Shadow
Report on the Implementation of the
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in Serbia,
Montenegro, and Kosovo
CONTENTS
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................
3
2. FR Yugoslavia and International Law
....................................................................... 4
3. Implementation of the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National
Minorities
..........................................................................................................................
6
Freedom to Choose One's Nationality (Article 3) .........................................................
6
1. The Law
.........................................................................................................................
6
2. The Practice
...................................................................................................................
7
Equality and Non-Discrimination (Article 4)
................................................................ 8
1. The Law
.........................................................................................................................
8
2. Special measures to promote equality
.......................................................................... 10
3. Special measures for promoting the position of Roma
................................................ 12
4. Prohibition of discrimination in new legislation
.......................................................... 12
5. Domestic standards and special measures in Kosovo
.................................................. 13
Culture, Preservation of Identity, Refraining from Assimilation
(Article 5) ........... 14
1. Policy and practice of assimilation
..............................................................................
15
Tolerance and Intercultural Dialogue (Article 6) .......................................................
16
1. Failure to Ensure Protection to Persons Subjected to Violence,
Threats or Discrimination
..................................................................................................................
17
2. Violence and Discrimination against Roma in Serbia and
Montenegro ...................... 17
3. Discrimination and Violence Against Other Minorities in Serbia
and Montenegro ... 19
4. Promotion of Ethnic Tolerance in Kosovo ..................................................................
20
5. Protection of Victims of Discrimination and Violence in Kosovo
.............................. 21
Freedom of Association, Peaceful Assembly, Expression, Thought,
Conscience
and Religion (Article 7) .........................................................................................................
21
Freedom of Manifesting Religion and Establishing Religious
Institutions (Article 8)
...........................................................................................................................................
22
Access to the Media and Use of Own Media (Article 9)
............................................. 24
Official Use of Minority Languages (Article 10) .........................................................
26
Use of Names in Minority Languages (Article 11)
...................................................... 27
Right to Education of Persons Belonging to Minorities (Article 12)
......................... 28
Private Educational Establishments (Article 13)
........................................................ 31
Right to Learn Minority Languages (Article 14)
........................................................ 31
Participation in Cultural, Social and Economic Life and Public
Affairs (Article 15)
...........................................................................................................................................
32
1. Participation in public affairs .......................................................................................
32
2. Serbia
...........................................................................................................................
33
3. Montenegro ..................................................................................................................
34
4. Kosovo
.........................................................................................................................
36
Refraining From Altering Proportions of the Population (Article
16) ..................... 36
Transfrontier Contacts and Participation in the Activities of NGOs
(Article 17) .. 38
Agreements on Protection of Minorities and Encouragement of
Transfrontier
Cooperation (Article 18) ................................................................................................
38
1. Introduction
The present report on the position of national minorities in
Serbia, Montenegro, and Kosovo, and the state of their rights was prepared by
the Humanitarian Law Center (HLC) proceeding from the legal principles embodied
in the Council of Europe's framework Convention for the Protection of National
Minorities 1 . Its
objective is to delineate the true position of persons belonging to national
minorities in political, economic and cultural life, and the level of their
participation in public affairs (representation in government bodies,
legislatures, the judiciary, law enforcement agencies, etc.). The report deals
also with the relevant legal and administrative measures which have an affect
on minority rights and how they are exercised.
Field research was conducted in Serbia and Montenegro, the two
constituent republics of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
("Yugoslavia"), in particular in the ethnically mixed regions of
Vojvodina and the Sandzak, as well as the southern Serbia municipalities of
Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja where ethnic Albanians are a large majority and
which were the scene of armed conflicts until mid-2001. The report also
includes Kosovo, now under the administration of the United Nations (UN Mission
in Kosovo - UNMIK), which applies the standards of international law 2 . The
Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government in Kosovo
("Kosovo Constitutional Framework") specifically states that the
institutions of self-government are bound to observe and ensure the human
rights and freedoms enshrined in a series of international treaties (Chapter 2,
Constitutional Framework), including the Council of Europe's framework
Convention (Chapter 3, paragraph 2. h).
The framework Convention was signed for Yugoslavia as a non-member
state of the Council of Europe on 11 May 2001 by the Federal Minister for
National and Ethnic Communities. Following ratification by the Federal
Parliament, it entered into force on 1 September 2001, pursuant to Article 29
(2) of the Convention. In monitoring implementation of the Convention, the
Council's Committee of Ministers attaches major importance to government
reports on the measures taken to give effect to the principles set out in the
Convention. These reports are submitted within a year following the entry into
force of the Convention in a particular country 3 .
As part of its program of legal aid to victims of discrimination
and torture before national courts and international bodies, the HLC
systematically monitors observance of international acts on human and minority
rights. It informs the public of investigated cases of discrimination, torture,
and human and minority rights abuses by issuing reports and press releases, and
invests a special effort to document and objectively study cases of direct and
indirect discrimination on ethnic grounds. This shadow report on the
implementation of the framework Convention draws on the HLC's strategy,
experience and research techniques.
Yugoslavia acceded to the framework Convention five years after
other countries in its region 4 . One year
clearly was not enough time to enact all the legislation required to ensure
compliance with the obligations ensuing from the Convention. Passage on 26
February 2002 of the federal Act on Protection of the Rights and Liberties of
National Minorities ("Minorities Protection Act) created in national law a
basic structure for the implementation of the main principles set out in the
Convention. The harmonization of laws and ancillary legislation regulating the
field of minority rights in the Yugoslav legal system has yet to be carried
out.
The Kosovo Constitutional Framework contains most of the minority
rights guarantees enshrined in the framework Convention. For their part, the
Serbian authorities insist on strict adherence to UN Security Council
resolution 1244, considering that the Constitutional Framework does not provide
sufficient protection for the Kosovo Serbs. In illustration, they cite the fact
that only 126 of the 226,000 Serbs displaced from Kosovo have returned since
June 1999.
2. FR Yugoslavia and International Law
The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia came into being in 1992 as a
federation of the constituent republics of Serbia and Montenegro, two of the
six republics of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia 5 . Three
constitutions are in effect: the Federal Constitution of April 1992, the
Serbian Constitution of September 1990, and the Montenegrin Constitution of
1992. There is a notable lack of harmony between these three organic laws,
particularly in respect of the Serbian Constitution, which was promulgated
before the Federal Constitution. A large number of republican laws have not
been brought into conformity with federal laws and, furthermore, such major
pieces of federal legislation as the Criminal Code, Minorities Protection Act
and others are not applied in Montenegro.
In all three constitutions, Yugoslavia is defined as a state of
equal citizens, not as a national state. This is an essential constitutional
prerequisite for determining and guaranteeing minority rights. Article 1 of the
Federal Constitution (Section I, Basic Provisions) lays down that Yugoslavia is
a sovereign federal state founded on the equality of citizens and the equality
of its member republics. The Serbian Constitution, also in its first article,
states that Serbia is a democratic state of all citizens living in it, and a
state founded on the rights and liberties of man and the citizen, the rule of
law, and social justice. Montenegro is defined in its constitution as a
democratic, social and ecological state (Article 1).
Following the federal presidential election of 24 September 2000
and the change of government in October of that year, the federal government
established a Ministry for National and Ethnic Communities 6 , which is
working actively on a project of a "new minority policy in
Yugoslavia." After ratifying the framework Convention, the Federal
Parliament, at the proposal of the federal government, adopted the Minorities
Protection Act, which for the first time comprehensively regulates the field of
minority rights.
Yugoslavia is currently in the process of political reform and
redefining of relations in the federation. A document containing guidelines for
establishing new relations between Serbia and Montenegro was signed on 14 March
2002 in the presence of the European Union's High Representative for European
Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana. A 27-member Constitutional
Commission set up as a result of this agreement, consisting of nine members
delegated by each of the three parliaments, was charged with drafting a
Constitutional Charter as the organic law of the new state-union of Serbia and
Montenegro. Under one of the draft provisions, the republics would be entitled
after a period of three years following the promulgation of the Constitution
Charter to initiate the process of altering their status, i.e. seceding from
the union.
Protection of human and minority rights is envisaged to be in the
jurisdiction of union 7 . The
activities of the present Federal Ministry for National and Ethnic Communities
would be continued by a new Ministry of Human and Minority Rights and the
Minorities Protection Act would continue to be in force in the new state 8 .
The Constitutional Commission began drawing up the Charter in
mid-June 2002. Of its 27 members, only four are from political parties of
minorities 9 . Noting in
a press release of 17 August that none of the amendments it proposed had been
accepted, the Union of Vojvodina Hungarians said the fact that draft envisaged
a reduction in the level of collective minority rights was unconscionable. The
Sandzak Bosniacs suggested that one of the government institutions of the union
be based in the region's capital Novi Pazar, that it be stated in the preamble
to the Charter that Bosniacs were a constituent nation of the former
Yugoslavia, and that a Chamber of Nations and Regions be established in the
future states as a legal mechanism that would guarantee national equality. None
of these suggestions was accepted.
The area of national law vis-a-vis international law is regulated
by Article 36 of the Federal Constitution. Paragraph 1 states that "The
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia shall fulfill in good faith the obligations
contained in international treaties to which it is a contracting party."
Paragraph 2 lays down that "International treaties which have been
ratified and promulgated in conformity with the present Constitution and
generally accepted rules of international law shall be a constituent part of
the internal legal order." The most important international treaties were
ratified by the former Yugoslavia in 1971: the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights and its Protocol (which makes it possible for individuals
who allege their rights under the Covenant have been violated to turn to the UN
Human Rights Committee) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, both of which were adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1966.
The 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
was ratified in 1967, and on 27 June 2001 Yugoslavia made a declaration
recognizing the competence of the Committee Against Discrimination to receive
and consider individual and group applications alleging violation of rights
guaranteed by the Convention. At the same time, the federal government
designated the Federal Constitutional Court as the body which considers
applications with regard to violation of the Convention when all other remedies
under national law have been exhausted.
Yugoslavia was an active participant in the adoption of the 1992
UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic,
Religious or Linguistic Minorities, and has signed the Council of Europe's
framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities, but not the
European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages of 5 November 1992. The new
government has expressed readiness to accede to this international act too.
3. Implementation of the Framework Convention for the Protection
of National Minorities
Freedom to Choose One's Nationality
Article 3, Framework Convention:
1.Every person belonging to a national minority shall have the
right freely to choose to be treated or not to be treated as such and no
disadvantage shall result from this choice or from the exercise of the rights
which are connected to that choice.
2.Persons belonging to national minorities may exercise the rights
and enjoy the freedoms flowing from the principles enshrined in the present
framework Convention individually as well as in community with others.
1. The Law
Article 45 (1) of the Federal Constitution guarantees freedom of
the expression of national sentiments and the use of one's mother tongue, and
paragraph 2 states that no one is obliged to declare his nationality. The
corresponding articles of the republican constitutions are very similar. These
provisions are of major importance for the protection of minority rights.
In its Article 5 (1), the Minorities Protection Act is explicit
that no disadvantage may result from the choice of nationality or expression of
national sentiments, or from not making such a choice. The second paragraph of
the Article prohibits any registration of persons belonging to national
minorities which obliges them to declare their nationality against their will.
Under national law, no disadvantage may result to a person because of his
refusal to choose a nationality as the possibility of free choice is a hallowed
principle of the freedom of declaring one's nationality.
The Serbian Constitution guarantees in Article 49 the freedom of
expressing national sentiments and also states that no one is obliged to
declare his nationality. The matter is regulated in much the same way by
Article 34 (1, 2 and 3) of the Montenegrin Constitution.
The Kosovo Constitutional Framework lays down in Chapter 4 (2)
that no one is obliged to declare to which community he belongs, or to declare
himself a member of any community. In accordance with the framework Convention,
it adds that no disadvantage may result from an individual’s exercise of the
right to declare or not declare himself a member of a community.
2. The Practice
The issue of nationality arises, as a rule, at times of
census-taking. After being postponed for one year 10 , the census
took place in April 2002 in Serbia excluding the territory of Kosovo. The
Montenegrin government has twice put off the census, which is now scheduled for
2003. For the first time, members of the Bosniac community in the Sandzak, a
region in south-west Serbia and northern Montenegro, were able to declare
themselves as such 11 . In
contrast to Serbia, where persons of the Muslim faith declare themselves as
"Bosniacs," their co-religionists in the Montenegrin Sandzak
variously opt for the appellations "Bosniac",
"Muslim-Bosniac", or "Muslim." The Montenegrin Muslim
Association and its president Avdul Kurpejovic insist on "Muslim."
