COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CONSIDERS REPORT OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has considered the combined seventh and eighth periodic reports of Bosnia and Herzegovina on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Presenting the report, Saliha Djuderija, Assistant Minister of the Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said that the State was working on eliminating the “two schools under one roof” problem which was the segregation in schools based on ethnic identification. In order to meet its international obligations, Ms. Djuderija said that Bosnia and Herzegovina was attentive to the needs of the Roma population as it was the State’s largest minority and it was a community that was vulnerable in many areas. An Education Action Plan was adopted not only for the Roma, but for other minorities and it had been revised this year to respond to the educational needs for all minority children and there was also a separate education plan to deal solely with the education of Roma children.

Bosnia and Herzegovina had also invested huge funds and engaged in activities to harmonize its domestic laws with international agreements to which it was a party. Refugees and displaced persons were also issues the State was addressing by providing the basic preconditions for normal living and normal activities for returnees, refugees and displaced persons, but Ms. Djuderija said Bosnia and Herzegovina was a poor country and it did not have all the funds needed to address all the problems with which it was confronted in this area. Thus, Bosnia and Herzegovina still had to rely on international aid and donors to help it take care of all the people who were displaced during the war.

In preliminary concluding observations, Jose Lindgren Alves, the Committee Expert who served as country Rapporteur for the report of Bosnia and Herzegovina, complimented the delegation on their impressive answers and explanations to the Committee’s questions. The presentation reminded the Rapporteur of his trip to Bosnia and Herzegovina last year to attend a meeting of the Alliance of Civilizations in Sarajevo. He could not believe that such a terrible war had taken place in such a beautiful city that had been under siege because he did not have the feeling that he was in a country that had undergone such a terrible tragedy so recently. The Rapporteur said during this visit he saw a government working to survive as a united country, as united as it could be, so he congratulated the delegation again on its presentation and the State’s commitment to the Committee.

During the discussion, other Committee Experts expressed concerns about the current constitution which had discriminatory measures enshrined in its articles. Several Committee members cautioned however that due to the ethnic divisions in the country any changes to the constitution should not be undertaken hastily and they also pointed out that the international community bore some responsibility for the structure and language of the constitution as it was a result of the Dayton Peace Accords. Committee Experts also raised numerous concerns about the treatment of the civilian population for trauma suffered during wartime, particularly women who were victims of sexual violence during the war. Experts also raised questions and asked for further information on subjects pertaining to, among other things, the office of the ombudsman, the status of children of mixed marriages, and the right of return for Roma persons who left during the war.

The delegation of Bosnia and Herzegovina included representatives from the Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees, the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, the Breko District Police, and the Permanent Mission of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The Committee will present its written observations and recommendations on the report of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the end of its session, which concludes on 27 August.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will begin consideration of the combined eighth and ninth periodic reports of Estonia (CERD/C/EST/8-9).

Report of Bosnia and Herzegovina

The combined seventh and eighth periodic reports of Bosnia and Herzegovina, submitted in one document (CERD/C/BIH/7-8), says that even though the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina guarantees to all citizens the enjoyment of all rights across the entire territory of the country, without any form of discrimination, following the tragic war, the problem of ethnic-based exclusion reflected in minorisation of some ethnic groups, either Bosnians, Serbs, Croats or others, in terms of their numeric representation in executive and judicial bodies, remains.

The employment situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is quite complex and of serious concern. According to the data provided by entity employment institutes and the Bosnia and Herzegovina Employment Agency, as well as the estimates of some international and local institutions and non-governmental organizations, the unemployment rate in Bosnia and Herzegovina is over 40 per cent and is one of the highest in the region. Generally speaking, from the point of view of fundamental human rights, which also include the right to work and employment as an important right, it can be said that a number of Bosnia and Herzegovina citizens has been discriminated against on these grounds. This sort of discrimination is more prevalent among the most vulnerable groups such as displaced persons and refugees, Roma as the most vulnerable minority, women, disabled persons, youth and the elderly working population. There are also a number of workers who unwillingly lost their jobs and, at the same time, they are not entitled to age retirement, while, on the other hand, their chances of finding a new job are slim. Quite numerous young and educated people seeking employment outside Bosnia and Herzegovina are also victims of employment-related discrimination. The problem of work and employment in Bosnia and Herzegovina could be solved through investments which would have a direct or indirect impact on the rise of employment, i.e. the creation of new jobs. The subsequent issue to be dealt with would be how to ensure equal employment opportunities for all Bosnia and Herzegovina citizens.

