COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS REPORT OF SERBIA

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has considered the initial report of Serbia on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Presenting the report, Sanja Jasarevic-Kuzic, Assistant Minister for Human and Minority Rights of Serbia, said that Serbia had ratified seven basic international agreements in the field of human rights protection. By presenting the initial report under this Convention Serbia had almost completed the cycle of submission of initial reports. Ms. Jasarevic-Kuzic said the State was committed to fostering democracy, and this involved the fulfilment of certain obligations, among which the respect of human and minority rights was a key obligation. Serbia was expected to sanction all persons who either committed or instigated gross human rights violations in any way. While the State faced problems in implementing the Convention in the autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija, whose administration was entirely entrusted to the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, everyone was equal and had the right to the same legal protection, free of discrimination according to the legal system. Discrimination was prohibited on all grounds, and particularly on the basis of race, sex, ethnic affiliation, social origin, religion, political or other affiliation, property, status or culture, as well as language, age and mental or physical disability.

In preliminary concluding observations, Gun Kut, the Committee Expert who served as country Rapporteur for the report of Serbia, noted that all the positive developments achieved in Serbia so far were thanks to the Government’s political will. The Committee’s recommendations would include the provision of enough resources to State institutions, the codification of regulations and the close monitoring of policy evaluation. Roma and related issues of education and housing should be looked into and, above all, the problem of legally invisible persons must be solved. Mr. Gut concluded that the State needed to give rights to minorities, but the entire Serbian public should be fully integrated in the process.

Also in concluding remarks, Jasarevic-Kuzic, Assistant Minister for Human and Minority Rights of Serbia, expressed thanks for the opportunity to address the Committee and for the keen interest displayed in Serbia’s efforts to prohibit discrimination against minorities. Ms. Jasarevic-Kuzic promised to supply subsequent replies to some of the questions which might have been unintentionally omitted. Despite limited resources, Serbia was focussed on adopting measures, including legislative ones, in order to enable the enjoyment of full rights in Serbia, especially by minorities.

Committee Experts raised questions and asked for further information on subjects pertaining to, among other things, what the provisions to eliminate discrimination added up to in terms of implementation, the availability of means to verify implementation, achievements in providing housing for Roma people, as well as the effects of overlapping competences in applying the strategies and the attitude of Serbs towards people from other horizons. Experts also asked about Serbia’s position regarding continued reports that Roma suffered from segregated education and how the State intended to solve the problem of unemployment affecting the Roma.

The delegation of Serbia included representatives from the Serbian Ministry of Human Rights and Minorities, the Ministry of Religion, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as well as the Return and Re-admission Sector of the Commissariat for Refugees and the Permanent Mission of Serbia to the United Nations at Geneva.

The Committee will present its written observations and recommendations on the initial report of Serbia at the end of its session, which concludes on 11 March.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon it is scheduled to take up the seventeenth and eighteenth periodic reports of Yemen (CERD/C/YEM/17-18).

Report of Serbia

The initial report of Serbia (CERD/C/SRB/1) notes that the Republic of Serbia is the legal successor of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Accordingly, Serbia is a member to all international treaties ratified by its predecessor States. The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia guarantees the protection of the rights of national minorities and stipulates that persons belonging to national minorities shall be guaranteed individual and collective rights in addition to the rights guaranteed to all citizens by the Constitution. They shall take part in decision-making, or decide independently on certain issues related to their culture, education, information and official use of languages and script through their collective rights in accordance with the law. With regards to the Roma, more particularly, the report notes that Serbia established the Council for the Promotion of the Status of Roma in March 2008. The 22-member Council includes representatives of the Ministries of Finance, Health, Education, Public Administration and local self-government, as well as other sectors which may have an impact on the promotion of the status of the Roma minority.