In the 1991 census, 21,552 people in Vojvodina declared themselves
as belonging to the Bunjevac minority and 1,866 to the Sokac minority.
Estimates on the total number of Bunjevacs vary greatly, and their
representatives hold that the authorities have invested little effort to
address the issue 12 .
An identical problem exists with respect to the Vlach community in
eastern Serbia. Some of its members declare themselves as Vlachs while others
consider Romania as their mother-state and call themselves Romanians. The
federal and Serbian authorities have not supported either view.
Although some 95% of the population in the Dimitrovgrad
municipality, also in eastern Serbia, have Bulgarian last names, 45% % declared
themselves as Serbs, Montenegrins or Yugoslavs in the 1991 census. The relevant
data gathered in the 2002 census has not yet been published.
Problems with group identification exist also in Kosovo with
respect to ethnic Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptians. Though these three communities
perceive themselves as separate groups, they figure in the reports of
international and regional organizations as one in view of their shared
characteristics and status. Research has shown their position and similarities
to be far closer than their differences (language, culture, customs).
Albanians, Serbs and other communities in Kosovo consider the Roma, Ashkali and
Egyptians to be a single ethnic group.
Equality and Non-Discrimination
Article 4, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties undertake to guarantee to persons belonging to
national minorities the right of equality before the law and of equal
protection of the law. In this respect, any discrimination based on belonging
to a national minority shall be prohibited.
2.The Parties undertake to adopt, where necessary, adequate
measures in order to promote, in all areas of economic, social, political and
cultural life, full and effective equality between persons belonging to a
national minority and those belonging to the majority. In this respect, they
shall take due account of the specific conditions of the persons belonging to
national minorities.
3.The measures adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 shall not be
considered to be an act of discrimination.
1. The Law
The Yugoslav, Serbian, and Montenegrin Constitutions and the
Kosovo Constitutional Framework guarantee equality before the law and equal
protection of the law to all, including persons belonging to national
minorities and ethnic groups. Article 20 (1) in the Yugoslav Constitution's
section on the freedoms, rights and duties of man and the citizen declares the
general principle of equality, and the wording of the corresponding articles in
the republican constitutions is very similar. Article 20 (2) of the Yugoslav
Constitution states that everyone is equal before the law. The same guarantee
is embodied in the republican constitutions (Art. 13, Serbian Constitution;
Art. 15 (2)), Montenegrin Constitution), and means that all citizens have equal
opportunity in exercising their rights under the law (personal, political,
economic, and social), equality in respect of their duties and, in particular,
equality in proceedings before courts and state administrative agencies to
protect their rights. Article 17 of the Montenegrin Constitution specifies that
everyone has the right to protection of their rights and freedoms in legally
regulated procedure, and the right of appeal against decisions pertaining to
their rights or interests grounded in law.
In Chapter 3 where it treats human rights, the Kosovo
Constitutional Framework states that all persons in Kosovo enjoy, without
discrimination on any ground and in full equality, human rights and fundamental
freedoms. Furthermore, the provisional institutions of self-government are
bound to observe and ensure the internationally recognized human rights and
fundamental freedoms enshrined in a series of international acts and the
framework Convention. All provisions on human rights and freedoms set forth in
these instruments, which are listed in the Constitutional Framework, are
directly applicable in Kosovo 13 .
A republican Council for Protection of the Rights of Persons
Belonging to National and Ethnic Groups has been set up in Montenegro pursuant
to Article 76 of the Montenegrin Constitution. Chaired by the Montenegrin
President, the Council has no regulatory functions. It concerns itself with the
exercise of the rights of national minorities and ethnic groups as set out in
Articles 67 through 76 of the Constitution. The functions of this body conform
only in part with those of similar bodies set up in other countries to promote
the principle of equal treatment. The Serbian Constitution envisages no such
body.
The Serbian and Montenegrin Parliaments have special bodies
dealing with issues related to the exercise of minority rights (Committee on
Inter-Ethnic Relations in Serbia, and Committee on Human Rights and Freedoms in
Montenegro). Representatives of minorities serve on these committees. In
addition to the Federal Ministry for National and Ethnic Communities, the
Montenegrin government has department of state for national and ethnic groups,
which ranks as a ministry and is headed by a representative of a minority
group. There is no ministry in Serbia charged specifically with the protection
of minority rights. The provincial administration of Vojvodina has also set up
a Secretariat for Regulations, Administration and National Minorities, which is
headed by a representative of the ethnic Hungarians, the largest minority
community in Vojvodina. The Kosovo Assembly has a Committee on the Rights and
Interests of Communities made up of two members of each community elected to
the Assembly. At the request of any member of the Assembly Presidency, any
proposed law is submitted to the Committee, which by a majority vote decides
whether to make recommendations regarding the proposed law. On its own
initiative, the Committee may propose laws and other measures it considers
appropriate to address the concerns of communities.
The Minorities Protection Act in Article 4 (1) authorizes
government bodies to make regulations, bring acts and take other measures in
accordance with the Constitution and law to ensure full and effective equality
between the minority and majority communities. Under Article 23 (1) of the Act,
persons belonging to minorities and national minority councils can file claims
for compensation with the competent court in order to protect their rights.
Paragraph 2 of the Article specifies that the Federal Ministry for National and
Ethnic Communities and the national minority councils may, in accordance with
the Act on the Federal Constitutional Court, file constitutional appeals when
they believe that there has been a violation of the constitutional rights and
liberties of persons belonging to minorities. They may do so also when
addressed by a person belonging to a minority who alleges that his
constitutional rights and freedoms have been violated.
No possibility of constitutional appeal is envisaged by the
Serbian Constitution. Under Article 113 (1.4) of the Montenegrin Constitution,
the republic's Constitutional Court considers constitutional appeals against
violations of the rights and liberties of man and the citizen laid down by the
Montenegrin Constitution when such protection is not in the jurisdiction of the
Federal Constitutional Court 14 and when other
judicial protection is not available. When considering appeals of this nature
and establishing that a violation of human or civil rights has occurred, the
Federal Constitutional Court annuls the act in question and orders the removal
of the consequences that resulted from it (Art. 39 (1)), Act on the Federal
Constitutional Court). Protection of minority rights is possible also through
the filing with the Constitutional Court of petitions challenging the
constitutionality of legal provisions, i.e. through a special constitutional
procedure. It is noteworthy in this context that all the constitutional courts
also take into consideration petitions by "citizens, organs and
organizations" 15 and their
decisions in such cases are binding and final. Article 74 (2) of the
Montenegrin Constitution states that persons belonging to national and ethnic
groups are entitled to turn to international institutions to protect their
constitutional rights and freedoms.
Violation of the equality of citizens is punishable under criminal
law. The federal Criminal Code ensures protection in this regard by
criminalizing as offenses the incitement of ethnic, racial and religious hate
and intolerance (Art. 143), and racial and other discrimination (Art. 154).
Both the Serbian (Art. 60) and Montenegrin (Art. 43) Criminal Codes define
violation of equality as denial of the rights of a citizen, including those
under ratified international treaties, on national, racial, religious or other
grounds as a criminal offense. It is also an offense to deny or restrict rights
(discrimination) or grant advantages (favorizing) on such grounds. The Serbian
Criminal Code in Article 61 also criminalizes violation of the equal use of
languages and scripts and, in Article 100, subjecting national and ethnic
groups to derision.
The UNMIK administration has passed a regulation prohibiting the
incitement to national, racial, religious, or ethnic hatred, discord or
intolerance (Regulation No. 2000/4 of 1 February 2000). If such acts are
committed systematically, or by taking advantage of one's position, or if
disorder, violence or other grave consequences resulted from them, or if
national, racial, ethnic or religious symbols were exposed to derision, the
belongings of another were damaged, or monuments or graves desecrated, the
offender faces a term of imprisonment of up to eight years.
2. Special measures to promote equality
Special measures to promote equality between persons belonging to
minorities and those belonging to the majority have always been taken to deal
with the effect rather than the cause. Such measures are most frequent in areas
in which minority communities are the majority population, and are taken by
local authorities through institutions set up by the local community.
After the armed conflicts in 2000 and 2002 in the southern Serbia
municipalities of Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja, Serbia adopted a plan to
resolve the crisis. The plan, which includes measures to promote the equality
of all communities in the area, was in principle supported by the Albanian
community but its implementation leaves much to be desired. The first
significant measure was the dissolution of local assemblies and calling of
early local elections. As a result of the elections, the Presevo, Bujanovac,
and Medjvedja Assemblies now, for the first time, reflect the ethnic makeup of
the population.
Some proposed amendments to laws have not always taken into
account the real needs of persons belonging to minorities in areas where they
are the predominant population. The planned abolition of the court in Backi
Petrovac (Vojvodina), for instance, indicates that the needs of the Slovak
community are being ignored 16 .
Measures for promoting equality are contained also in laws. The
new Act on Local Self-government in Serbia (Sluzbeni glasnik RS, No. 9/2002)
envisages in Article 63 the establishment of Councils on Inter-Ethnic
Relations. These councils are made up of representatives of all national and
ethnic communities in ethnically-mixed municipalities, which are defined by the
Act as municipalities in which one national community accounts for over 5% of
the total population, or in which members of minority groups make up over 10%
of the population according to the latest census. Communities in which
minorities are more than 1% of the population can delegate representatives to
the councils. Focusing on the exercise of national equality, its protection and
promotion, the councils address their opinions and recommendations to the local
municipal assemblies. The assemblies are bound to place these on the agendas of
their first sessions following reception or within 30 days at the latest. Under
the law, the councils are local bodies set up to consider the multi-ethnic
dimensions of ethnically mixed communities and promote inter-ethnic
cooperation. Their basic role is coordination.
A republican Council for the Protection of the Rights of National
and Ethnic Groups has been established in Montenegro. Similar councils at local
level do not exist 17 .
At the recommendation of the UNHCR and OSCE, an Advisory Committee
on Communities was established in Kosovo in December 2001. The Committee
ensures that the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General is provided
with information on the position of minority communities, which he takes into
account in discharging his responsibilities following the establishment of the
Kosovo Assembly. The Committee also provides the Special Representative with
policy guidelines, advice and recommendations with regard to stabilization and
the integration of minority communities in Kosovo. One of its first actions was
to issue guidelines on the employment of persons belonging to minority groups
and freedom of movement. It considers it most important to persuade the Kosovo
Albanian political leaders to support the return and integration of minority
communities.
3. Special measures for promoting the position of Roma
Before enactment of the Minorities Protection Act, the Roma
community had the status of an ethnic group and were formally in a position of
inequality in respect of both the majority population and other minorities. The
law accorded the Roma the status of a national minority and, under Article 4
(2), the authorities have an obligation to adopt legislation and measures to
"improve the position of persons belonging to the Roma national
minority." Yugoslavia thus became the eighth European country to declare
the Roma a national minority by law, with the aim of promoting their
integration into society.
An inter-ministerial group on Roma rights has been established to
draw up a program of affirmative action measures for Roma. Made up of officials
from different federal, republican and provincial ministries, the activities of
the group are coordinated by the Federal Ministry for National and Ethnic
Communities. In mid-September 2002, the Ministry signed an agreement with
international organizations in Yugoslavia on setting up a group of experts to
formulate a strategy for the integration of the Roma community. This strategy,
which includes the issues of housing, education and employment, is expected to
be ready by the end of the year.
4.Prohibition of discrimination in new legislation
Article 3 of the Minorities Protection Act prohibits any
discrimination on national, ethnic, racial or linguistic grounds. Under
paragraph 2, government agencies at all levels - federal, republican,
provincial and municipal - may not bring discriminatory laws or take any
measures of a discriminatory nature. Article 4 (1) envisages the possibility of
these agencies adopting affirmative action measures to ensure the full equality
of majority and minority communities. Under Article 4 (3), measures taken in
the framework of affirmative action are not to be considered as an act of
discrimination, which is in accordance with Article 4 (3) of the framework
Convention.
