The report Contributing to Public Administration Reform in Kraljevo  was prepared as the result of the research conducted by Praxis within the project "Contributing to public administration reform in Kraljevo" in the period from 1 June 2017 - 31 March 2018, as part of  the project Western Balkans Enabling Project for Civil Society Monitoring of Public Administration Reform (WeBER), financed by the European Union and co-financed by the Kingdom of Netherlands.

Based on the conducted research of the transparency of local self-government and the efficiency of local administrative bodies in Kraljevo, as well as monitoring of the application of the Law on General Administrative Procedure, Praxis has established that there is a significant  space for improving the work of local administrative bodies in all areas. 

Despite the efforts made in recent years in the field of public administration reform, both at the national and local level, there is no visible progress in some areas. The most serious gaps have been identified in the area of transparency of the work of administrative bodies, in particular regarding public participation in decision- and policy-making processes, since the participation of citizens and civil society organisations in such processes is almost non-existent. Consequently, discriminatory decisions have been made in several cases indicating the failure of local self-government to respond to the needs of vulnerable groups. Active citizen participation in the decision-making and policy-making process can undoubtedly prevent the adoption of discriminatory and inappropriate decisions and make the work of administration accountable and efficient.  

In addition, it has been established that there is no proactive approach in terms of improving the conditions and creating a conducive environment for the development of civil society at the local level. 

The role of the local media in Kraljevo, as drivers of public debate, is not sufficiently developed in the area of public administration reform, due to both financial instability and insufficiently encouraging environment for reporting on specific topics.

Download the report here.

An updated and expanded country profile on Serbia as part of the Statelessness Index has been launched today. The Serbia pagenow includes up-to-date data on new categories like withdrawal of nationality, reduction of statelessness, and bilateral return and readmission agreements, as well as a shorter country briefing in English and Serbian, which outline recommendations for the Government on how to improve the treatment of stateless people and to prevent and reduce statelessness (also attached to this email).

The Index country profile on Serbia provides analysis for over 25 different categories. Law, policy and practice under each of these categories are assessed against international norms and good practice and marked with a clear and easy to understand assessment key. 

MAIN 2019 INDEX UPDATES

Serbia saw some positive legislative developments in 2018, but the update also highlights some continuing concerns with implementation in practice. 

In March 2018, Serbia adopted a new Law on Foreigners, which established a definition of a stateless person and introduces provisions on detention and return procedures that could improve the situation of some stateless people. Detention may now only be ordered after considering less coercive measures; removal can be postponed and access to basic rights granted if someone’s identity can’t be determined (through no fault of their own); and temporary residence can be granted on humanitarian grounds if removal is postponed for over a year. As a result, the assessment of Serbia’s performance in the Detention theme has slightly improved. 

However, there is also a provision in the new law that presumes that if someone can’t establish their identity or doesn’t have a travel document, they are obstructing removal, which undermines some of these positive changes. The Index update also shows that work remains to be done to bring Serbian law, policy and practice on the protection of stateless people and prevention and reduction of statelessness in line with international standards: Serbia still has no statelessness determination procedure; bylaws requiring parents to be documented to register births remain in force; and safeguards to prevent children being born stateless in the country are undermined by implementation gaps. 

For more information, see the announcement here.

The European Network on Statelessness, with Praxis being one of its members, published a country briefing on the issues significantly affecting the situation of protection against statelessness in Serbia. The briefing points to the problems related to immediate birth registration and prevention of statelessness among children born in Serbia, and provides some positive solutions concerning late birth registration.  

It is pointed out that because of inadequate regulations, children whose parents do not have documents cannot be registered in birth registry books immediately after birth. It is also stressed that children who, according to the law, should acquire citizenship automatically by birth must conduct a separate procedure for acquiring citizenship, and that in practice it is not possible to obtain citizenship by birth in Serbia after reaching the age of 18 years. On the other hand, it is stated that significant progress has been made in Serbia to facilitate access to late birth registration by prescribing a court procedure for determination of date and place of birth, thanks to which many people who had previously been unable to register in birth registry books obtained personal documents.