It is generally recognized that after the tragic war conflict, the housing sector in Bosnia and Herzegovina has changed dramatically, with partial or complete destruction of almost half pre-war housing. A total of 452,000 housing units were partially or fully destroyed. In addition to that, a great number of people were displaced exactly because of this destruction of their pre-war houses. They moved into “safer” premises, occupying temporarily the abandoned property. So, this abandoned property was occupied by internally displaced persons. In this way, more than 200,000 housing units were occupied. It can only be assumed what degree of discrimination has been involved here. Bearing in mind the complexity of housing situation, the Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities have focused their activities on two operational areas: property/occupancy right repossession and reconstruction of housing.

Presentation of Report

SALIHA DJUDERIJA, Assistant Minister of the Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees of Bosnia and Herzegovina, said that she wanted to update the Committee on the measures taken by Bosnia and Herzegovina to eradicate discrimination. These measures included the establishment of an ombudsman’s office; the Gender Equality Agency that had been working for a number of years, contributing to the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, particularly in the employment of women; and the establishment of a human rights committee in the parliament whose aim was to guarantee fundamental rights and freedoms. During 2009 Bosnia and Herzegovina also adopted a law prohibiting discrimination in all areas of work and life including education, employment, housing, sport, culture, science, public information, social services, and the judiciary among other areas. All public entities were required to comply with the law prohibiting discrimination and each person was free to file complaints for the prohibition of discrimination or the suppression of discrimination that was already present.

Ms. Djuderija said the State was also working on eliminating the “two schools under one roof” problem which was the segregation in schools based on ethnic identification.

In order to meet its international obligations, Ms. Djuderija said that Bosnia and Herzegovina was attentive to the needs of the Roma population as it was the State’s largest minority and it was a community that was vulnerable in many areas. An Education Action Plan was adopted not only for the Roma, but for other minorities and it had been revised this year to respond to educational needs for all minority children and there was as aerate education plan to deal solely with the Roma.

Bosnia and Herzegovina had also invested huge funds and engaged in activities to harmonize its domestic laws with international agreements to which it was a party. Refugees and displaced persons were also issues the State was addressing by providing the basic preconditions for normal living and normal activities for returnees, refugees and displaced persons, but Bosnia and Herzegovina was a poor country and it did not have all the funds needed to address all the problems with which it was confronted in this area. Thus, Bosnia and Herzegovina still had to rely on international aid and donors to help it take care of all the people who were displaced during the war.

Ms. Djuderija said that Bosnia and Herzegovina had undertaken efforts to secure full freedom of the press, expression and speech but also to sanction hate speech on electronic and print media. This was particularly important in a pre-election season such as the State was in now. There was an initiative to adopt legislation to prevent any fascist or neo-fascist organizations in the country and the draft law was currently before the parliament.

Ms. Djuderija said that Bosnia and Herzegovina was committed to maintaining its ethnic diversity. Recently, a comprehensive law outlawing all forms of discrimination was adopted by the parliament and the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination were incorporated into the criminal code. Civil society and all levels of government were included in the preparation of this report. Ms. Djuderija asked the delegation to expound on other measures taken in Bosnia and Herzegovina to combat racial discrimination.

Concerning the role of the police in combating discrimination, the delegation said that the police took preventive measures such as patrols in returnee settlements and action plans that were implemented with the aim of strengthening and building capacity. There were also human rights training seminars for police officers to inculcate these aspects into their work.

Regarding the human rights of minority groups, the delegation said there were three administrative units in the country and most executive competencies were with the State. There were some competencies vested with the local communities in specific incidents. In terms of activities in the improvement of the Roma situation, the State had enacted action plans for the protection of Roma concerning housing, social security, education, healthcare and other areas and joined the Decade for the Inclusion of Roma.

Progress was also made in regulating the relationship between the State and religious communities. A law had been developed between Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Orthodox Church and one was being formulated for the Islamic community. An agreement had also been established with the Holy See, the result of which was an agreement about the religious rights of Catholic soldiers in the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The delegation said that labour and employment laws had anti-discrimination provisions written into them which stipulated that people should not be disadvantaged due to race, gender or other characteristics. The amended labour law also introduced punishments for violating anti-discrimination laws. Unemployment was increasing due to the war and the transition in the economy, so the federal government had budgeted money to help difficult to employ groups such as women victims of violence and people with disabilities. A new law on social protection was in its first draft and several other laws to strengthen social security and social protections were also under review.