The new Serbian Act on Elementary Schools contains in Article 7 a
provision that prohibits any activities in schools which threaten or disparage
groups and individuals on the grounds of race, nationality, language, religion
or gender, incitement to such activities, and corporal punishment or
humiliation of schoolchildren. The new Serbian Labor Act in Article 12
prohibits discrimination and states that both persons seeking employment and
those already employed may not be at a disadvantage in respect to others
because of their sex, birth, language, race, nationality, religion, etc. The
Serbian Broadcasting Act lays down in Article 3 (6) that regulation of
relations in the field of broadcasting is based, inter alia, on "the
principle of the prohibition of discrimination."
In addition to this new legislation, Yugoslavia on 27 June 2002
made a declaration pursuant to Article 14 (1) of the International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination recognizing the
competence of the UN Committee Against Discrimination to receive and consider
individual and group applications alleging violation of the rights guaranteed
by the Convention. The federal government at the same time designated the
Federal Constitutional Court as the body which considers such applications
after the exhaustion of all other available domestic remedy. The Federal
Constitutional Court, however, is unable to consider applications of this
nature since such matters, under the Federal Constitutional Court Act, are not
in its jurisdiction. The competence of the Court cannot be based on a
government declaration and it is necessary to either amend the law or adopt a
new one. In January 2002, the HLC submitted an application regarding the
barring of Roma from a Belgrade discotheque to the Federal Constitutional Court
as the highest instance, and before lodging it with the UN Committee Against
Discrimination. To date, the Court has been silent on the matter. Government
agencies also failed to provide protection to these victims of discrimination
since the Public Prosecutor's Office has taken no action on the criminal
complaint filed by the HLC in July 2000, that is, for 18 months.
5. Domestic standards and special measures in Kosovo
All legislative and executive powers, including court
administrations, in Kosovo are in the competence of the Special Representative
of the UN Secretary-General. Laws in force before 24 March 1999 remain in
effect if they conform with international standards, the UNMIK mandate,
Security Council resolution 1244, and regulations adopted by UNMIK 18 . The Kosovo
Constitutional Framework 19 has not been
published in the Turkish, Romani or Bosniac languages. Indeed, no provision has
been made to ensure publication of UNMIK regulations, which appear only in
English, Albanian and Serbian, in those minority languages. A category of
complaints relating to human rights have been removed from the jurisdiction of
courts and transferred to UNMIK, against whose decisions there is no
possibility of judicial appeal.
Discrimination against minority communities is present in a
variety of fields. HLC research has brought out that it is most pronounced in
education, the use of minority languages in official matters, and in
employment, with the Roma population being the most threatened. Roma, Egyptians
and Ashkali displaced from Kosovo to Serbia and Montenegro are in the direst
position as they are discriminated against in both republics. Their position
improves somewhat with their return to Kosovo 20 .
Culture, Preservation of Identity, Refraining from Assimilation
Article 5, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties undertake to promote the conditions necessary for
persons belonging to national minorities to maintain and develop their culture,
and to preserve the essential elements of their identity, namely their
religion, language, traditions and cultural heritage.
2.Without prejudice to measures taken in pursuance of their
general integration policy, the Parties shall refrain from policies or practices
aimed at assimilation of persons belonging to national minorities against their
will and shall protect these persons from any action aimed at such
assimilation.
Though there are no formal restrictions on fostering the culture
of national minorities, their amateur cultural societies operate in difficult
conditions. The position of minority cultural organizations founded by
municipal authorities is somewhat better as the founders provide financial
assistance for their activities. The activities of the ethnic Hungarian
Cultural Center Nepkor and the Roma Cultural Center in Subotica are, for
instance, funded by the local authorities.
Under the new Serbian Act on Local Self-Government, municipalities
are entitled to set up cultural institutions whose activities they monitor and
support (Art. 18, para. 14). Although with a long tradition, minority cultural
institutions are in difficulties. Despite the obligation of the state to
promote conditions for maintaining and developing the culture of minorities,
such measures are on the whole absent. Cultural projects do occasionally
receive support but generally on a case-to-case basis.
The Montenegrin Council for Protection of the Rights of National
and Ethnic Groups established in 2001 a Center for Fostering National and
Ethnic Cultures, which is in accordance with Article 5 of the framework
Convention and was the first significant measure aimed at maintaining and
developing minority cultures.
Amateur cultural societies are in rural areas virtually the only form
of organized minority cultural activities. Almost every town and village in
Vojvodina with Hungarian inhabitants has a society which maintains, develops
and promotes their culture. All these societies have problems in securing
funding for their activities, in particular, musical, theatrical and similar
performances. The societies of other minorities in Vojvodina are in a very
similar position.
The sole organization whose aim is to promote the culture and
national identity of Bulgars, who are concentrated in the eastern Serbia
municipalities of Dimitrovgrad and Bosilegrad, is the Caribrod Cultural and
Information Center in Dimitrovgrad. The Center has cultural exchange agreements
with the National Library and City Assembly of Sofia in neighboring Bulgaria.
It has a branch office in Bosilegrad which, as part of its activities, brings
out a monthly news bulletin with a circulation of 2,500.
The Cultural-Educational Society in Sjenica is a major Bosniac
cultural institution in the Sandzak. Founded in 1984, it brings out the Zbornik
Sjenice whose publication has been assisted by the Federal Ministry for
National and Ethnic Minorities and the Serbian Ministry of Culture since the
ratification of the framework Convention. The Federal Ministry also financially
supports an literary event held annually since 1998.
Owing to the armed conflicts in the Presevo, Bujanovac and
Medjvedja municipalities, minorities cultures were pushed to the sidelines. The
main institutions in the region are the cultural centers founded by the
municipalities. Few ethnic Albanians are employed in these centers, and books
in Serbian make up the bulk of the public libraries. Of the 35,000 books in the
Bujanovac library, for instance, only 1,000 are in Albanian. The only Albanian
national song and dance ensemble had its last performance back in 1997. Since
Yugoslavia's accession to the framework Convention, the state has taken no
measures specifically designed for the maintenance and development of the
culture, language and cultural heritage of ethnic Albanians in Serbia. Only
some of the necessary conditions have been created in Presevo, due to the
efforts invested by the local authorities.
A proportion of Bosniac children in Kosovo have to attend
Albanian-language elementary schools since education in their own language is
not provided 21 .
High-school graduates belonging to this group have no possibility of obtaining
a higher education in Kosovo in the Bosniac language. The community insists on
the provision of Bosniac-language education, saying that it will soon be
culturally assimilated if this is not done. The Turkish minority is in a
somewhat better situation since the Turkish government grants scholarships for
study at schools and universities in that country. The majority of Roma
children in Kosovo do not go to school at all and those who do attend classes
in the language spoken by the majority population in the particular area. The
Ashkali and Egyptians who speak Albanian are in a slightly better position. All
the measures taken by the international community are aimed at the integration
of minorities while at the same time maintaining their identity, and are in
accordance with Article 5 of the framework Convention.
1. Policy and practice of assimilation
The HLC registered no direct and forcible attempts at assimilation
in areas in which it conducted its field research although various actions by
the authorities and the absence of appropriate measures results in a greater or
lesser loss of national or ethnic identity. In Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo,
such actions are present mostly in the field of education where the approach to
secondary and higher education in minority languages is unbalanced. In
addition, the programs and curricula at all three levels of education do not
include classes on the culture and traditions of minority communities.
The problem with forming classes providing instruction in minority
languages is most acute in Vojvodina 22 where
students who are unable to enroll in a class providing instruction in their
language are forced to attend Serbian-language classes. It also happens that
the number of periods in which minority languages are taught as a subject is
inadequate (Bulgar minority in Serbia) and in some cases curricula do not
envisage teaching of minority languages as a separate subject (Bosniac in Serbia,
Montenegro and Kosovo). School programs and curricula continue to be
ethno-centric and focused on Serbian culture, history and traditions. That this
results in assimilation is evident from the way Bulgars and Vlachs declared
themselves in the 1991 census.
Tolerance and Intercultural Dialogue
Article 6, Framework Convention
1.The Parties shall encourage a spirit of tolerance and
intercultural dialogue and take effective measures to promote mutual respect
and understanding and cooperation among all persons living on their territory,
irrespective of those persons' ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious
identity, in particular in the fields of education, culture and the media.
2.The Parties undertake to take appropriate measures to protect
persons who may be subject to threats or acts of discrimination, hostility or
violence as a result of their ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious
identity.
The Federal Ministry for National and Ethnic Communities launched
in 2001 a media campaign titled "Tolerance" to promote
multiculturalism. It also established a Multiculturalism Center based in
Belgrade to advance minority cultures. In May 2001, it started bringing out a
bulletin designed to promote intercultural dialogue and, in a special edition
of this bulletin, published the Minorities Protection Act in Serbian, English
and nine minority languages (Albanian, Bulgarian, Macedonian, Hungarian,
Romani, Romanian, Ruthenian, Slovak and German. Ethnic tolerance is at its best
in Vojvodina. Serious ethnic incidents involving Bosniac and Serb groups have
been registered in the Sandzak, and the situation in the Presevo, Bujanovac and
Medvedja municipalities is similar, with insufficient cooperation between local
Serbs and Albanians even after the armed conflict.
A new minority policy was implemented in dealing with the ethnic
conflicts in southern Serbia. The state Coordination Center drew up a special
plan to resolve the crisis, which included a cessation of hostilities, the
political integration of local Albanians, and economic and social restructuring
of the region. The negotiations were mediated by the international community
and resulted in an agreement on ending the conflict. Since few Albanians were
on the police force prior to the conflict, a multi-ethnic force was trained
with OSCE assistance. After the first local elections in the three
municipalities in 2002, Albanians have been adequately represented in the local
governments. At the request of the Albanian community, a federal act was passed
amnestying those all those involved in the armed conflicts in the period from 1
January 1999 to 31 May 2001.
Local assemblies in which political parties of minorities are in
power hold sessions devoted to the state of human and minority rights in the
particular municipality (e.g. Sjenica and Presevo). This is not the practice in
municipalities in which Serbs and Montenegrins are a majority. In Kosovo, such
a practice exists also and its focus is on the return of displaced person,
almost all of whom belong to minority groups. This has resulted in specific
initiatives such as the Vucitrn Assembly declaration.
The Montenegrin Council on the Protection of the Rights of
National and Ethnic Groups convenes periodically, adopts positions and
recommendations on the exercise of minority rights 23 . Though the
Council's positions are not legally binding, they do have political weight.
Similar recommendations have been made by the Advisory Council on Communities in
Kosovo.
1. Failure to Ensure Protection to Persons Subjected to Violence,
Threats or Discrimination
In the course of its field research, the HLC registered a large
number of cases of threats, discrimination and police torture of persons
belonging to all ethnic groups. In most of these cases, the victims were Roma
(Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo), followed by Albanians and Bosniacs. The safety
and security of persons belonging to the Serb, Bosniac and Gorani communities
is one of the biggest problems in Kosovo.
2. Violence and Discrimination against Roma in Serbia and
Montenegro
Although the constitutions and laws declare the principle of
equality, practice shows that Roma find it hardest to obtain the protection of
the law and to exercise their basic rights. Persons belonging to this community
are discriminated against in the fields of education, employment, housing,
access to social services, and are barred from public places. In drastic cases,
Roma are even unable to obtain the required personal papers. When Roma in
Podgorica, Niksic and Kotor (Montenegro) applied for identity cards, they were
insulted and derided clerks and officials of the city administrations 24 . Virtually
none of the persons denied access to public places has received the protection
of the law (cases of barring from four discos in Belgrade), or the judicial
proceedings have been unduly prolonged (barred from public swimming pool in
Sabac 25 ). In the
case of denial of access to the Trezor disco in Belgrade, the Federal
Constitutional Court has not yet considered the petition filed by the HLC 26 .
The problem of access by Roma to public places is at times
compounded by violence against them by private citizens, with Albanian-speaking
Roma from Kosovo being the most frequent targets. Ashkali, who also speak
Albanian, have been subjected to unlawful police conduct 27 . The
Serbian and Montenegrin authorities have no clear strategy for encouraging the
majority communities to understand the problems of Roma and the conditions they
live in, and frequently fail publicly to condemn instances of violence and
discrimination against persons belonging to this minority.
