Jasmina Mikovic, Deputy Executive Director of non-governmental organization Praxis, says for Daily Danas that Praxis has joined the action "I am Roma and I exist" implemented by the Police Department of the City of Belgrade in cooperation with OSCE Mission to Serbia.

The aim of this project is to raise the awareness of the Roma population about the importance of possession of personal documents, which is the precondition for the exercise of fundamental human rights. The project activities include visits to informal Roma settlements in the territory of the Municipalities of Palilula and Cukarica. In addition, a bilingual information bulletin has been prepared with an aim to point out to the importance of the possession of personal documents and relevant procedures for their obtaining. 

Praxis lawyers draw up and submit requests and other submissions to relevant state bodies and institutions representing thus the interests of persons who are not able alone to protect and exercise their rights before the stated bodies nor are they able to pay lawyers' services of representation in various procedures, says Jasmina Mikovic.

 Read in Danas

The Rulebook of procedure for registration of permanent residence at the address of the social welfare center came into force at the beginning of December 2012, but the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Policy of the Republic of Serbia issued the Instruction for proceeding to be followed when registering the permanent residence at the address of social welfare center (SWC). The act of the Ministry prescribes the guidelines for  coordination of the activities of the competent bodies in the concerned procedure, but the interpretation of the provision of the Instruction that envisages the conditions for the registration of the permanent residence at the address of SWC turned out to be disputable. Specifically, in addition to the evidence on identity of a person whose request is being decided on, the disputable provision requires enclosing “evidence by the competent body of internal affairs that permanent residence cannot be registered pursuant to the Article 11, Paragraph 2, Items 1, 2 and 3 of the Law on Temporary and Permanent Residence of Citizens” (on the basis of the ownership right over the apartment, lease contract over the apartment or any other legal basis).

On 23 January 2013, Praxis’ representatives attended the meeting held in the premises of the Social Welfare Centre Bujanovac where the possibilities of the simplification and more efficient conducting of the initiated procedures of registration of permanent residence at the address of this SWC were considered. Due to uncertainty related to the interpretation of this disputable provision, Praxis addressed the Police Station in Bujanovac, which interprets the envisaged evidence as the final decision rejecting the request for determination of permanent residence. The Administrative Affairs Directorate of the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Serbia has the same opinion of which Praxis was informed in a phone conversation.

Conducting the administrative procedure before the competent body of the Ministry of Interior for receiving the final decision rejecting the request for registration of permanent residence, which would serve as the evidence as requested by  the Instruction, is a time-consuming process. The previous experience points out that the same administrative procedures most often last about three months (without the period necessary for the onset of effectiveness), though there are procedures lasting more than even two years in practice. It is clear that acting in the envisaged manner will cause delays in procedures to an unacceptable extent. Such situation does not contribute to the intentions to solve the problem of persons without the permanent residence as efficiently as possible.

Conducting of a significant number of procedures of registration of permanent residence at the address of SWC is the precondition for the valuation of the effect of the concerned regulation. However, it is necessary to point out to the lacks of adopted acts at the very beginning of their implementation. Urgent removal of doubts and ambiguities is a must. In addition, the basic goals of all responsible bodies should include the simplification of administrative procedures and taking steps to make them more efficient, particularly because the problem of impossibility of the registration of permanent residence affects mainly the most vulnerable categories of citizens.

Download: Instruction for Proceeding in the Procedure for Registration of Permanent Residence at the Address of Social Welfare Centre

For more information see the announcement: Additional Complications Related to Registration of Permanent Residence at the Address of Social Welfare Centre 

Praxis has signed the Memorandum of Understanding with the Project “Second Chance” – Systemic Development of Elementary Practice Based Adult Education in Serbia with an aim to continue the successful cooperation dating back to 2011.

Project “Second Chance” has been implemented in Serbia since September 2010 and was initiated by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development in cooperation with the European Union in order to establish the system of functional elementary education of adults.

