Ivan Rimac, professor at the Faculty of Law in Zagreb, commented on the debate between presidential candidates Dragan Primorac and Zoran Milanovic on the morning programme "Novi dan" with Tihomir Ladisic.

“The debate was so ugly that those who did not already have a favourite will certainly not vote,” said Professor Rimac.

“The supporters of both candidates may be disappointed”

“Both candidates attacked their opponent fiercely. Each has stuck to their base. However, supporters of both may be disappointed because their candidate failed to score decisive points in this trench warfare. In this context, even a win can feel like a loss. There is no winner here and the debate did not live up to expectations in terms of organisation and moderation. The moderators failed to steer the discussion, either thematically or through their interventions,” he continued.

Rimac cited foreign policy as an example, noting that Milanovic gave the impression that he was deeply rooted in Croatia’s current position, while Primorac gave the impression that he was leading Israel, suggesting that the Americans would support whatever Croatia needed for Croatia to stand out in the region without having to engage in dialogue. Even if this was not said directly, Rimac said, such conclusions could be drawn.

We have been saturated with fake news all autumn. It is difficult to consider old statements by candidates as relevant anymore

“There was nothing new, apart from the fact that both candidates tried to provoke and irritate their opponent in order to attack him more easily. There were some very strange defences and it was obvious that both were nervous and irritable. At certain moments they could have scored more effectively. For example, when Milanovic was accused of collaborating with Milorad Dodik (the president of Republika Srpska), he did not respond by affirming that he recognises Bosnia and Herzegovina and that he needs to talk to everyone in order to improve the situation of Croatians there.

Primorac had similar missteps when Milanovic attacked his scientific career. He argued that a head of state cannot comment on scientists without a doctorate and also mentioned that he lives in America. If you are running for president of Croatia, you cannot live in America,” Rimac said.

“The decision that one candidate did slightly better than the other does not change things”

“A lot of what has been said has been taken out of context or made up by others. We have seen clear examples of quotes being cited as fact by the candidates’ opponents. This is now taken for granted and makes it difficult to distinguish between truth and fake news,” said Rimac.

“As far as the election campaign is concerned, the narrative of Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic, which was picked up by Primorac… We have been saturated with fake news all autumn. It is difficult to consider old statements by candidates as relevant anymore. In this sense, the election campaign is losing momentum because we have already heard most of the arguments. I don’t see any progress in this context. The decision that one candidate did slightly better than the other does not change things; it only creates distrust in politics as an activity that is supposed to serve the citizens. We lack culture in political discourse, which undermines trust in politics and politicians,” he said.

There was nothing new, apart from the fact that both candidates tried to provoke and irritate their opponent in order to attack him more easily

According to Rimac, Milanovic has made it clear in his answers about Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu that he is not interested in war criminals, while Primorac has not taken a position. “He has not responded to anything except accusing Milanovic of siding with Hamas,” he said.