REPORT ON THE STATUS OF HUMAN RIGHTS
IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

(Analysis for the period January – December 2006)

Introduction

In the year 2006, the major event in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) was the General Elections of 1 October. People's representatives at all levels of government, excluding the local government, were elected. The whole year was marked by the elections and the elections campaign, although the official campaign was only one month long. Political relations in the country became even more complicated, which has particularly affected the inter-ethnic relations. With the goal of winning support of voters, political leaders and election candidates largely resorted to nationalistic rhetoric and creation of fear among ethnic groups.  The politicians’ statements mostly reminded of the time preceding the war period in the nineties. The election results thus awarded more radical political options, and left aside moderate politicians open for dialogue and compromise.

The invitation of NATO for Bosnia and Herzegovina to join the Partnership for Peace can be assessed as positive, as this is considered to be an encouragement for reformist forces and forces of peace. Bosnia and Herzegovina has, over the past year, had talks on Stabilization and Association with the European Union, but due to delays in reforms, the European Union postponed signing of the Agreement until further notice. The major difficulty has been the impossibility of reaching of agreement on police reform, on which the European Union had insisted and which was opposed by one part of political structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Processes against war crimes perpetrators from the period of 1992 to 1995 continued in The Hague before the International War Crimes Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia, as well as before Bosnian local courts. Nevertheless, the main perpetrators of crimes from the period mentioned, Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, still remain at large, which has complicated the situation in the country and delayed the process of normalization of relations in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina.

By the end of this year the Human Rights Commission at the BiH Constitutional Court ended its mandate as a successor of the former Human Rights Chamber, a tribunal of its kind, whose decisions were final and binding and which would base its work on direct application of on the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms. The remaining 500 cases that the Commission did not review during its mandate will be transferred to the BiH Constitutional Court.

Despite the fact that it was envisaged that the reform of the BiH Ombudsmen institution be finalized by the end of the last year, the process has not been completed yet. Thus, the very functioning and existence of human rights institutions is brought into question.

In the course of the last year, the issue of changes of the BiH Constitution, better known as the Dayton Constitution, was put under extensive consideration, but amendments were not adopted. The said amendments would have marked the first step towards creation of pre-conditions for improvements in the area of human rights in this country.

Democratic Elections

On the 1 October 2006, the General Elections were held in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These elections were held for the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the House of Representatives of the Parliament of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH), president and vice presidents of Republika Srpska (RS), the National Assembly of Republika Srpska, and Cantonal Assemblies in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

On the Election Day, according to the official report of the Central Election Commission, the total of 1,420,281 citizens voted at the General Elections, which is 52.74 per cent of the total number of registered voters.

The one-month pre-election campaign was characterized by attempts of political subjects to discredit political rivals and other political options. Promotion of own programmes and candidates was absent, and hate speech, inflammatory remarks and offences against political opponents used.

Abuse of religious gatherings, as places for promotion of certain political options and candidates, was observed during the campaign, while a number of religious officials and clerics instructed followers on who to vote for. Abuse of children and violations of their human right not to be manipulated with for political purposes were noted too.

Concerning the media, it is generally assessed that they had mostly acted in a fair manner. However, some broadcasters failed to respect the impartiality principle and favoured certain parties and candidates. Particularly concerning was the conduct of debates on TV programmes. Absence of tolerance was obvious, and participants often started open disputes, which were not free of offences, while the public were sent messages about irreconcilable differences created during the period of war.

As far as printed media are concerned, as those that are subject to self-regulation, occurrences of failure to respect professional standards and objectivity were observed. A number of media were particularly biased and did not provide objective informing of public about all participants in the election race. From the aspect of human rights, some articles, which were promoting national intolerance and fiercely insulting some election candidates, caused concern.

From the point of view of the criteria established by the CSCE Copenhagen Document from 1990, Bosnia and Herzegovina is mostly compliant with the requirements set for democratic countries. A big problem is posed by some provisions of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina that limit the passive voting rights and disable compliance with criteria outlining the right of every citizen to be elected for political positions without discrimination. Bearing in ming the fact that Bosniaks, Croats, members of national minorities and «others» in Republika Srpka cannot be nominated for a Member of the Presidency, nor can Serbs, national minorities and «others» be nominated in the Federation, we note the lack of compliance with a very important democratic principle in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

It is a general assessment that the General Elections, held on 1 October 2006, were conducted in a far and democratic atmosphere. The problems exposed during the elections did not affect the election flow considerably, and it can be considered that the final results reflect the will of voters.

A matter of concern has been the fact that the election results are being implemented with delay. Three months after the elections, the parliaments at the level of BiH, FBiH and some cantons are not fully constituted, while the constitution of the government at all levels has also been delayed, which has seriously brought into question the democratic character of the electoral process.