The briefing also contains recommendations for overcoming the identified obstacles, and states that it is necessary to amend regulations that prevent the registration of children whose parents do not possess documents. It is also stressed that it is necessary to ensure the consistent implementation of the Law on Citizenship to prevent childhood statelessness, and that the time limit for acquiring citizenship by birth should be extended in line with the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

The briefing was published as part of the Statelessness Index,  a comparative tool that assesses how different European countries protect stateless people and what they do to prevent and reduce statelessness. 

On 24 December, 2018, Praxis held a conference in the Media Centre in Belgrade to present the achieved results and remaining challenges in the fields of prevention and elimination of statelessness and child marriages in Serbia.

The conference was opened by Ivanka Kostić, Praxis Executive Director, who welcomed the attendees and gave a brief overview of the multi-year activities implemented by Praxis in the field of preventing statelessness and child marriages with the financial support of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). On that occasion, Ivanka pointed out that thanks to free legal assistance provided by Praxis, in the period of 14 years over 90,000 people had been able to access their basic status rights. She also expressed hope that in the course of 2019, a systemic solution to the problem of stateless persons and legally invisible children would finally be found. Referring to the problem of child marriages in Serbia, Ivanka pointed out that the legal provision allowing early marriages after reaching the age of 16 in exceptional cases had been deleted from the current Draft Law on Family, which indicated the state’s willingness to eradicate child marriages.

Participants were then addressed by Hans Friedrich Schoder, UNHCR Representative in Serbia, who pointed out that in the same period the number of persons at risk of statelessness decreased from 30,000 to 2,100. He highlighted that child marriages represented a disregard for international conventions, in particular the Convention on the Rights of the Child, endangered the girls’ health and had an additional impact on the emergence of statelessness. He also expressed his satisfaction for continuing the cooperation with Praxis and his expectation that a common goal would be achieved and that a systemic solution to the problem of statelessness would be found.

Milan Radojev, Praxis Status and Socioeconomic Rights Programme Coordinator, presented all the remaining problems faced by people at risk of statelessness and pointed out that there were still newborns in Serbia who could not be registered immediately after birth due to the two by-laws that did not allow their registration if their parents did not possess personal documents, and added that Praxis had submitted an initiative to the Constitutional Court for examining the constitutionality and legality of these regulations, and sent an appeal to the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-government regarding their amendments.

Nataša Živković, Head of Sector for Personal Status of Citizens, Keeping Registers and Electoral Rights of the Secretariat for Administration in the Belgrade City Administration, spoke about the background of the problem of illegally invisible persons in Belgrade, as well as the beginning of successful cooperation with Praxis, dating back to 2012. 

Jelena Petrović, Praxis Child Rights Programme Coordinator, presented the activities implemented by Praxis aimed at raising awareness about the harmfulness of child, early and forced marriages and explained that a major obstacle to fighting against child marriages was the perceiving of the phenomenon of child marriages out of the context of Roma tradition and culture, in particular by the competent authorities, and the lack of records on child marriage cases kept by relevant institutions.

Sadija Gicić, a social worker and women’s rights activist, spoke about the responsibilities of institutions in cases of child marriage. She stressed the importance of timely response of institutions and pointed to their duty to act in accordance with binding protocols.

Finally, it was concluded that, regardless of the achievements in the field of prevention and elimination of the emergence of legally invisible persons, it was necessary to continue the intensive work on eliminating the remaining challenges in order to prevent the emergence of new cases of legally invisible and stateless persons. In the field of prevention and elimination of child marriages, in addition to the civil sector that was making the biggest contribution in combating this extremely harmful traditional practice, decision makers, social welfare centres, the police, prosecution, schools, health care institutions and the media should be involved more actively and in a coordinated manner, because without efforts of all relevant actors, it was not possible to ensure a solution to this problem.

For more information, see the announcement here.

A series of recommendations issued to Serbia by international organisations and treaty bodies indicate that the situation in Serbia related to timely birth registration is not satisfactory. Thus, the UN Human Rights Committee recommended to Serbia to enhance its efforts to enable registration of children born to parents without identification documents. Similar recommendations were given by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child and the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The European Parliament called for full implementation of the right to timely birth registration, while the the UN Human Rights Council, in the Universal Periodic Review for Serbia, recommended to Serbia to provide the registration into birth registry books immediately after birth, without discrimination and regardless of whether parents had personal documents. Serbia accepted this recommendation of the UN Human Rights Council and committed to fulfil the UN Sustainable Development Goals, including to provide universal registration into birth registry books. 

