DOCSLIB.ORG

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

UNITED NATIONS CCPR International covenant Distr. on civil and GENERAL political rights CCPR/C/HRV/99/1 7 March 2000 Original: ENGLISH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE COVENANT Addendum CROATIA* [19 November 1999] * This report is issued without editing, in compliance with the wish expressed by the Human Rights Committee at its sixty-sixth session in July 1999. GE.00-40975 (E) CCPR/C/HRV/99/1 page 2 INITIAL REPORT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS I. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. In accordance with Article 40, Paragraph 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of December 16, 1966, the Republic of Croatia is submitting its Initial Report on the implementation of the said Covenant. 2. The Initial Report contains the overview of the measures that have been adopted, which give effect to the rights recognized by the Covenant. For a more detailed report on the political structure and basic legal system of the Republic of Croatia we are referring to the Basic Document of the Republic of Croatia (HRI/CORE/I/Add.32). II. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COVENANT BY ARTICLES ARTICLE 1 3. Upon the holding of the first multi-party elections in the Republic of Croatia of April 22, 1990, the Republic of Croatia started the process of transformation of its political system towards the realization of a system of parliamentary democracy and market economy. At the same time, together with some other republics within the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Republic of Croatia requested from the federal bodies the establishment of more equal relations within the federation at the time. 4. After the unsuccessful termination of negotiations between the presidents of the former Yugoslav republics on future organization of the federation or a confederation at the meeting in Ohrid held on April 19, 1991, it was decided that a referendum on remaining within the federation was to be held in each of the republics. The referendum in the Republic of Croatia was held in May 1991, and 94% of voters opted for independence and sovereignty of the Republic of Croatia. Accordingly, the Croatian National Parliament, exercising the right to self determination contained in the 1974 Constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, enacted the Constitutional Decision on the Sovereignty and Independence of the Republic of Croatia (“Narodne novine”, hereinafter: “NN”) /Official Gazette/ 31/91) on June 25, 1991 by which the Republic of Croatia severed all legal ties with the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. 5. Due to the aggression against the Republic of Croatia and spreading of the armed conflict on the territory of former Yugoslavia, the European Community organized negotiations aimed at the preservation of peace in this part of Europe. At the meeting held on August 27, 1991 in CCPR/C/HRV/99/1 page 3 Brussels, a moratorium regarding the Decision on Independence was agreed for the period of three months, as well as the organization of International Conference on Former Yugoslavia sponsored by the United Nations and European Community. 6. The mentioned negotiations were unsuccessful, and accordingly, upon the lapse of three months, the Constitutional Decision on Independence and Sovereignty of the Republic of Croatia took effect on October 8, 1991, and from that date the Republic of Croatia exists as an independent state. 7. The Constitution of the Republic of Croatia guarantees the realization of the right to self- determination in the economic sphere and prescribes that Croatian National Parliament and the people decide directly and independently • on the regulation of economic, legal and political relations in the Republic of Croatia, and • on the preservation of natural and cultural wealth and its utilization (Article 2, Paragraph 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia). 8. This constitutionally guaranteed right is regulated in more detail in the Law on Concessions (NN 89/92) and in the Law on Mining Industry (NN 35/95). The Law on Concessions regulates the institute of concession for the research and exploitation of mineral raw materials. It sets, at the same time, a time limit for granting of such concession and limits it by the principle of mutual benefit, and by the provision of appropriate assurances for the realization of economic purpose of concession in accordance with the interests of the Republic of Croatia (Article 1, Paragraph 1 of the Law). The House of Representatives of the Croatian National Parliament establishes the said public interest for granting of concession for economic exploitation of natural wealth. The mentioned legislation of the Republic of Croatia ensures the exercise of the right of people to free disposal of natural wealth, as well as prohibition of the deprivation of people of their own means for life, in accordance with the UN General Assembly Resolution of 1962 ”Lasting Sovereignty Over Natural Resources”. 9. In the period from 1991 to 1995, free use of natural resources of the Republic of Croatia was made impossible on temporarily occupied territories, because of the aggression against the Republic of Croatia and the occupation of almost one fourth of its territory. Out of the total of 2,075 MW installed in hydropower plants, the Croatian electric-power industry was unable to use 561.5 MW, which were occupied and seriously damaged. Equally, in the period from 1992 to 1996, the Republic of Croatia was unable to use approximately 600,000 tons of raw oil from the oil-fields Đeletovci, Privlaka and Ilača on the territory of Croatian Danubian Region. 10. Croatian legislation provides for the realization of the internal dimension of the right to self-determination by setting an obligation to hold elections (Article 1, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia) as well as through the exercise of active and passive electoral right of an individual (Article 45 of the Constitution). The Constitution guarantees to the members of minorities freedom to express their nationality, freedom to use their language and script and cultural autonomy (Article 15 of the Constitution), while the Constitutional Law on Human Right and Rights of Ethnic and National Communities or Minorities guarantees a larger number of specific minority rights including the right to education in minority languages, CCPR/C/HRV/99/1 page 4 to public and private use of minority languages and scripts, access to the media, participation of members of minorities in public life, special representation of members of minorities in Croatian National Parliament, etc. (Articles 1-21 of the Constitutional Law). ARTICLE 2 11. The prohibition of discrimination on any grounds is regulated in the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia, namely in Articles 14, 15 and 26, as well as in Article 2 of the Constitutional Law on Human Rights and on the Rights of Ethnic and National Communities or Minorities. 12. Article 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia reads as follows: “Every person and citizen of the Republic of Croatia shall enjoy all rights and freedoms, regardless of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, education, social status or other properties.” 13. Article 14, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia reads as follows: “All shall be equal before the law”. 14. Article 15 of the Constitution emphasizes equality of members of all national minorities, and reads as follows: “Members of all national minorities shall have equal rights in the Republic of Croatia. Members of all national minorities shall be guaranteed freedom to express their nationality, freedom to use their language and script, and cultural autonomy.” 15. Article 6 of the Constitutional Law additionally prescribes full respect of the principle of non-discrimination regarding members of all national minorities. 16. A more detailed report on minorities in the Republic of Croatia follows Article 27 of the Covenant. 17. Article 26 of the Constitution: “All citizens and aliens shall be equal before courts and other state bodies and other bodies vested with public powers”. 18. One of the basic Constitutional principles is expressed in Article 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia: freedom, equal rights, national equality, love of peace, social justice, respect for human rights, inviolability of ownership, conservation of nature and the human environment, the rule of law and a democratic multiparty system are the highest values of the constitutional order of the Republic of Croatia. CCPR/C/HRV/99/1 page 5 19. For several years the Government of Republic of Croatia has been implementing series of measures and actions in the promotion and protection of human rights. 20. On the occasion of the celebration of 50th Anniversary of the adoption of General Declaration on Human Rights, round tables dedicated to the theme of the General Declaration on Human Rights were held at the Law School of the University of Zagreb, in the Institute of Social Sciences, as well as in the Old Townhall in November and December 1998. 21. On this occasion a poster with the text of the Declaration on Human Rights was made and sent to all schools in Republic of Croatia and to all county offices. 22. A conference on the significance of local and non-governmental organizations in the promotion of human rights was held in the European Home in Zagreb between May 11 and 12, 1998. It was organized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a non-governmental organization, the Center for Direct Protection of Human Rights. 23. The Government of Republic of Croatia established a Commission for the Issues of Equality that has issued a publication “ The Beijing Platform and National Policy – action for the Promotion of Equality”.
Recommended publications
  • Peace Youth Group Danube , Vukovar

