The Comfort of Togetherness – The Young and the Old Have Similar Needs – They Need Attention, Respect, Conversation, Exchange, Contact

March 26, 2021 by Radomir Bojic

March 26, 2021

The three-hour online event “Comfort of Togetherness – a Step towards Intergenerational Cooperation,”organised by BCHR’s Youth Programme on Thursday, 25 March 2021, provided young people and people over 65 participating in our Solidarity First Aid (SOFA) Programme with another opportunity to share their insights and experiences with a view to establishing new models of intergenerational cooperation and fostering community solidarity.

“Intergenerational cooperation is a fundamental social contract without which humankind cannot survive,” said Equality Commissioner Brankica Janković, who participated in the event. Assistant Representative and Head of Office at United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) Borka Jeremić said that the COVID-19 crisis exacerbated the intergenerational communication gap.

“This is why we embraced the opportunity to creatively support the exchange of knowledge and information between youth and the elderly,” she said in her remarks about the SOFA Programme implemented by UNFPA and BCHR’s Youth Programme since last October.

Youth Programme Coordinator Nevena Nikolić said that the SOFA Programme was a new challenge prompting the team to leave its comfort zone in work with youth and that, thanks to its spontaneity, intuition and commitment to the needs of both the young and the old, it demonstrated that we could hear and understand each other regardless of our age.

“Understanding each other is very important, we need to hear the elderly, their knowledge and experience,” said youth activist Živkica Milojković, who has been volunteering for years, because, in her opinion, volunteering is “learning for solidarity contributing to both personal and social progress.” National Association of Youth Workers (NAPOR) Programme Coordinator Nemanja Obradović discussed the importance of open intergenerational cooperation free of prejudice.

“Youth are primarily depicted as a problem rather than as a resource, and we need to change such perceptions," said Obradović, prompting Miloš Grabundžija, the Chairman of the Nezavisnost association of pensioners, to remark that the lack of space and a budget for both the youth and the elderly did the most harm and was the greatest danger to our society because both generations needed to be much more visible.

The three-hour ZOOM event was moderated by youth activists Demir Mekić and Ivana Antonijević. In addition to the main part, over 60 participants took part in virtual Working Groups that explored various aspects of intergenerational cooperation: the needs of youth and the elderly and the ideas, methods and techniques that would genuinely contribute to intergenerational cooperation and understanding.

“I feel that both the young and the elderly have similar needs but different capacities and that we need to bring them together. Both generations need attention, respect, conversation, exchange, contact…,” said Vesna Petrović, a facilitator of the first Working Group. She went on to describe some good practice examples in the local communities. For instance, the youth in Dimitrovgrad are constantly in touch with the residents of the local old people’s home; the youth and the elderly in Kula stage performances and celebrate their birthdays together and the elderly teach the youth to write letters and the youth teach the elderly digital literacy; in Novi Sad, hiking and walking tours are organised for people of all generations.

The second Working Group highlighted the importance of ensuring that both the elderly and the youth have access to all institutions and information relevant to the realisation of their rights. However, “the greatest problem is that there are not too many places where youth and the elderly can get together, either in urban or rural communities,” said Jasmina Ristić, the Working Group facilitator. She alerted to the importance of providing more physical and media space and quality initiatives linking generations.

The event ended with the presentation of guidelines and ideas for continuing intergenerational rapport and turning the SOFA Programme into a concept of cooperation and understanding among all generations.

The Comfort of Togetherness event was organised within the SOFA Programme. This Programme, encouraging intergenerational solidarity and exchange, has been implemented since end October 2020 by the BCHR with UNFPA’s support.

The event is available on BCHR’ s YouTube channel:

Stop the Attacks on Journalists and Independent Media

March 10, 2021 by Radomir Bojic

March 10, 2021

The House of Human Rights and Democracy warns the competent institutions, as well as the domestic and international public, of serious endangering of the safety of journalists that comes with the latest in a series of attacks by pro-regime media and tabloids on KRIK – an independent investigative media and part of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project.

The accusations made in some media that KRIK journalists and editorial office cooperated with criminal groups represent a serious threat to media freedom because the facts are the opposite. KRIK is working on revealing the connections of the mafia with public officials. Unfounded accusations expose these journalists to life danger, paradoxically only 10 days after the Government of Serbia activated the SOS telephone for journalists whose safety is endangered.

When government officials and media close to them constantly accuse independent journalists and media of being traitors, foreign mercenaries, an extended arm of the opposition, ignorant and liars, conspirators in the victory of the coronavirus, and now even collaborators suspected of the most serious acts of organized crime, it is the government and media close to the government that bear full responsibility for endangering the safety of journalists, freedom of the media and the absence of the rule of law.