However, despite the accepted obligations and proclaimed commitment to allowing every child to register in birth registry books immediately after birth, Serbia has not yet removed legal obstacles that impede registration of a significant number of children. Moreover, in 2018, the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-government refused Praxis’ suggestions to amend legislation to allow all children to be timely registered in birth registry books. 

Given the fact that this situation is unsustainable both in terms of respecting human rights and in terms of compliance of secondary legislation with primary legislation, with Serbia being in the position of a state that does not fulfil its international obligations, Praxis once again stresses that it is necessary that the competent institutions take immediate action to allow every child to be registered in birth registry books immediately after birth.

For more information, see the announcement here.

The Paperless People Podcastfollows the stories of two Roma families, exploring how policies in Serbia are perpetuating their legal invisibility. Through these stories and expert analysis, it is explored how the UN Sustainable Development Goals may struggle to achieve what they set out to do if the approach to implementation and monitoring does not account for structural discrimination that is too often leaving certain people behind: in this case the Roma in Serbia. 

This podcast series, produced by the Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion, with the support of the Knowledge Platform for Security and the Rule of Law (Knowledge Management Fund), explores how the implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals need to be re-thought in order to effectively address statelessness challenges. 

This episode was created in close partnership with Praxis, a human rights organization based in Serbia. With thanks to Ivanka Kostic and her team.

Music from Blue Dot Sessions and Podington Bear under Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution License. 

Listen to this episode here.

The Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government believes that there are no reasons to amend the by-laws that hinder birth registration immediately after birth of children whose parents do not possess personal documents. Such an opinion stems from the response which the Ministry sent to Praxis upon the recently submitted appeal to amend the provisions of two by-laws (Instruction on administering registry books and forms of registry books and Rulebook on the procedure for the issuance of birth notification and form of the issuance of birth notification in a health care). Praxis stated in the appeal that these by-laws were in contradiction with the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, Family Law and ratified international conventions, since many children are left without birth registration immediately after birth. 

The Ministry disregarded these arguments in its response, stating that the normative framework enabled every person to be registered in the birth registry books. It also stated that the problems in birth registration were overcome. However, the Ministry did not take into consideration the fact that not only would the children whose parents do not possess documents not be able to get registered in the birth registry book immediately after birth, but also that additional, often lengthy procedures would have to be conducted for them.

In this way, the Ministry disregarded the opinions of many international organizations and treaty bodies which emphasised in their recommendations to Serbia that the children whose parents do not possess documents must be enabled to register in the birth registry books immediately after birth. Furthermore, the Ministry also neglected its obligation stemming from the Operational conclusions from the seminar “Social Inclusion of Roma in the Republic of Serbia 2017”  to ensure the fulfilment of the right to report and register births of children whose parent do not possess personal documents. 

Government of the Republic of Serbia, in cooperation with the European Commission, organized the fourth seminar “Social Inclusion of Roma in the Republic of Serbia” in October 2017. The seminar is a biennial meeting, first organized in 2011, dedicated to the status of Roma in the region organised by the European Commission. Roma seminars are the main channel of communication between the European Commission/EU Delegation and Serbian authorities dealing with these issues. The Seminar discussed actions to improve the status of Roma in education, implemented activities and observed problems at the national and local level in the field of employment of Roma, social and health protection of Roma, housing and legalisation of Roma settlements as well as challenges and possible solutions to the issue of personal documents and the status of IDPs and returnees under the Readmission Agreement.

Ivanka Kostic, Praxis’ Executive Director, once again pointed at the problem faced by undocumented parents when registering the birth of their children, and advocated for the systemic solution of the problem through the amendments of relevant regulations/bylaws.

By achieving this goal, new cases of statelessness would be prevented. Children whose parents do not possess personal documents could be registered in the birth registry immediately after birth and exercise their other basic rights.

For more information, see the announcement.

In its work, Praxis continually encounters undocumented women who have given birth and who cannot register their children in birth registry books. In some cases, due to not possessing documents, mothers and their children not only lose the opportunity of receiving parental and child allowances and exercising their right to social assistance, but are also brought to the situation of being asked to pay for expenses, which does not happen to persons who possess personal documents. Moreover, sometimes they are asked to pay even for the expenses that they are not legally obliged to pay. It should be noted that in Serbia the problem of not possessing documents almost always affects members of the Roma national minority, who are among the poorest and most marginalised citizens.