Concerning the position of women, the report underscored that special measures to promptly achieve gender equality in terms of political rights were first introduced in the 2002 Law on Local Elections. That law stipulates that candidates of the less-represented sex shall comprise at least 30 per cent of the electoral list. However, data indicate that Roma women are being discriminated against; notably as no Roma women are holding decision-making positions in either the public or the private sector. Moreover, property registered to Roma women accounts for less than 0.2 per cent of the total property owned by families, the jobs performed by Roma women are among the most difficult and the lowest-paid jobs, and women account for about 70 per cent of the illiterate Roma population.

According to the Criminal Code, a person who instigates or exacerbates national, racial or religious hatred or intolerance among peoples and ethnic communities in Serbia shall be punished by imprisonment of six months to five years. The number of indictments for discrimination increased after 2004, when the Ministry of Internal Affairs instructed regional police administrations to file indictments even in cases with the slightest indication that an offence was motivated by national, racial or religious hatred; the aim being to step up the protection of minority groups and religious facilities.

The Republic of Serbia still faces large numbers of refugees from the territory of former Yugoslavia. According to data obtained between 2004 and 2005, the total number of refugees was 104,246, almost 273,000 less than in 2001, when the previous registration had been conducted. However, this reduction in the number of refugees can largely be put down to the possibility of obtaining Serbian citizenship or returning to the country of origin. In early 2009 there were still 97,354 refugees in Serbia, and an estimated 200,000 refugees have obtained Serbian citizenship.

Presentation of Report

SANJA JASAREVIC-KUZIC, Assistant Minister for Human and Minority Rights of Serbia, said that Serbia had ratified seven basic international agreements in the field of human rights protection. By presenting the initial report under this Convention Serbia had almost completed the cycle of submission of initial reports. Ms. Jasarevic-Kuzic said the Government was committed to fostering democracy, and this involved the fulfilment of certain obligations, among which the respect of human and minority rights was a key obligation. Serbia was expected to sanction all persons who either committed or instigated gross human rights violations in any way.

Ms. Jasarevic-Kuzic said the Government and civil society signed an agreement in February 2009 that required both signatories to regularly exchange information on activities related to the development, adoption and implementation of laws and strategies in terms of human rights and fundamental freedoms. In that regard, civil society’s participation in human rights policy-making and decision-making processes had increased.

The delegation pointed out that the State faced problems in implementing the Convention in the autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija, whose administration was entirely entrusted to the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo.

The delegation underlined that, according to the legal system, everyone was equal and had the right to the same legal protection, free of discrimination. Discrimination was prohibited on all grounds, and particularly on the basis of race, sex, ethnic affiliation, social origin, religion, political or other affiliation, property, status or culture, as well as language, age and mental or physical disability. Discrimination was recognised as a criminal act in the Penal Code and in other legal instruments. Also, separate measures may be introduced to attain the full equality of persons or groups who are in an unequal position compared to other citizens.

Serbia had also adopted the Law on Gender Equality to create the conditions necessary for pursuing policies on equal opportunities. In addition, the Constitution provided wide-ranging protection to minorities, including the right to protection from discrimination against national minorities, the right to equal participation in the management of public affairs, and the right to protection from forced assimilation. Also, special temporary measures had been introduced in economic, social, cultural and political life to achieve full equality between members of national minorities and most of the population. Ms. Jasarevic-Kuzic said that elections had been conducted for national minority councils as legally and culturally autonomous institutions with some public legal powers. To advance the position of national minorities in Serbia, measures had been taken in specific areas of social life in which the minorities were particularly interested or where they participated less.

According to a recent census, the Roma population was between 250,000 and 500,000 people. The main problem of this group was dire poverty, which was mostly due to issues related to education, unemployment and housing conditions. Through the Strategy for the Advancement of the Position of Roma, the authorities had undertaken measures to try and ensure that their legal rights were observed, protected and enjoyed, and that Roma were fully and effectively included in all spheres of social life. Efforts were also aimed at ensuring respect for and the promotion of diversity, fostering equal opportunities based on equal rights, improving gender equality, preventing and fighting against all forms of discrimination, and implementing affirmative action measures.