Intolerance and Aggressive Nationalism

Over the whole year, we have noted occurrences that can be characterized as consequences of intolerance and aggressive nationalism, or, due to the political context, they can be described as such. We have, therefore, noted a considerable number of planting of explosive devices under vehicles or in front of religious objects, shooting at religious objects by firearms, as well as a missile launch at a mosque in Mostar. According to information presented by the Police authorities of Trebinje, up to 11 explosions were registered only in their area of responsibility until 10 May this year. Although the general security situation in the country can be assessed as better than several years ago, we noted the statement of Fuad Serdarevic, the chairman of the Association of Returnees to Trebinje, that the security situation in Trebinje, when Bosniaks are concerned, is much worse than in the previous year. He said that an unknown person was found to be shooting from firearms for a whole hour over Muslim tombstones on 18 July this year.

Many cases of attacks on religious objects of all three confessions were registered. Windows were broken, inventory destroyed, cemeteries and tombstone desecrated. Only the mosque in Balinovac, in Mostar, had suffered 15 attacks in the first 11 months of 2006. In the Tuzla Canton, there had been the total of 170 attacks on religious objects in the past five years.

In the municipalities of Kakanj and Ilijas, near Sarajevo, there had been several cases of destruction of tombstones at the Orthodox cemetery.

The building and offices of the Croatian Cultural and Education Association “Napredak”, which is based in the centre of Sarajevo, have been the subject of break-ins, while the walls were ruined by graffiti, some of which of provocative content. The appearance of graffiti has been spreading, while the graffiti calling for killing of members of certain confessions or nations are very concerning.

A specific problem is the fact that police rarely discover perpetrators of these actions and the latter frequently end up unpunished. Members of abused groups have interpreted this as a lack of will of the police to deal with those violating the law and disturbing inter-ethnic relations. It should also be noted that it very rarely happens that incidents of intolerance and aggressive nationalism are condemned by representatives of nations or religious groups that have not been direct victims of the attacks or provocations.

Return of refugees and displaced persons

Since as early as the end of 2005, property laws were enforced throughout the entire BiH in 98.5% cases, whereas the practice, exceptionally pronounced in the previous years of creating an appearance of successful implementation of Annex 7, died out in 2006.  Instead of data on a number of people who returned home over the past 12 months, today we hear assessments by the competent authorities that the implementation of Annex 7 of the Dayton Peace Agreement is completed in its primary part, i.e. that return has been provided to everyone. Some go a step further to claim that the implementation of the Annex 7 may be declared as a finished job, which is encouraged by the identical position of one part of the international community.

Minority returns were next to none in 2006. Even though nobody has taken up to analyse a number of returned, sold or exchanged property units, or to visit returnees’ settlements and towns, it can be determined that more than 50% of returned flats, houses or land plots changed owners by some sort of sale or exchange agreement, and another 30% are in the process of sale or being used over weekends only. Even some newly refurbished units from the return funds have become the object of sale.

Poor results of the implementation of Annex 7 in 2006 are further aggravated by an increasing number of returnees, who, due to their unsustainable return, wish to move further to places where they hope to be able to sustain themselves.

The Helsinki Committee assessments coincide with data collected by the Federation of Associations of Refugees and DPs of BiH. On the other hand, official sources  - the state and entity ministries for human rights and refugees, as well as the UNHCR, adhere to a rather strange methodology and maintain their claims that the number of returnees exceeded one million people.

In the course of the last war, around 2.2 million people were driven away from their homes. At the third congress of the World Federation of BiH Diaspora held in 2006, it was disclosed that one million and three hundred thousand Bosnian and Herzegovinians of different ethnicities live in 110 countries of the world. Most of them left the country during war or immediately after war efforts ceased. A number of internally displaced persons in BiH determined by the latest re-registration was rounded up to 180,000, while the number of those who lost that status because they could but did not return, is at least twice higher.

The Ministry for Human Rights ad Refugees estimates that another half a million people, who left BiH from 1992 to 1995 and who are registered as refugees from BiH, are currently staying outside BiH.

The first comprehensive and official registration of displaced persons in BiH was conducted at the end of 2000, when 183,355 displaced families were registered, i.e., 556,214 persons. According to the latest requests submitted for revision of the status, 180,000 displaced persons in BiH are still looking for a permanent solution. According to estimates of local authorities, 15,000 people are still living in collective centres. According to information of the Federation of Associations of Refugees and Displaced Persons, around 7,000 people still live under poor conditions in collective centres throughout BiH. Only in Mihatovici, near Tuzla, 825 people are accommodated in one centre, while 77 families are accommodated in Karakaj, near Zvornik. Those who had lost the refugee status is the latest repeated registration process claim that the collective centres accommodate a significantly larger number of people, who are not registered anywhere. They are perhaps only mentioned on some occasions as social cases.

