Canopy fall: The devastating effect of caries

Most recently, Boris Dežulović Serbian progressive party (Latin name Factio Progressiva Serbica) compared to the spiny worm (Latin name Ramisyllis multicaudata) (News, 14 December 12). One of the properties of that organism is that, being parazit, attaches itself to the body of its host and does not let go until all life has been drained from it. Another property would be, for example, that the parasite uses the anal opening as a sexual organ, to defecate (in vulgar Croatian: shit) wherever it goes. And so on. (Disgusting, Basara would say in his novel minority report.) Hence the title of Dežulović's text.

In the meantime, another comparison arose: with tooth disease (Latin name Caries dentium), popularly known as caries. It is a chronic disease of the hard dental tissues that usually begins on the surface of the tooth with enamel breakdown, after which it progressively spreads and affects the rest of the dental tissue. If you do not respond in time, caries leads to the complete death of the vital part of the tooth (nerve). According to exogenous theories of caries formation - for example, the chemical-parasitic acidogenic theory - the causative agents are microorganisms-parasites that cause the breakdown of proteins.

Caries, in addition, can "work" inside the tooth for a long time and unhindered before it gives a sign, that is, before the tooth hurts. This is precisely why it can sometimes be too late for intervention because the tooth has, in the meantime, been destroyed, eaten from the inside. He was eaten by a parasite.

Creating a gray area

When this description is transferred to the field of society and politics, and the tooth is understood as Serbian society (state and culture), the Serbian Progressive Party behaves like caries: it destroys society from the inside, often promoting processes that are not visible on the surface, and the pain is felt when it's already late. The fall of the concrete canopy at the Railway Station in Novi Sad, under which fifteen people died, is the result of carious and parasitic action of SNS. Here's how and why.

According to the provisions of the Law on Planning and Construction (before 2018), Basic Provisions, Article 2, Paragraph 32, reconstruction of an object it is defined as "the execution of construction works on the existing building in the size and volume of the building, which: affects the stability and safety of the building".

According to the Law on Amendments to the Law on Planning and Construction adopted by the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia at the Second Session of the Second Regular Session on October 26, 2018 (and signed by the President of the Republic of Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić on October 29, 2018), in Article 1 point 32 is changed and now reads: "reconstruction is the execution of construction and other works on the existing building in the size and volume of the building, which affect the fulfillment of the basic requirements for object".

From the definition of reconstruction, therefore (as we can see), the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, i.e. the members of the Serbian People's Party (it would be unjustified to call them MPs, despite the formal designation), removed the provision according to which the reconstruction affects the stability and security of the building. According to them, therefore, the reconstruction does not affect the stability and safety of the building, or that provision is redundant since it is taken for granted.

In a report on television N1 on December 25, Ivan Ignjatović, professor of the Faculty of Civil Engineering (on the subject of concrete structures), comments on the "minor" change in the text of the Law as the legislator's desire to speed up the construction process, which is fine, except that the concrete canopy at the Railway Station in Novi Sadu, precisely because of the speed and unsoundness of the construction, and because of the neglect of the danger of the building's instability and its insecurity, crushed fifteen hundred people.

Professor Ignjatović adds that this change in the legal provision creates a "gray zone" very susceptible to free and arbitrary interpretations.

Legal concession to investors

What was the idea or intention of the legislator when he threw out those two words - stability and security? What did the legislator mean by that? What interpretation did he draw attention to?

When we see what Belgrade is turning into, for 12 years now, under the absolute violence of investors (Novi Sad as well) and with the absolute support of SNS (because it's about money) - into a disgusting urban scrambled egg without meaning, into an above-ground sewer - it's impossible to imagine another interpretation is that the removal of the provisions on the (in)stability and (in)security of the buildings being reconstructed is actually a concession to investors under the control of SNS, to the detriment of citizens.

The provisions "stability" and "security" do not appear in the law just like that, arbitrarily, because the law does not imply anything. The law does not assume the good will of the builder to build (or reconstruct) respecting the highest criteria of stability and safety of the building, nor does it imply common sense which says that no normal person will build (reconstruct) an unstable and unsafe building.

Therefore, in legal construction, in legal reconstruction, stability and security are legal categories that must be respected according to the highest criteria. If there are no such provisions, then there is nothing to comply with in the legal sense, so everything else can be done according to the law, except for ensuring the stability and safety of the facility. Then the canopies fall and kill.

In the reconstruction of the Novi Sad Railway Station, therefore, the stability and safety of the facility were not a legal obligation for those who reconstructed the station, since those two conditions were removed from the legal provision, and the civilized obligation and common sense of the reconstructors proved to be unreliable.

In fact, respect for the customs of civilization and common sense is a moral, not a legal obligation, and so far it has not been observed that SNS has anything to do with civilization, moral norms and common sense.

The provisions on the stability and security of the building were removed by members of the SNS, the proposer of the amendment to the law and, of course, the signatory of the law, the president of the republic and the party president at that time. While the parliamentary setup of the SNS for slander, disorientation of citizens and diversionary actions against civilization and the opposition, with its talent for producing nonsense, distracted attention from the slow progression of caries and the internal eating away of the fabric of this country, legal changes were adopted which created the legal conditions for the fall of the canopy and death of fifteen citizens.

Those fifteen (innocent) citizens were sentenced to death.