LYUAN KOKA, Counsellor at the Office for the Implementation of Roma Strategy, said that Serbia was the only country with an office dealing with the specific advancement of the Roma, which demonstrated its commitment to integrating the Roma into mainstream society. In this light, 180 Roma assistant teachers had recently been employed in public schools and given the title of pedagogic assistant. Serbia was also taking legislative steps to resolve the housing problem facing the Roma, in line with the international requirements in this area. These facts demonstrate Serbia’s commitment to resolving issues related to the Roma.

A member of the delegation informed the Committee that Serbia was committed to protecting minority rights and that it had been working together with civil society and minorities in this regard. A law was drafted, giving all partners in the discussions the opportunity to express their points of view, and the only significant objection related to how entry into election lists was handled. However, the law was submitted to parliament for consultation before enactment. Ms. Govedarica further said that the elections onto the minority councils were democratic, that 54.5 percent of the minority population took part in the elections, and that there were several lists competing for positions.

A member of the delegation said that several measures had been established to improve respect for human rights, especially in the field of racial discrimination. It was expected that the commissioner would receive and solve all discrimination cases, legislation had shifted the burden of proof to the defendant, and the commissioner had launched two initiatives to prevent discrimination.

A member of the delegation said that Serbia was making some progress in using mediation as a possibility in discrimination-related cases, with the purpose being to promote equality in the country. In 2010, separate funds had been dedicated to the commissioner and these would subsequently be multiplied. Smaller projects such as conflict resolution had been implemented, benefiting youth, adults and children. Over 500 people had been trained to foster the implementation of these projects, and the authorities were very interested in the participation of youth.

DRAGA TRNINIC, Counsellor, Return and Re-admission Sector, Commissariat for Refugees, said measures had been taken regarding refugees. However, many obstacles hindered the return of refugees to their home countries, and internally displaced persons were the most vulnerable group of people in the country. Funding was earmarked for spending on integration and living conditions in order to improve the general living conditions of refugees.

Questions Raised by the Rapporteur and Experts

GUN KUT, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Serbia, said the large delegation from Serbia reflected the range of expertise that needed to be addressed by the Committee. Serbia was a very interesting country, not only because of its geographical location, but also because it succeeded the Republic of Yugoslavia and had been plagued by decades of serious problems. Noteworthy issues in dealing with the report included Serbia’s population, which was in several aspects a microcosm of the Balkan Peninsula. Many minority groups lived in the country, spread out in various locations.

Past difficulties had facilitated Serbia’s transition to a better State, Mr. Kut underscored. Looking at the texts aimed at protecting human rights gave an absolutely impeccable impression, but Mr. Kut asked for a reformulation of the fact that the territory belonged to the people of Serbia. Some of the issues the Committee intended to recommend were addressed in the report and guaranteed by Serbia’s legal framework. For example, the Ombudsman’s Office had multiple layers, which meant that the State intended to cover the whole country.

The main question was what all the provisions added up to in terms of implementation, Mr. Kut said. He drew attention to the need to follow-up the established infrastructure so that implementation was effectively ensured and the results reflected the Government’s intention.

Regarding the legal steps taken, the Rapporteur said that a lot of funding had been allocated, but signalled that the delegation should inform the Committee as to what the strategy’s end result was, and whether there was any means to verify the implementation.

Mr. Kut asked the delegation to explain the achievements of the programmes aimed at providing housing for the Roma. He noted that Serbia must incorporate input from society at large, and should not just be geared towards achieving an international political goal such as admission to the European Union. Measuring the impact of the projects amongst its own citizens must therefore be of utmost importance and needed further reflection on the part of the delegation. Mr. Kut also asked the delegation to explain the effects that might arise from overlapping competencies, given that the strategies to curb racial discrimination were very broad and in need of specific considerations. The Rapporteur also wondered how the Government dealt with Bosnians, who had some rights to freedom but lacked possibilities to enjoy these.

A Committee Member noted the progress the State had made, especially in the domain of war crimes, where many people had been brought to the International Court of Justice. The delegation was asked to indicate the steps taken to continue to shape and change the attitude of some citizens towards people with different outlooks, as nobody would like to see a repetition of the atrocities committed in the past. The Expert encouraged Serbia to increase its efforts to locate and deliver the remaining fugitives to international judgement. The delegation was equally invited to explain measures undertaken to bring to justice those who were still committing crimes, particularly Kosovo Albanians.