    Peace Youth Group Danube , Vukovar

    3. Struggling for the Right to a Future: Peace Youth Group Danube , Vukovar The Post-war Landscape of Vukovar In 1991, Vukovar was under siege for full three months, completely destroyed and conquered by the Yugoslav Army and the Serbian paramilitary forces on November 18, 2001, which was accompanied by a massacre of civilian population, prisoners of war and even hospital patients. More than 22 000 non-Serb inhabitants were displaced and around 8000 ended up in prisons and concentration camps throughout Serbia. The town remained under the rule of local Serb self- proclaimed authorities until the signing of the Erdut Agreement in November 1995, followed by the establishment of UN Transitional Administration in the region of Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES) and the region’s full reintegration into the Republic of Croatia on January 15, 1998. During the two years of UNTAES, deemed one of the most successful UN missions ever of its kind, demilitarization, local elections (1997) and peaceful reintegration into the Republic of Croatia were achieved without major incidents, resulting in a considerably higher percentage of remaining Serbs, in comparison to other parts of Croatia that were reintegrated by means of military operations. At the same time, the processes of confidence building, resolution of property issues and investments into social and economic revitalization have been much slower than needed, considering the severity of devastation and trauma inflicted by the war. Despite the fact that the town of Vukovar represents the most prominent symbol of war suffering and destruction in Croatia the quality of life of its post-war inhabitants, a half of whom are returnees, has remained the worst in Croatia, with unemployment rate of 37%, incomplete reconstruction of infrastructure, only recently started investments into economic recovery, lack of social life and education opportunities and severe division along ethnic lines marking every sphere of political and daily life in Vukovar.
  • Jewish Citizens of Socialist Yugoslavia: Politics of Jewish Identity in a Socialist State, 1944-1974