That is why we call on the competent prosecutor’s office, the Government of the Republic of Serbia, the Ministry of Culture and Information and REM to take all necessary steps to stop drawing targets on journalists and independent media. The Constitution and laws specify that there is a duty and obligation of these institutions to do everything in their power to protect the safety of journalists and to enable the freedom of media and freedom of expression that should exists in a democratic, European society that Serbia strives to be.

Members of the Human Rights House:
– Civic initiatives
– Belgrade Centre for Human Rights
– Committee of Lawyers for Human Rights – YUCOM
– Helsinki Committee for Human Rights
– Centre for Practical Policy

BCHR Presents its 2020 Annual Human Rights Report

March 5, 2021 by Radomir Bojic

March 5, 2021

The Belgrade Centre for Human Rights presented its annual Human Rights in Serbia 2020 report on 4 March 2021.

The Report was presented on ZOOM by the Report editors Vesna Petrović and Dušan Pokuševski and one of its authors, journalist Ivan Protić. Head of the UN Human Rights Team in Serbia Milan Marković provided an overview of respect for human rights in Serbia from the UN’s perspective, while Daniel Mohseni, the Political Officer at the German Embassy in Belgrade, spoke about the EU accession process, notably Chapters 23 and 24. Vida Petrović Škero, the former President of the Supreme Court and chair of CEPRIS, CRTA’s Tamara Branković, Dragan Popović from the Policy Centre and Sanja Radivojević from the BCHR took part in the debate that followed, focusing on rule of law and the judiciary, parliamentary elections, the status of civil society and the July protests in Belgrade and Novi Sad.

The Human Rights in Serbia 2020 report provides a comprehensive overview and analysis of the human rights situation in Serbia in the year marked by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has given rise to numerous challenges and resulted in restrictions of human rights and freedoms. The threat coronavirus posed to the life and health of Serbia’s population apparently overwhelmed the Serbian authorities, which often failed to respond adequately to the challenges.

The Report is available HERE.

The Belgrade Centre for Human Rights has for years now been alerting not only to the serious problems in realising and protecting human rights, but also to the threat to the fundamental principles the Republic of Serbia is based on – rule of law, social justice, civil democracy and commitment to European principles and values. Economic difficulties, widespread crime and corruption, populist rhetoric lying at the heart of political activity have all turned Serbia into a deeply polarised community of widespread prejudice and stereotypes and great social distance towards specific groups of the population, and resulted in a deluge of hate speech in public discourse.

The research, translation and publication of the Report Human Rights in Serbia 2020 were supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany through the Embassy of the Federal Republic of Germany in Belgrade and by the United Nations Human Rights Team in Serbia. The Report does not necessarily reflect the official position of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany or the views of the United Nations.

Watch the presentation of the Report HERE:

BCHR Presents Its Right to Asylum in the Republic of Serbia 2020 Report

February 25, 2021 by Radomir Bojic

February 25, 2021

The Belgrade Centre for Human Rights presented its annual report “Right to Asylum in the Republic of Serbia 2020” on Wednesday, 24 February 2021.

The 2020 Asylum Report was informed by the experience of the BCHR’s legal and integration team in extending free legal aid to asylum seekers and persons granted asylum. It provides an overview of statistical data, as well as an analysis of the implementation of national law on asylum and other regulations relevant to the status of asylum seekers and refugees and their integration in Serbian society in 2020.

A total of 2,830 people expressed the intention to seek asylum in 2020, whereas 12,937 expressed such an intention in 2019. The drastic difference can be ascribed to the fact that the Ministry of Internal Affairs did not perform the registration of people intending to seek asylum
as it would have ordinarily, mostly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than to a decrease in the number of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees.

In 2020, 144 people applied for asylum with the Asylum Office, which upheld 29 applications. The number of applications it received in 2020 was also much lower than in 2019. Health protection measures introduced in response to COVID-19 led to substantial restrictions of the fundamental human rights of refugees and migrants living in Serbia.

Migration was one of the main topics on the public agenda in 2020. The change in narrative led the BCHR team to analyse public discourse, including public opinion, and the proliferation of unverified theories and fake news, as well as widespread hate speech against migrants and refugees.

The Report was developed within the project “Support to Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Serbia”, which BCHR has been implementing with the support of the UNHCR Office in Serbia. As UNHCR’s implementing partner, BCHR has been providing legal aid to asylum seekers and persons granted international protection in Serbia since 2012.

The “Right to Asylum in the Republic of Serbia 2020” is available HERE.

The Report was presented by UNHCR Representative in Serbia Ms. Francesca Bonelli, BCHR Executive Director Ms. Sonja Tošković, the Report Editor Ms. Ana Trifunović, and the authors of the Report, Asylum and Migration Programme Legal Team Coordinator Mr. Marko Štambuk and Asylum and Migration Programme Coordinator Ms. Anja Stefanović.