The cooperation between Praxis and the Project “Second Chance” reflects in ensuring the right to education and inclusion into the educational system for the adults who have not finished elementary school with the final aim of social inclusion. In addition, Praxis will also provide legal representation in administrative and court procedures for the regulation of the personal status and in the procedures of obtaining personal documents.

The cooperation on achievement of the goals defined by this memorandum will be realized during the whole period of the Project “Second Chance”, that is by September 2013.

The Law on Amendments to the Law on Non-Contentious Procedure came into force on 8 September 2012, which is a step forward towards the resolution of the problem of legally invisible persons, at least in the part referring to the possibility of the registration in birth registries. The stated act standardizes the new form of non-contentious procedure before courts – procedure for determination of date and place of birth.

Although it seemed that the law would change the legally unbearable situation, which was in place before its adoption, there is a question on how to exercise the right to citizenship. Specifically, the Article 71k, Paragraph 2 of the Law on Amendments to the Law on Non-Contentious Procedure envisages that the “body competent to conduct the procedure for acquisition of citizenship of the Republic of Serbia is not bound by the final decision on date and place of birth”. It thus questions the effectiveness of the court decision, since based on the law, the same decision is binding on one but not on the other administrative body. The goal of this provision is fully unclear, particularly if we have in mind that the Law on Amendments to the Law on Non-Contentious Procedure envisages that upon receiving the motion for determination of the fact of birth, the court addresses the very body of internal affairs in order to check out if there are data about the time and place of birth of persons whose birth is being proved. In addition, it has been envisaged to conduct special checks in case of suspecting that the person whose birth is being determined has had temporary residence abroad.

Praxis will monitor the implementation of the Law in practice, as it is obvious that the issue of acquisition of citizenship is not clearly and precisely regulated, and therefore there is a danger that upon the determination of time and place of birth, persons will remain at risk of statelessness.

See:Proposal for the Law on Amendments to the Law on Non-Contentious Procedure

Sixty seven non-governmental organizations have called upon the legislative authority to consider amendment of the Article 85 of the Draft Civil Procedure Law that prevents the most vulnerable categories of population to have access to court.

In particular, the proposed legal solution enables the citizens to undertake actions in a procedure either personally or through a proxy who has to be a Bar-admitted lawyer. Thus, the most vulnerable citizens of Serbia who are physically unable to access court or do not have financial resources to come to court will be deprived of the opportunity to undertake any legal actions if they do not have the money to pay for Bar-admitted lawyers’ fees. Paragraph 2 of the stated Article is in direct contravention of the constitutional guarantee that everyone has the right to appeal or to other legal remedy against a decision that establishes one’s right, obligation or legally based interest. Since the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia did not prescribe any restrictions but guaranteed the right to legal remedy to everyone, the suggested solution, which envisages that a party must be represented by a Bar-admitted lawyer in the procedure, directly violates the right to legal remedy guaranteed by the Constitution and the Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Furthermore and particularly bearing in mind the situation in which the work on drafting the Law on Free Legal Aid is still in process and in which the working group preparing this law has not yet taken the final position as regards the circle of potential providers of free legal aid, the Article 85 prejudicates that associations of citizens, trade unions, legal clinics within faculties and other potential legal aid providers will not be in fact able to provide free legal aid. Thus, the residents of informal settlements, persons with disabilities, internally displaced persons, survivors of domestic violence and other categories of socially most vulnerable citizens will practically be left without the right to access to court.

The constitutional provision that prescribes that legal aid is provided by the Bar-admitted lawyers and legal aid services established within the local self-government units represents a level of protection of right to legal aid guaranteed by the state, but cannot be interpreted in a way so as to prohibit activities of other legal aid providers. In addition, such solution also violates the provisions of the Article 20, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia that states that the achieved level of human and minority rights cannot be reduced.

For all the above-mentioned, non-governmental organizations call upon the responsible state bodies to consider amendment to the aforementioned legal provision which, if adopted, will prevent the most vulnerable and the poorest citizens of Serbia from exercising the right to access to court guaranteed by the Constitution.

