The residents of the informal Roma settlement in Dr Ivana Ribara Street in Novi Beograd, where most of internally displaced persons from Kosovo live, received yesterday, on the International Day for Tolerance, the decision from Department for Inspection Affairs of the Administration of City of Novi Beograd ordering them to pull down the facilities they had been living in for years within a day. Despite the assurances received from the competent authorities that the whole eviction process would be conducted in compliance with international documents binding on the Republic of Serbia, the yesterday’s delivery of the decision shows the absolute inobservance of the international standards related to the right on housing and represents yet another pressure on the residents of this settlement.

Thirty-three families are living in the settlement in Dr Ivana Ribara Street and the access to fundamental human rights is not achievable for them. The Ombudsperson joined the resolution of the problems, which occurred on the occasion of the construction of business and residential facility built by the Building Directorate of Serbia, and initiated a meeting held on Thursday at which it was agreed to form a working group which would work on finding the solution for the residents of this informal settlement. According to the agreement, the first meeting of the working group, which will include the representatives of the informal settlement and representatives of Praxis, should be held on Friday, 18 November 2011.

The achieved agreement, which envisaged complete observance of international standards on the housing right, primarily the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and guidelines of the United Nations on development-based evictions, was questioned yesterday as well as the determination of the Republic of Serbia for the full respect of human rights for all citizens. Accepted international standards in the area of human rights clearly forbid forced evictions in bad weather, as well as those, which will result in homelessness of the residents.

We draw attention to the fact that most of the residents of this informal settlement are facing multiple discrimination in society related to employment, education, health care, access to documents and other rights. Accordingly, acting of state bodies must be complied with measures of affirmative action envisaged by the Constitution and other regulations. Non-governmental organizations are calling on competent state bodies to return to dialogue in order to find an adequate alternative accommodation and observance of the residents’ dignity.

The Coalition against Discrimination welcomes the judgment of the Municipal Court in Rijeka by which the Pastor Franjo Jurcevic was sentenced to a three-month suspended prison sentence for incitement to discrimination during the 2010 Pride Parade in Belgrade. This sentence unequivocally confirms that incitement to discrimination and violence against any social group must not be tolerated, and that any hate speech will be penalised.

The procedure against the pastor from Kastav near Rijeka was instigated after he had published an article on his blog in which he supported violence in Belgrade during the Pride Parade, opposed to the Parade participants’ right of assembly and called them derogatory names. The pastor said in the text that holding the Pride Parade in Belgrade was the "proof that moral freaks and psychopaths have been increasingly dominating the media, streets, institutions, cities..." and that "the Belgrade citizens have shown what they think of these psychopaths", and that he was sorry for the injured policemen, but they should have pulled back to allow "the normal people to discuss for a while with these diseased individuals."

The Coalition against Discrimination believes that this judgment coming from Croatia on the second anniversary of the adoption of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination by the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, is a serious reminder for the national courts and other independent bodies that they have a positive obligation to protect the rights of LGBT community without exception, especially in the context of the recent, publicly announced, withdrawal of the lawsuit against the Metropolitan Amfilohije Radovic.

We recall that on the basis of a complaint received from Labris and 25 citizens of Serbia, the Commissioner for Protection of Equality established in early March that the Metropolitan Radovic had used hate speech against the LGBT community during the 2010 Pride Parade, but only a few days after publishing her decision, she publicly renounced the right to file a lawsuit against him.

The Coalition against Discrimination points out that pursuant to Article 13 of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination, the Metropolitan Radovic’s hate speech may qualify, on several grounds, as a severe form of discrimination, because it was presented through public media (Article 13, paragraph 3), repeated several times over a longer period (Article 13, paragraph 6), incited hatred and intolerance (Article 13, paragraph 1), and significantly contributed to the development of severe consequences for discriminated persons, other persons and property (Article 13, paragraph 7), and therefore we believe that a civil lawsuit can be filed in this case, which is almost identical to the case of Pastor Jurcevic.