A law on the protection of victims of domestic violence was passed because domestic violence had increased in the last three to four years. According to the delegation, safe houses had been established to house female and child victims of domestic violence, but funding for these safe houses had fallen so there was the prospect that they would close, leaving these victims with no place to go. One of the by products of the terrible war the country endured was an increase in violence in the population. It was also important to note that Bosnia and Herzegovina had a programme to help victims of sexual violence that was in its third year of implementation.

The delegation concluded its presentation by saying that in addition to the human rights challenges faced by the country they also faced economic hurdles.

Questions Raised by the Rapporteur and Experts

JOSE LINDGREN ALVES, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Bosnia and Herzegovina, asked the delegation if there was a representative from the Republic of Srpska and the delegation responded that there was not; this was not intentional but due to budgetary constraints.

Mr. Alves said that the war of the late 1990s was not a result of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s bellicosity, but rather issues in the region that exerted pressure on Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the preparation of his report, the Rapporteur said that he consulted several United Nations reports such as the Universal Periodic Review, the State party’s previous periodic report, reports of non-governmental organizations, and the Internet.

The Rapporteur said the Committee would like more information on the law of 2009 on the prohibition of discrimination. Mr. Alves said that since a census would be conducted in the State party in 2011, he would not elaborate on the need for statistics as this was acknowledged by the government already.

During the review of the last periodic report, the Committee pointed out the incompatibility of the Bosnia and Herzegovina constitution with the provisions of the Convention which impeded its implementation. Bosnia and Herzegovina was made up of two entities, the federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Srpska and this was confusing at times concerning which entities had responsibility for which matters. One of the major concerns of the Committee was the allocation of judgeships and parliament seats based on ethnicity and it was confusing to understand how these seats were allocated. Also, were people who were not Bosniacs or Croats hindered from running for state wide office? Proposed amendments to the constitution and the electoral law in 2006 were supposed to bring the laws in line with the Convention: these attempts failed, but the process was ongoing.

Mr. Alves said some important measures had been taken that had a bearing on their discussion today. In 2004 the functions of the ombudsman were unified into one office rather than separate offices for each entity. How was this accomplished and how was it progressing?

The Committee had recommended laws to overcome ethnic discrimination in the country, and a constitutional court had ruled that it was prohibited to discriminate against anyone on the basis of race, ethnicity or other characteristics. Was this law still in effect? What measures had been taken to stop discrimination in employment, education, housing, healthcare and social security such as pensions? Was the lack of registration of births a problem in the State?

Was there progress made in dealing with the fall out from the war, such as helping persons with disabilities, providing pensions to people who were displaced by the war and rebuilding housing for people whose homes were destroyed.

How were the members of the people who sat on the Roma council selected? In 2005 the State adopted a Roma strategy that covered the areas of census, health, education and social protection with the aim of developing action plans for housing, education and employment. How were these plans funded and what were the budgets for them? What progress had been made in addressing these issues?

The State report said that there were ten cases in which the complainant invoked the Convention, which should not be taken as evidence that there was no racism, rather it might indicate that people were not fully aware of their rights under the Convention. How did cantonal and district courts proceed with indictments?

Other questions raised by the Rapporteur concerned the teaching of history to minorities and how these groups learned about their history and were portrayed in textbooks. There were also many important initiatives to foster diversity and multiculturalism, including the formation of the Inter-religious Council made up of Islamic, orthodox Christian, Catholic and Jewish representatives.
A Committee Expert voiced concerns regarding where Bosnia and Herzegovina was going based on analysis of materials from non-governmental organizations and media outlets and personal experience. The Expert’s concern was that the system as presently constituted was not working and was not set up to work to foster true harmony into the future and it invited division with a tri-partite presidency stipulated by the constitution whose members were there solely to represent the interests of their group. It was the international community, via the Dayton Accords, that set up this framework. Was the constitution as presently drafted adequate? Were the systems fair? Was there a plan for the future? Currently the State was still stuck in the post-conflict era so what was the plan to move the country forward. The Expert was also concerned about reports that the Republic of Srpska was looking at Kosovo as a model and considering breaking away from Bosnia and Herzegovina. In terms of war crimes, there continued to be reluctance in some quarters to go after war criminals that were still at large. In order for the country to move on, it needed to address these issues.

