 February 1942.

Croatian Sabor | 269 seems, however,that the Poglavnikwas not impressedby the Sabor's Beforeitconvenedforthefirst time,he abolished the activity. legislative committeein the Officeof the PrimeMinister.This legislative special of and body was in chargeof preparation laws,ordinances, decrees.With committee the conveningof the Sabor, the legislative appears to have become redundant.56 fromthe Sabor, On 9 October 1942a new legislative body,different a saddled itwithtasks came intoexistence: StateCouncil. The authorities preparation, explanation,and promulgausuallygiven to a parliament: tion of laws and theirpublicationin the officialCollection. The eight members thisnew body includedseveralSabor deputies.A Justiciar of and Creation,transfer, (Prabiljezhnik) presidedover the State Council.57 and werefrequent the NDH. Indeed, in abolition of institutions offices the weakness and instability theperpetual changesexpressed characteristic dissolutionof the legislative of the Ustasha state.Nevertheless, committee shows Pavelich'strustin the Sabor; once his hopes appeared to have been dashed,theStateCouncil was to fillthevoid. It is certain, shallbe as role forthe seen later,that Pavelichneverreallyplannedan important Sabor in his executiveand legislative system. beforethe House's dispersion, some deputiespetitioned the Shortly includedseveralof the NDH's leading Poglavnikagain. The signatories such as SpeakerDoshen, thedistinguished Ustasha Muslim personalities, and Chairman of the Judiciaryand Religion Committee Ademaga the ZAVNOH functionary Tomo Mesich,the GermanGasteiger, future Vojkovich, and six others. They criticizedthe situation in occupied extermination" of Dalmatia, wherethe Italianspracticed"ethnographic the Croatians.Theycomplainedof the Ustasha corruption. the Further, Ustashaauthorities adopted the habitof clashingwithstateand municiand consequentlyspoiled any efficient administrative pal authorities, work. The judiciary was guilty of depravity.It passed unjust and and inmates in detentionsuffered harsh treatexaggeratedsentences, numerous HSS members weresentto prison ment.People - including and administrative a without fairtrial.Military, chaos prevailed political, in the armed forces.The Ustasha militiaand the regulararmy{Domobrana or Home Defence) were at each other's throats. Any powerman had a chance to manage state affairs. hungry The petitionerssuggested solving the Dalmatian problem with and Germanassistance;reorganizing reconvening Sabor so as to turn the it into a genuine representative body of the people; purgingthe state so administration as to replace corrupt and inefficient officialswith
56. HrvatskiNarod (Zagreb), 27 October 1942. 57. BAMA, RH 31 III/5, 30 November 1942.

2701 Canadian Slavonic Papers HSS prisoners; honestand efficient ones; liberating keepinga carefuleye on government offices;cleaning up the Ustasha and the Domobrana' an the establishing supremacyof the law; and constructing armed force of Croatia's enemies.58 worthy fighting In the Sabor's last session, Pavelich answered these and other year a new Ordinancewould be charges. He said that in the following basis. Fundamenwhichwouldplace theSabor on a permanent published, tal laws requireda long period of deliberationand preparation,and the The therefore Sabor was not in a positionto legislateforthe future. conditions requiredextraordinary legislation. prevailingextraordinary Frequentchanges occurred in the country'slife,and thesedemanded the proper responsein the laws. Presently, main task of the state was defence and supply.For thetimebeing,dutiesotherthanthesecould not be assumed, because theywould only obstructthe fulfillment more of urgenttasks. Nobody but the Poglavnikcould take care of the major or nor his duties.He could not resign give up his office, could he transfer for to responsibilities anybody.He carriedthe responsibility everything. He did not want to share the burden and his only request was for cooperation by all. He never intended to turn the Sabor into an for life. was and institution responsible thecountry's Criticism welcomed, should be positiveand one should learnfrommistakes.But thecriticism had been not forits own sake. Pavelichstatedthatthe Sabor's criticism positiveand itshelp in wordand deed was appreciated.Finally,Pavelich of thankedthe deputies,and in particularpast members the HSS, the Muslims,the Germans,and the Orthodoxfor theirgoodwill.59 formwhatcould be seen and This speechexpressedin concentrated sensed duringthe entireyear: that the Sabor was only a provisional and propaganda. It convenedfor reasons of public relations institution was not intended be a tool foreffective to work,and the Poglavnikwas to by no meanswilling sharewiththeSabor any partof his prerogatives, or whether legislative executive. A If so, what could one expect in the future? partial answer was knownlongbeforetheSabor met:on 26 January1942Glaise reported to to his superiors thatPavelichintended convenea Sabor with consultative it powersonly. He would reconvene in December 1942,and laterwould of construct new Sabor out of representatives corporations.60 seems a It his whenhe witnessed popular the Pavelichreappraised expectations that response and enthusiasm.A circularlettersent to Croatian missions testified thischangeof mood in to abroad by theCroatian ForeignOffice
58. Donau Zeitung,30 December 1942; BA, SOEG, R63/337, 28 December 1942; USNA, OSS No. 29314, I February 1943. 59. BAMA, Rh III/4, No. 188, Glaise to OKW, Abt. Ausland, 26. January 1942. 60. AVII, K 241, 7 February 1942.