    Jewish Citizens of Socialist Yugoslavia: Politics of Jewish Identity in a Socialist State, 1944-1974

    JEWISH CITIZENS OF SOCIALIST YUGOSLAVIA: POLITICS OF JEWISH IDENTITY IN A SOCIALIST STATE, 1944-1974 by Emil Kerenji A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) in The University of Michigan 2008 Doctoral Committee: Professor Todd M. Endelman, Co-Chair Professor John V. Fine, Jr., Co-Chair Professor Zvi Y. Gitelman Professor Geoffrey H. Eley Associate Professor Brian A. Porter-Szűcs © Emil Kerenji 2008 Acknowledgments I would like to thank all those who supported me in a number of different and creative ways in the long and uncertain process of researching and writing a doctoral dissertation. First of all, I would like to thank John Fine and Todd Endelman, because of whom I came to Michigan in the first place. I thank them for their guidance and friendship. Geoff Eley, Zvi Gitelman, and Brian Porter have challenged me, each in their own ways, to push my thinking in different directions. My intellectual and academic development is equally indebted to my fellow Ph.D. students and friends I made during my life in Ann Arbor. Edin Hajdarpašić, Bhavani Raman, Olivera Jokić, Chandra Bhimull, Tijana Krstić, Natalie Rothman, Lenny Ureña, Marie Cruz, Juan Hernandez, Nita Luci, Ema Grama, Lisa Nichols, Ania Cichopek, Mary O’Reilly, Yasmeen Hanoosh, Frank Cody, Ed Murphy, Anna Mirkova are among them, not in any particular order. Doing research in the Balkans is sometimes a challenge, and many people helped me navigate the process creatively. At the Jewish Historical Museum in Belgrade, I would like to thank Milica Mihailović, Vojislava Radovanović, and Branka Džidić.
  • The War in Croatia, 1991-1995

    The War in Croatia, 1991-1995

    7 Mile Bjelajac, team leader Ozren Žunec, team leader Mieczyslaw Boduszynski Igor Graovac Srdja Pavlović Raphael Draschtak Sally Kent Jason Vuić Rüdiger Malli This chapter stems in large part from the close collaboration and co-au- thorship of team co-leaders Mile Bjelajac and Ozren Žunec. They were supported by grants from the National Endowment for Democracy to de- fray the costs of research, writing, translation, and travel between Zagreb and Belgrade. The chapter also benefited from extensive comment and criticism from team members and project-wide reviews conducted in Feb- ruary-March 2004, November-December 2005, and October-November 2006. Several passages of prose were reconstructed in summer 2010 to address published criticism. THE WAR IN CROATIA, 1991-1995 ◆ Mile Bjelajac and Ozren Žunec ◆ Introductory Remarks Methodology and Sources Military organizations produce large quantities of documents covering all aspects of their activities, from strategic plans and decisions to reports on spending for small arms. When archives are open and documents accessible, it is relatively easy for military historians to reconstruct events in which the military partici- pated. When it comes to the military actions of the units in the field, abundant documentation provides for very detailed accounts that sometimes even tend to be overly microscopic. But there are also military organizations, wars, and indi- vidual episodes that are more difficult to reconstruct. Sometimes reliable data are lacking or are inaccessible, or there may be a controversy regarding the mean- ing of events that no document can solve. Complicated political factors and the simple but basic shortcomings of human nature also provide challenges for any careful reconstruction.
  • Roma Rights Journal Examines the Impact of Conflict on Romani Populations in Modern Europe

    Roma Rights Journal Examines the Impact of Conflict on Romani Populations in Modern Europe