The following organisations, members of the Coalition against Discrimination, are signing this statement: Center for Advanced Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, Praxis, Anti-Trafficking Centre, Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia (CHRIS Network), Association of Students with Disabilities, Gayten LGBT and Regional Center for Minorities.

Download: Bill of Indictment of the Municipal Court of Rijeka

Download: Judgement of the Municipal Court of Rijeka

The Coalition against Discrimination strongly condemns the latest statement of Metropolitan Amfilohije Radovic, which is the worst form of hate speech directed against the members of LGBT population, and at the same time, the justification of violence and open support to hooligans and thugs.

Addressing the gathered people in the village Klinci near Lustica, the Metropolitan Radovic on 11 October 2010, called LGBT people, among other things, the "stench of Sodom" and described them as "ungodly and perverse" and stated that LGBT people were "plague and pestilence of Sodom."

In addition to using the most terrible words of hatred towards a minority group, which used its rights guaranteed by the Constitution to gather peacefully in the centre of Belgrade, the Metropolitan Radovic very openly tried to justify violence committed by the members of right-wing, quasi football supporters and clerofascist associations on the day of the Parade, but he also indirectly supported and announced the similar actions of violence in the future. He says: "Be assured that this is the pre-apparition of the fall of Christian nations. God will know when to strike with His whip and warning, but it has already been slowly prepared. People, nations, cultures and states cannot be built on filth, impurity, stench and godlessness."

Instead of calling for peace and love as a representative of the Church and religious leader, the Metropolitan Radovic, not for the first time, openly advocates and supports a policy of violence and hatred, and directly calls for aggression and discrimination.

Because of these statements, a member of the Coalition against Discrimination, Labris – Organisation for Lesbian Human Rights, yesterday filed a complaint with the Commissioner for Protection of Equality in accordance with the Law against Discrimination, and invited the Synod of the Serbian Orthodox Church to publicly distance itself from the statements of its member Metropolitan Radovic.

We emphasise that just before the Pride the Serbian Orthodox Church explicitly called people to refrain from any violence, and therefore we believe that the statement of the Metropolitan Radovic expresses his personal view of hatred and intolerance against the LGBT population. Bearing this in mind, we believe that the only logical and responsible response of the Serbian Orthodox Church is to distance itself from all the aforementioned statements of one of the members of the Holy Synod, the Metropolitan Radovic.

We recall that several dozens of policemen and one participant of the Pride Parade were injured in violent actions and riots on Sunday, and also that numerous institutions and locations were attacked, while the centre of Belgrade was destroyed.

The Coalition against Discrimination also demands the detention of those arrested for violence that happened on 10 October, quick apprehension and arrest of those perpetrators who are still at large and most severe punishment for all those who took part in destructive actions and violence against the police officers and the participants of the Pride Parade.

The members of the Coalition against Discrimination are: Center for Advanced Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, Labris - Lesbian Human Rights Organisation, Anti-Trafficking Centre, Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia (CHRIS Network), Association of Students with Disabilities, Gayten LGBT, Praxis and Regional Center for Minorities.

The Coalition against Discrimination strongly condemns the opposition of the Democratic Party of Serbia and certain representatives of the Serbian Orthodox Church to the application of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination in the case in which the Commissioner for Protection of Equality established that the Metropolitan Amfilohije Radovic used the prohibited hate speech in talking about the members of LGBT community. Instead of welcoming the Commissioner’s decision and thus contributing to building a society of tolerance and non-violence, the purpose of such petty-political efforts is to further deepen the gap among the citizens of Serbia, which only contributes to the emergence of new forms of discriminatory practices against the members of LGBT population.

The Coalition against Discrimination stresses that the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination should be applied equally to all those in the Republic of Serbia who commit discrimination, including those individuals who publicly spread the ideas of hatred and violence against the individuals and groups who share certain personal characteristics, regardless of whether the offenders are nationals or foreigners.