Another Committee member expressed concerns that the census of 2011 might not help them determine the number of Roma in the State since many of them identified as other groups or did not participate in the census at all, and this could be out of fear of discrimination.

A Committee Expert asked whether minority groups were consulted in developing the census that would be undertaken in 2011. In terms of rebuilding the social fabric of the country, what measures had been undertaken to accomplish this? The burden of displacement was a huge issue in the State. Was there a differentiated approach to dealing with displacement for different ethnic groups?

Referring to the substantial challenges in the institutional framework of the country, a Committee member raised a couple of concerns. Roma were particularly vulnerable so what was being done for them? Women from minority groups could experience double discrimination, what was being done to address this? How was diversity reflected and celebrated in the country? The Committee member reiterated the need for disaggregated data, preparation and training of enumerators, preparing the questions and how they would be framed, and encouraging people to participate without fear.

The next Committee Expert to speak noted the State’s attempts to amend the constitution that was adopted after the Dayton Peace Accords and to amend requirements for presidents and members of parliament. Even the system of minor constituents did not work as these representatives were not there so how could the representative of a small minority be aware of the needs of another minority that lived in a different part of the country. Perhaps each minority should have its own representative. It was also not clear whether all entities in the country had adopted certain legislation and this was confusing. There should be a uniform system of implementation, for this Convention at least, as well as a common mechanism for enforcement and oversight.

Response by Delegation

Addressing concerns expressed by the Committee members about constitutional changes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the delegation said the Council of Ministers had adopted a very clear action plan to establish a political consensus to embark on the process of constitutional amendments. The challenge of constitutional changes and agreements on the structure of the presidency and the organization of the House of Representatives was that there were political and legal challenges. However, they understood there were no alternatives to this. The question was how to build a system in this asymmetric structure that would allow members of other ethnic groups to be given their rights, particularly in the issue of the right to stand in elections. Despite these shortcomings, they had moved forward.

In terms of combating discrimination against Roma communities, the delegation said that competent human rights authorities wanted to identify the needs of Roma and they were firm in implementing this process with the participation of Roma organizations and Roma representatives. This analysis resulted in identifying precise indicators for 20,000 Roma people who were included in this registration, representing about 5,000 Roma families who participated in this survey programme to identify their needs. Construction had begun on homes for 2,500 Roma families and money had been allocated for the improvement of Roma family life.

Bosnia and Herzegovina was not a rich country, so it could not raise all the funds necessary for the improvement of the Roma community in a short period of time. The State had received outside funds, but it was still not enough because there were a number of groups who had needs that needed to be addressed.

The delegation said that a shorter deadline had been introduced in which local courts had to decide on discrimination complaints as complaints had increased recently under the new law prohibiting discrimination. An expert working group had been established to monitor implementation of the law and to collect statistics on discrimination.

In terms of how children were taught history in school, the delegation said the textbooks were designed to teach about the history of the Republic of Srpska and the federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and how it was recognized and the current system in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Regarding safe houses for victims of domestic violence, the delegation said there were six such safe houses for victims of domestic violence and human trafficking. The system of funding had become problematic because earlier they had been funded by foreign donors and with the economic crisis the funding had declined and some of them had to be closed. Even those that were still open faced the challenge of continued funding and the current funding levels did not provide for adequate assistance and operation.

The delegation said that the merger of the office of the ombudsman had been finished so there was one unified ombudsman office funded by Bosnia and Herzegovina and the office in the Republic of Srpska had been closed. The role of the ombudsman had been strengthened as well.

Regarding birth registrations, the State had undertaken measures to modernize procedures and administrative access for obtaining identity documents, including travel, birth and other identity papers. This was done as part of its preparation to become part of the European Union and to accede to the Schengen Agreement. The State had also identified reasons as to why some Roma children had not been registered. There were nearly 6,500 births that were not registered in the country and the Government had built relationships with offices in local communities to resolve almost 4,200 cases of these unregistered children. The other cases were being worked on but they were difficult to resolve because there were whole families that had no documents at all, but the hope was that this problem would be resolved completely by early next year.