    This issue of Roma Rights Journal examines the impact of conflict on Romani populations in modern Europe. As marginalised populations subjected to both random and very specific cruelties, Roma were viewed by warring parties with a mixture of ambivalence and contempt, and deemed to be communities of little consequence. As a consequence, ROMA RIGHTS Roma were also excluded from the peace-building processes that followed the conclusion of hostilities. JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN ROMA RIGHTS CENTRE In addition to situations where Roma were the direct targets of murderous aggression, or written off as collateral damage “caught between two fires”, articles in this issue also examine incidents where Roma actively took a side, and refute notions of Roma and Travellers as being “a people without politics.” The contributions in this issue address long-standing lacunae, for as long as Europe’s largest ethnic minority is rendered invisible and written out of the histories of Europe’s wars and conflicts; and excluded from the politics of reconstruction and peace-making, the continent’s self-understanding will remain fatally flawed. ROMA AND CONFLICT: UNDERSTANDING THE IMPACT OF The European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) is a Roma-led international public interest law organisation working to com- WAR AND POLITICAL VIOLENCE bat anti-Romani racism and human rights abuse of Roma through strategic litigation, research and policy development, advocacy and human rights education. 1, 2017 CHALLENGING DISCRIMINATION PROMOTING EQUALITY CHALLENGING DISCRIMINATION PROMOTING EQUALITY Editorial team: KIERAN O’REILLY, BERNARD RORKE AND MAREK SZILVASI Language Editing: KIERAN O’REILLY Layout: DZAVIT BERISHA © April 2017 European Roma Rights Centre ISSN 1417-1503.
  • Civil and Political Rights in Croatia

    Civil and Political Rights in Croatia

    Croatia Page 1 of 78 Recent Reports Support HRW About HRW Site Map CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS IN CROATIA Human Rights Watch/Helsinki Human Rights Watch Copyright © October 1995 by Human Rights Watch. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 95-75413 ISBN 1-56432-148-7 Human Rights Watch/Helsinki Human Rights Watch/Helsinki was established in 1978 to monitor and promote domestic and international compliance with the human rights provisions of the 1975 Helsinki Accords. It is affiliated with the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights, which is based in Vienna, Austria. Holly Cartner is the executive director; Erika Dailey, Rachel Denber, Ivana Nizich and Christopher Panico are research associates; Ivan Lupis is the research assistant; Anne Kuper, Alexander Petrov and Lenee Simon are associates. Jonathan Fanton is the chair of the advisory committee and Alice Henkin is vice chair. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH Human Rights Watch conducts regular, systematic investigations of human rights abuses in some seventy countries around the world. It addresses the human rights practices of governments of all political stripes, of all geopolitical alignments, and of all ethnic and religious persuasions. In internal wars it documents violations by both governments and rebel groups. Human Rights Watch defends freedom of thought and expression, due process and equal protection of the law; it documents and denounces murders, disappearances, torture, arbitrary imprisonment, exile, censorship and other abuses of internationally recognized human rights. Human Rights Watch began in 1978 with the founding of its Helsinki division. Today, it includes five divisions covering Africa, the Americas, Asia, the Middle East, as well as the signatories of the Helsinki accords.
  • ACFC 2Nd State Report Croatia

    ACFC 2Nd State Report Croatia

    April 2004 ACFC/SR/II(2004)002 SECOND REPORT SUBMITTED BY CROATIA PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 25, PARAGRAPH 1 OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES (Received on 13 April 2004) ACFC/SR/II(2004)002 Table of contents: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 6 PART I.............................................................................................................................. 11 From the report of the Ministry of Justice ........................................................................ 11 From the report of the Office for National Minorities of the Government of the Republic of Croatia .......................................................................................................................... 20 From the report of the Commission on Relations with Religious Communities.............. 34 From the report of the Central State Administration Bureau............................................ 38 From the report of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs .......................................................... 38 From the report of the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports .................................. 38 Albanian national minority ............................................................................................... 43 PART II............................................................................................................................. 46 Answers to the Questionnaire of the Advisory
  • D E C I S I O N

    D E C I S I O N

    THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA No.: U-I-3786/2010 U-I-3553/2011 Zagreb, 29 June 2011 The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia, composed of Jasna Omejec, President of the Court, and Judges Mato Arlović, Marko Babić, Snježana Bagić, Slavica Banić, Mario Jelušić, Ivan Matija, Antun Palarić, Aldo Radolović, Duška Šarin and Miroslav Šeparović, deciding on proposals to institute proceedings to review the conformity of a law with the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia (Narodne novine nos. 56/90, 135/97, 113/00, 28/01, 76/10), at its session held on 29 June 2011 rendered the following D E C I S I O N I. Proceedings have been instituted to review the conformity with the Constitution of Article 4 of the Constitutional Act on Amendments to the Constitutional Act on the Rights of National Minorities (Narodne novine, no. 80/10), and - in paragraph 1 the new paragraphs 7 and 8 supplementing Article 33 of the Constitutional Act on the Rights of National Minorities (Narodne novine, nos. 155/02, 47/10 – decision and ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia no.: U-I-1029/2007 and others of 7 April 2010) are hereby repealed. II. This decision shall be published in Narodne novine. S t a t e m e n t o f r e a s o n s I. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT 1. The Serbian Democratic Forum, represented by Veljko Đakula, president of the Administrative Committee, and the Socialist Party of Croatia – SPC, represented by Milovan Bojčetić, president, submitted proposals for the Constitutional Court to institute proceedings to review the conformity with the Constitution of Article 4 para.
  • Serbia and the Serbian Rebellion in Croatia (1990-1991)