The Coalition against Discrimination points out that those who use hate speech cannot hide behind the freedom of expressing their political or religious beliefs, because their own freedom should not be an excuse for violating the rights and freedoms of others. No one is free to promote hatred, violence and discrimination against the individuals and groups that share certain personal characteristics, regardless of whether they are church or party officials.

The Coalition against Discrimination calls upon the highest state representatives to politically condemn, without delay, those who believe that the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination should not be applied in this flagrant case of hate speech and thus send a clear message to all those who do not take seriously the rights and freedoms of individuals and groups in the territory of the Republic of Serbia.

The members of the Coalition against Discrimination are: Center for Advanced Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, Labris - Lesbian Human Rights Organisation, Praxis, Anti-Trafficking Centre, Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia (CHRIS Network), Association of Students with Disabilities, Gayten LGBT, Praxis and Regional Center for Minorities.
 

Download: Recommendation of the Commissioner for Protection of Equality on the occasion of hate speech by Metropolitan Amfilohije Radovic

The Coalition against Discrimination condemns the statement of Nevena Petrusic, Commissioner for Protection of Equality, who promised in the daily Danas of 7 March that she would not file a lawsuit against the Metropolitan Amfilohije Radovic, even if he failed to act on her earlier recommendation. This Commissioner’s attitude is an encouragement to all those who on a daily basis use hate speech and justify violence against the members of various minority groups in Serbia. At the same time, such statements stultify the Commissioner’s main available tool - filing a lawsuit for violation of the prohibition of discrimination in cases where other protection mechanisms have failed.

The Commissioner for Protection of Equality was addressed by Labris, a member of the Coalition against Discrimination, and 25 citizens of Serbia, and as late as nearly 5 months after filing of their complaint, she made a decision establishing that the Metropolitan Amfilohije had used hate speech when he called the Pride participants "the stench of Sodom that poisoned and polluted Belgrade" and justified violence in the streets by saying that "violence of those ungodly and perverse people has caused more violence." The Coalition against Discrimination believes that the Commissioner properly qualified these statements as hate speech and welcomes the parts of her recommendations by which she required the Metropolitan Amfilohije to apologise to the LGBT community and to refrain from similar statements in the future.

However, the Coalition considers it completely unacceptable that in the case of hate speech to which the general public reacted and which gives an explicit justification of violence against the members of the LGBT community, the Commissioner responds with the request that the victims of this severe form of discrimination should meet with someone who obviously has no serious intention to change his position, which was confirmed a day after the Commissioner’s decision when the Metropolitan Amfilohije and Velibor Dzomic, Coordinator of the Metropolitan Legal Council, said that the Commissioner’s recommendation would not be implemented. In his statement given to Blic daily, the Metropolitan Amfilohije reiterated that we should "love the sinner" but "hate the sin and evil", again alluding to homosexuality, which he said was "a way that leads to destruction," "perversion" and "error".

Instead of reacting sharply and unambiguously to the repeated hate speech of Metropolitan Amfilohije, pointing out that his words were unacceptable and undermined the authority of her decision, the Commissioner gave a statement to Danas daily by which she actually promised to the Metropolitan that he would not be prosecuted, thus giving him a sort of "blessing" to continue with the same rhetoric of hate. At the same time, by stating that the Metropolitan Amfilohije would be just warned if he did not act upon her recommendation, but that there would be no lawsuit because she lacked the capacity for that, the Commissioner only encouraged others to commit discrimination and violate the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination.

The Coalition finds it particularly troubling that the Commissioner Nevena Petrusic said in her statement that "in the case of Metropolitan Amfilohije there is no reason for a lawsuit." According to Article 13 of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination, which defines severe forms of discrimination, the Metropolitan Radovic’s hate speech may qualify, on several grounds, as a severe form of discrimination. His hate speech was presented through public media (Article 13, paragraph 3), repeated several times over a longer period (Article 13, paragraph 6), incited hatred and intolerance (Article 13, paragraph 1) and significantly contributed to the development of severe consequences for discriminated persons, other persons and property (Article 13, paragraph 7). Therefore, we believe that in this case there are certainly reasons for filing a lawsuit.

