The case of a boy, who was identified by Praxis staff during their visit to Doljevac in 2020, demonstrates how failures in the work of institutions can affect the lives of citizens and their access to basic rights. A sixth-grade primary school pupil did not have a determined personal name for thirteen years. His parents failed to determine his personal name within the legal deadline, and the father did not recognise paternity.

After the parents went abroad, the boy's grandparents took care of him and his siblings, and after their death, the children lived alone in Doljevac for several months, until their father returned from abroad. The boy's mother left the family many years ago. The boy now lives with his brothers, two of whom are adults.

In such situations, the social welfare centre is obliged to take measures and perform activities to regulate the child’s personal status and enable his or her access to basic rights, in the best interest of the child. The guardianship authority was obliged to conduct a procedure and adopt a decision on determining the child’s personal name, and then to adopt a decision appointing a guardian in order to regulate the boy's personal status, and particularly his registration to health insurance.

Considering that in one of the field visits Praxis staff established that the boy did not have a determined personal name, they helped with submitting a request for determining a personal name to the Social Welfare Centre in Doljevac.

As there was no response to the submitted request, Praxis sent a letter to the Social Welfare Centre in Doljevac requesting information on the status of the case. In the telephone conversations that followed, Praxis reminded the Centre’s lawyer, supervisor and social worker of the fact that the Law on Family required the guardianship authority to determine the child's personal name in such cases, and that it was in the child's interest to be formally recognised before the law. Praxis then stressed that the boy, due to the lack of documents, was deprived of basic rights, and in particular the right to health care and education.

The Centre’s representatives considered that it was not possible to determine the personal name of the child without the participation of his parents. Given that the guardianship authority still did not adopt a decision on the submitted request, Praxis sent an urgency letter, after which the Centre responded with a notification of the inability to conduct a procedure for determining the child's personal name, because the child's mother did not reside at the address covered by the Social Welfare Centre. The boy's mother lives in Germany and does not have a valid ID card.

The Social Welfare Centre is obliged to assign a name to every child, if it is not determined within the legal deadline, regardless of any circumstances, including whether the mother can participate in the procedure. The Constitution, the Law on Family, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child guarantee every child the right to be registered into birth registry books and to have a personal name.

In the meantime, the boy's older brothers went to the Social Welfare Centre in Doljevac on their own with the intention to regulate the personal status of their minor brother. After repeatedly insisting with this guardianship authority to take measures to solve the boy's status, as they told Praxis, the Centre threatened to relocate the boy and place him in a foster family, after which they stopped contacting the guardianship authority.

Praxis has learned from the boy's brothers that the boy was diagnosed with diabetes last year. The boy experienced various symptoms for several days, after which the paediatrician of the Health Centre in Doljevac agreed to examine him, despite the fact that the child did not have a health card. The blood test revealed a high sugar level, after which the boy was urgently transported to the Clinical Centre Niš, where they initially refused to admit him for not having a health card. Since his health condition was critical, the boy was finally hospitalised. After being discharged from the Clinical Centre Niš, the boy could not be examined by an endocrinologist because he did not have a birth certificate or a health card. The boy bought all the medical devices and supplies necessary for the control of blood sugar levels, which he would have obtained for free if he had been registered to health insurance. The boy bought the necessary supplies when and if the family had the money.

Due to the seriousness of the situation and the boy's health condition, and due to the omissions in the work of the Social Welfare Centre, Praxis addressed the Protector of Citizens to take action within its purview and to control the legality of the Centre's actions. The UNHCR, the Protector of Citizens and the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government of the Republic of Serbia signed the Agreement of Understanding, with the aim of resolving the outstanding problems faced by undocumented persons. Their representatives are also the members of the Task Force set up on the basis of this Agreement.