Another Expert said it was useful and informative to have sufficient data on the composition of the minorities in the country. However, could the delegation explain the distribution of power or functions between the two Ombudsmen in the country? The Expert also asked for further explanation of the parties concerned with minorities and what the delegation meant by ‘least advantaged gender’.

Regarding the issue of Roma poverty -- which the Government linked to education, unemployment and housing conditions -- an Expert said these were not the most salient issues with regards to this minority group. He asked the delegation for its position on continued reports of segregated education suffered by the Roma. The delegation was further asked about Serbia’s efforts to stop the recurrent issue of forced eviction, which had not been a problem in the past, and how authorities intended to solve the problem of unemployment among Roma women.

Statement by Civil Society

A representative of the Ombudsman informed the Committee about the problems that gave rise to or served as indicators of inequality among Serbian citizens and that needed to be fought and eliminated. These problems dated from July 2007, when the Prosecutor of Citizens was established. They concerned, in particular, the status of national ethnic minorities, which led to inequality and discrimination. The progress made by the Government in this domain was evident. However, this should not be taken as an obstacle to a realistic overview of the position of minorities, the determination of shortcomings and activities to improve the position of national minorities and eliminate discrimination, prejudice and inequality.

The representative of the Ombudsman said that the State had failed to develop capacities to ensure the collective rights of national minorities in accordance with the principles of good governance. It has also failed to implement the Ombudsman’s recommendations regarding collective rights, which involved the refusal of allowing local self-governance to include language. Open forms of racism and chauvinism were frequent and manifested themselves through insulting and derogatory statements and protests such as those organised in Jabuka in June 2010, when Serbs and Macedonians applied pressure and physical force to the local Roma population. The large ethical divide indicated the distrust between the majority and the minorities, but also the distrust among the minority communities themselves. The State was encouraged to allow the Ombudsman’s Office to contribute to the eradication of discrimination on all grounds.

Response by Delegation

The delegation said that Serbia has based its democratic institutions on the positive legacy of the former Republic of Yugoslavia, especially regarding the equality of all nations living it, and now there were 29 national minorities. According to legislation, everyone was entitled to declare their nationality as they felt fit.

The racist discourse was a residue of the past. While unfortunately still present in public and political life, the highest national authorities and civil society responded to it. In 2009, the Constitutional Court had received a proposal that the work of football fan subgroups be prohibited because their activities aimed at the violation of human or minority rights and instigated racial, national or religious hatred. The Constitutional Court had also received a proposal to prohibit the patriotic movements “Obraz” and “1389”. In the same year, the court continued this process upon the proposal of the Attorney General to prohibit the organisation “Nacionalni stroj”.

The delegation assured the Committee that full cooperation with the International Court of Justice remained a priority and that Serbia was doing all it could to bring the remaining two fugitives to justice. Such efforts included rewards for information leading to the location and arrests of Ratko Mladic and Goran Hadzic, as well as exercises in several locations with indices that the indictees could be found there. The competent court of Serbia was currently processing 11 persons accused of assisting Ratko Mladic. As for the war crimes in Kosovo and Metohija, the delegation asserted that the State had established a War Crime Prosecutor Office and a special war crime court department, with 383 persons processed. The delegation also emphasised that Serbia would do all it could to investigate the human organ trafficking crimes reported by the Council of Europe Special Rapporteur Dick Marty because these crimes were ethnically motivated.

Regarding the incidents of hate speech, the delegation said that Serbia was in the process of amending its Penal Code so that this act would be treated as a criminal one. However, the law on public information contained an article, “Hate Speech”, prescribing the possibility of charges in cases of hate speech in the press. Examples included an article under the title “Boycott” in the Glas javnosti daily, deemed as hate speech by Belgrade’s municipal court in March 2006, and the web edition of a magazine entitled “New Serbian Political Thoughts” in April 2009.