    Serbia and the Serbian Rebellion in Croatia (1990-1991)

    Serbia and the Serbian Rebellion in Croatia (1990-1991) By Harry Jack Hayball Thesis submitted to Goldsmiths College, University of London, for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 2015 Supervised by Professor Jan Plamper 2 Declaration All the work presented in this thesis is my own. Harry Jack Hayball Declaration 3 Abstract It is often suggested that the Serbian rebellion in Croatia in 1990-91 was orchestrated by Serbia, and, in particular, by its president Slobodan Milošević personally. Despite the popularity of this interpretation, however, the literature on the break-up of Yugoslavia is yet to offer a focused study of Serbia's role in the descent into conflict in Croatia. Many sources that have become available in recent years remain unused. Through a critical and cautious use of such sources, including extensive interviews with participants in the conflict and contemporary documentation, this thesis aims to fill this gap in the literature and to update our knowledge of this important aspect of the bloody disintegration of Yugoslavia. Honing in on Belgrade's relationships with Serb political and military/paramilitary leaders in Croatia, as well as Serbia's direct involvement in and attitude towards the road to war, it concludes that the existing focus on Milošević's Serbia has been misplaced. Serbia's stance towards Croatia was hardline, but Belgrade's influence over the Croatian Serbs was limited and its direct involvement in events minimal. Milošević did not have a grand plan to orchestrate violence in Croatia, and the leaders of the Serbian rebellion in Croatia were fundamentally independent and autonomous actors, who, far from being Milošević's puppets, were often in conflict with him.
  • Croatia Replies to Questionnaire on 3Rd PR

    Croatia Replies to Questionnaire on 3Rd PR

    Strasbourg, 21 May 2007 MIN-LANG/PR (2006) 4 Addendum 2 EUROPEAN CHARTER FOR REGIONAL OR MINORITY LANGUAGES Third Periodical Report presented to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in accordance with Article 15 of the Charter CROATIA Replies to Comments/questions submitted to the Government of Croatia regarding its Third Periodical Report Preliminary Section 1. Before the Republic of Croatia became independent, the Constitution of the former state guaranteed the status of a constitutive nation to Croats, Serbs, Slovenes, Montenegrins, Macedonians and Bosniaks (which were at that time called "Muslims"). The status of a national minority in the former state was enjoyed by: Italians, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Ruthenians, the Roma, Ukrainians, Albanians, Vlachs and Jews. After independence, the Republic of Croatia granted the status of a national minority to the existing national minorities and to all the constitutive nations from the territory of the former state. With the adoption of the Constitutional Act on the Rights of National Minorities, which recognised the status of a national minority to each ethnic group guided by the wish for the preservation of its special characteristics, the number of national minorities in Croatia increased, so there are 22 national minorities in Croatia today. On the basis of the Constitution of the former state and the Public Administration Act, which was then in force, in 1981 the Decree on the manner of, and the conditions for the use of languages and scripts of national minorities in proceedings before public administration bodies and organisations vested with public authority was passed ( Official Gazette , no.
  • Fifth Opinion on Croatia / 1

    Fifth Opinion on Croatia / 1

    FIFTH OPINION ON CROATIA / 1 FIFTH OPINION ON CROATIA Adopted on 1 February 2021 X FIFTH OPINION ON CROATIA / 2 ACFC/OP/V(2021)2 Published on 10 June 2021 Secretariat of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities Council of Europe F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex France www.coe.int/minorities FIFTH OPINION ON CROATIA / 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS___________________________________________________________ SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS____________ ______________________________________ 5 Personal scope of application _____________________________________________________________________ 5 Population census ______________________________________________________________________________ 5 Legal and institutional framework __________________________________________________________________ 5 Hate speech and hate crime ______________________________________________________________________ 5 Intercultural dialogue ____________________________________________________________________________ 5 Portrayal of minorities in the media and minorities’ media _______________________________________________ 5 Policies concerning national minorities and Roma _____________________________________________________ 5 Minorities’ education, language and culture __________________________________________________________ 5 Participation in public affairs and in socio-economic life _________________________________________________ 6 RECOMMENDATIONS__________________ ______________________________________ 7 Recommendations for immediate action _____________________________________________________________
  • Political Rights of the Serbs in the Region 2018 REPORT SUMMARY