According to data supplied by the Ministry for Refugees and Displaced Persons of the Republic Srpska, 26,990 displaced and 2,000 refugee families are registered in the territory of this entity. The same Ministry has information that over 6,300 persons in RS still use alternative accommodation. The Committee for Refugees and DPs of BiH claims that there are 150,000 displaced persons in the entire BiH.

Nobody is in the possession of comprehensive data on a number of people who returned to their pre-war homes in the course of 2006. Not even at the local level - this has been certified by mission members of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, when they paid a visit to BiH municipalities - from Ilidža to Hadžići, through Mostar, Drvar, Bosanski Petrovac and Bugojno, from Pale, Sokolac, Foča and Goražde, to Ilijaš and the District Brčko. Since the authorities have been reluctant even to start with preparation for census of population (last one was made back in 1991), everyone is engaged in making estimates with parameters to suit their needs and interests, thus opening a way for manipulation with funds designated for return and reconstruction. Free estimates say that around 2,500 persons returned in the course of the year.

As a consequence of population movement in BiH today, we have ethnically clean or almost clean areas; in the town core of Višegrad there is only one Bosniac living there, and in Foča

none. Vlasenica and Sokolac the same. Of 1,800 pupils in an elementary school at Pale, only one student is Bosniac, while in the village Bukovice near Doboj of once 1,250 inhabitants from Croatian ethnic group, only one returned.

Personal documents with registration of place of residence within the municipality of Ilidža since May 2006 were issued to more than 52,000 citizens. Thus, it is estimated that almost 70,000 people live in this area, of which Bosniacs constitute at least 85%. The last census of population of 1991 states that 67,937 people lived at Ilidža - 6,934 or 10.2% Croats, 29,337 Muslims or 43.2%, 25,029 or 36.8% Serbs, 5,181 or 7.6% Yugoslavians, and 456 or 2.1% from the category of Others. The official sources claim that between 4,000 and 5,000 Serbs returned to Ilidža. The NGO sector claims that this number corresponds with the number of those registered on this address, but that at least 2,000 of them only visit their property occasionally. It is specifically pointed out that in the years following re-integration of Ilidža, almost half of Serbs who had stayed there during war and immediately after re-integrating of the town, left their homes. 

The total of 136,746 citizens had lived in the municipality Novi Grad-Sarajevo before the war. According to the latest statistical data of the General Administration Service, approximately 115,000 people live in this area. Of this number, almost 95,000 are Bosniacs, whereas 19,000 are Bosniac refugees; there are less than 10,000 registered Serbs (38,000 before war), Croats less than 7,000 (9,000 before war) and less than 3,000 from the category of Others (around 20,000 before war).

According to the 1991 census, 24,200 people lived in the municipality Hadžići. Of this number, 15,392 or 63% were Muslims, 6,362 or 26.3% Serbs, 746 or 3.2% Croats, 841 or 3.5% Yugoslavians, and 859 or 3.5% of Others. Nowadays there are 23,000 people living there; almost 95% are Bosniacs. The local police administration confirms that 750 Serbs registered in the municipality only visit occasionally. 

Currently there are around 6,000 Croats in Bugojno, in comparison to 16,000 of the pre-war population of Croats. There are 700 citizens of Serb ethnicity, as compared to 9,000 registered at the last census.

The Association of citizens “Građanska incijativa” /Citizens’ Initiative/ of Serbs from Sarajevo states that of 157,000 pre-war citizens of Serb ethnicity, less than 30,000 are living in Sarajevo today. They point to an example of the municipality of Vogošća, where 8,000 Serbs lived before war, while there are only 500 today. These data are based on visits to all households.

The total of 126,628 people lived in the municipality Mostar in 1991. Of this number, 43,037 were Croats, 23,846 Serbs, 43,856 Bosniacs, 12,768 Yugoslavians and 3,121 Others. Findings of the Helsinki Committee indicate that at present approximately the same number of citizens live in this area as before war. However, the ethnic structure has been changed considerably: today there are 8,000 Croats, more than 40,000 Bosniacs, and five to six thousands Serbs.

The overall population in Bosanski Petrovac was halved with regard to pre-war population. Today there are around 4,500 Serbs living in this municipality, compared to 12,000 of pre-war population, and 2,200 domicile Bosniacs together with 350 Bosniac DPs.

The Association of Expelled, Refugees and Displaced Croats from Bosanska Posavina provided the information that 220,000 people were relocated from their homes, while around 13,000 persons returned to the area. They state the example of Derventa, where, according to the 1991 census, 48,481 Croats lived, while today there are only 1,200. They further claim that return of refugees was fully stalled in 2006. This is particularly true for the areas of former municipalities of Derventa, Bosanski Brod and the northern part of a Croat municipality Doboj, where the ratio of overall return is 2.52 %.

