Country Assessment Report – Human Security SERBIA

1. Research content

1.1.Principles security narratives

What are the principal security narratives in your country? For example what are put forward as the chief threats, and who are described as enemies or 'Others'?

The perceived chief security threats vary greatly between different groups and public realms. In order to best delineate these narratives, the main narratives are divided according to the political and civil society realm.

Political arena (policy documents and discourses of the political elites)1:

 Serbia’s state sovereignty threatened by minorities - especially in relation to Kosovo, where Kosovo Albanians and national and international institutions (e.g. Kosovo Government, Kosovo Police Service, and EULEX) are seen as the main enemies.2  Crime as a continuous threat to stability and security – the main threats are international and national organized crime (e.g. human trafficking, drugs, illicit economies) and corruption (state officials and institutions, private sector).  Insufficient economic development and low living standards threaten the well-being of people across Serbia – several threats are seen in relation to this issue: internationally, the economic crisis is seen as the main threat and the EU as the main factor influencing its outcome; nationally, unutilized industrial and agricultural potential, badly structured state fiscal policies, technological backwardness, and consequences of the 1990s wars are seen as perpetuators of economic problems and the state system as a whole is usually blamed for the country’s economic status and poorly implemented reforms.  Rising intolerance and upsurge of conflict seen as everyday possible threats - hooligans and right-wing extremist groups are seen as the main instigators of ethnic, sexual, political hatred and violence, and consequently as the main threats towards tolerance of differences in the country.

Civil society sector (women, minorities, internally displaced persons, persons with disabilities, people in rural areas etc.)3:

 Inability to assure the human rights of the most vulnerable populations in Serbia– human rights are in these narratives representing overarching disadvantages of minorities and vulnerable groups whereby the Serbian state is characterized as the ‘enemy’ who is not providing them with their internationally legitimized rights and freedoms.

1 Based on: Strategy for Defence, Strategy for National Security, Strategy for Sustainable Development, and numerous media reports (Danas, Blic, Politika, Vreme, Nin etc.). 2 To a lesser degree, sovereignty in south Serbia is seen as threat due to a large population of Kosovo Albanians in the area and in Vojvodina increased autonomy is seen as a possible threat to separation. 3 Based on: numerous researches of vulnerable groups, policy briefs and statements of CSOs, and advocacy initiatives.

Savska 5, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia TEL: (+381) 11 412 12 57; FAX: (+381) 11 762 17 85

 Violence against women, children and minorities (based on ethnic, political or sexual orientation) – widespread systematic violence as a consequence of broader social values (patriarchal culture, nationalism, and numerous prejudices), lack of proficient institutional support and political will to tackle these problems e.g. police and justice responses against perpetrators of violence (hooligans, right-wing groups, criminal organizations, male perpetrators) and lack of support systems (shelters for victims of violence and socio-psychological guidance).  Exclusion from the labour market and economic development – due to discrimination (and racism), exclusion from other public realms such as political, educational, and cultural life, and generational exclusion from economic activity, vulnerable groups have limited job opportunities and possibilities for developing their economic resources/potential. The main actors threatening their ability to provide for basic needs are the state (lack of sanctions against discrimination, lack of affirmative action and investment) and a prejudicial public.  Justice and institutional security – lack transparency and accountability of institutions, especially in regard to corruption, are considered a continual threat limiting access to all forms of rights. Furthermore, limited sustainability of institutions creates long term insecurities.

1.2.Policies, institutions, instruments and resources

What are the main policies, institutions, instruments and resources attached to these narratives?

State sovereignty Crime and violence, Economic Justice and human rights development institutional security Policies Strategy for National Strategy for the Fight against National Employment National Judicial reform Security, Strategy of Organized Crime, Strategy for Strategy, Strategy for Strategy, Defence, UN Charter, the fight against Sustainable Public Adm. reform Constitution of RS Discrimination, Criminal Development, Poverty Strategy Code, Strategy for fight Reduction Strategy against VAW, National Anti- corruption Strategy, National Strategy on Resolving the Issue of Refugees and IDP, Strategy on Improvement of the Status of Roma Institution Government of RS, Office Ministry of Interior, Ministry Ministry of Labour, Ministry of justice and s for Kosovo and Metohija, of Justice and Public Employment and Social public administration, Coordination Body for the Administration, Policy, Ministry of Administration for Joint Municipalities of Presevo, General Police Directorate, Finance and Economy Services of the Republic Bujanovac and Medvedja, Juridical system, Ministry of Regional Bodies AP Vojvodina, National Anticorruption Agency Development and Local The Constitutional Court Security Council of Self-Governance, Supreme Court Serbia, Ministry of Social inclusion and The Republic Public Defence, Serbian Armed poverty reduction unit, Prosecutor Forces National Judicial system Unemployment, Service, Centre for Social Work, IMF

Savska 5, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia TEL: (+381) 11 412 12 57; FAX: (+381) 11 762 17 85

Instrumen Political negotiations, Law enforcement actions, Banks and other Reform of the judicial and ts armed and police forces Prosecution of criminals, financial institutions, institutional system (e.g. deployed imprisonment, sanctions, investment, incentives, choice of judges, socio-psychological support to social entrepreneurship employment procedures), victims sanctions in cases of institutional misconduct, sustainability of strategies, actions and institutions

1.3.Security providers

Who/what are seen as the main security providers?

Officially, the main security providers in Serbia are considered individual state institutions (Police, Military, Centre for Social Work, Health Care Centres, Food inspections etc.), appointed autonomous state bodies (Commissioner for protection of equality, Ombudsman), non- governmental organizations (shelters for victims of violence, free legal aid, food kitchens), and adopted policies including strategies, legislations and conventions.