Praxis was addressed by S.Z. seeking free legal aid. She did not have personal documents because the birth register book in which she had been registered remained unavailable to the authorities of the Republic of Serbia after the 1999 Kosovo conflict. She gave birth in late July, but - unlike mothers with an ID card - she was unable to determine her child's name in the maternity hospital, register the child’s permanent residence and register the child to health insurance. Moreover, she and her newborn were not allowed to leave the maternity hospital until she took the hospital bill in the amount of RSD 234,000. On that occasion, the mother and her cohabiting partner were told that they had to pay the bill within one month or to register to health insurance, otherwise they would be sued.

N.A. faced a similar problem. She does not have documents because her mother did not have an ID card at the time of child delivery, and therefore she was not able to register her child into birth registry books. Consequently, N.A., who gave birth about a month ago, could not register her newborn child into birth registry books either. In her case, the maternity hospital did not ask for the payment of child delivery costs, but the child had to be hospitalised soon after birth where it was treated for seven days. Upon completion of treatment, the mother was asked to pay RSD 44,000.  In both cases, Praxis has pointed out to health care institutions that these cases should be treated as urgent and that patients should not be asked to pay the costs, but it remains to be seen whether the hospital will give up the intention to collect the payment.

Such situations would be avoided by registering every child into birth registry books immediately after birth, because it would allow the child to obtain a health card immediately as well as to access other rights. This would also ensure adherence to the principle according to which the best interest of the child must always be in the first place, as well as compliance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and ratified international conventions guaranteeing to every child the right to birth registration and to a personal name immediately after birth.

Therefore, it is necessary to change, without delay, the provisions of the Instruction on administering civil registry books and forms of registry books and the Rulebook on the procedure for the issuance of birth notification and form of the issuance of birth notification in a health care institution, which prevent the birth registration of children whose mothers do not possess personal documents. This would prevent the generation of new legally invisible persons, and give an opportunity to a considerable number of children, who would otherwise be without documents, to get the necessary protection in the most vulnerable period of their lives. Therefore, in mid-July Praxis sent an appeal to the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-government, which is responsible for these regulations, to urgently amend the controversial provisions.

For more information, see the announcement.

Civil society organisations are concerned about the provisions contained in the Draft Law on Free Legal Aid, which directly affect the right to effective and equitable access to justice for all persons in need of this type of assistance. 

The Draft Law brings confusion to the existing legal provisions by introducing a very vague provision according to which attorneys-at-law shall provide free legal aid on behalf of the CSOs legally entitled to provide free legal aid. We recall that the Law on Civil Procedure stipulates that the legal representative of a party may be an attorney-at-law, relative or spouse, representative of free legal aid service, lawyer that passed the bar exam representing the legal entity in which he or she is employed, and a representative of a trade union. Moreover, the smallest part of free legal aid services are in-court representations or representations before state authorities, while most of them consist of free legal advice and filing submissions. 

The Draft Law directly discriminates against lawyers as service providers on the basis of the place of their employment or engagement. It is unclear why a lawyer employed in local self-government is allowed not only to provide free legal aid, but also to issue decisions granting the right to free legal aid, while a lawyer employed with social welfare centre, court, prosecutor’s office or CSO is not allowed to do so? 

This affects primarily the citizens in need of legal assistance because the Draft Law directly links the means test with the right to free legal aid equalising it with the means test for social assistance and the right to child allowance. This means that all individuals who do not fall into this category, or some of the categories specified in the law, shall be denied this type of assistance. 

It is unacceptable that a law whose purpose is to facilitate effective and equitable access to justice for the most vulnerable groups of citizens, in this case the Law on Free Legal Aid, limits this right by derogating the existing legal provisions and recognising the right to free legal aid to a small group of persons, while not allowing the provision of assistance by any CSO lawyers who have been performing this work for years.  

Civil society organisations involved in the protection of human rights do not request state funding for free legal aid activities, but they ask for allowing civil society organisations to continue providing free legal aid to a large group of citizens who need this kind of assistance in order to protect and exercise the rights guaranteed not only by the Constitution but also by numerous international documents, and above all the right to access justice. 

For more information, see the announcement.