In terms of percentages, the best results of return are recorded in the municipality of Bratunac and the local community Kozarac in the municipality of Prijedor. For example, in 2006, 24 families returned to the municipality Bratunac, 320 houses were reconstructed - this represents only one fourth of established requirements for that year. More than 1,400 return requests have not been met. Most of these people are in the territory of the BiH Federation- Sarajevo, Tuzla and Zenica-Doboj Cantons. Otherwise, since the end of the war, close to 7,000 people returned to the territory of the municipality of Bratunac and more than 6,000 people to five local communities of Kozarac. More than 22,000 people from Kozarac are still living outside BiH.  Please note that the stated locations refer to the largest locations of return.

In accord with results of the Fact Finding Mission on the State of Human Rights, the Helsinki Committee asserts that the population of refugees, displaced and internally displaced persons, as well as of returnees, are still being marginalised and discriminated.

Irregular and disharmonious pension and health insurance, education system, health protection and especially the problem of employment, as well as all other problems led to unsuccessful implementation of Annex 7. The problem of ethnic privatization which was completed before returnees started to return is evident everywhere. The feeling of unequal treatment of applicants requesting building permits and resolution of infrastructural needs is noticeable with all minority returnees.  How badly the return is planned is best illustrated by an example from the local community Jeleč, municipality Foča, where a school was fully reconstructed, even though there is not a single child of school age in the area!

In places of return there are only 0.8 to 1.0 returnees who are employed. Despite the fact that the law on local self-government was adopted, it is not being observed and it is impossible to get a position in public institutions such as a municipality, post office, court, health institutions, communal and utility services, etc., because vacancies in such institutions are reserved for majority constitutive people in a given area.

We would like to quote few examples only: according to reports by the Centre for Humane Politics, more than 200 people are engaged in the municipal administration of Doboj. Of this number, there are only 11 Bosniacs and four Croats; of 90 employees in the municipal administration of Hadžići, only two are not Bosniacs, three in secondary school and one in elementary school in Hadžići. Of 25 councillors, only the Chair of the Council is non-Bosniac. In the municipal structure of Ilidža, of 300 employees there are only 12 Serbs and 13 Croats - all others are Bosniacs.

Amongst staff of the public companies Elekroprivreda and PTT in Bosanski Petrovac, there are no Serbs at all. All 33 members of steering board elected in 2006 are Bosniacs. The situation is similar in Bugojno: of 107 employees in the Municipality Administration there are only 21 Croats and 3 Serbs. Eight persons are employed in a local outpatient clinic, veterinarian station and social welfare centre, while employees of the Radio and TV Service in Bugojno are mono-ethnic. In the area of Sokolac, there is no a single Bosniac working in public institutions and companies; until recently only three Bosniacs were working in municipal services in Foča, while today there is only one; all this sends a bad signal to returnees and reflects prevailing political will. Only one person of Serb ethnicity is employed in the municipal service in Goražde, working as a lawyer.

The Helsinki Committee Legal Department noticed that not a single applicant-returnee did get his/her job back based on Article 143 of the FBiH Labour Law, and Article 152 of the RS Labour Law.

Neither the Law on Civil Service of the FBiH, which was supposed to regulate the issue of employment in the public sector, was in favour of numerically minor ethnic groups in “divided” municipalities. There are as many as 60 such municipalities. Article 2 of the law, pertaining to proportionate representation of constitutive people, Para 2 reads:” Pursuant to the constitutional principles, proportionate representation will be based on the 1991 census until Annex 7 has been fully implemented, except for employment in civil services of municipalities of which parts, according to the Dayton Agreement and High Representative’s decisions were assigned to another entity or municipality”. The said provision did not contribute to successful implementation of Annex 7 and actually impeded it. This is how the FBiH Constitutional Court reasoned and declared the said provision unconstitutional on 31 October. However, the said law has not been amended yet in accord with the said decision of the Constitutional Court, but it is expected that relevant amendments will be conducive to positive changes and open the way for employment of members of less numerous ethnic groups.

Ethnic balance of employees has been maintained to a certain extent at the police. Even in communities that do not have citizens of another ethnic group, or of adequate qualifications, policemen from less numerous ethnic groups come to work from neighbouring municipalities.

The situation in the area of education is of particular concern. Returnees are not able to attend classes in their mother tongue. In the Federation, a true apartheid is in place. Schools are divided along ethnic lines, children are being taught based on two separate curricula, Croat and Bosnian. In some schools even commuting to school is organized for students based on ethnic affiliation.

The process of return and building of confidence further aggravates the problem of missing persons. Even until today the destiny of twenty Croats who were taken from the stadium had not be resolved in Bugojno, as well as of another 16 persons reported missing; in the Municipality Hadžići there are another 120 Bosniacs reported missing and in Foča as many as 500.