Roma also do not enjoy full protection of the law. Judicial
proceedings are unduly prolonged when Roma appear as plaintiffs, and the police
response when they are physically assaulted by private citizens is often
inadequate. Presuming that they must be guilty of criminal offenses, mainly
theft, police resort to extracting statements and confession from Roma, even
though such statements are inadmissible in court except as evidence against
persons accused of torture (Art. 15, UN Convention Against Torture). Numerous
criminal complaints alleging torture have been filed, with prosecutors most
frequently taking no action on tem. On the other hand, police and prosecutors
often bring charges against Roma even on the flimsiest evidence.
Several cases of police abuse of Roma investigated by the HLC
brought out lack of respect for a person's dignity and physical integrity,
disparagement on ethnic grounds, and harboring of stereotypes such as
"Roma are born thieves." A number of these incidents involved minors,
who were beaten in the street 28 or in police
stations 29 . Complaints
alleging use of excessive force by police officers addressed to Ministry of
Internal Affairs' Internal Control Division by the HLC and other human rights
organizations are not properly investigated and most often dismissed as
unfounded.
Though courts have started sentencing officers found guilty of
subjecting Roma to acts of torture, the punishment they receive is usually the
lightest envisaged by law and inappropriate to the severity of the crime. Two
sentences handed down against private citizens were also very light 30 . The fact
that it sometimes takes years before courts finally rule on such cases
additionally discourages the victims from seeking redress.
A large majority of Roma in Serbia live in slums erected in
defiance of zoning regulations, without electricity, running water, or sewers.
Cases on record with the HLC demonstrate the authorities' lack of concern when
these people are evicted from their homes. Evicted Roma most frequently find
new locations on which to build ramshackle dwellings and, as a rule, are soon
evicted again (settlements in the Novi Beograd district, in Zimonjiceva and
Zvecanska streets in Belgrade).
Roma are in a somewhat better position in Montenegro where housing
is concerned. Local authorities in some municipalities have allowed Roma to
build settlements on land owned by city assemblies (two in Bijelo Polje) or
provided alternative housing (Cetinje). In some cases, Roma squatters moved
into abandoned buildings and local authorities, by issuing them with ID cards,
have accepted the fact (Herceg Novi, Kotor). Nonetheless, a large number of
Roma still live in slums without even basic amenities.
Roma displaced from Kosovo are the most frequent victims of
discrimination in the field of housing. The overwhelming majority of almost
7,000 are inadequately housed. Many families live in organized family
accommodations (Konik, Vrela Ribnicka), some have moved into the settlements of
local Roma (Cetinje, Budva, Niksic). The worst off are those who were forced to
set up home on municipal landfills (Lovanja and Pljevlja). Displaced Roma receive
worse treatment than local Roma (Safari settlement in Ulcinj), and even those
who have been assigned temporary housing have to deal with frequent cuts in
water and power supply (Cetinje, Bijelo Polje).
Roma are discriminated against in the field of employment in
Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo (case of Natasa Stevic in Kragujevac).
3. Discrimination and Violence Against Other Minorities in Serbia
and Montenegro
During the 1990s, the Sandzak Bosniacs were victims of violation
of the right to physical integrity, with Serbian police officers most
frequently being the perpetrators. No proceedings were ever instituted in many
of these cases, others were started years afterwards (on criminal complaints
filed by the Sandzak Human Rights Committee) and of these many unduly
prolonged. Bosniacs do not enjoy equal protection of the law in cases with an
ethnic background (the "Group of 24," stoning of a house in
Prijepolje). One drastic case of prolonged proceedings involved the torture by
police of Hajdarevic and Kamberovic, which, eight years after the event, is
still winding its way through the courts 31 . Final
judicial decisions are few and far between. Bosniacs in other parts of Serbia and
Montenegro find it hard to obtain the protection of the law when subjected to
violence and discrimination 32 .
Bosniacs and Muslims who were dismissed from their jobs during the
previous regime were unable to obtain redress. The statute of limitations
expired in many of these cases, some proceedings are still under way, and some
judicial decisions have never been executed 33 .
Discrimination against ethnic Albanians in Serbia was most
pronounced in the 1990s. Since Yugoslavia's accession to the framework
Convention, the HLC has investigated several cases of physical abuse of
Albanians by police, finding that the police authorities in many cases failed
to conduct prompt and impartial investigations. Discrimination is still present
in education, official use of languages and participation in public affairs.
This is the result of unchanged legislation and the Serbian authorities' lack
of readiness to carry out effective reforms in these fields. With the exception
of acts involving Yugoslav Army members, there were no major incidents of
threats or hostility against Albanians in Montenegro 34 .
When the former Yugoslavia disintegrated, ethnic Croats in
Vojvodina, who live mainly in the Srem and Backa regions, and in Montenegro
(Boka Kotorska), became a national minority. About 30,000 Croats have moved out
of Serbia under pressure since 1991. Croats do not enjoy equal protection of
the law in either Serbia or Montenegro 35 . They are
still subjected to pressures, from which the police fail to protect them
(anonymous letter addressed to Mila Franovic-Martinovic, assault on a Croatian
state television crew in Kotor).
4. Promotion of Ethnic Tolerance in Kosovo
The lack of cooperation between ethnic groups is most evident in
Kosovo. Cooperation between albanian majority and other communities is not
satisfactory. In spite of the constant efforts of the international community,
which organized events such as the Carnival of Communities in Urosevac/Ferizaj,
and the Multi-Ethnic Concert in Gnjilane), the results are unsatisfactory. The
parallel systems that continue in contravention of Security Council resolution
1244 are a major obstacle to the promotion of tolerance, understanding and
cooperation between the majority Albanians and the minority communities in
Kosovo. Since the establishment of the institutions of provisional
self-government, Kosovo officials have come out publicly in support of the
return of displaced persons and the integration of minorities in Kosovo society
36 . The civil
sector plays the most important role in promoting tolerance.
5. Protection of Victims of Discrimination and Violence in Kosovo
Physical assaults on Bosniacs, Serbs, Goranis and Roma are still
commonplace in Kosovo. The Special Representative has passed a regulation (No.
2000/4) prohibiting incitement to hatred, and national, racial, religious and
ethnic intolerance and envisaging terms of imprisonment of up to 10 years for
offenders. The HLC has investigated cases of ethnically motivated violence,
which are aimed primarily against Bosniacs, Serbs, Goranis and Roma (Plamentina
and Osojane villages). Persons belonging to these communities do not have the
freedom of movement and even their lives may be in danger when they travel to
other villages or towns (attack on Osojane Serbs). In the period under review,
the police were in several cases able to identify the assailants. The punishment
for such acts is generally too lenient 37 .
Discrimination against minority communities in Kosovo is
pronounced in the fields of employment, use of languages, education, and health
care, and is aggravated by the poor economic situation. Where discrimination in
employment is concerned, it occurs primarily in the areas of hiring and the
restructuring of companies or public institutions. Persons belonging to
minorities are often ineligible job openings because of their poor knowledge of
Albanian.
Freedom of Association, Peaceful Assembly, Expression, Thought,
Conscience and Religion
Article 7, Framework Convention:
The Parties shall ensure respect for the right of every person
belonging to a national minority to freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of
association, freedom of expression, and freedom of thought, conscience and
religion.
The freedoms cited in Article 7 of the framework Convention are
guaranteed by the constitutions of Yugoslavia, Serbia and Montenegro, and the
Kosovo Constitutional Framework. Everyone is entitled to freedom of association
and only organizations whose goals are aimed against rights and liberties and
at incitement of ethnic, racial and religious hatred and intolerance are
prohibited.
Exercise of the freedom of association is in practice hindered by
obstacles and formalities which delay entry of minority societies and
organizations (e.g. the Roma Pharo Drom) into the appropriate registers.
Although required by law to enter the applying society or organizations within
30 days, issuance of certificates of entry is frequently late (e.g. the Bosniac
Ikra Society for Science, Culture and Arts).
The freedom of political association of minorities is also
guaranteed and is respected in practice. It takes different forms, with all
minorities in Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo having their own political parties.
These generally win the votes of all their co-nationals (Albanians, Hungarians,
Bosniacs in Serbia) though persons belonging to minorities at times opt for
parties with civil rather than national programs (Bosniacs in Montenegro).
Cases have been recorded of minorities voting for rightist parties (Bulgars in
Bosilegrad).
The HLC has no information on violation of the right to the
freedom of thought, conscience or religion of persons belonging to minorities
since September 2001.
Freedom of Manifesting Religion and Establishing Religious Institutions
Article 8, Framework Convention:
The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging to
a national minority has the right to manifest his or her religion and to
establish religious institutions, organisations and associations.
National minorities are able freely to manifest their religion or
belief. Numerous rights, however, are accorded by law and other regulations to
the "traditional religious communities," most importantly the
organizing of religious instruction in public schools.
All three constitutions guarantee the freedom of religion, public
or private profession of religion and performance of religious rites. Small
religious communities are, however, under the pressure of the large communities
and frequently the target of threats and attacks (desecration of religious
buildings, offensive graffiti and the like).
Religious instruction was introduced as an elective subject by a
Serbian government decree, which also envisages another subject as an
alternative in elementary and secondary schools. When it passed the decree, the
government failed to take into the account the equality of all religious
communities. The decree favors the traditional Serbian Orthodox Church, Islamic
Community, Jewish Community, Slovak Evangelical Church, Christian Reformist
Church and the Evangelical Christian Church, and thus discriminates against
other minority religious communities (e.g. Romanian Orthodox Church). A number
of instances have been registered of Serbian Orthodox clergy openly exerting
pressure on students to choose religious instruction as a school subject (case
in Beocin).
Treatment of religious communities is also unequal where building
of churches and other religious institutions is concerned, and when people are
compelled to give contributions toward the construction of churches of a
religion other than the one they profess (e.g. for the Serbian Orthodox church
in Secanj).
All minority communities in Kosovo have the right freely to
manifest their religion and establish religious institutions. Exercise of this
right, however, is at times difficult owing to threats to the safety and
security of some ethnic groups (Serbs, Bosniacs, Roma).
Access to the Media and Use of Own Media
Article 9, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties undertake to recognise that the right to freedom of
expression of every person belonging to a national minority includes freedom to
hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas in the minority
language, without interference by public authorities and regardless of
frontiers. The Parties shall ensure, within the framework of their legal
systems, that persons belonging to a national minority are not discriminated
against in their access to the media.
2.Paragraph 1 shall not prevent Parties from requiring the
licensing, without discrimination and based on objective criteria, of sound
radio and television broadcasting, or cinema enterprises.
3.The Parties shall not hinder the creation and the use of printed
media by persons belonging to national minorities. In the legal framework of
sound radio and television broadcasting, they shall ensure, as far as possible,
and taking into account the provisions of paragraph 1, that persons belonging
to national minorities are granted the possibility of creating and using their
own media.
4.In the framework of their legal systems, the Parties shall adopt
adequate measures in order to facilitate access to the media for persons
belonging to national minorities and in order to promote tolerance and permit
cultural pluralism.
Access to the media and public information in minority languages
are guaranteed by law. In July 2002, the Serbian Parliament adopted the
Broadcasting Act as the first law in the field of public information since the
change of government in October 2000. Under the Act, the sphere of broadcasting
is regulated by the independent Broadcasting Agency, one of whose nine members
"shall be from an organization focusing primarily on the protection of
freedom of speech, the rights of national and ethnic minorities, and the rights
of the child." Serbian state television is to become a public service.
TV Novi Sad covers the whole territory of Vojvodina and broadcasts
daily news programs in Hungarian, Slovak, Romanian and Ruthenian. Weekly
programs in Romani and Croat have been introduced recently. The HLC registered
only one violation of the right to information (banning of an item in a
magazine-type TV show). Depending on their size and interests, all minority
communities in Vojvodina have their own printed media, and there are no
restrictions, formal or otherwise, in this regard.
Sandzak Bosniacs have a large number of printed and electronic
media, most of which are based in Novi Pazar. In Sjenica, a municipality where
Bosniacs are predominant, the local radio station cannot go on the air as an
essential piece of equipment confiscated in 1997 has not yet been returned.