Croatian Sabor | 271 informed legations the thatthepoliticaland the Ustashalite.The letter of moral significance the Sabor was largerthan initiallyexpected. It of pointedto the Sabor's representation the nationalwill,whichwould forever legendthatthe Ustashagovernment no popular had the disprove But when the Poglavniklearnedthat,in spiteof all preparasupport.61 his and thatof theUstashaclique, tions,theSabor threatened supremacy he failed to reconveneit. of Even afterthedispersion the House, Pavelichstilltoyedwiththe influenced idea of a corporative assembly.He was in all probability by and the ItalianChamberof Corporations,62 hislateralienationfromItaly to of must have contributed the rescinding this initiative. to On 30 December 1942 Gasteigerreported Algayerthat the new Sabor would probablymeetduringFebruary1943. The Poglavnikwas looking for a means of cooperationbetweenthe Sabor and the State in Council. The Sabor was expectedto have a largerinfluence thefuture on the political and economic life of the state than it had so far. Therefore, Gasteigerconsideredit advisable to increasethe numberof German deputies in the body. He recalled that the House's presidium Pavelichshelvedtheplan for almostunchanged.63 remained Nonetheless, a new Sabor, at least forthe timebeing. Doshen continuedto represent in the Sabor on all formaloccasions.64Membership the Sabor would in one's personal record,while the institution's representatives appear would join in diverse kinds of consultations.But, of course, all this remainedon paper. to Pavelich was unwilling reconvenethe House even on occasions whentheSabor could have givena legal seal of such as Italy'ssurrender, of Since the Ustasha approval to the reunification the Croatian lands.65 state continued to slip away, new ideas were needed to stabilize it. whena delegationof peasantsarrivedin 1944to extendNew Therefore, Nikola Mandich,he welcomedthem to Year's greetings PrimeMinister Sabor. It would be smallerin number, withthe storyof a forthcoming they were told, but the peasants would have a greaterrole in it.66 to Pavelich,too, addressedhimself theissuein his New Year's messageto He of the members the government. explainedthat the Sabor, in close a cooperation with the State Council, would be in charge of writing for constitution the NDH. The Sabor, one of theoldestinstitutions its of
61. Herrmann Finer, Mussolini's Italy (New York, 1965), pp. 257, 258. 62. BAMA, Freiburg, RH 31III/2, No. 0379/42, Bericht, 25 February 1942.

63. Donau Zeitung, 10 January 1943; Deutsche Zeitung in Kroatien (Zagreb), 23 September1943. 64. Buch, HrvatskaRevija, X, nos. 2-3 (38-39) (June I960), 222-23. 65. BA, SOEG, R63/345, 18 January 1944.
66. Za Dom (Zagreb), 2 February 1944.

2721 Revue Canadienne des Slavistes and theold constitukind,would expressthe nationalwill forprogress, tional ideas would be revivedin a new form.In the new assembly,the proper stage for displayingthe mutual trustof the people and their would come into existence. Mandich, in answeringhis government to the Sabor.67 leader,emphasized cabinet'sresponsibility theforthcoming The regime'sspokesmencontinuedto rehashtheapproachingconvocaas of tion of the House, and its importance a faithful representative the The Sabor did not conveneagain, however.The governnationalwill.68 of and ment controlled onlya smallfraction thestate'sterritory, eventhe of Zagreb was far fromsafe. The countrywas divided between city German and Tito-partisan troops (as well as General Drazha Mihailowithonly tokenpower leftin the Ustasha authorities' vich's Chetniks), hands. The Ustashiwereanxious to widentheir publicsupport.Onlythus the repeatedattemptsto include HSS men in the can one understand cabinet,and the renewedpromiseof a Sabor. of Pavelich knew well the historicimportance the Sabor, and its He was also aware of thecontradiction embodiedin the popular impact. The Ustasha, in its wish to draw closer to institution. representative and parliaFascist and Nazi ideologies,condemnedwestern democracy the hierarchical From the beginning, Ustasha builta strictly mentarism. to withleadersnominated and all members structure, by responsible the establishment a representative of authoritarianPoglavnik. Therefore, assembly might have sounded anachronistic.In reality,it was less a thanone would expect.The Sabor, originally mediaeval anachronistic The right became electivein thenineteenth to estateinstitution, century. classes. Croatia never however,was curtailedto the propertied vote, witnesseda general election, and the deputies were chosen by small in did not alteressentially Yugoslavia. groupsof electors.The situation and electionswerea rarity, thepublicwas notused to a Free,untampered of the of freeexpression its will.The arbitrary system staffing 1942Sabor Croatiansno doubtappreciated the was thusnot so unique. Nevertheless, the revivalof the institution, especiallyas some of themcherished hope Ustasha rule. Pavelich that the assembly would restrainunfettered of desired HSS cooperation; the Sabor activity formerHSS members for as harboured a promise suchcooperation.The Peasant Party deputies hoped to get a chance to controlthe state,and to lead it in a direction fromthe Ustasha line. different side The It wouldbe fairto say thatthehopesof neither materialized. who madean appearancein thehallon St. Mark'sSquare fewHSS deputies
67. Za Dom, 2 March 1944: Donau Zeitung,20 April 1944. drzhave Hrvatskc 68. Milan Basta, Agoni i slomnczavisnc (The Agonyand theCrush ja

of the Independent State of Croatia) (Belgrade, 1971), p. 207.

CroatianSabor| 273 on Their feeble to not were allowed havea strong impact theNDH's life. theauthorities to to exercise sortof independence angered any attempts let thatthey theSabor sitfora totalof onlyeight suchan extent days and 28 December), on to and 23 (from February 28 February, 10 April How seriouswas the talk about then padlockedits gate forever. one leaveto surmise. The the convening Houseagainin thefuture, must lite sensed needto legitimize Ustasha the is that declining the its feeling and its it to Therefore, rule, broaden influence, to recruit public support. authoritarian assemblies all devised kindsof plans,studied elsewhere, and subjective with and fed the constituency fata morgana. Objective for weretoo adverse, of conditions however, the re-establishmenta Sabor. in an The 1942Saborremained episode thenot-too-happy existence Stateof Croatia. of the Independent