The delegation said that 90 per cent of the members of national minorities declared their nationalities in the police force and 19 per cent of them were Roma. The State intended to increase the number of Roma among the police and would invite them to apply for such vacancies.

Regarding the housing of Roma, and relocation to metal containers and living conditions in these containers, the delegation said the previous living conditions had been even worse than those at present.

Regarding the issue of Roma children and their access to education, the delegation said every mechanism undertaken by authorities was built on social inclusion as a priority objective. In practical terms, children of extremely vulnerable groups were paid particular attention to by the law. This effort started in 2010 and it was now mandatory to have all children enrolled in schools in their communities of residence, even after the dates of registration. When a Roma child was enrolled, the teacher must collect information in order to determine the child’s level of adaptation to the environment of residence, including that of the school. The decision on whether or not a child needed support and how that should be given only concerned those children of extremely vulnerable groups.

The State had involved Roma women when drafting the current strategy and the position of Roma girls had been covered by creating Roma pedagogic assistants. Recent data showed that these girls had remained in school and that the drop-out rate had greatly reduced. Unfortunately, Roma women remained largely under-represented in the job market, but steps had been taken to ascertain that those who were fit for employment were sensitised on how to seek employment.

It was very difficult to solve the issue of people being prevented from getting married, especially due to the lack of identification, but the State would look into this, the delegation said.

There were about 47,000 refugees in 54 centres and only very few internally displaced persons faced the problem of obtaining documentation. However, authorities were making an effort to cover all those facing this problem. Also, Serbia had made efforts to improve the living conditions and access to employment of internally displaced persons, and projects to assist returnees would be implemented in the near future. The delegation said that members of all national minorities exercised their right to education in their native languages or had access to services helping them to learn the language used in the schools in the communities where they lived. The Constitution protected the right of every citizen to use his or her native language through education, culture, information and in judicial and administrative procedures.

Serbia had ratified several regional and international Conventions in relation to the protection of minorities, and the application of these measures was being monitored by independent international bodies, the delegation went on to say. It added that the results would equally be reported to the Committee.

The State did not participate in debates by national minority members on issues of identity and it chose to treat all entities equally. Freedom of worship was guaranteed by the Constitution and not necessarily conditioned by the official registration of religious groups. As for the restitution of the property of churches and religious communities, the delegation said this was governed by law. A total of 3,409 requests had been filed and about 500 had been resolved so far.

Further Questions by Experts

An Expert underscored that a solid political will was needed to halt the propagation of hate speech, which continued to bring back memories of the past and might lead to a new crisis. Regarding the issue of racial discrimination, the Expert said the delegation rarely spoke of the issue in these terms, encouraging them to address this in its legal framework. The Expert invited the delegation to reflect on the issue of minorities and consider to what extent this had borne fruit. The delegation was also reminded that education was the cornerstone of every effort to rebuild the State, and was asked to carefully consider the policy.

Response by Delegation

The delegation said the State would try to focus on specific issues related to racial discrimination in the future. For the most part, the Government had decided to focus on discrimination against minorities because incidents of racial discrimination were sporadic.

Further Questions by Experts

An Expert expressed doubts about the State’s handling of groups which practiced racial hatred speech and asked for information on steps taken to ban them.

Response by Delegation

The delegation said it was aware of the presence of racial discrimination in the country and the Government had stepped up efforts to prohibit it. Discrimination against minorities was used as an umbrella term in order to cover all areas. Authorities were involved in drafting legislation against hate speech, which would be based on international legislation so that implementation would be smooth.

Regarding national minority languages, the delegation said those of particularly large groups were already in use in several parts of the country. Serbia had no indigenous groups so there was no indigenous language.

Further Questions by Experts

An Expert commented on the interpenetration of nationalists in the country, saying this could encourage xenophobia and asking that the delegation treat it as an important challenge to be addressed. The Expert also asked for more information regarding the violent, forced evictions of certain communities without the provision of sufficient compensation. What resources were available to the Ombudsman’s Office to enable it to carry out its work efficiently?