There are no Bosniac-language programs on Serbian state television, nor are
programs on Bosniac traditions and culture broadcast with any regularity.
Thanks to a cable TV system in Dimitrovgrad and Bosilegrad,
Bulgars in these municipalities can receive three channels of stations in
neighboring Bulgaria. There is also a local television station established by
the municipality. Broadcasting of a weekly news and information program in
Bulgarian was discontinued in 1999 and has not resumed. Bulgars do not have
their own daily newspapers, and Bulgarian newspapers reach Belgrade with
several days' delay. Police on a number of occasions seized magazines and books
private citizens were bringing in from Bulgaria, even after FR Yugoslavia's
accession to the framework Convention.
The weekly Jehona is the only Albanian-language printed media in
Serbia. It received financial assistance from the local government in Bujanovac
for the first time in 2001. There were no Albanian-language printed or
electronic media in the Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja municipalities before
the armed conflict in the region. The situation improved in 2001 with the
opening of Radio Presevo and assistance to a private radio station in
Bujanovac. With the signing of an agreement on the criteria for the
reorganization of public media in Bujanovac municipality, local Albanians have
the possibility of participating in creating the programs of such media
(Albanian-language program on Radio Bujanovac).
Freedom of public information in Montenegro is protected by the
Council on Protection of the Freedom of Public Information. The republic's
Parliament is the founder and publisher of the Albanian-language magazine Koha
Javore. A number of private radio and television stations in Podgorica and
Ulcinj municipalities broadcast Albanian-language programs, and Ulcinj also
receives several radio and TV programs from neighboring Albania. The only
Bosniac/Muslim printed media in Montenegro is the Almanah magazine whose
subject matter is the cultural and historical heritage of Bosniacs/Muslims in
Montenegro.
A large number of minority communities in Kosovo have applied for
licenses to establish private radio stations. Bosniacs and Goranis in the
Prizren area alone have filed 40 applications for radio frequencies. Up to the
establishment of the international administration in Kosovo, the sole
Bosniac/Muslim-language printed medium was the Selam magazine on cultural,
religious and societal issues, which was banned by the Serbian authorities a
year before the withdrawal from Kosovo. Brief news programs in the Bosniac and
Serb language are broadcast for members of these communities by local stations
and Kosovo Radio and Television. The Roma have only one periodical on cultural
topics. There are no longer any radio and television programs in their
language. Publication of the only Turkish-language newspaper Tan, which came
out for 30 years, has been discontinued.
Official Use of Minority Languages
Article 10, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging
to a national minority has the right to use freely and without interference his
or her minority language, in private and in public, orally and in writing.
2.In areas inhabited by persons belonging to national minorities
traditionally or in substantial numbers, if those persons so request and where
such a request corresponds to a real need, the Parties shall endeavour to ensure,
as far as possible, the conditions which would make it possible to use the
minority language in relations between those persons and the administrative
authorities.
3.The Parties undertake to guarantee the right of every person
belonging to a national minority to be informed promptly, in a language which
he or she understands, of the reasons for his or her arrest, of the nature and
cause of any accusation against him or her, and to defend himself or herself in
this language, if necessary with the free assistance of an interpreter.
Article 49 of the Yugoslav Constitution guarantees to everyone the
right to use his own language in proceedings before a court or other authority
or organization which, in the performance of its public powers, decides on his
rights and duties, and in the course of those proceedings to be informed of the
facts in his own language. Under the Act on Official Use of Languages and
Scripts, local communities inhabited by minorities decide when a minority
language is in official use alongside Serbian in their territories. This right
has been realized mainly by municipalities in which minority political parties
hold power in the assemblies (Sjenica, Bujanovac, Novi Pazar).
In Vojvodina, the matter is regulated by Article 10 (4) of the
province's Statute under which the Hungarian, Slovak, Romanian, Ruthenian and,
since recently Croatian, languages are in official use along with Serbian. Use
of all the minority languages is compulsory in the Vojvodina Executive Council
(provincial government). Birth certificates and other forms are multilingual
and are filled out in a minority language upon request. One minority language
in addition to Serbian is in use in 20 Vojvodina municipalities, two minority
languages and Serbian in 11, and three minority languages and Serbian in five
municipalities and in the capital city of Novi Sad.
A proposal to introduce Croatian as a language in official use was
heatedly debated in the Vojvodina Assembly before its passage. Croats in
Montenegro, who live mainly in the Kotor and Tivat municipalities, are unable
to use their language in relations with administrative bodies.
Albanian is in use in Presevo municipality together with Serbian
and, following the change of local government, the same decision was taken in
Bujanovac. The Serbian language and Cyrillic script are in official use in
Medjvedja municipality where Albanians make up approximately 30% of the
population. Serbian is the only language in official use in the Montenegrin
municipality of Bar in which Albanians account for 12.5% of the population
although the municipal assembly's statute envisages the possibility of the
Albanian language being used.
Election legislation lays down the compulsory use of minority
languages in the election process (Act on Election of Parliamentary Deputies
and Act on Local Elections). This provision creates practical problems and
considerably increases costs (e.g. Backa Topola municipality).
Federal legislation and regulations of significance for the
exercise of the rights and liberties of persons belonging to national
minorities are required by law to be published in minority languages.
Because Bulgars are a majority in the Dimitrovgrad and Bosilegrad
municipalities, Bulgarian should be in official use along with Serbian. This,
however, is not the case; all forms and documents issued by the local
administrations and republican agencies, including birth, marriage and death
certificates, are in Serbian alone, as are also the statutes and other acts of
the local assemblies.
In contrast, use of minority languages is the practice in the
ethnically mixed municipalities of Vojvodina. In Alibunar municipality, for
instance, Romanian and Slovakian are used along with Serbian, enabling persons
belonging to these minorities to communicate orally and in written form with
the administrative authorities in their own languages.
Bosniac is in official use in the Novi Pazar, Sjenica and Tutin
areas of the Sandzak where there this minority lives in substantial numbers. In
Prijepolje municipality where Bosniacs account for some 45% of the population,
only Serbian is used. The Minorities Protection Act envisages in Article 11 (2)
that "units of local self-government shall introduce into equal official
use the language and script of a national minority when the national minority
constitutes 15% of the population of the municipality according to the latest
census."
Bosniacs and Croats in Montenegro are not yet able to exercise
their right to use their own language. Albanian and Serbian are in use in
Ulcinj municipality, but only in bodies that are in the purview of the local
self-government authorities.
Sessions of the Kosovo Assembly and its committees are conducted
in Albanian and Serbian, and all official documents are in both these languages.
Deputies belonging to other ethnic communities may address the Assembly and its
committees orally and in writing in their own languages. The situation is
identical where the Kosovo government and its agencies are concerned. Turkish,
however, is no longer a language in official use in Kosovo. Persons belonging
to minorities can use their languages in judicial proceedings, with the
assistance of an interpreter.
The new Serbian Act on Local Self-Government envisages the display
on official premises only of symbols of the state and the units of local
self-government. The Federal Ministry for National and Ethnic Communities and
the Vojvodina Secretariat for Regulations, Administration and National
Minorities have submitted a petition to the Federal Constitutional Court
challenging Article 7 (3) of the Serbian Act on Official Use of Languages and
Scripts and Article 118 (2) of the Act on Local Self-Government. They maintain
that both provisions are in contravention of the federal Minorities Protection
Act as they stipulate that only symbols of the state and units of local
self-government may be displayed on official premises, and not also the symbols
of minorities. This, the Ministry and Secretariat assert, substantially
restricts the right of minorities to use their symbols.
In accordance with international law, the Yugoslav Constitution
recognizes the right of national minorities to use and display their symbols.
The relevant article of the Montenegrin Constitution is very similar although
it recognizes this right as the right of members of national minorities.
The use of national symbols is regulated in more detail by the
Minorities Protection Act, which in Article 16 states that persons belonging to
national minorities may display the symbols and observe the holidays proposed
by their national councils. Paragraph 2 of the Article stipulates that these
symbols may not be identical with the national symbols of other states. Under
the Act, minority symbols and emblems may be displayed on state and minority holidays
on and inside the buildings of local organs and organizations exercising public
authority in areas in which minority languages are in official use, and along
with the symbols of Yugoslavia or its constituent republics.
The matter is differently regulated by the laws of the two
republics. Under the Serbian Act on Local Self-Government, only state symbols
and symbols of the units of local self-government may be displayed on and in
official premises. The Montenegrin Act on Use of National Symbols envisages the
display of minority symbols outside the buildings of units of local
self-government in areas where minorities are the majority population on
Montenegrin public holidays, and alongside the symbols of Montenegro.
In accordance with Article 10 (3) of the framework Convention, all
the highest acts of Yugoslavia, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo state that every
person must be informed in a language he understands of the reason for his
arrest and the accusations against him.
Use of Names in Minority Languages
Article 11, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging
to a national minority has the right to use his or her surname (patronym) and
first names in the minority language and the right to official recognition of
them, according to modalities provided for in their legal system.
2.The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging
to a national minority has the right to display in his or her minority language
signs, inscriptions and other information of a private nature visible to the
public.
3.In areas traditionally inhabited by substantial numbers of
persons belonging to a national minority, the Parties shall endeavour, in the
framework of their legal system, including, where appropriate, agreements with
other States, and taking into account their specific conditions, to display
traditional local names, street names and other topographical indications
intended for the public also in the minority language when there is a
sufficient demand for such indications.
The use of personal names in minority languages as envisaged by
the framework Convention has not been accepted by domestic law. All personal
and public documents are in the Serbian language and Cyrillic script, and first
and last names cannot be in the spelling of minority languages. This
occasionally has inappropriate and even derogatory outcomes, causing
dissatisfaction among persons belonging to minorities. When parents insist on
names in minority languages and in keeping with their traditions, registrars
have refused to enter children in the Register of Births (case in Bosilegrad).
The HLC has registered no cases of restrictions being placed on inscriptions of
a private nature in minority languages.
Displaying of inscriptions with traditional local names, street
names and other topographical indications in minority languages depends on the
official use of minority languages at local level. Under the Act on Official
Use of Languages and Scripts, inscriptions intended for the public are in Serbian
and in the minority language in official use in a particular area. Such
inscriptions are commonly to be found in municipalities where a minority is the
majority population (Subotica, Coka, Presevo, Ulcinj, Novi Pazar), and are
regulated by the statutes of local assemblies. HLC research has brought out
that the republican authorities pay the least heed to these requirements.
Inscriptions on buildings of republican agencies in multi-ethnic communities
are in Serbian alone.
Right to Education of Persons Belonging to Minorities
Article 12, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties shall, where appropriate, take measures in the
fields of education and research to foster knowledge of the culture, history
and religion of their national minorities and of the majority.
2.In this context the Parties shall inter alia provide adequate
opportunities for teacher training and access to textbooks, and facilitate
contacts among students and teachers of different communities.
3.The Parties undertake to promote equal opportunities for access
to education at all levels for persons belonging to national minorities.
Article 13 of the Minorities Protection Act lays down the right of
national minorities to education in their languages from pre-school over
elementary to secondary school. The HLC has found, however, that minorities do
not have equal access to education at all three of these levels, although the
state has a duty to create the requisite conditions. In the case of some
minorities, education in their language is ensured only up to a certain level,
e.g. from grades 1 to 4 and but not up to grade 8, the final year of elementary
school.
The situation is particularly bad for Roma schoolchildren who,
owing to school entry tests that have not been adapted to their circumstances,
are over-represented in special schools (school for special-needs children in
Bor). In Vojvodina, where classroom instruction is provided in five languages
(Serbian, Hungarian, Slovak, Ruthenian and Romanian) over 70% of Roma are
illiterate or semi-literate. There has been an expansion in the past two or
three years of various forms of extramural alternative education for Roma
children, mainly at the initiative of non-governmental organizations (in Backa
Palanka, Obrenovac, Backi Monostor, Podgorica).
Grave violations of the right to education have taken the form of
refusal to enroll Roma children (Niksic) or their segregation in separate,
all-Roma classes (Subotica, Belgrade, Podgorica). Preparatory classes and
additional lessons for Roma children are organized chiefly by non-governmental
organizations. These have proved successful as the teachers are more responsive
to the needs of the children, who then achieve better results in regular
school.