Although Praxis repeatedly, during more than nine months, pointed out to the need to resolve the boy's case and the Centre's unlawful actions, it was only after the Protector of Citizens controlled the legality of the Social Welfare Centre's actions that the guardianship authority initiated a procedure for determining the child's personal name. The results were fully visible two months after the involvement of the Protector of Citizens in this case.

The Social Welfare Centre in Doljevac adopted a decision determining the personal name for the boy. His personal name was registered, his Citizen Unique Personal Number (JMBG) was determined and the fact of his citizenship was registered in the registry office in Niš. It was only then, thirteen years after his birth, that the boy obtained the necessary documents, which finally enabled him to exercise the right to health insurance, which he desperately needed. The Social Welfare Centre in Doljevac obtained a birth certificate and, in cooperation with the branch office of the Republic Health Insurance Fund in Doljevac, registered the boy for health insurance.

This finally solved the case of the boy from Doljevac who had been deprived of access to basic rights for thirteen years because his personal name had not been determined. The case was solved within two months of addressing the Protector of Citizens, thanks to the cooperation established within the Task Force, based on the Agreement of Understanding between the UNHCR, the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government and the Protector of Citizens of the Republic of Serbia. Although this case has finally been successfully resolved, it shows that in practice a lot of work remains to be done to strengthen capacity, as well as to sensitise officials about the special position and needs of persons from the marginalised groups, so that all citizens can access their basic rights. The examples like this (the boy from Doljevac) show us the extent to which legal aid and also advocacy are necessary and important in such cases. Despite the successes that have been achieved so far in this area, unfortunately, in the field and in practice in general we continue to meet people who still do not have personal documents and, as a consequence, lack the opportunity to exercise basic rights.

Nevladine organizacije Tim 42 i Praxis, podnele su inicijativu za izmene pojedinih odredaba Zakona o socijalnoj zaštiti Ministarstvu za rad, zapošljavanje, boračka i socijalna pitanja i Ministarstvu za ljudska i manjinska prava i društveni dijalog, koju su podržale 34 organizacije civilnog društva u Srbiji.

Zakon o socijalnoj zaštiti, koji je na snazi već deset godina, trebalo je da posluži kao osnova za stvaranje sistema koji će pružati pomoć i osnaživati pojedince i porodice za samostalan i produktivan život u društvu, sprečiti nastajanje i otkloniti posledice socijalne isključenosti. Zakon o socijalnoj zaštiti je krovni zakon koji uređuje oblast socijalne zaštite i predstavlja sistemski propis koji se odnosi na veliki broj građana i građanki, naročito značajan za pripadnike različitih osetljivih društvenih grupa. Zbog toga je posebno važno da rešenja predviđena zakonom sistem socijalne zaštite urede na celovit način i u skladu sa ciljevima socijalne zaštite, kao i da uspostave procedure koje su prilagođene korisnicima i njihovim potrebama. Ustav Republike Srbije garantuje građanima i porodicama, kojima je neophodna društvena pomoć radi savladavanja socijalnih i životnih teškoća i stvaranja uslova za zadovoljavanje osnovnih životnih potreba, pravo na socijalnu zaštitu čije se pružanje zasniva na načelima socijalne pravde, humanizma i poštovanja ljudskog dostojanstva.

Svaki pojedinac treba da bude zaštićen od oskudice i da uživa minimum prava neophodnih za opstanak. Sistem socijalne zaštite neodvojiv je od fenomena siromaštva i od prevencije posledica koje oskudica za sobom povlači. Iako socijalnom zaštitom nije moguće iskoreniti uzroke i sam fenomen siromaštva, njom je moguće ublažiti njegove posledice i dalje ponavljanje i širenje, pa države imaju obavezu da mehanizmima socijalne zaštite pomognu licima kojima je socijalna pomoć neophodna.