Download the document: A Call to Legislative Authority to Consider Amendment of the Article 85 of the Draft Civil Procedure Law (Serbian only)

Following the submission by the Coalition for Access to Justice of the Initiative for reviewing compliance of certain provisions of the Civil Procedure Law with the Constitution, general rules of international legislation and the ratified international treaty – European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Constitutional Court brought a decision initiating the procedure for establishing non-constitutionality of the provisions of the Law and their non-compliance with the ratified international treaty.

On 24 January 2012, the Coalition for Access to Justice submitted the initiative for constitutional review of the articles 85, 170, 193, 499 and 500 of the Civil Procedure Law. The Constitutional Court initiated the procedure for establishing non-constitutionality of the Article 85, paragraph 1 that restricts the right to access to court to citizens who cannot afford to pay for attorneys’ fees. In September 2011, during the procedure for adoption of the Civil Procedure Law, the initiative for amendment of this provision was supported by 67 non-governmental organizations, Ombudsperson, Association of Public Prosecutors and Deputies to Public Prosecutors of Serbia and the Judges’ Association of Serbia. Besides, the Constitutional Court initiated the procedure for constitutional review of the Chapter 36 of the Civil Procedure Law that regulates the procedure for protection of collective rights and interests of citizens.

In the part relating to articles 170 and 193 of the Law, the Initiative was rejected.

Coalition for Access to Justice represents informal gathering of organizations for protection of human rights and consists of the Center for Advance Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, Humanitarian Law Center, Youth Initiative for Human Rights, CHRIS – Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia, Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina, Praxis, Sandzak Committee for Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms

You can see the announcement about the submitted initiativehere

Following the submission by the Coalition for Access to Justice of the Initiative for reviewing compliance of certain provisions of the Civil Procedure Law with the Constitution, general rules of international legislation and the ratified international treaty – European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Constitutional Court brought a decision initiating the procedure for establishing non-constitutionality of the provisions of the Law and their non-compliance with the ratified international treaty.

On 24 January 2012, the Coalition for Access to Justice submitted the initiative for constitutional review of the articles 85, 170, 193, 499 and 500 of the Civil Procedure Law. The Constitutional Court initiated the procedure for establishing non-constitutionality of the Article 85, paragraph 1 that restricts the right to access to court to citizens who cannot afford to pay for attorneys’ fees. In September 2011, during the procedure for adoption of the Civil Procedure Law, the initiative for amendment of this provision was supported by 67 non-governmental organizations, Ombudsperson, Association of Public Prosecutors and Deputies to Public Prosecutors of Serbia and the Judges’ Association of Serbia. Besides, the Constitutional Court initiated the procedure for constitutional review of the Chapter 36 of the Civil Procedure Law that regulates the procedure for protection of collective rights and interests of citizens.

In the part relating to articles 170 and 193 of the Law, the Initiative was rejected.

Coalition for Access to Justice represents informal gathering of organizations for protection of human rights and consists of the Center for Advance Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, Humanitarian Law Center, Youth Initiative for Human Rights, CHRIS – Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia, Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina, Praxis, Sandzak Committee for Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms

You can see the announcement about the submitted initiativehere

Praxis, in cooperation with United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), organized a round table Implementation of the Law on Non-Contentious Procedure and the Law on Temporary and Permanent Residence of Citizens. The roundtable was an opportunity to present adopted legal solutions aimed at enabling the facilitated manner of proving the time and place of birth of persons who are not registered in birth registry books, at determination of the permanent residence at the address of social welfare centres, and also at exchanging opinions and presenting examples of good practice and already noticed problems related to the implementation of the stated laws.

The speakers were Eduardo Arboleda, Chief Representative in the UNHCR in the Republic of Serbia, Gordana Stamenovic, State Secretary in the Ministry of Justice and Public Administration, Goran Basic, Deputy Ombudsperson, Davor Rako, Associate Protection Officer in UNCHR Belgrade, Natasa  Markovic, Head of the Citizenship Department in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and Ivana Stankovic, Praxis’ Program Coordinator. About 40 participants, representatives of stated bodies, international and non-governmental organizations gathered at the roundtable.