The delegation said that in terms of the transitional period that the country was still in, unfortunately they were still dealing with problems related to the victims of the war including victims of rape, detainees, expelled persons, displaced persons, people in certain ethnic groups, etc. Although there were many problems, the State had been able to resolve the problem of missing persons through collaboration with the Red Cross and other bodies. In collaboration with the United Nations Development Programme, Bosnia and Herzegovina had also instituted a transitional justice project to address issues of reparations, institutional capacities to establish facts about the consequences of war, and memorials to mark events that took place in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

With the United Nations Population Fund, Bosnia and Herzegovina had launched a programme to address concerns such as women victims of violence during the war, particularly sexual violence and rape. The aim was to repair the social, economic and other situations these women had ended up in by providing safe residences for them because many of them did not want to return to their pre-war residences out of fear and providing well organized legal assistance for when they had to testify in court in war crimes cases.

The delegation said that to combat street begging by Roma children, the State had identified the two basic causes of such activities. The first reason for begging was that it was economically and socially motivated because there were families that lived in a total state of poverty and had no other source of income. The second reason was there were organized groups that collected or bought children and then dispatched them to busy roads and junctions to have them gather money. To address these root causes, the Government had developed strategies to combat illegal trafficking in persons and protection of children. The challenge that the State faced was a lack of funds. They had also tried to build capacities for admission of children from the street and in collaboration with the police they had established several reception centres for street children. It was very hard to reach some of these children, however, especially those held by organized crime groups.

In terms of protecting minority cultures, the delegation said the State had a commission for the protection and preservation of culture to preserve national treasures of a cultural nature as well as important cultural sites. There were also publications explaining minority cultures and how they came to be in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and this publication was also used in schools to help promote multiculturalism.

The delegation said that the State continued to deal with the requests of the huge number of displaced persons and refugees. The State also had to deal with the issue of returnees as well as finding housing for people who did not want to return to their pre-war homes. It had been agreed that the new law concerning this issue must contain two key answers on returnees as well as compensation for property that could be repossessed by people who had decided to settle elsewhere and needed to be compensated for their lost property.

The delegation said that regarding hate speech used during elections, there would be fines levied against political parties and individuals who used any such hate speech during the course of the election process.

The delegation said there was a downward trend in crimes against returnees as well as damage of religious facilities. Also various religious events and religious commemorations were characterized by a high level of security and professional conduct by the police who increased patrols in returnee areas. There were several projects aimed at capacity building for the police and multicultural training for police and good cooperation with religious communities as well.

Various government bodies as well as non-governmental organizations were involved in addressing the situation of the Roma in areas such as housing, employment, cultural identity and so on. Roma participated in decision-making on issues important to them and they were represented in the Council of Roma. The President of the National Council on Minorities was a Roma as well. The State also provided financial support to the Roma non-governmental organization network. The funds were not adequate because the sector was fragmented with numerous non-governmental organizations so the money was dispersed between various bodies by the Roma board, which also proposed a budget to the Government. Roma women also contributed their views on healthcare schemes. Roma women were largely self-employed in traditional crafts.

The budget for Roma housing was spent largely in 17 areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina and allocations for housing were decided at a local level. The funds for housing were secured in the budget and many funds were provided by Swedish organizations and other international donors. The total from all sources was more than 3 million Euros.

The delegation said that in 2005 the Government had adopted a strategy that identified 15 problems of Roma and suggested long term solutions for these issues for the systematic and gradual resolution of these problems.

The delegation turned to educational curriculum and textbook revisions. The revisions were done in 2003 and all inappropriate content had been removed from national subjects.

Further Questions Posed by Experts

A Committee Expert commented that the international community bore some responsibility for the turmoil into which Bosnia and Herzegovina was plunged in the 1990s. If the international community could not solve the problems faced by Bosnia and Herzegovina, it should at least not make them worse. Bosnia and Herzegovina was dealing with war crimes and the need for constitutional overhaul. These were both matters in which the international community needed to tread carefully. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination did not like politics based on ethnicities. The current system was set up at Dayton and it was discriminatory. The United States and the European Union seemed to be losing patience with Bosnia and Herzegovina and were pushing it rapidly to adopt a unitary form of government. But pushing for change too quickly would disturb the balance on which the fragile peace was based. Hate speech was deplorable, but was practiced, even among political leaders. It could not be otherwise since it was obvious that the wounds of the 1990s had not healed and so the elections that were going to take place this fall had resulted in the ethnic card being played. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination should exercise the greatest caution in its recommendations and the pace at which they should take place. To the extent that the constitution enshrined discrimination, until there was consensus on how to overhaul it they had to accept it.