Tokom višegodišnjeg rada sa ranjivim kategorijama društva i korisnicima usluga socijalne zaštite kroz pružanje pravne pomoći i/ili informisanje i savetovanje, nevladine organizacije Tim 42 i Praxis uočile su brojne manjkavosti, kako kada je reč o pojedinim zakonskim rešenjima, tako i kada je reč implementaciji. Pojedine odredbe Zakona su necelishodne, nesvrsishodne, kose se sa načelima socijalne zaštite, ali i sprečavaju i ograničavaju potencijalne korisnike da zadovolje svoje potrebe za dodatnom podrškom.

Imajući u vidu proklamovane ciljeve socijalne zaštite i analizu efekata koje pojedina rešenja aktuelnog Zakona o socijalnoj zaštiti proizvode u praksi, nevladine organizacije Tim 42 i Praxis izradile su predlog za izmene pojedinih članova Zakona o socijalnoj zaštiti koji možete pogledati OVDE.

Organizacije koje su podržale inicijativu su:

• FORCA Požega
• SKRUG - Liga Roma
• Udruženje Žene za mir
• Centar za decu i omladinu
• Grupa za decu i mlade "Indigo"
• Inicijativa za razvoj i saradnju
• UG NEXUS - Vranje
• Fondacija Centar za demokratiju
• Zrenjaninski centar za jednaka prava
• Volonterski centar Vojvodine
• Društvo ROM iz Velikog Gradišta
• Centar za proizvodnju znanja i veština
• Bibija Romski ženski centar
• Inicijativa za razvoj i saradnju (IDC)
• A11 - Inicijativa za ekonomska i socijalna prava
• Adventistički razvojni i humanitarni rad - ADRA
• Odbor za ljudska prava Leskovac
• Nepušački Edukativni Centar - RP
• Udruženje građana Eduaktivni centar Roma
• Romski centar za žene i decu "Daje"
• Građanske inicijative
• Partneri za demokratske promene Srbija
• Multietnički centar za razvoj regije Dunav 21
• YUROM Centar
• Udruženje tumača za lica oštećenog sluha Srbije
• Sandžački odbor za zaštitu ljudskih prava i sloboda
• “EU zona “
• Društvo Roma Bogatić
• Društvo "Bakija Bakić"
• UGR produkcija Roma World
• Multikultura
• Autonomni ženski centar
• OFER - Omladinski forum za edukaciju Roma
• Centar za unapređivanje pravnih studija

We have sent another call to the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government and the Ministry of Health to change the disputed provisions, thus eliminating the obstacles to registration in birth registry books immediately after birth. This problem, which affects some of the poorest and most disadvantaged citizens of Serbia, can be solved rather easily and quickly with some good will from the competent authorities.

Every child must be registered in birth registry books immediately after birth. This right is guaranteed to children by the Constitution, the law and ratified international conventions.

However, children who cannot be registered at birth continue to be born in Serbia. It happens when their mothers do not have identity cards. In these cases, instead of registering children in birth registry books immediately after birth, it is necessary to conduct special procedures before social welfare centres, municipal administrative bodies or courts. These procedures can often be lengthy and complicated and last, at best, several months, often more than a year and sometimes even for years. In this way, the child's right to timely registration in birth registry books is grossly violated. UNICEF has taken the position that registration immediately after birth implies a period of several days, not months.

Until these procedures are successfully completed, the child will not be able to obtain a birth certificate, due to which many of his or her rights will be denied or difficult to access. For example, the child will not be able to obtain a health card, which means that the parents will have to cover the costs of medical examinations and medicines, and will not be able to receive parental or child allowance or exercise other social security rights.

This problem in Serbia almost exclusively affects members of the Roma national minority, who are among the most vulnerable, most discriminated and most marginalised citizens. Thus, their already difficult position is only worsened.

The cause of the problem, i.e. the reason why the children of undocumented mothers cannot be registered at birth, is found in the two by-laws that regulate the procedure of birth notification and registration in birth registry books. They stipulate that data on parents shall be entered in birth registry books on the basis of their identity cards and birth certificates.