    Political Rights of the Serbs in the Region 2018 REPORT SUMMARY

    Political rights of the Serbs in the region 2018 REPORT SUMMARY Belgrade, 2018. POLITICAL RIGHTS OF THE SERBS IN THE REGION 2018 REPORT SUMMARY Publisher NGO Progresive club Zahumska 23B/86, 11 000 Belgrade, Serbia www.napredniklub.org, [email protected] For publisher Čedomir Antić Editor Čedomir Antić Written by Čedomir Antić Milan Dinić Ivana Leščen Miloš Vulević Vladimir Stanisavljev Aleksa Negić Branislav Tođer Aleksandar Ćurić Branko Okiljević Igor Vuković Translated by Miljana Protić Editorial board Miljan Premović Print and graphic design Pavle Halupa Jovana Vuković Printed by Shprint ISSN 1821-200X Print in: 1000 copies Progressive club POLITICAL RIGHTS OF THE SERBS IN THE REGION 2018 REPORT SUMMARY (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republic of Croatia, Montenegro, Republic of Macedonia (FYRM), Albania, Republic Slovenia, Hungary, Romania, Kosovo and Metohija – Kosovo - UNMIK) Report for 2017/2018. No. 10 Belgrade, 2018. CONTENTS: Introduction . 7 Republic of Albania . 18 Bosnia and Hezegovina – The Republic of Srpska . 32 Republic of Croatia . .65 Hungary . .97 Kosovo and Metohija – Kosovo-UNMIK . 109 Republic of Macedonia (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) . 119 Montenegro . 153 Romania . 171 Republic of Slovenia . 181 Conclusion . 190 6 INTRODUCTION The Progressive Club, a Belgrade-based civil society organization, has been publishing reports on the political rights of the Serbian people in the region since 2009. This is its tenth annual report. Serbs are the largest nation based and concentrated in the territory of the Balkans, a large peninsula in Southeast Europe. The Balkans is the only European peninsula where geographic and historical reasons have always precluded the creation of a unified and functional modern state gov- erned by the domicile population.
  • Pragmatic Peace the UNTAES Peacekeeping Mission As Example for Peaceful Reintegration of Occupied Multiethnic Territories

    Pragmatic Peace the UNTAES Peacekeeping Mission As Example for Peaceful Reintegration of Occupied Multiethnic Territories

    ema Awarded Theses 2017/2018 Sandra Kasunić Pragmatic Peace The UNTAES Peacekeeping Mission as Example for Peaceful Reintegration of Occupied Multiethnic Territories ema, The European Master’s Programme in Human Rights and Democratisation SANDRA KASUNI PRAGMATIC PEACE:ć THE UNTAES PEACEKEEPING MISSION AS AN EXAMPLE FOR PEACEFUL REINTEGRATION OF OCCUPIED MULTIETHNIC TERRITORIES SANDRA KASUNI ć FOREWORD The European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation (EMA) is a one-year intensive programme launched in 1997 as a joint initiative of universities in all EU Member States with support from the European Commission. Based on an action- and policy-oriented approach to learning, it combines legal, political, historical, anthropological, and philosophical perspectives on the study of human rights and democracy with targeted skill-building activities. The aim from the outset was to prepare young professionals to respond to the requirements and challenges of work in international organisations, field operations, governmental and non-governmental bodies, and academia. As a measure of its success, EMA has served as a model of inspiration for the establishment of six other EU-sponsored regional master’s programmes in the area of human rights and democratisation in different parts of the world. These programmes cooperate closely in the framework of the Global Campus of Human Rights, which is based in Venice, Italy. 90 students are admitted to the EMA programme each year. During the first semester in Venice, students have the opportunity to meet and learn from leading academics, experts and representatives of international and non-governmental organisations. During the second semester, they relocate to one of the 41 participating universities to follow additional courses in an area of specialisation of their own choice and to conduct research under the supervision of the resident EMA Director or other academic staff.