Response by Delegation

The delegation said it was usually very difficult to be expedient in executing re-settlement initiatives. The State was however aware of actions violating the rights of Roma people in the process of moving them to other areas of residence where they would receive better benefits, such as those sent to the southern municipalities where new houses were being built for them. The Government would submit a written report to the Committee on how these resettlements were conducted, and it promised to correct the errors.

The delegation said that when dealing with unknown perpetrators it was difficult to determine whether the crime committed was motivated by ethnic or racial grounds. Over 100 cases of racial and ethnic crimes had been reported in 2008, 2009 and 2010, and the judiciary had passed judgement on 9 cases in 2009, while there had been 4 acquittals in 2010. 29 cases had already been filed in 2011.

Answering the question on the Ombudsman’s resources, the delegation said that the office had been allocated about 1.3 million Euros in 2009 and several jobs had been created, while about 2 million Euros had been allocated in 2010. The only problem this year was to find premises, but the Government was engaged in helping the Ombudsman find appropriate premises.

Further Questions by Experts

An expert asked for clarification about the recognition of Albanian diplomats by the State. The Expert also asked for more information about unknown perpetrators of racially motivated crimes and how the problem was being solved.

Response by Delegation

Serbia did not recognise the State of Kosovo and still referred to the terms of the Security Council, the delegation responded. Regarding the establishment of the Ministry of Minority and Human Rights, the delegation said that the 3 year old Ministry had been active in creating and implementing legislation.

The delegation said one of the State’s priorities was the legal implementation of the draft law for recognising legally invisible persons, and efforts would be complemented by the national census this year.

Regarding the issue of destroyed registry books, the delegation explained that out of all the record keeping and administrative procedures -- especially concerning Kosovo and Metohija -- those still existing would be recovered and entered in the current state registry books.

As for the use of national languages which were not standardised, the delegation said these remained recognised by the State even in the absence of written traces. The authorities further encouraged the communities using such languages to take the initiative and launch a process to carry out surveys that would lead to the publication of their alphabets and reference terms. The State did not have a national standardisation bureau and was therefore not competent to carry out the process.

Further Questions by Experts

An Expert expressed concern about the role of political parties and other informal organisations involved in the practice of hate speech and other incitements to the violation of the rights of minorities, and encouraged the State to take measures to redress this.

Preliminary Concluding Observations

In preliminary concluding observations, GUN KUT, the Committee Expert who served as country Rapporteur for the report of Serbia, thanked the delegation for its detailed responses to the many questions raised on the delicate situation in Serbia. Mr. Gut equally thanked the Committee Members for asking insightful questions which paved the way for fruitful and open discussions. He noted that all the positive developments achieved in Serbia so far were thanks to the Government’s political will and said that the issues raised would be included in the Committee’s final report. The Rapporteur underlined that the recommendations would not mean that the Committee doubted the State’s intentions and dedication. The recommendations would include tackling the overlap and inconsistency in legal and institutional structures, the danger of politicisation of these institutions and the need for complementarity between the institutions, as well as the issue of the proper functioning of the Ombudsman and raising awareness at the public, government and administrative levels in relation to human rights. The Committee would further recommend the provision of enough resources to state institutions, the codification of regulations and the close monitoring of policy evaluation, as well as tackling the need for adequate data on discrimination on racial grounds and close monitoring of racist violence. Roma and related issues of education and housing should be looked into and, above all, the problem of legally invisible persons must be solved. Mr. Gut concluded that the State needed to give rights to minorities, but the entire Serbian public should be fully integrated in the process.

In concluding remarks, JASAREVIC-KUZIC, Assistant Minister for Human and Minority Rights of Serbia, expressed thanks for the opportunity to address the Committee and for the keen interest displayed in Serbia’s efforts to prohibit discrimination against minorities. Ms. Jasarevic-Kuzic promised to supply subsequent replies to some of the questions which might have been unintentionally omitted. Despite limited resources, Serbia was focussed on adopting measures, including legislative ones, in order to enable the enjoyment of full rights in Serbia, especially by minorities.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CRD11/011E