The process of return of property in BiH is mainly completed. However, it does not mean that Annex 7 has been implemented fully. A large number of families whose houses were destroyed in the entire BiH territory failed to exercise their rights to reconstruction of these houses and thus, the right to return. A small number of housing units, which are not returned yet, are related to the most problematic cases and are currently undergoing court proceedings.

It should be noted that the percentage related to implementation of property laws does not relate to Serb refugees from Croatia who mainly live in the RS territory today. According to the Association of Serb Refugees from Croatia, there are 35,000 Serb refugees from Croatia living in the RS. Of this number, 3,500 Serbs did not resolve the issue of return of property. Except for those who managed to exchange housing units in 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993, others failed to resolve issues related to tenants’ rights. UNHCR’s records indicate that there were only 12,348 returns to Croatia from Bosnia and Herzegovina, both organized and spontaneous. In August 2006, the Croatian Government agreed to a proposed program of financing construction of 3,600 housing units, i.e. 120 housing blocks for returnees who used to live in state-owned flats. The program envisages that the state should buy on the property market another 400 flats for this category of population. According to data supplied by the Association, none of the beneficiaries have signed this contract yet.

Reconstruction is slow everywhere. The number of donors is constantly decreasing. Potential returnees are losing hope. Only the District of Brčko and the BiH Council of Ministers met their liability of payment of funds into the Joint Fund for reconstruction, while the entities failed to do so. Data suggests that only 58 per cent of housing units have been reconstructed so far.

Many returnees’ settlements are without water and electric power supply, access roads and sewage system, and lack all elements of infrastructure. Up to 3,700 households in BiH do not have electricity. A large number of returnees’ homes in the municipalities Višegrad, Doboj, Sapna, Jajce, Glamoč, Prijedor, Foča, Grahovo, Zvornik... are without electric power supply. Only in the municipality of Foca, 158 households in 17 settlements do not have electricity, while 40 per cent of households are without electricity in the municipality of Glamoc. This is a true reflection of how the authorities relate to the implementation of Annex 7 of the Dayton Peace Agreement.

Plans and actors dealing with return are in abundance. Both energy and money is being wasted. Speaking about planned returns, we have to add that in the local community Jeleč, municipality Foča, there are 42 families with 72 members who are living there today compared to the pre-war population of 1,380 people. In the neighbouring local community Kratina, there are another 30 families compared to 300 living there before 1992. More than 120 houses in Jeleč were reconstructed, electric power supply provided (in Kratina is still dark), a mosque reconstructed. There is a fully renewed school in the centre of the settlement. But there are no pupils. Their parents applied for return, compiled house lists and their houses were reconstructed accordingly. Yet, nobody thought that people need to live on something.

Status of foreigners, asylum-seekers and the issue of citizenship

The Law on Citizenship and the Law on Movement and Stay of Aliens and on Asylum are in force in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These laws have been in compliance with international standards of human rights. However, the November 2005 amendments to the Law on Citizenship abolished the right of appeal for persons deprived of citizenship, which is contrary to internationally recognized right to a fair and just procedure. These amendments have also led to establishment of a Commission for Revision of Decisions on Naturalization of Foreign Citizens, which was tasked with revision of all decisions on awarding of citizenship to foreigners made in the period from 6 April 1992 to the present day. This commission was formed in February 2006 and is made up of nine members, three being internationals.

According to information of the Commission chairman, the total of 487 cases were processed so far; the decision on dispossession of citizenship was made in 61 cases, while the decision on awarding of citizenship was confirmed in 169 cases.  Other cases are still being processed. According to estimates, the total of 16,000 decisions on awarding of citizenship had been made over the past 14 years, most of which referred to residents of former Yugoslavia. It was expected that the Revision Commission would process around 1,500 cases, primarily those of citizens of Afro-Asian background.

A number of decisions on dispossession of citizenship is not legally founded, while in many cases the decisions were made without hearing of relevant citizens, nor were they given an opportunity to present their arguments and evidence personally of through the power-of-attorney. Another big problem is deportation of a number of persons dispossessed of citizenship in this manner. In a number of cases, citizens were deported to countries where they could face death penalty or torture, or other inhumane and degrading treatment. Although Bosnia and Herzegovina has ratified the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms and it is obliged to respect the right of people not to be extradited to countries threatening death penalty or torture, extraditions to these countries continue.