Under the Serbian Act on Secondary Education (Art. 4 (1)),
classroom instruction is in Serbian, while Article 5 (2) states that
instruction is in a minority language or two languages when requested by at
least 15 children in a first-grade class. The new Serbian University Act states
that instruction in institutions of higher education may also be in minority
and foreign languages.
The Hungarian and Slovak communities have the best access to
education in their languages from the lowest to the highest level. There are
several elementary and secondary schools providing instruction in Romanian
(Vrsac, Alibunar, Plandiste,) as well as a class at the Teachers College in
Vrsac. Persons belonging to the Romanian community can obtain a higher
education in their language at the Novi Sad University School of Languages
which has a Romanian Studies department.
At the start of the 2002/2003 school year, the Subotica
educational authorities made it possible for Croat children to start their
education in the Croatian language. Thus 41 first-graders are now receiving
instruction in Croatian at three schools in the municipality. The curriculum
was drawn up by the Croat Academic Society in Subotica and approved by the
Vojvodina educational authorities.
Education for Bulgar children is organized in Bosilegrad and
Dimitrovgrad municipalities. Besides Serbian, the curriculum includes two
Bulgarian-language periods a week. After elementary school, Bulgar children
choose which kind of secondary school they wish to attend. Instruction is in
Serbian with two Bulgarian-language periods a week since there was not enough
interest in all-Bulgarian or combined Bulgarian-Serbian instruction. Students
may take their secondary school final examinations in the Bulgarian language, an
option chosen by only two students in 2001. The curricula of Serbian-language
schools contain no lessons on Bulgarian culture, traditions and history.
Owing to the armed conflicts, Albanians had only partial access to
educational institutions in Serbia in 2001. Some school buildings were taken
over by armed formations and other, such as the secondary school in Bujanovac,
were sequestered by the armed forces even before the fighting broke out. There
are no institutions of higher learning in Serbia providing instruction in
Albanian, and diplomas obtained in Kosovo were not recognized by the Serbian
authorities up to 2001. The problem was resolved by instructions issued by the
Serbian Ministry of Education which, however, do not have the force of law. No
measures for dealing with the numerous educational problems of minorities are
envisaged in the plans for overcoming the crisis in the Presevo, Bujanovac and
Medvedja municipalities. Together with their demands, representatives of the
Albanian community have proposed specific measures to improve the situation 38 . Elementary
and secondary school textbooks in the Albanian language are almost all
translations of Serbian textbooks and are out of date. A large number feature
sections the Albanian population finds offensive, some contain parts printed in
the Cyrillic script, and virtually none have anything to say about the culture
and traditions of Albanians.
Albanian-language elementary school education in Montenegro is
provided in Ulcinj, Podgorica, Bar, Plav and Rozaje municipalities while the
only pre-school institutions are located in Ulcinj and Tuzi near Podgorica.
Some 300 Albanians students receive instruction in Albanian alone in an elementary
school at Ostros near Bar. Secondary education in this language is available in
Ulcinj, Plav and Tuzi, and the Montenegrin government recently decided to
establish an Albanian-language chair at the Faculty of Humanities in Niksic.
Since the government disregarded the request of Albanian political parties that
the chair be located in an area where Albanians are the majority population,
not enough students enrolled.
Skolski Biseri, a magazine for elementary school children in
Serbia, Montenegro and the Republika Srpska (Bosnia-Herzegovina) whose
publication is financed jointly by the educational and cultural authorities of
the three entities, featured in the February 2002 issue (pages 22 and 23) a
strip cartoon in which Bosniacs/Muslims were depicted in an inappropriate and
insulting way.
Roma and Bosniac children in Prizren, Kosovo, are indirectly
discriminated against in respect of their right to education in their own
languages. The Romani language was taught in Prizren up to a few years ago but
this has not resumed. Parents are concerned over the failure of the Kosovo
educational authorities to create conditions for education in the Bosniac
language (cases in Skorobiste and Rezane).
The Serbian and Montenegrin Ministries of Education have invested no
effort to train teachers and other staff for schools in which minorities make
up the bulk of the student body. This pertains in particular to counseling
services in Albanian-language schools in Montenegro. The shortage of teachers
able to teach in Albanian is due also to the non-validation or delayed
validation of degrees obtained in Albania. Individual teachers and schools
procure textbooks and required reading on a private basis from neighboring
Albania.
Under the relevant Serbian law, the Minister of Education
determines which textbooks and teaching aids are to be used in elementary and
secondary schools. The law envisages printing of textbooks in minority
languages. Following the NATO intervention in 1999, no textbooks have come out
in Kosovo in any minority language. Some Bosniac children use textbooks from
Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Goranis textbooks from Serbia.
Private Educational Establishments
Article 13, Framework Convention:
1.Within the framework of their education systems, the Parties
shall recognise that persons belonging to a national minority have the right to
set up and to manage their own private educational and training establishments.
2.The exercise of this right shall not entail any financial
obligation for the Parties.
HLC research has brought out that conditions have not yet been
created for setting up of private educational establishments by minorities,
which is surprising since the state has no financial obligations in this
regard. Initiatives have been put forward but, owing to the slight interest
among minorities, none have materialized.
The Serbian University Act states in Article 10 (1) that
universities and faculties may be founded by the republic as well as legal
persons and private citizens. Taking advantage of the law, a committee headed
by the Mufti of Sandzak, Muamer effendi Zukorlic, recently established a
university with four faculties (law, computer science, languages, economics)
and 12 departments in Novi Pazar. The opening ceremony was attended by the
Serbian Minister of Education and Sport. Some 300 students, the planned quota,
enrolled in the 2002/2003 academic year.
Programs of alternative education for Roma exist in both Serbia
and Montenegro but the diplomas are not recognized by public schools in the two
republics 39 .
Right to Learn Minority Languages
Article 14, Framework Constitution:
1.The Parties undertake to recognise that every person belonging
to a national minority has the right to learn his or her minority language.
2.In areas inhabited by persons belonging to national minorities
traditionally or in substantial numbers, if there is sufficient demand, the
Parties shall endeavour to ensure, as far as possible and within the framework
of their education systems, that persons belonging to those minorities have
adequate opportunities for being taught the minority language or for receiving
instruction in this language.
3.Paragraph 2 of this article shall be implemented without prejudice
to the learning of the official language or the teaching of this language.
As the 1992 Serbian legislation on elementary education was
restrictive with regard to minority rights, it was amended on 25 April 2002.
However, the rule that a class receiving instruction in a minority language or
in two languages must have at least 15 students continues to apply. A smaller
number of students in a class requires the approval of the Minister of
Education. Decisions in this regard have varied from rigid adherence to the
rule or liberal. Students receiving instruction in their own language have a
obligation to learn Serbian. Schools in which classroom instruction is in
Serbian provide opportunities for students who belong to minorities to learn
their own languages and about their cultures. The subject is an elective and
two consecutive periods are taught once a week, mainly on Saturdays, if there
is a sufficient demand.
Participation in Cultural, Social and Economic Life and Public
Affairs
Article 15, Framework Convention:
The Parties shall create the conditions necessary for the
effective participation of persons belonging to national minorities in
cultural, social and economic life and in public affairs, in particular those
affecting them.
The participation of national minorities in cultural, social and
economic life and public affairs is regulated by the Minorities Protection Act.
The Act provides for the forming of national councils as bodies of minority
self-government in the fields of culture, official use of languages, public
information, and education. To enable minorities to maintain, promote and
protect their national, ethnic, religious, linguistic and cultural
characteristics, the federal government has established a Federal Council on
National Minorities made up of representatives of the national councils.
Regulations on the work of electoral colleges which elect the
minority councils have also been adopted. The Minorities Protection Act defines
the Federal Council as a body of minority self-government elected by persons
belonging to national minorities to represent them and work in their interest
in the fields of the official use of languages, education, culture and public
information. Article 19 (7) of the Act states that the national councils decide
on issues in these fields, and thereby entrusts them with exercising public
authority in fields of significance for maintaining the identity of national
minorities. The process of establishing the national councils and the Federal
Council is currently under way. The Hungarian and Ruthenian national councils
were established in early November 2002.
1. Participation in public affairs
There is no effective participation of national minorities in
cultural, social and economic life and public affairs. The situation is
satisfactory only in municipalities in which minorities are over 80% of the
population (Tutin, Kanjiza, Presevo) and where they participate in local
government, institutions and companies founded by the municipality. In smaller
places, minorities participate in public life through their activities in local
neighborhood communities (Sid). Effective participation is, however, rarely
ensured in areas where minorities are under 50 % of the population, and the
number of persons belonging to minorities holding senior positions in local
offices of republican agencies and state companies is negligible.
With the exception of a few municipalities (Kovacica, Ulcinj), the
situation is similar where the office of judges and prosecutors is concerned.
By far the worst is the state of affairs in law enforcement where persons
belonging to minorities are severely under-represented in the command
structure. Only symbolic changes have been carried out in this area, such as
the appointment of persons belonging to minorities as the police chiefs in
Presevo and Novi Pazar.
2. Serbia
Interference by the central authorities in local government
affairs was commonplace during the Milosevic regime, especially in multi-ethnic
municipalities where the rights of the minorities were completely disregarded.
A "technique" was developed to enable the central authorities to take
over local governments by placing municipalities under interim administration 40 .
At the local elections on 24 September 2000, the List for Sandzak
- Dr Sulejman Ugljanin coalition secured 34 seats out of the 47 seats in the
Novi Pazar municipal assembly, 34 of 37 seats in the Tutin assembly, and 20 of
the 39 seats in the Sjenica assembly. The mayors of all three municipalities,
in which Bosniacs are a majority, are Bosniacs and members of the List for
Sandzak - Dr Sulejman Ugljanin. Cooperation between the local governments in
the Sandzak and the republican authorities is poor 41 , and
Bosniacs are under-represented in state bodies, state companies and their
boards of directors (Serbian state television, electric power and oil
companies, etc.). Only recently have Bosniacs been appointed to senior
positions in law enforcement. Thus a Bosniac became the chief of police in Novi
Pazar for the first time on 1 March 2002, but with a Serb as the assistant
chief. Announcing the appointment, the Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs
said adequate representation of national minorities would be taken into account
in the future. Only some 15 Bosniacs (16.5%) are on the 95-man local police
force in Sjenica even though this nationality accounts for over 75% of the
municipality's population.
There are five municipal courts in the Serbian Sandzak (Novi
Pazar, Sjenica, Tutin, Priboj and Prijepolje) and Novi Pazar is also the seat
of the District Court. Three municipal court presidents are Serb and two
Bosniac. Of the 46 judges of these courts, 21 are Bosniac and 25 Serb (45.6%
Bosniacs). The percentage shows that the principle of proportionality is not
observed in the judiciary. The number of Bosniac judges differs from
municipality to municipality. In Sjenica (75% Bosniacs), the president of the
municipal court is Serb and judgeships are evenly divided. In Tutin (95%
Bosniacs), 60% of judges are Bosniac. The president of the Novi Pazar District
Court is Bosniac and of nine judges only four are Bosniacs.
In the five municipal prosecutor's offices, prosecutors in four
are Serb and only the Tutin prosecutor is Bosniac. Of the eight deputy
prosecutors, six are Serb and two Bosniac, or only 25%, which is not in
accordance with the principle of proportionality. Especially illustrative is the
situation in the Sjenica municipal public prosecutor's office where both the
prosecutor and his deputy are Serb. The district prosecutor in Novi Pazar is
Bosniac and of his two deputies one Bosniac and one Serb. The office has a
total staff of five, of whom four Serb and only one Bosniac.
Roma are severely under-represented politically in Serbia and are
not effectively represented at any level of government, in particular in senior
positions. A Rom is an advisor to the Federal Minister for National and Ethnic
Communities and heads a new section charged with advancing the position of
Roma. The deputy president of the Nis executive committee is a Rom, and a Rom
is on the executive committee of Apatin, a town in which Roma live in
significant numbers.