Report from the roundtable can be downloaded here
Read the news on Media Centre

Since 2009, eighteen forced evictions of informal Roma settlements have been identified in Serbia and affected more than 2,700 Roma. None of them have been conducted in compliance with human rights standards binding on the Republic of Serbia and national legal framework is inadequate in relation to protection of human rights and respect for dignity of the inhabitants of informal settlements.

Danilo Curcic, a legal analyst in NGO Praxis, talked about this in his interview to e-Novine.

Curcic said that human rights organizations had formed the Platform for the Right to Adequate Housing. The Platform is a place where civil society organizations exchange experience for the purpose of establishment of the system where human rights of the inhabitants of informal settlements will be fully respected. Within the Platform, civil society organizations have elaborated the document on the obligations of the Republic of Serbia in the area of the right to housing, which is the starting point for the regulation of the eviction procedure.

Read in Elektronske Novine

ADALAH PRESS RELEASE

(East Jerusalem) On 26 and 27 November 2012, Adalah convened an international legal workshop on “Citizenship and Residency in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. The workshop provided a forum for the participants to appraise the available legal and other means of challenging Israeli policies that limit Palestinians’ rights to citizenship and residency. The workshop, which was supported by the United Nations Development Programme, brought together local and international practitioners who are working to protect the residency and citizenship status of Palestinians and members of other vulnerable populations around the world. Over 30 individuals representing a dozen local and international organizations joined the workshop.

The first session, which addressed the use of litigation strategies to defend Palestinian citizenship and residency rights, featured Adalah Attorney and General Director Hassan Jabareen, Attorney Yossi Wolfson, Attorney Manal Hassan-Abu Sinni of the Society of St. Yves, and Attorney Sanaa Duweik of the Women’s Center for Legal Aid and Counseling (WCLAC). The speakers described the various laws and policies through which Israel exercises control over Palestinian residency rights, and their devastating impact, particularly on women and children. Attorney Padraig Hughes of London-based international legal human rights organization Interights drew comparative lessons from the approach and case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

The second session, which discussed comparative legislation and policies, was moderated by Adalah Attorney Sawsan Zaher and included presentations by Eitan Diamond of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Ivanka Kostic, the Executive Director of Praxis, a Serbian human rights organization that defends the rights of the Roma minority. Mr. Diamond set out the rules of the law of occupation as they concern demographics and population transfer.  Attorney Kostic then described the successful legal and advocacy efforts used by Praxis to challenge the discrimination, marginalization and social exclusion of the Roma community in Serbia.

The second day of the workshop focused on international advocacy and public activities as ways of bolstering legal work and raising awareness of violations of residency and citizenship rights. A session on international outreach and advocacy, chaired by Rina Rosenberg (Jabareen) of Adalah, brought together Sebastian Kohn of the Open Society Justice Initiative, Valentina Azarov of Al-Quds Bard College, Martin Clutterbuck of the Norwegian Refugee Council, and Tzvika Besor, an Israeli social media expert.  Nicole Fritz of the Southern African Litigation Center submitted a written description of international advocacy efforts to change citizenship regulations in Apartheid and post-Apartheid South Africa. The speakers emphasized that challenges to discriminatory laws should be discussed in relation to issues that the government already cares about, that target audiences must be chosen and spoken to carefully, and that there have thus far been few successful public campaigns challenging the Israeli government’s discriminatory policies towards Palestinian residency and citizenship rights.

The workshop concluded with a group discussion on lessons learned and the most important issues for the future, including the need for relevant actors within Palestinian and Israeli civil society to work together to address the erosion or total erasure of Palestinians’ citizenship rights. The group identified women and children as the most vulnerable populations, those who tend to be harmed the most by both divided marriages and the loss of residency, and discussed possible local and international advocacy strategies tailored to the needs of these groups.

The concept note and program of the workshop, as well as panelist bios

Photographs of the Workshop