In 2005 only, the total of 97 asylum requests for 145 persons were made to the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, since the country gained independence, not a single request for asylum was approved, which demonstrates the level of respect for international obligations and the generally recognized right to asylum by Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Women's Rights

Exercising and protection of human rights of women in Bosnia and Herzegovina has not yet reached a sufficient level, while violation of human rights of this vulnerable category of population is still considerable. Rising of the level of efficacy and functionality in the protection of human rights of women has imposed itself as one of priorities to the authorities and other political factors in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The state authorities of our country made some progress by enactment of the state Law on Gender Equality of 2003 and the Law on Family, while the Laws on the Protection against Domestic Violence were adopted in both entities and took effect in 2006. However, appropriate by-laws are still missing, while the implementation of the above laws is not satisfactory.

By the adoption of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, BiH committed itself before the UN Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to submitting reports on progress in the implementation of the said Convention. Thus, it prepared a combined initial, second and third information report based on guidelines recommended by a committee for preparation of reports. However, the Committee ascertained that reports were late and asked the BiH authorities in the future to observe reporting deadlines of the said UN institution.

The Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women forwarded its closing comments on the submitted report by Bosnia and Herzegovina (16 May 2006) in three chapters and 45 points. The Committee specifically underlined that the state must, without delay, meet commitments set forth under the said Convention: to include women in all economic and political processes at the state, entity, cantonal and municipal levels, and therefore make them equal to men. The Committee requested from Bosnia and Herzegovina to ensure de facto application of the law arising from the Convention, by all domestic courts and other mechanisms, to accelerate the process of law harmonisation for the purpose of meeting requirements contained in the Law on Gender Equality, as well as to ensure procedures for successful implementation and enforcement of the pertinent law.

The Committee also requested that education in human rights and gender training be included in the educational system, as well as efforts intensified in fight against trafficking in women and young girls; measures undertaken for greater representation of women in elected and appointed bodies. The Committee particularly expressed concern about the status of victims of sexual violence during the armed conflict in BiH, and requested that the state should recognise explicitly these women as civilian war victims who were exposed to sexual violence. The Committee expects concluding commentaries to be widely disseminated to acquaint people in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including all the levels of government, politicians, women associations and human rights organisations, with steps undertaken in establishing of true equality of women, as well as with measures to this effect to be undertaken in the future.

The very fact that the BiH delegation at this session was not represented at the highest level reflects the actual position of the government regarding the issue of gender equality in our state.

Despite all undertaken activities, women of Bosnia and Herzegovina are victims of increased discrimination in the economic sphere, family violence against women; a warning stereotype are sexisms in commercials, a percentage of women participating in the executive and legislative government is impermissible, as well as in all positions where important political decisions are being made.

According to data supplied by the Statistics Agency, women constitute 51.6% of overall population in BiH, but only 34.9% are employed. Some of conducted research studies indicate that women are paid less than men for the same jobs.  Employers often disregard norms of the Labour Law and the Collective Labour Agreement and prevent women from enjoying the benefit of maternity leave or leave of absence due to illness of their children, and sometimes fire women from work during pregnancy.

N.N. from Sarajevo in the 12th week of pregnancy was fired and doctors expressed concern about a possibility of abortion.

It is held that women in Bosnia and Herzegovina get employment much faster, particularly when young. But at the same time they are faced with fast illegal termination of working contracts. Thus, women begin to work in the area of “grey economy”, earning money to support their family and bring themselves into even less favourable position because they do not have regular health care, fixed working hours, pre-determined working rates, and are not organised in syndicates.

The situation of women-victims of violence is particularly concerning. In response to this phenomenon, the BiH authorities had an SOS line for violence victims set up and stepped up co-ordination with social welfare centres, Ministries of Interior, medical institutions and non-governmental organisations. However, expected results were missing. Everyday we hear news about domestic violence in black chronicles in the press. We come across titles like the following: ”Husband Reported for Violent Conduct”, “Husband Abused His Wife“, “Beaten up Woman End Up in Hospital”, “ Youngster Beats up His Girlfriend”, etc.

Women address the Helsinki Committee with requests for legal assistance. The case of P.Z. who experienced torture in her extra-marital relationship by her common law husband and his friends, who „beat me with various objects, their legs, fists, put cigarettes out against my body, tied my arms, eyes, mouth, and inflected on me severe physical injuries”; or a women whose husband placed her head on the table threatening to slit her throat.

In spite of five hearings held, the judgment has not yet been passed on in the mentioned case.

In 2006, there were as many as 75 official reports on violence at the Social Centre Goražde; of this number, in 54 cases women themselves reported violence. Only 9 cases were processed, and in 7 cases sentences and sanctions ensued. Or for example, in one of municipal court in Sarajevo, 212 measures against domestic violence were pronounced. As to the Canton Sarajevo, more than 2,000 cases of domestic violence were recorded in the same period.

Unfortunately, the above examples reflect the magnitude of the problem of violence against women in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and point to the fact that the key actors are not sufficiently efficient in pronouncement of sanctions against perpetrators. Proceedings are not conducted in accord with the effective Law against Domestic Violence and the Law on Gender Equality, but instead the Criminal Code is applied. This brings the victim of a crime into an unfavourable position, and consequently causes pronounced sentences to be mild, reducing preventative and repressive effects of sentences.