The local assemblies of Presevo, Bujanovac and Medjvedja, which
failed to ensure effective participation of Albanians, were dissolved. New
assemblies were constituted following local elections and resulted in the more
effective participation of Albanians in public affairs 42 . Now that
they have the majority in the local assemblies, Albanians can work to improve
the position of their community. This is particularly the case in
municipalities in which Albanians were elected mayor (Riza Halimi in Presevo
and Nagip Arifi in Bujanovac). Affirmative action measures have been
implemented in Presevo owing to which more Albanians have gained employment in
local government bodies, as against almost none in Bujanovac.
3. Montenegro
In researching the representation of the Bosniac/Muslim community
in local assemblies in Montenegro, the HLC found that the number of seats held
by persons belonging to this minority does not correspond to the ethnic makeup of
the population in Bijelo Polje, Pljevlja, Berane, Bar and Podgorica
municipalities, and is adequate only in Rozaje and Plav municipalities. Among
the reasons for this situation is the fact that many Bosniacs/Muslims vote for
non-Bosniacs, and that election lists for assemblymen and deputies in the
republic's Parliament as well as political parties are headed by Montenegrins.
It was evident that Bosniacs/Muslims voted in the last several elections mainly
for political parties with a civil orientation (Democratic Party of Socialists,
Social-Democratic Party, and Liberal Alliance of Montenegro).
In Bar municipality where Bosniac/Muslims are 13.76% of the
population, only 1.88% are employed in local administration bodies. In
Podgorica, where they are 5% of the population, only 1% Bosniacs/Muslims work
for the municipal administration. There are 41.57% Bosniacs/Muslims in Bijelo
Polje, of whom only 18.44% are employed by the local administration. The
percentage of Bosniacs/Muslims working for the administrations of Pljevlja and
Berane is very low and those who do work there hold the lowest-paid jobs
(messengers, cleaners and the like).
With the exception of Plav and Rozaje, minorities are not
represented in sufficient numbers in the Montenegrin judiciary, especially in
the highest positions. All the prosecutors and advisers at the municipal
prosecutor's office in Podgorica are Montenegrin although the population is
ethnically mixed and Podgorica is the Montenegrin capital. Of the nine judges
of the Pljevlja municipal court, only one is Bosniac/Muslim and there are no
prosecutors who belong to this minority. The number of persons belonging to
minorities in the judiciary falls as the seniority of positions rises. The High
Court in Bijelo Polje, which has jurisdiction over seven municipal courts, has
12 judges of whom only three, or 25%, are Bosniacs/Muslims. There are no
Bosniacs/Muslims at the Montenegrin state prosecutor's office and, of the 23
judges of the Montenegrin Supreme Court, only one who was appointed two months
ago, is Bosniac/Muslim. There are no regulations governing in any way the
representation of minorities in the Montenegrin judicial system.
The police chief and commanding officers of the Pljevlja police
force are Montenegrin and of the 178 persons employed there only 12 are
Bosniac/Muslim (6.74%). Of the 20 persons working for the criminal
investigations squad, two (10%) are Bosniac/Muslim, and of the 51 border police
only three are Bosniac/Muslim (5.88%). The administrative affairs service employs
19 people of whom two are Bosniac/Muslim (10.52%). In Rozaje where
Bosniacs/Muslims are the majority population, 65% of the police force are
persons belonging to this nationality, which corresponds to the ethnic makeup.
By contrast, the representation of Bosniacs/Muslims in Bijelo Polje, Plav,
Podgorica and Bar municipalities is inadequate.
The mayor and two deputy mayors of Ulcinj municipality are
Albanian, as well as the secretary of the municipal assembly. Of the 33
assemblymen, 28 are Albanian whereas only four of the 32 Plav assemblymen are
Albanian (12.5%). There is only one Albanian on the Rozaje municipal assembly,
and three on the Bar assembly. The recently dissolved Podgorica assembly had 54
seats, of which three were held by Albanians (5.5%).
Of the 109 administrative and cleric workers in Ulcinj, 86 are
Albanian (79%); in Podgorica 13 of 402 (3.23%), in Bar 10 of 159 (6.29%). There
are no registered workers in the Rozaje local administration who declared
themselves to be Albanian. Of the 65 workers in Plav, 6 (9.23%) are Albanian.
The president of the Ulcinj municipal court is Montenegrin/Serb
and three of the five judges are Albanian (60%). The majority of the court
administration are Albanian, and of the 20 lay judges 15 (75%) belong to this
national group. The public prosecutor in Ulcinj is Montenegrin/Serb, the
president of the magistrates chamber is Bosniac/Muslim and the magistrate
Montenegrin. Of the seven administrative workers, 40% are Albanian.
The Ulcinj police chief and the head of criminal investigations
are Albanian. The local force numbers 130, of whom about 50% are Albanian, 35%
Montenegrin, and 15% from other national groups. The commanding officer of the
police station in Tuzi near Podgorica, which has a large Albanian majority, is
Albanian as are also three police officers. There are only eight Albanians on
the Podgorica police force although Albanians account for 8.5% of the
municipality's population.
4. Kosovo
Pursuant to the Kosovo Constitutional Framework, the Assembly of
Kosovo has 120 seats, of which 20 are reserved for the additional
representation of non-Albanian communities. Ten of these seats are allocated to
parties, coalitions, citizens' initiatives and independent candidates
representing the Serb community, and 10 seats to other communities: four to the
Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian communities, three to the Bosniac community, two to
the Turkish community, and one to the Gorani community. The Assembly's
presidency has seven members of whom one is appointed from members of the
Assembly who represent the Serb community and one from parties representing
non-Albanian and non-Serb communities. The Kosovo Serb coalition won 22 seats
in the Assembly and has one representative on the Assembly Presidency, two in
the Kosovo government (co-ordinator for the return of displaced Serbs and other
non-Albanians, minister of agriculture and forestry), and a Serb is an advisor
at the office of the UNMIK chief on issues relating to the return of displaced
persons.
Following the adoption of the Constitutional Framework and the
parliamentary election in Kosovo, the Roma community has one representative in
the Assembly, who is also on its Presidency. There are no Roma in the Kosovo
government. Of the 869 representatives in local assemblies, 123 were appointed
by the UNMIK chief: 10 Ashakalis, 9 Roma, and four Egyptians. Representation of
Roma in local assemblies is not satisfactory. There is, for instance, only one
person belonging to this community in the 47-member municipal assembly of Prizren.
Refraining From Altering Proportions of the Population
Article 16, Framework Convention:
The Parties shall refrain from measures which alter the
proportions of the population in areas inhabited by persons belonging to
national minorities and are aimed at restricting the rights and freedoms
flowing from the principles enshrined in the present framework Convention.
The massive influx of refugees and displaced persons from the
former Yugoslav republics and Kosovo and emigration from Yugoslavia resulted in
significant changes in the ethnic makeup of the population. There are at
present some 700,000 registered refugees and internally displaced persons in
Serbia, mostly in Vojvodina (approximately 50%) where the most progress has
been achieved in respect to programs for their permanent settlement there and
integration in local communities. The most heated reaction to these programs
came from the Party of Vojvodina Hungarians and the Democratic Union of
Vojvodina Hungarians, both of which consider that the settlement of refugees in
the province alters the ethnic composition of the population, and that measures
such as the purchase of empty houses for them are in "direct contravention
of the federal Act on National Minorities which expressly prohibits changing
the national composition of the population on any grounds whatsoever."
Concurrently with the influx of refugees to Vojvodina, the size of
the Croat community in the province decreased, especially in the Srem region
from which many persons belonging to this group were forced to move out 43 . A
significant number of Bosniacs left the Sandzak. Refugee relief programs
concentrated mainly on areas traditionally inhabited by minorities,
significantly altering the ethnic structure of the population. Another problem
is the low birth rate owing to which some small areas inhabited by minorities
are being depopulated (e.g. Jakov Most near Zrenjanin). The state and local
communities in general are not taking effective measures to preserve
multi-ethnicity and encourage the economic development of such areas (e.g.
Muzlja village near Zrenjanin, Lug village near Beocin).
A significant number of Croats in the Boka Kotorska area of
Montenegro were forced to move out in the 1990s, and Bosniacs were expelled
from the north of the republic. Most of these people have not returned.
Low-intensity but serious armed conflicts in southern Serbia
during 2000 and early 2001 also induced major population changes. This ended
with the signing of a agreement on 31 May 2001 under which the armed groups
were disarmed and the tight security in the ground security zone along the
administrative boundary with Kosovo was eased. Following restoration of the
freedom of movement, 8,982 displaced Albanians returned to their homes in the
region in the period from 24 May 2001 to 1 February 2002.
Persons belonging to minorities, including the Serb, were accused
by Albanians of involvement in crimes and collaboration with the Serbian
regime, and the attacks and even murder they were subjected to forced them to
leave their homes in large numbers after the deployment of international
peacekeepers in Kosovo. Some municipalities (Vucitrn and Stimlje) have passed
resolutions on the reintegration of displaced persons. The main obstacles to
the return of the displaced are the continuing lack of personal safety, the
fact that their homes and apartments remain illegally occupied, and the
impossibility of finding jobs.
Transfrontier Contacts and Participation in the Activities of NGOs
Article 17, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties undertake not to interfere with the right of persons
belonging to national minorities to establish and maintain free and peaceful
contacts across frontiers with personal lawfully staying in other States, in
particular those with whom they share an ethnic, cultural, linguistic or
religious identity, or a common cultural heritage.
2.The Parties undertake not to interfere with the rights of
persons belonging to national minorities to participate in the activities of
non-governmental organisations, both at the national and international levels.
Contacts with co-nationals in mother-states and their
organizations, and participation in the activities of international
non-governmental organizations are improving. Approval of the implementation in
Yugoslavia of the "status law" passed by the Hungarian parliament,
which accords privileges to ethnic Hungarians in neighboring countries, caused
a major political controversy, and several attacks were registered on Vojvodina
Hungarians who exercised their rights under the law. Some municipal governments
have the possibility of participating in different forms of international
cooperation (e.g. Subotica).
Persons belonging to the Albanian community were harassed on a
number of occasions when travelling to Kosovo. Albanians who work or have
relatives in Kosovo are in particular affected by such incident, the number of
which dropped in 2002.
Agreements on Protection of Minorities and Encouragement of
Transfrontier Cooperation
Article 18, Framework Convention:
1.The Parties shall endeavour to conclude, where necessary,
bilateral and multilateral agreements with other States, in particular
neighbouring States, in order to ensure the protection of persons belonging to
the national minorities concerned.
2.Where relevant, the Parties shall take measures to encourage
transfrontier cooperation.
The Yugoslav government has expressed readiness to conclude
agreements with all neighboring countries. The first such agreement has been
signed with Romania.
The Montenegrin government and the government of Albania have
intensified cooperation in the framework of which, at the request of the
Albanian community in Montenegro, another border crossing has been opened. The
most progress has been made in cultural and scientific exchange. Political
parties of Vojvodina Croats have urged the concluding of an agreement between
Yugoslavia and Croatia on the protection of minorities but this has not materialized
as yet.
With the aim of promoting inter-regional cooperation, the
Vojvodina Assembly on 5 September 2002 confirmed the protocol signed with
Croatia's Vukovar-Srem county. In early September, the Minister for National
and Ethnic Communities discussed with a Hungarian government official the
position of ethnic Serbs in Hungary and ethnic Hungarians in Yugoslavia. They
announced that a bilateral agreement on the protection of these minorities, for
which there has been a need for a long time, would be signed shortly.
The interest in developing transfrontier cooperation has not been
clearly defined in some cases. Bac municipality in Vojvodina, which borders on
Croatia, has over 2,000 Croats and cooperates with Vukovar municipality in that
country. The main reason is the fact that some 400 people in Bac and as many in
Vukovar own property on the other side of the border. To help these people go
about their business, the two countries have introduced border passes.
|
Additional
info |
|
|
The 32-article framework Convention is a legally binding act
which catalogues specific principles for the protection of minority rights.