However, consultations illustrate that people often do not recognize these individual institutions and legislations as security providers. Although, people usually look at ‘the state’ as the main actor responsible for ensuring security, the state is often considered as the main threat to security because they are not fulfilling their role. For instance, most people recognize the police and military as security providers, but they do not depend on them.4 The EU on the other hand, is seen as a possible security provider in the future. In the end, people often feel that they have to ensure their own security (either by direct protection against threat or by changing the system).

1.4.Main security issues – people centred

What issues do you think are significant which could be described as 'human security' issues as defined in our discussions in Istanbul (ie that relate to the security of everyday life, that are people centred, that are about dignity and empowerment; also issues that have a regional aspect)

Based on consultations and desk review of researches of the main problems people in Serbia are facing, the following issues have been selected:

 Insecurity in institutional and legislative accountability – people feel that the rule of law is not implemented equally nor sufficiently: lack of government accountability, corruption at all levels and sectors (especially employment), inefficiency of judicial system, selective justice (according to political affinities, self-interests). As a result, people do not trust that their citizen rights are respected or that they have equal opportunity to execute these rights.  People do not feel represented or protected by the political elite, rather, they feel alienated – political power is often seen as separate from citizens, as dishonest, centred

4 Hadzic, M. eds. (2011), Javnost Srbije o bezbednost [The Serbian Public on Safety], Bezbednost zapadnog Balkana 6(20).

Savska 5, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia TEL: (+381) 11 412 12 57; FAX: (+381) 11 762 17 85

around party or party leaders interests which do not account for the public good, and in the case of local communities, people (both in local government and in general) feel powerless against the centralized state.  Economic and material insecurity – unemployment and low living standard are creating everyday insecure environment for people, especially vulnerable group, in Serbia. This insecurity includes inability to plan or feel secure in the existence of a future, to provide for the basic human needs. Furthermore, economic insecurity is to a large part considered the cause of other security issues, including youth migration, lack of parental supervision, inability to participate in politically and socially life, increased crime rates, grey economy, social tensions and conflicts etc.  Threat of violence (physical, psychological, economic and sexual) – women, children, minorities, street involved children/youth, are among the most exposed to and in fear of violence.  Lack of information as threat to security – some people recognize that lack of an informed public can be a threat to security, especially in regard to recognizing imminent threats (e.g. food security) and awareness of citizen rights (e.g. lack of knowledge of institutional procedures). Additionally, the media has been characterized as a powerful actor influencing security relations especially in regard to manipulation of citizens (e.g. spreading of fear).

1.5.Dominant security narratives vs. everyday security issues

Comment on the relative importance (politically, in the media etc) of 4) compared to 1)

Everyday security issues are generally recognized by the security narratives of the civil society sector. However, the dominant power in defining security priorities are decision makers, which to a lesser degree put weight on institutional insecurities (especially political biases, corruption or selective justice). Lack of institutional and political security does now only create an insecure present but also lack of belief in a secure future and cooperation with others towards a security goal.

1.6.Specific topics

Nominate any specific topics or themes either relating to traditional or human security which you would like the project to focus on, whether at country or regional level.

 Social inclusion as a way towards economic security (e.g. social entrepreneurship)  Institutional security: both in terms of sustainability and (equal) rule of law – accountability and responsibility of institutions  Anti-discrimination and human rights  Crime and corruption eradication

Savska 5, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia TEL: (+381) 11 412 12 57; FAX: (+381) 11 762 17 85

2. Research capacity

2.1.Research capacities of SeConS

Comment briefly on the strengths and weaknesses in your own organisation (and possibly barriers within your country) for undertaking: desk research, collection of both quantitative data, and qualitative data for human security as described in Istanbul. data analysis.

SeConS research capacities are very strong both in terms of qualitative as well as quantitative research. Still, it is important to point out that SeConS is experienced in social and political science research and less qualified in areas such as environment, health, and food security. In these cases, SeConS would engage external consultants. Although it is dependent on the human security priorities selected, access to data in regard to the judicial system would be the hardest in Serbia.

2.2.Key stakeholders

Identify key stakeholders who should be included in this and a second round of consultation/outreach.

Ordinary people and vulnerable groups: minority groups (Roma, Albania, Bosnian Muslims, Hungarian – also local communities with high ethnic tensions), internally displaced persons (IDPs), socially excluded population (people from rural areas, people living in poverty, minorities, elderly etc.), victims of violence/trafficking (children and women), LGBT population etc.

Civil society actors: CSOs representing the above listed vulnerable groups e.g. Youth Integration Centre, Queeria Centre, Autonomous Women’s Centre, Women’s Centre Uzice, Atina, Astra, Group 484, Veza, Jazas, Amity, Crta, Community Recourse Center – Bujanovac, New Vision, Women in Black etc.

Research community: political and social science Faculty of the University of Belgrade, Institute for Social Science Research, Centre for Human Security Research, Belgrade Centre for Security Policy, research networks.

Policy makers and public authorities: ministries (Ministry of Defence, Ministry of Regional Development and Local Self-Government, Ministry of Justice and Public Administration etc.), agencies (Agency for fight against corruption, for environmental protection, for regional development, Coordination Body for the Municipalities of Presevo, Bujanovac and Medvedja) councils (Roma Council Serbia, Socio Economic Council Serbia, Anti-corruption Council etc.), public institutions (Centre for Social Work, Health Centre, National Employment Service), and representatives from local self-governments.

Savska 5, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia TEL: (+381) 11 412 12 57; FAX: (+381) 11 762 17 85