JOSE LINDGREN ALVES, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Bosnia and Herzegovina, agreed with the previous speaker that the Committee had to take into consideration the responsibility of the international community toward Bosnia and Herzegovina in general. The international community also had to take care of the situation there and the State party was doing extremely well in trying to normalize the situation in the country after a tremendous war in which the international community had a very bad attitude most of the time. The Rapporteur then turned to the issue of rape as a weapon of war and the consequences for women who were victims of sexual violence and stigmatized as a result of this violence. The safe houses that housed these women should not be closed for lack of funding. Another point Mr. Alves made was that the office of ombudsman ran the risk of being downgraded as a national human rights institution. He said there were some misgivings expressed by other bodies about the appointment process, lack of funding, limitations in terms of cooperation with non-governmental organizations, lack of interaction with international human rights mechanisms and a broad mandate to address human rights violations.

Another Expert then asked about war trauma and whether the necessary measures been taken to address the psychological and psychiatric consequences for the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina to help them overcome their suffering. Secondly, was the issue of the Roma a national issue and was it possible to solve the ongoing problem? Did the delegation believe a national approach was capable of providing a solution to a problem that had persisted since the Second World War or did it need to be addressed at the regional or European level? The third question posed by the Expert concerned mixed marriages and what was the status of children of these unions? And what happened to the children of such couples in cases of divorce?

A Committee member noted with satisfaction that fascist and neo-fascist organizations were banned. The Committee member then asked about the situation of Roma from Bosnia and Herzegovina who might have left during the war and were now living outside the country. Were there any bilateral links between Bosnia and Herzegovina and other States to facilitate their return to the country and was the State ready to accept their return?

A Committee Expert congratulated the State on appearing before the Committee despite the national tragedy it had undergone. There were many States that had not appeared before the Committee in years, so the Expert saluted Bosnia and Herzegovina’s commitment to the Convention. Turning to transitional justice, the Expert said some States looked to “homemade solutions” that were not appreciated by foreigners and the international community and they cited South Africa and Rwanda as examples. Were there any local initiatives to complement the existing systems of justice to deal with what happened in the country? Also, what was the role of institutions of higher learning, academicians and professors in finding solutions to address ethnic divisions in the country? Were they contributing anything or were they as divided as the politicians? Lastly, did the Commission for the Preservation of Cultural Monuments have a mandate to deal with the issue of plundering of national culture treasures during the war?

Concerning the Universal Periodic Review from June 2010, one Expert noted that there were 125 recommendations from the working group, including ones that were of importance to this Committee, such as the need for a national human rights institution that met the Paris Principles, the elimination of ethnic segregation and the need for human rights education in schools. Had the State provided replies to these recommendations, and which ones was it able to accept and which ones had it not accepted? Also, were there any lessons learned from its participation in the Universal Periodic Review?

A Committee member said he had wondered why the truth and reconciliation concept had been rejected in Bosnia and Herzegovina, while it was accepted and applied successfully in South Africa and Rwanda. Perhaps the answer was because the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina did not conclude in the same way that the wars had in Rwanda and South Africa, where there was one leader who emerged after national elections who unified the country. In Bosnia and Herzegovina however, the situation was fractured and complicated and still evolving.

The next Committee Expert to speak commented that in African traditions the concept of reconciliation was a very important one and justice was not always punitive. Even those who were right could be wrong to a certain extent and after a crisis it was important to heal the wounds and re-establish a balance among the living and the dead.

Replies by Delegation

Responding to those questions and others, the delegation said that two schools under one roof and other policies were the consequences of the war and there were ways to confront these problems and resolve them. There were two cantons that still had this problem of two schools under one roof. The Croats were the majority so they saw this as an issue of access to education for other groups and they were looking for an adequate approach that would not deteriorate the situation.

In terms of safe houses, they were mainly funded by different organizations and there was a law under consideration to add funding for safe houses to the budget. Raped women were no longer in safe houses, but living in homes or in reintegration programmes. The trauma and the consequences were manifold and had disturbed these women’s lives and this type of war crime (sexual violence as a weapon of war) was never formally recognized by the law in a way that would provide them access to treatment and rehabilitation. In conjunction with the United Nations Population Fund, the Government had put this issue at the top of its priority list, but it needed all the help it could get to complete this process.