The Coalition against Discrimination urges the Commissioner for Protection of Equality to consistently apply the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination and to immediately start pointing to particularly severe forms of discrimination, which is her legal obligation. We demand that the Commissioner uses all the mechanisms envisaged by the law, especially to file lawsuits in particularly serious cases of discrimination, because technical issues and capacities cannot be an excuse for failing to implement the law. The Coalition against Discrimination expects from the Commissioner not to insist on a meeting between the victims of discrimination or representatives of the organisations that provide support to minority groups and the persons who justify violence and hate speech, especially when it is obvious that on that occasion they would use such speech. Instead, by her clear and unambiguous public statements, the Commissioner should provide support to all victims of discrimination in Serbia and encourage them to file complaints.

The members of the Coalition against Discrimination are: Center for Advanced Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, Labris - Lesbian Human Rights Organisation, Anti-Trafficking Centre, Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia (CHRIS Network), Association of Students with Disabilities, Gayten LGBT, Praxis and Regional Center for Minorities.

Although the beneficiaries of financial social assistance already encounter numerous problems, the new Law on Social Protection (hereinafter referred to as the Law) imposes another requirement for obtaining this kind of assistance, thus posing an insurmountable obstacle to the exercise of the rights of many beneficiaries.

Article 84 of the new Law provides that an individual, a family member who is unable to work, must accompany a request for determining eligibility to receive financial social assistance with a final court decision, court settlement or proof on having initiated a procedure before the competent court for determining the obligation of a relative who does not live in the same household but who is obliged and able to participate in his/her support in accordance with the law governing family relations.

This provision further complicates the exercise of the right to social protection, since the legislator has decided to additionally burden the already complicated administrative procedure by filing a lawsuit. However, the filing of lawsuit requires the payment of prescribed fees. Hence, if we take into consideration that in mid-2011, the number of the beneficiaries of financial social assistance grew to 190,000, and that, according to the latest estimates of the Statistical Office, about 700,000 people in Serbia live below the poverty line, it is clear to which extent the support lawsuits will overload the already overburdened courts.

We should also bear in mind that the beneficiaries of financial social assistance are poor, and in most cases, insufficiently educated and informed, often illiterate, and the social welfare centres often do not provide them with clear and complete information about the real meaning and possible effects of a lawsuit. Being a lay party, the beneficiary of financial social assistance is not able to draft documents and file a lawsuit to the court independently and without expert legal assistance. Although some municipal administrations provide free legal aid services, it is still not enough to help all those in need of free legal assistance in order to submit a request for financial social assistance and fulfil the requirements for filing a lawsuit for support.

The Law stipulates that it is sufficient to submit evidence that the procedure has been initiated before the competent court along with a request for financial social assistance. However, it remains unclear whether a final court decision must be presented for the extension of assistance, or whether it is necessary that the court case be completed by the deadline for submitting a request for the extension of financial social assistance. Moreover, it seems unjustified that a lawsuit is filed against those relatives who are themselves the beneficiaries of some form of social assistance or unemployed and unable to support themselves and their family.