Despite the fact that the regulations of higher legal force (the Constitution, the Law on Family, ratified international conventions) stipulate that every child, without exception and regardless of any circumstances - including whether their parents have personal documents or not - must be registered in birth registry books immediately after birth, in practice, registrars apply by-laws and do not register the children of undocumented mothers in birth registry books immediately after birth. Therefore, it is necessary to amend the disputed by-laws so as to enable the registration in birth registry books of each child immediately after birth.

Numerous international organisations and treaty bodies have stressed that this situation is unsustainable and that it constitutes a violation of the child’s basic rights. These include the European Commission, the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the UN Committee on Human Rights and the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination, which in their recommendations to Serbia have pointed out that every child must be allowed to register at birth, and that it is necessary to amend the regulations that prevent it.

This activity has been implemented as part of the project “Ending Roma Statelessness in the Western Balkans”, financed by the Open Society Foundation through the European Network on Statelessness. The views expressed in this document are those of the author only and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the donor.

Download document: HERE

Civil society organizations demand from the competent authorities to remove the shortcomings contained in the draft Law on Amendments to the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination and the draft Law on Same-Sex Unions, in accordance with the recommendations of civil society and the issued opinion of the Protector of Citizens.

During and after the public debate on the amendments to the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination, the Ministry of Human and Minority Rights and Social Dialogue has, without providing any justification and contrary to the recommendations of civil society organizations, formulated provisions that deviate from the legal standards of the Council of Europe, and in particular the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance. It has also deviated from European Union standards regarding the prohibition of discrimination in the field of labour and employment. Shortcomings have also been identified in the other provisions of the draft law, including those that are not in line with other systemic laws, such as the Law on General Administrative Procedure and the Law on Personal Data Protection.

The Government of the Republic of Serbia adopted the draft Law on Amendments to the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination on April 22, 2021. This text is burdened with the same shortcomings as the draft Law. 

In the draft Law on Same-Sex Unions the Ministry included provisions that are not based on the recommendations of LGBT organizations regarding obstacles to the registration of same-sex unions, the relationship between a partner and a child of another partner and their mutual subsistence, as well as conditions for the recognition of an unregistered union. In addition, the draft law is burdened with numerous other flaws.

As the body responsible for the protection of human rights on the basis of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, the Protector of Citizens also informed the Ministry of Human and Minority Rights and Social Dialogue about the above-mentioned shortcomings in the opinion he issued.

Human rights organizations demand that the Ministry take into account the recommendations of the Protector of Citizens and civil society and remove the shortcomings of the draft Law on Same-Sex Unions. We expect the Government of Serbia to ensure that the above-mentioned shortcomings are removed before making any final decision on the text of the draft law. We appeal to the members of the National Assembly (MPs) to remove the identified shortcomings of the draft Law on Amendments to the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination through the submission of amendments. 

This request has been supported by: Center for Advanced Legal Studies (CUPS), Civil Rights Defenders, Praxis, Independent Journalists’ Association of Serbia (IJAS), Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina (IJAV), Heartefuct fund, Pride Society, Association of Students with Handicap, Geten, Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR), Humanitarian Law Center, Sandzak Committee for Protection of Human Rights, CHRIS Network of Human Rights Committees in Serbia, Labris, Child Rights Centre, Standing Conference of the Roma Associations of the Citizens (60 orgnisations), The Network of Organisations for Children of Serbia (103 organisations).

Praxis’ submission to the European Commission regarding Serbia 2021 Annual Report gives an overview, inputs and recommendations regarding Political Criteria and Rule of Law chapters, specifically state of civil society, pulic administration reform and rule of law and fundamental rights.

Space for civil society in Serbia is constantly shrinking. According to a research Praxis conducted in 5 local self-governments in Serbia in 2020, local civil society organizations are facing continuous weakening of their capacities, they are almost entirely dependent on funding from the local self-governments and are under constant pressure as they do not want to confront the authorities. There are more and more undemocratic practices which cause numerous irregularities in public calls for funding of civil society organizations. The space for civic participation is objectively small or practically does not exist.