When it came to the merged office of the ombudsman, the delegation admitted that the appointment of the ombudsman by the legislature became more of a political process. As for the ombudsman’s budget, the State had been affected by the economic crisis like everyone else. In terms of the office’s cooperation with civil society, there were not clear cut relations and this was something that had to evolve and needed to be worked on.

The delegation said concerning the issue of trauma, for years a number of experts had been warning all levels of authorities that trauma should be given adequate attention and transitional justice should deal with trauma issues. Wartime could have and had had impacts on all spheres of life. There had been improvements in some areas such as mental health facilities, but they had to recognize that the State was not ready and did not allocate enough funds to face the problems of wartime trauma. They had also tried to address the issue by providing benefits and pecuniary compensation amounting to 70 per cent of average salaries to victims, but this programme was not enough for this group of disadvantaged people. Veterans also needed important and well balanced programmes to address their problems, but it was difficult to organize this throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina because of the structure of the State so currently these programmes had a fragmented approach.

In terms of mixed marriages, they enjoyed the same civil, legal rights as other marriages and children of these unions could choose to identify their own ethnic background. They could only choose Serbs, Croats, Bosniacs or other however.

With regards to Roma and their right of return, the State had an agreement with the European Union that allowed for bilateral agreements between countries. Estimates were that there were 40,000 Roma people in Bosnia and Herzegovina now, whereas there were only 7,500 who identified as such before the war so the assumption was that any Roma who migrated to other European countries came from other former Yugoslav republics and not from Bosnia and Herzegovina and after the war many of them returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Also, since they were gone for over 15 years to other countries in Europe, they mixed with other Roma communities and their children were born abroad and they often did not regulate their status or register the births abroad so it was hard to definitively establish where they came from in the first place.

The delegation clarified that the ban on fascist and neo-fascist groups had not been passed yet, but was in its second reading and the hope was that the law would be passed by the end of the year.

The delegation said there was an initiative to establish a truth and reconciliation commission, but the voters did not approve that initiative and they wanted to deal with the issue in a different manner. Last year the Council of Ministers decided to establish a coordinated expert team to examine transitional justice including for fact finding to establish the truth of what happened during the war and establishing a national mechanism such as a commission with the capacity at the state and local level. The academic community had not been involved in transitional justice, but now they were trying to change that to include them in this process. The Commission for the Preservation of Cultural Monuments identified and completed lists of national treasures and it could also submit initiatives for research into treasures that had been plundered and the criminal code had provisions for cultural theft as well. Thus far there had only been one such case of cultural theft.

The delegation said that it found the process of the Universal Periodic Review and this Committee to be very different. Some of the recommendations from the working group were already processes that had been launched in Bosnia and Herzegovina, while some were issues that had to be decided on by the parliament and the Council of Ministers. Thus, the delegation could not say which recommendations would be accepted and which would not be. This was compounded by the fact that national elections were scheduled to be held this fall.

In terms of what was learned through the reporting process, the delegation said that in order to prepare this report and the one for the Universal Periodic Review they had to prepare a system to collect all the important information related to international instruments and their function in the country and they had to collaborate with non-governmental organizations and civil society to prepare these reports and gather all the data to fulfil their reporting obligations.

Preliminary Concluding Observations

In preliminary concluding observations, JOSE LINDGREN ALVES, the Committee Expert who served as country Rapporteur for the report of Bosnia and Herzegovina, complimented the delegation on their impressive answers and explanations to the Committee’s questions. The presentation reminded the Rapporteur of his trip to Bosnia and Herzegovina last year to attend a meeting of the Alliance of Civilizations in Sarajevo. He could not believe that such a terrible war had taken place in such a beautiful city that had been under siege because he did not have the feeling that he was in a country that had undergone such a terrible tragedy so recently. The Rapporteur said during this visit he saw a government working to survive as a united country, as united as it could be, so he congratulated the delegation again on its presentation and the State’s commitment to the Committee.

SALIHA DJUDERIJA, Assistant Minister of the Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in concluding remarks, said that the country was very diverse but everyone expected to enjoy their individual rights. Despite all the limitations and challenges facing Bosnia and Herzegovina, everyone in the country hoped that they would resolve all these very difficult problems and she hoped that the delegation was able to convey to the Committee what the State was doing to address these issues. The delegation welcomed all recommendations and suggestions from the Committee to help the country move forward.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CERD10/028E