The following example shows how the application of this Article of the Law looks like in practice:

Drita lives with her common-law husband Avdul in an informal Roma settlement in Cukaricka suma. They have three minor children and both of them are unemployed. The situation is further complicated by the fact that Drita’s husband is a "legally invisible" person and does not possess any identification documents. Therefore, he was not able to recognise his paternity and without the registered data about the father, he is not legally obliged to support his children since his identity cannot be determined before the court, which formally makes Drita a single mother. On the other hand, Drita’s father is permanently employed in JAT as a manual worker and supports himself and three other people – his unemployed wife, an unemployed son and a minor daughter. In order to qualify for financial social assistance, under the new Law, Drita as a legal representative of her three minor children who have been taken away from her and are currently in the reception centre, must file a lawsuit against her father on behalf of her children because under the Family Law he has an obligation to support his grandchildren since they are unable to work and their parents do not receive any income. Drita is not on good terms with her father because he does not approve of her relationship with Avdul, and filing a lawsuit for support would only worsen their bad family relationships. On the other hand, if Drita does not file a lawsuit, she will lose income and the children will not be returned to her since she will not be able to ensure financial security. The procedure for returning the children to the family is ongoing.

Another problem, faced mainly by Roma people/residents of informal settlements, is that very often they do not have registered permanent residence, and many of them even temporary residence. The situation is especially difficult for "legally invisible" persons who do not have personal documents and for whom it was difficult or impossible to exercise the right to social protection even before this newly imposed requirement. On the other hand, if people without registered permanent or temporary residence have a legal obligation to support the family members who are unable to work, it will be a problem to establish the territorial jurisdiction of the courts before which a lawsuit against these individuals should be filed.

The new legal provisions seemingly allow the increased number of beneficiaries, greater coverage of the poor, as well as higher cash benefits for the existing beneficiaries. Nevertheless, by prescribing such provisions, the legislator undoubtedly intended to reduce the number of beneficiaries of financial social assistance bearing in mind that many people would rather give up requesting assistance than file a lawsuit against their family members. Some of them will give up for the fear of disturbing family relationships or additionally worsening their relatives’ often adverse financial situation, while others will give up because they are not able to initiate a court procedure without legal assistance, and thus meet the requirement for the submission of a request for financial social assistance.

The introduction of mandatory lawsuit against the nearest relatives only further complicates the already complicated administrative procedure. Such a requirement leads to the situation that many beneficiaries will not be able to exercise the right to financial social assistance. This approach stultifies the very essence of social protection whose purpose is precisely to help the most vulnerable layers of population to cope with poverty and penury, and not to deny them that right by placing conditions that they cannot meet, thus directly violating the basic principles of social protection - the principle of efficiency, the principle of availability of social protection and the principle of the best interests of beneficiaries.

The non-governmental organisations call upon the legislative authorities to consider amending Article 85 of the Bill on Civil Procedure, which prevents the most vulnerable population to have access to court.

More precisely, this Bill envisages that citizens are allowed to take actions in the procedure either personally or through a representative who must be an attorney-at-law. Thus, the most vulnerable citizens of Serbia, who are physically disabled to access the court or lack financial resources to come to the court, will not be able to take these actions if they do not have the money to pay for the services of an attorney-at-law. Paragraph 2 of the said Article directly contradicts the constitutional guarantee that everyone shall have the right to an appeal or other legal remedy against any decision on his rights, obligations or lawful interests.  Given that the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia has not envisaged any restrictions, but has guaranteed that everyone has the right to a legal remedy, the proposed provision according to which an attorney-at-law must represent a party in the procedure, which is a legal remedy, directly violates the right to a legal remedy guaranteed under the Constitution and Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

In addition, we believe that in a situation where the Law on Free Legal Aid is still being drafted and the working group for drafting this law has not taken yet the final position on the potential providers of free legal aid, Article 85 predetermines that associations of citizens, trade unions, legal clinics at faculties and other potential providers of free legal aid will not be allowed to provide such services.  The result of this will be that the residents of informal settlements, persons with disabilities, internally displaced persons, victims of domestic violence and other categories of socially vulnerable citizens will virtually be left without access to court.
The constitutional provision stipulating that legal assistance shall be provided by legal professionals and legal assistance offices established in the units of local self-government refers to the level of protection of the right to legal assistance guaranteed by the state, and it may not be interpreted as the prohibition to other free legal aid providers to perform this activity. In addition to all the aforementioned, this provision violates Article 20, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, according to which the attained level of human and minority rights may not be lowered.