The same is true for women as victims of sexual violence. This type of violence is still a taboo topic in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Women avoid reporting perpetrators, because frequently a victim is perceived as the guilty party by the local community. This is frequently a result of up-bringing and customs in some communities. If this type of violence occurs in cases of common-law marriage, women seldom recognise it. Courts pronounce minimum sentences for this type of violence, despite the fact that it qualifies as a severe criminal offence. Thus, victims remain frustrated. If sex crime offenders come from the milieu of public figures and celebrities, women seldom decide to initiate court proceedings for the fear of repression.

Human trafficking involving women has caused great concern in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Contrary to previous years, when Bosnia and Herzegovina served as a transit country only, nowadays women and girls, citizens of BiH, have become the object of trafficking. Traffickers increasingly visit rural areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina for the purpose of “recruiting” women for “fictitious jobs”, who end up as victims of human trafficking. 

With regard to equal participation of women in political life in the country, results of the October 2006 elections can serve as a good example. Namely, the Election Law stipulates that every third candidate on all lists of political parties should be a woman. All political parties met this requirement. There were 37% of women on all candidate lists, but women rarely showed up at promotion rallies and interpreted programmes and activities presented to voters. As a result, women are represented by 17% in legislative bodies. Of 42 seats in the House of Representatives of the BiH Parliament, only six belong to women. It was noted that neither the press nor electronic media had dedicated much space and time to women candidates. According to some analyses, only 15% of the overall coverage was designated for women.

The newly elected government is obliged to change the current practice and establish adequate co-ordination for the purpose of consistent and responsible implementation of laws pertaining to protection and improvement of the status of women; to effectuate even closer co-operation based on partnership with non-governmental organisations for the purpose of achieving more efficient results in the protection of human rights of women and gender equality.

Rights of the Child

International standards on human rights and freedoms and the Convention on the Rights of the Child place upon the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina the commitment to draft and adopt appropriate instruments and provide mechanisms for their implementation aimed at promotion, observance and protection of the rights of the child.

However, the constitutional-legal order of the country is conceptualised in such a way that the protection of children and their rights do not fall under the powers of the state, but instead under the powers of the entities, cantons and the District of Brčko. The Council of Ministers, i.e., the Ministry for Human Rights and Refugees – the Sector for Human Rights, is engaged in activities on the adoption of an action plan for children in Bosnia and Herzegovina 2002-2010 and monitoring of its implementation. The BiH Council of Ministers set up the Council for Children of BiH in 2003. The Law on Elementary and Secondary education was enacted at the state level in 2003, while the Law on Pre-school Education has not yet been adopted.

In spite of importance of all those undertaken activities, children in Bosnia and Herzegovina are exposed to different kinds of discrimination and are unequal in exercising of their rights.

Children are constantly confronted with obstacles in attempts to exercise their rights to health and social protection. According to some estimates, 60% of population in BiH do not have regular health care. This implies that the same percentage of children is also deprived in this regard. This problem is particularly pronounced with children of pre-school age. Records indicate that a number of new-borns and deceased population is almost even in both entities- thus, we can say that the population of Bosnia and Herzegovina is stagnating. The state failed to adopt policies and strategies or programmes for demographic development of Bosnia and Herzegovina. 

Children of school age are entitled to free health insurance, but due to ignorance or lack of information, parents very rarely exercise this right. At the beginning of a school year all schools are obligated to submit lists with names of students to the competent ministry of education, which then follows the procedures to provide basic health care for students.

Speaking about rights in the area of social protection, competent institutions, government and its agencies do not have updated social records of the BiH population, while at the local level there are no records of socially vulnerable families. Therefore, children, particularly in smaller local communities, together with their parents, if they wish to exercise their rights related to this aspect of protection, have to register themselves with competent offices and undergo exceptionally complicated procedures. These procedures present a problem especially for disabled children because regulations stipulate fairly strictly that committees for categorisation have first to determine a degree of disability before deciding on the degree of benefit/allowance fees. It often happens that such committees convene only once or twice a year.

Over than 3,500 children in BiH are without parental care.  A large number of such children are institutionalised. These children are often stigmatised by their communities - at school, in the street.

Children placed in collective and refugee centres are stigmatised and frequently neglected by the authorities and the wider public.

Roma children, as the largest minority in BiH, are deprived of education because of parents' lack of education and poverty. According to OSCE research results, 64% of Roma children do not attend elementary school. A large number of children leave school when faced with stereotyping and prejudices. They find it difficult to adapt to students' groups who do not speak the Roma language. Ninety per cent of these children do not have regular health insurance, and as to social protection, housing conditions - there is no systematic and organised care by governmental institutions. The state adopted the Law on Protection of National Minorities and established the Roma Council at the BiH Council of Ministers, but yet significant steps towards better protection and enjoyment of rights of these children have not been observed in practice.