As for public administration reform, respectively policy development and coordination and accountability of administration, Praxis findings show that the weaknesses of the system and insufficiently developed mechanisms for participation in the development of policies at the national level are even more pronounced at the level of local self-governments where there is almost no transparency and participation, except in exceptional cases. With reference to citizens’ free access to information of public importance, there is still no full implementation of the regulations relating to this right, while regarding openness towards the public, local self-governments are the most transparent in terms of information and data for which there is a clear legal obligation in terms of disclosure, which certainly does not mean that the local self-governments publish all legally prescribed information.

With regards to the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights, Praxis’ focus was on the access to free legal aid and Roma inclusion. In addition to pointing to shortcomings of the Law itself, Praxis’ inputs show that an effective system of free legal aid, which will enable all socially vulnerable citizens to access justice through easily accessible and professional free legal aid has not been established yet. The experience of Praxis’ beneficiaries who tried to obtain legal aid in this way in the first year of application of the Law is extremely negative. Furthermore, there was no appropriate campaign at the beginning of the implementation of the Law, due to which most marginalised and socially vulnerable citizens still do not know that they have the right to free legal aid or where to seek assistance.

Regarding Roma inclusion, Praxis pointed out the shortcomings regarding access to personal documentation. The report identifies problems with timely birth registration, since, in cases when parents do not possess an ID card or a birth certificate, it is still not possible to register the new-born child with all the necessary data entered (including the child’s name) right upon birth. Furthermore, the inputs identify the latest challenges in the implementation of the procedure for determination of time and place of the birth, problems in acquisition of citizenship for otherwise stateless children born in Serbia, but also in residence registration.

When it comes to access of Roma to the right to social protection, Praxis inputs point to the challenges related to the Law on Financial Support to Families with Children and the Law on Social Protection. Regarding access to humanitarian aid during the state of emergency, Praxis pointed out that persons without documents, which are mostly members of Roma national minority, were denied systemic social support, because they are invisible to the system, while the consequences of the impact of the epidemic and the applied restrictive policy measures further worsened their situation.

A significant number of Roma children are still facing a series of obstacles in access to education. According to the research Praxis conducted, completion of primary education and transition into secondary education is recognized as the most critical point, since the drop out in this period is the most frequent. There are numerous reasons for this: stereotypes and discrimination inside the educational institutions that Roma students are facing, coverage of Roma children in pre-school activities is significantly lower than in majority population, lower coverage and lower level of completion of primary education, insufficient knowledge of a number of children of the language in which they are being educated, lower quality of knowledge acquired by Roma children and lower achievements, as well as segregation of Roma students. The already difficult position of Roma students was additionally aggravated since many Roma families lie in absolute poverty, without electricity, access to internet and without necessary devices needed for attending online schooling.

Discrimination against Roma is a problem addressed by institutions and public policies, but the persistence of discriminatory treatment and behaviour towards them indicates that it is necessary to strengthen existing resources and build new capacities through a comprehensive anti-discrimination policy. Employment, exercising the right to work, social protection and health care and education, spatial segregation and segregation in education, as well as hate speech, are forms of discrimination that, despite the established institutional protection, make exercising the rights of Roma more difficult.

Due to poor qualifications, marginalization and prejudices, the Roma face difficulties in finding employment. Access to work and sources of income is the key area in which the risks for Roma have increased during the restrictive measures and response of the State to the epidemic.

Finally, Praxis also specified the problem of child, early and forced marriages in Serbia that mostly affects the Roma population. Adequate addressing of child marriages by relevant government institutions is still missing, despite the domestic and international regulations that bind them, mainly because they still see child marriages just as a part of Roma culture and tradition, and not as a serious violation of the rights of children, particularly girls.

Praxis’ Contribution to the European Commission’s Serbia 2021 Annual Report can be found HERE