Taken all this into consideration, once again we call upon the competent state authorities to consider amending the aforementioned legal provision, which will, if adopted, prevent the most vulnerable and poorest citizens of Serbia to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed right to access to court.


The signatory organisations:
1.    Praxis
2.    CUPS (Centre of Advanced Legal Studies)
3.    Regional Center for Minorities
4.    Belgrade Center for Human Rights
5.    Humanitarian Law Center
6.    YUCOM - Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights
7.    Center for Practical Politics
8.    Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia CHRIS
9.    Educational Roma Center
10.    ASTRA
11.    NGO Atina
12.    Civil Rights Defenders
13.    Association of Citizens Power of Friendship – Amity
14.    Novi Sad Humanitarian Center
15.    Sandzak Committee for Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms
16.    Humanitarian Center for Integration and Tolerance
17.    AS - Center for Empowerment of Young People Living with HIV and AIDS
18.    Center for Interactive Pedagogy
19.    SOS hotline for women and children victims of violence
20.    Women for Peace
21.    KIC Pralipe
22.    NEC-RP Kragujevac
23.    Voice of Kosovo and Metohija
24.    Association Help for the Children
25.    Balkan Center for Migration and Humanitarian Activities
26.    HO Bozur
27.    Association Iskra
28.    Society for Development of Children and Youth - Open Club
29.    NGO Panonija
30.    Labris - Organisation for Lesbian Human Rights
31.    Association Sveti Spas
32.    Association against AIDS – JAZAS
33.    Together Together
34.    Local Democracy Centre LDA Nis
35.    Mental Disability Rights Initiative MDRI-S
36.    Autonomous Women's Center
37.    Association of Citizens Nexus
38.    Women in Black
39.    INTEGRA, Kraljevo
40.    Children's Center Small Prince
41.    Ecumenical Humanitarian Organization
42.    Youth Integration Center
43.     Liceulice (Face of the Street)
44.    Group 484
45.    Victimology Society of Serbia
46.    Gay Straight Alliance
47.    Committee for Human Rights Vranje / SOS Hotline Vranje
48.    PAAD Center for Social-Culturological Excellence
49.    Center for Improvement and Promotion of Socially Marginalized Groups New World
50.    Association of Citizens Kula    
51.    Roma Information Center (RIC)
52.    Association of Citizens Ekobecej
53.    NGO School of Peace Kragujevac
54.    Gayten LGBT
55.    Center for Equal Rights
56.    Transparency Serbia
57.    Fund for Open Society
58.    UTLOSS
59.    Committee for Human Rights Leskovac
60.    NGO European Vojvodina
61.    Association Fenomena
62.    Association of Roma Women Osvit, Nis
63.    Association Center for Public Policy Research
64.    SOS Vlasotince
65.    Youth Initiative for Human Rights
66.    PRO BONO
67.    Center for Minority Rights

The initiative is also supported by:

68.    Office of the Protector of Citizens in Subotica
69.    Judges' Association of Serbia
70.    Association of Public Prosecutors and Deputy Public Prosecutors of Serbia
71.    Protector of Citizens

The Coalition for Access to Justice (Coalition) submitted on 24 January the initiative for assessing the constitutionality of the recently adopted Law on Civil Procedure, whose application starts on 1 February 2012 , and which, as stated in the initiative, limits access to justice and threatens the freedom of thought, action and critical opinion. Because of the possible irreparable harm to the citizens of Serbia, the submitting organisations proposed to the Constitutional Court to suspend the implementation of the disputed provisions until a decision on their compliance with the Constitution and ratified international documents is brought.