It was adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 10 November 1994, opened for
signature on 1 February 1995, and entered into force three years later, on 1
February 1998. |
|
|
In parallel with its peace-keeping function, UNMIK is in the
process of establishing institutions of Kosovo self-government in accordance
with the Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government
(UNMIK/Reg/2001/9) of May 2001. |
|
|
Art. 25 (1): "Within a period of one year following the
entry into force of this framework Convention in respect of a Contracting
Party, the latter shall transmit to the Secretary General of the Council of
Europe full information on the legislative and other measures taken to give
effect to the principles set out in this framework Convention." |
|
|
Romania on 1 February 1995, Albanian on 29 June 1995, Hungary on
1 February 1995, etc. |
|
|
There is a major disparity between these two republics in terms
of both territory and population. Serbia covers 86% of the country's 102,173
square kilometers, and Montenegro 14%; the population of Serbia is 16 times
larger than that of Montenegro. |
|
|
Three divisions have been set up within the Ministry dealing
respectively with cooperation with organizations of national and ethnic
communities and NGOs, the rights of national and ethnic communities in
Yugoslavia, and cooperation with international organizations. |
|
|
Defense and security, the monetary system and currency, and the
customs system are also to be in the purview of the union. |
|
|
"The laws of the FRY shall be applied in the affairs of
Serbia and Montenegro as the laws of Serbia and Montenegro." XVIII,
draft Constitutional Charter of the state-union of Serbia and Montenegro. |
|
|
Federal deputy Esad Džudžević representing Sandžak Bosniacs,
republican deputy Mujo Muković of the Sandžak Democratic Party, Ferhat Dinos
of the Montenegrin Party of Albanians, and Istvan Ispanović of the Union of
Vojvodina Hungarians. |
|
|
The regular census was to have been taken in 2001. |
|
|
Until the 2002 census, only the option available was
"Muslim." |
|
|
The executive committee of the Bunjevac organization in Sombor
believe that the number of Bunjevacs in Vojvodina has increased five-fold.
They estimate that some 70% to 75% of the Roman Catholic population declare
themselves as Bunjevacs. Rather than seeking national minority status for the
community, the organization urges that Bunjevacs be designated in the
Constitution as a constituent nation as "they participated in building
this country and do not consider Croatia to be their mother-state." A
Bunjevac delegation headed by Djuro Bošnjak met with Yugoslav President
Vojislav Koštunica to discuss the issue in September 2001. Assistant Federal
Minister for National and Ethnic Communities Jelena Marković, who was present
at the meeting, said the Bunjevacs had historical grounds for their request
but that the issue could not be discussed at the present time. |
|
|
Kosovo Constitutional Framework, Chapter 3 (3.3.). |
|
|
Under Art. 37 (1) of the Act on the Federal Constitutional Court
(Službeni list SRJ, No. 36/92), a constitutional appeal may be filed by any
person who alleges violation by judicial, administrative or other state
bodies or companies and organizations exercising public authority of his
human and civil rights and liberties as laid down by the Yugoslav
Constitution. |
|
|
See, e.g. Art. 4 (4) of the Act on Proceedings Before the
Constitutional Court (Serbia), and legal effect of its rulings (Službeni
glasnik RS, No. 32/91). |
|
|
Amendments to legislation on the organization of the judiciary
in Serbia envisage abolition of the Bački Petrovac division of the Novi Sad
Municipal Court. Since Slovaks account for over 75% of the population of the
Bački Petrovac municipality, this is clearly against their interests.
Reacting to the decision, the local assembly noted that the municipality had
its own municipal court from 1961 until 1991 when it became a division of the
Novi Sad Municipal Court, enabling the inhabitants to realize their rights in
their own municipality. Pointing out that the population was ethnically
mixed, with Slovaks in the majority, the assembly maintained it would be more
rational to retain the court in Bački Petrovac since the staff and lay jurors
spoke both the languages in official use in the municipality, which
considerably facilitated the organization and work of the court. In response
to the insistence of the local authorities, amendments to the law were
enacted under which the Novi Sad Municipal Court now has divisions in Bački
Petrovac, Beočin, Žabalj, Sremski Karlovaci (Art. 2, para. 90, Act on Seats
and Territorial Jurisdiction of Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices,
Službeni list RS, No. 63, 8 November 2002, 42/02). |
|
|
More about the Montenegrin Council in the section reviewing
implementation of Article 3 of the framework Convention. |
|
|
UNMIK Regulation No. 1/1999 (UNMIK/Reg/1999/01). |
|
|
Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government,
UNMIK/Reg/2001/9, 15 May 2001. |
|
|
In a special resolution, the Vučitrn assembly called on
displaced Ashkali to return. Some 100 people responded but only to face
housing problems. Of the 127 illegally occupied houses, 35 homes of local
Ashkali have not been restituted. |
|
|
Forty-three Bosniac children in Ljubižda village near Prizren
did not attend school for three months in the 1999/2000 school year since
instruction was in Albanian, a language they did not know since they
previously went to a Serbian-language school, and no instruction in their own
language was provided. |
|
|
The Mihajlo Pupin high school in Kovačica, a municipality where
Slovaks are the majority population, has a total of 14 classes of which only
four provide instruction in Slovak. |
|
|
Positions of the Republican Council on the Protection of the
Rights of National and Ethnic Groups, Sl. list RCG, No. 35/01. |
|
|
Ramiz Zenedi, a Roma man displaced from Kosovo, has been living
in Požarevac, eastern Serbia, since November 2001 without papers of any kind.
He applied for an ID card but was told that he could obtain the required
birth certificate in Niš, to which the Register of Births of his municipality
in Kosovo had been transferred. There was no response from Niš to his request
for a birth cerficate, without which he cannot realize his rights as an IDP.
Alji Beriša, also a Rom displaced from Kosovo, was unable to register the
birth of his granddaughter who was born during the family's flight from
Kosovo. |
|
|
After gathering evidence in this case and acting for the barred
Roma, the HLC sued for damages and filed a criminal complaint, charging the
owner of the sports center in which the pool is located with violation of the
equality of citizens. In the civil action, the Municipal Court in Šabac in
February 2002 ordered the owner to publish a public apology in the Politika
daily and to cease such discriminatory practice. The ruling was the first in
domestic jurisprudence to unequivocally determine that discrimination on the
grounds of race is clearly a violation of the rights belonging to a person.
The court in addition admitted random testing as valid evidence of
discrimination. Investigative proceedings are currently under way in the
criminal case. |
|
|
When it made a declaration recognizing the competence of the UN
Committee to receive and consider applications by individuals, the Yugoslav
government designated the Federal Constitutional Court as the highest
instance to which persons alleging violations of the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination could apply when other
domestic remedy is exhausted, and prior to addressing the Committee. |
|
|
On 14 September 2001, the police used force to disrupt a
birthday party in the home of a Kosovo Ashkali in a Novi Sad suburb, injuring
one of the guests. |
|
|
Miroslav Milić (18) was beaten by four officers in Belgrade on 5
March 2001 to make him confess to burglarizing his ex-girlfriend's apartment.
Ljubica Ristić (14) and Dragan Stanić (14) were physically abused by a
policeman on 29 June 2002 when they were washing windshields of cars at a
major intersection in Belgrade. A police patrol ill-treated a group of Roma
children on 22 September 2001 when they were collecting waste paper in the
center of Novi Sad, breaking one boy's arm. |
|
|
Police in Sombor insulted Svetozar Miletić on 26 November 2001,
confiscated 300 deutsche marks from him and beat him at the police station.
Boban Spasojević of Čačak was taken in by police from a birthday party
because he was not carrying his ID card, and verbally and physically abused
at the police station. |
|
|
Belgrade's First Municipal Court on 7 August 2002 placed on
probation and terminated the criminal proceedings against juveniles who
attacked and injured a Roma girl, Gordana Jovanović. Two skinheads in Niš
were fined 600 dinars for beating up a 15-year-old Roma boy, Dragiša
Ajdarević, on 8 April 2000. |
|
|
Proceedings against 24 Bosniac intellectuals and activists of the
Party of Democratic Action in the Sandžak on charges of conspiring to
endanger the territorial integrity of FRY are still under way. The trial
began on 31 January 1994 and ended with the conviction of the defendants on
12 October 1994. On 25 March 1996, the Serbian Supreme Court quashed the
decision and ordered a retrial because of procedural violations. Most of the
defendants were in custody for over three years and one died. The new trial
opened on 10 January 2002, five years after the Supreme Court's decision and
only subsequent to the HLC's intervention with the Serbian Ministry of
Justice. It was adjourned indefinitely on 12 March 2001. None of the judges
and prosecutors involved in this rigged political trial have been dismissed. |
|
|
The Bosniac family Gojak in Novi Sad has been subjected to
harassment by their neighbor Momir Vujić for three years. No criminal or
misdemeanor charges against Vujić have been brought to date. |
|
|
Igbala Derviši, a Bosniac who worked for 23 years for the
Defense Affairs department of the Pljevlja municipality, was dismissed on 13
March 2000. The court decision on her reinstatement has not been carried into
effect. |
|
|
Kaludjerov Laz, an Albanian village in Rožaje municipality, was
has been abandoned since 1999 when Yugoslav Army members killed several
civilians in a refugee column. |
|
|
In March 2002, the Montenegrin government turned down a request
by the Croat Civil Union in Kotor to install a TV repeater to enable the
community to receive the program of Croatian state television. |
|
|
Agreement on the President and Government of Kosovo, Section II,
point 8, 28 February 2002. |
|
|
Džemail Fetahai, an Albanian who attacked the Agović family in
their yard in Pečka Banja on 9 March 2002 was sentenced to one month in jail.
|
|
|
"... Participation of Albanians in the management of
schools, appointment of principals and school boards; making possible by law
the creation of special educational institutions which would focus on
programs and curricula, and Albanian-language elementary and secondary school
textbooks; establishment of a special Committee on Education (Serbia-Kosovo)
which would regulate the issue of the education of local Albanians in
secondary schools that do not exist in the Preševo Valley and at
post-secondary schools and institutions of higher education in Kosovo;
validation of all diplomas and degrees obtained from secondary,
post-secondary schools in Kosovo and Priština University in the 1991-2001
period; and acceleration of validation of degrees from universities in
Albania and other countries by way of a special decision of the Ministry of
Education; giving Albanians students equal access to student living standards
funds; building and reconstruction of school facilities and provision of
equipment for the modernization of the teaching process..." |
|
|
The Trifun Dimić elementary school in Podgorica has about 80
Roma students, and a pre-school attended by 60 Roma children. The school
provides one of the best alternative Roma education programs. |
|
|
Invoking Art. 45 of the Act on the Territorial Organization of
the Republic of Serbia and Local Self-Government (Službeni glasnik RS, Nos.
47/91, 79/92 and 47/94) and Art. 29 of the Act on the Government of the
Republic of Serbia (Službeni glasnik RS, Nos. 5/91 and 45/93), the Serbian
government on 10 July 1997 took over local government in Novi Pazar
municipality. Something similar happened with the municipality of Tutin. The
Serbian Public Prosecutor's Office challenged the constitutionality of
articles of the municipality's statute which state that the municipality
"is situated in the territory of the Sandžak", that "Bosniacs
are the majority population", on the introduction of the Bosniac
language into official use, and the choice of 28 March, "the first
documented mention of Ottoman power in this municipality," as Tutin's
day. The Prosecutor's Office also disputed the flag and coat of arms of Tutin
since municipalities, as territorial units, have no authority to determine
these symbols. On 11 January 2001, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled the
disputed articles unconstitutional. It noted that the appellation
"Bosniac" did not appear in the 1991 census either in Serbia or Yugoslavia,
and said there were no sociological or linguistic reasons for naming as
Bosniac "the standard language of today's Muslims, which is an authentic
variety of the Serbian language." |
|
|
Representatives of the List for Sandžak discussed with the
Serbian Prime Minister on two occasions the participation of Bosniacs in the
Serbian government (one ministerial post). No agreement was reached. |
|
|
Winning 48.41& of the vote, the ethnic Albanian Party of
Democratic Action (PDD) secured 18 seats in the Preševo assembly, and was
followed by another Albanian party - Party of Democratic Union of Albanians -
with 11 seats. The PDD wons 11 seats in the Bujanovac assembly and the Party
of Democratic Union of Albanians only one. The PDD has five seats in the
Medvedja assembly. |
|
|
"The ethnic makeup of Vojvodina was altered also by the
massive emigration of Vojvodina Croats as the result of various pressures,
including physical violence." Samardžić, Miroslava, Position of
Minorities in Vojvodina, Center for Anti-War Action, Belgrade 1999, p. 43. |
|