With regard to school-age children from other minority groups, the state failed to formulate an educational plan and programme which would recognise the right to use of one's mother tongue, study of one's own history and nurturing of one's culture.

Violence against children is a problem that the society of Bosnia and Herzegovina is seriously confronted with. Children suffer violence in family, which is further spread to school as an institution. According to some research studies, verbal abuse is widespread, but it often results in physical fights. The state has not found an adequate solution to this problem. Problems are being mitigated to some extent by non-governmental organisations that keep “safe houses” for victims of violence. This raises the crucial question of whether the state should be dealing only with consequences of this problem or be committed to conceptualisation of programmes to prevent violence.

An increasing number of cases of sexual violence against children have been recorded lately. These phenomena occur in family, as well as at school, and in a wider community. The father of under-age N.N. addressed the Legal Department of the Helsinki Committee requesting protection and pointed to a teacher as a perpetrator; or a case of sexual violence in family when step-father abused his two underage step daughters for as long as five years, and after that time one of them ran away from home and reported the case to the police.

A special problem ever so evident in the streets of all larger towns is child-begging, closely related to human trafficking. According to some estimates, more than 10% of registered victims of human trafficking are underage. The state of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not paying enough attention to this problem, whereas in practice there are no efficient programmes and measures to curb human trafficking. Bosnia and Herzegovina did not ratify the European Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings. As a consequence, domestic legislation has not been harmonised with international standards in this area.

The state authorities launched a reform project in education in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but disregarded pre-school education in the process.

A nine-year school system is being introduced - thus meeting one of requirements by the Council of Europe. However, this endeavour is not followed by provision of other conditions related to modernisation of educational processes and infrastructure of schooling system. This is particularly true for disabled children who are not provided adequate transportation, training of school staff, etc. The reform is not reflected adequately in secondary schools, in terms of harmonisation of educational profiles with economy and society requirements. Also, practical work is not maintained sufficiently. Classrooms for practical classes are not equipped adequately, and programmes for practical exercises in economic/industrial firms are not conceptualised.

Another specific problem is the issue of 54 schools organised as “two schools under the same roof”, where classes are conducted in the Croatian and Bosnian languages. The implementation of such curricula divides students and teaching staff into Croats and Bosniacs while they virtually have no contact at all. The children are therefore prevented from learning about the other and different, as directly opposed to co-existence and tolerance, and which further deepens the lack of confidence and hatred. Division of school age children by the ethnic principle with tacit agreement of the authorities contradicts the Law on Elementary and Secondary Education and all international documents pertaining to this area.

The media poorly cover the life and work of students at school, while parents do not have room to express their critical views on events related to the functioning of school.

The abuse of children and violation of their human right not to be manipulated for political purposes were observed in the eve of the October elections at pre-election rallies of some political parties.

It is the responsibility of the Bosnia and Herzegovina government to pay more attention and honour commitments arising from international documents related to the rights of the child, particularly the Convention of the Rights of the Child, and to provide a unified legal framework for respect of the rights of the child.

Based on the assessment of the state of human rights, the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina proposes to the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina the following

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.     To pay due attention to the issue of return as the fundamental issue related to effectuation of human rights and freedoms in Bosnia and Herzegovina [BiH]. In this context, the issues of primary importance are reconstruction of housing, reconstruction of infrastructure, including provision of electricity supply for all settlements by the end of 2007. The end of this year should be the deadline for provision of housing for all persons currently accommodated in collective centres.

2.     To adopt Anti-Discrimination Law at the level of BiH and thus create legal assumptions for prevention of generation of discrimination and the most widespread violations of human rights and freedoms.

3.     To complete reform of institutions for protection of human rights. This entails transformation of the institution of Ombudsman of BiH into an independent institution capable of protection of human rights based on universal principles and generally accepted international standards.

4.     To make work of police more efficient for discovery of perpetrators of criminal acts and offences. It would be of utmost important to encourage greater sensitivity of police for incidents that disturb inter-ethnic relations and have negative consequences for relations between ethnic and religious communities.

We expect from the judiciary to react timely and efficiently against incidents that generate violations of human rights and freedoms.

5.     Authorities at all levels should demonstrate greater understanding for issues related to status of minorities, whose members are especially vulnerable and are the most frequent victims of violations of human rights. This primarily refers to women, children, third-age persons, persons with disabilities, families of missing persons, victims of torture, sexual and gender minorities, and others.

Br: 06A-02/2007
Sarajevo, 12.02.2007

▲ To the top