The submitted initiative for assessing the constitutionality refers to Articles 85, 170, 193, 499 and 500. These provisions relate to the requirement of professional legal representation in civil procedures, the position of the Republic of Serbia as defendant and the procedure for the protection of collective rights and interests.
The following organisations are the members of the Coalition for Access to Justice: Center for Advanced Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, CHRIS - Network of the Committees for Human Rights in Serbia, Humanitarian Law Center, Youth Initiative for Human Rights, Independent Journalists' Association of Vojvodina, Sandzak Committee for Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms and Praxis.

Download: Initiative for accessing the constitutionality of the Articles 85, 170, 193, 499 and 500 of the Law on Civil Procedure

Platform for the right to adequate housing was presented today at the meeting held on the occasion of the eviction of informal Roma settlement in Block 72 in Novi Beograd. More than sixty civil society organizations (CSOs), eight networks, CSOs coalitions, and the National Council of the Roma National Minority have supported the Platform.

The Platform is an informal grouping of NGOs working at the domestic and international level on issues of human rights, anti-discrimination, anti-racism and Roma rights. The need to create this platform came from a worrying increase of forced evictions over the past three years – 15 forced evictions, which affected over 1,500 Roma, have been identified.

This document gathers the organizations which express concern over the increased number of forced evictions conducted contrary to ratified international standards binding on the Republic of Serbia, and it primarily presents the attitudes related to the forced eviction of the informal Roma settlement in Block 72. In addition, the Platform provides recommendations for all forthcoming evictions.

Platform for the right to adequate housing represents a contribution of CSOs to the elaboration of regulations or other documents, which will regulate the evictions of informal settlements in compliance with international human rights standards.

The Platform has been presented to the Ministry of Environment, Mining and Spatial Planning, Ministry of Human and Minority Rights, Public Administration and Local Self-Governance – Directorate for Human and Minority Rights, Republic Housing Agency, Commissariat for Refugees of the Republic of Serbia and representatives of the City of Belgrade. 

Download: Platform for the Right to Adequate Housing

Despite the severest commendation of the announced eviction and undertaking of all available legal activities, and the international action of solidarity with Mevljuda Kurtesi and her family, she and her six minor children were forcibly evicted from the flat in 4 Ljeska Street in Banovo Brdo in Belgrade on 25 October 2011. This is another in the series of illegal forced evictions in the territory of the City of Belgrade, which turned Mevljuda and her children, internally displaced persons from Kosovo, into homeless people and deprived them of the possibility to have a decent life. The eviction was followed by racial comments of the neighbours, which culminated with unabashed joy when Mevljuda was evicted in the street.

To remind, Belgrade Land Development Public Agency, which previously gave Mevljuda the flat for use and now requires the eviction, did not offer the alternative accommodation or the explanation for the eviction. The Municipality of Cukarica rejected written requirements from several non-governmental organizations to suspend the eviction since it was contrary to international standards to which our country committed itself by ratifying the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which refer to the eviction process and provision of an alternative accommodation.

Since we refuse to be accomplices in this inhuman and illegal eviction of Mevljuda and her children, we decided to support by our presence her decision to remain in the apartment she lives in. On that occasion, two activists of the Regional Centre for Minorities, who did not want to move from the entrance to Mevljuda’s apartment, were taken to police station Cukarica where they were interrogated in the presence of the legal representative from YUCOM. Criminal charges were pressed against them for the criminal act of “justice disturbance” based on the Article 336 b of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Serbia. We consider this as a pressure made on human rights defenders, with an intention to intimidate and give up from the consistent and unreserved struggle for full respect of human rights.

We demand that the competent city institutions immediately provide an adequate alternative accommodation for Mevljuda, who is temporarily accommodated in the cardboard barrack at her mother’s in the informal Roma settlement Belvil. At the same time, we point to the state institutions, which want to criminalize solidarity and distract us from such commitment, that we will continue uncompromisingly  defend human rights and stand by those whose rights are violated, who are poor and deprived.


Women in Black
Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights – YUCOM
Youth Initiative for Human Rights – YIHR
Praxis
Minority Rights Centre
Regional Centre for Minorities