The presentation of the Report is available here:

Serbian Constitutional Court Rules Serbian Authorities Illegally Deported 17 Afghani Migrants

January 25, 2021 by Radomir Bojic

January 25, 2021

In late December 2020, the Serbian Constitutional Court upheld the constitutional appeal filed on behalf of 17 Afghani nationals, including four children under five and three children under seven years of age, who had expressed the intention to seek asylum in the Republic of Serbia. The BCHR filed the constitutional appeal claiming violations of their rights in March 2017, a month after they were pushed back from Serbia to Bulgaria in the midst of winter.

The Constitutional Court found violations their rights enshrined in the Serbian Constitution, specifically: the right to liberty and security (Art. 27(3)) in conjunction with their rights in case of deprivation of liberty not ordered by the court (Art. 29(1)), and their freedom of movement (Art. 39(3)) in conjunction with the right to inviolability of their physical and mental integrity (Art. 25). The Constitutional Court also found that they had not been extended adequate legal aid.

In cooperation with the Gendarmerie and Army of Serbia, the Gradina Border Police patrol on 3 February 2017 deprived the 17 migrants of liberty on the road to Dimitrovgrad. They were brought before a misdemeanour judge in Pirot, who discontinued the misdemeanour proceedings against them after they expressed the intention to seek asylum. The Serbian police were ordered to issue all of them certificates of intention to seek asylum so that they could be referred to an asylum centre. However, that night, the police subjected them to inhuman and degrading treatment as they took them to the border zone and pushed them back to Bulgaria. The Afghani migrants were forced to walk through the woods at below freezing temperatures, without any documents, all of which, including those issued in Serbia, the police had seized.

The Constitutional Court concluded that the police officers’ treatment of the 17 Afghani migrants had been inhuman, noting that the Pirot Misdemeanour Court concluded that they were refugees who fled their war-torn country of origin area, had expressed the intention to seek asylum and were thus eligible for protection under Serbian law. The Constitutional Court’s decision, the first on a constitutional appeal for illegal expulsion of persons who expressed their intention to seek asylum in Serbia, will be published in the Official Gazette in public interest.

To recall, the Serbian Government in July 2016 adopted a Decision on the Establishment of Joint Police-Army Forces to combat illegal migration and human trafficking along the border with Macedonia and Bulgaria. This facilitated pushbacks of aliens, who were denied the opportunity to access the asylum procedure in Serbia.

In its Concluding observations of April 2017, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about reported cases of efforts to deny access to Serbian territory and asylum procedures, of collective and violent expulsions and of the misapplication of the “safe third country” principle, despite concerns regarding conditions in some of those countries. It recommended that Serbia refrain from collective expulsion of aliens and ensure an objective assessment of the level of protection when expelling aliens to “safe third countries”.

A detailed analysis of the Constitutional Court decision will be published in BCHR’s upcoming Right to Asylum in the Republic of Serbia, Periodic Report for January-March 2021.

More about the case is available in BCHR’s Right to Asylum in the Republic of Serbia, Periodic Report for January-March 2017, pp. 22-27.

Protector of Citizens refuses to establish errors and omissions that may have resulted in the high mortality rate among doctors and other health professionals in Serbia

January 21, 2021 by Radomir Bojic

January 21, 2021

The Protector of Citizens dismissed BCHR’s initiative to perform an ex officio review and establish any errors or omissions on the part of the relevant medical institutions that may have led to a higher number of COVID-19 deaths and infections amongst health professionals in Serbia.

In his letter to BCHR of 20 January 2021, the Protector of Citizens said that the requirements for initiating a review of the operations of administrative authorities had not been fulfilled because the BCHR should have first sent requests for free access to information of public importance to the Ministry of Health and the Public Health Institute Dr Milan Jovanović Batut, asking them about the higher number of COVID-19 deaths and infections among health professionals.

The media have over the past few weeks been publishing alarming information and statements by doctors, representatives of the Serbian Trade Union of Doctors and Pharmacists and other medical workers, who said that around 70 doctors succumbed to COVID-19 in 2020. They drew attention to the major discrepancies between the mortality rates among health professionals, especially doctors, in Serbia and the other countries in the region (e.g. Croatia and Slovenia). In their opinion, the main reasons for the higher rates in Serbia included, among others, staff shortages, lack of quality protection equipment, inadequate testing protocols in COVID-19 zones, et al.

Neither the Ministry of Health nor the Batut Institute have reacted to such information to date or to public appeals and requests by health professionals to release the official data on the number of medical workers who succumbed to COVID-19.

To recall, under Articles 24 and 32 of the Protector of Citizens Act, the Protector of Citizens is entitled to himself initiate a review of the operations of administrative authorities based on information he learns in any manner, in order to ascertain whether any systemic shortcomings resulted in violations of human rights, in this case of health professionals during the COVID-19 epidemic. BCHR notes with regret that the Protector of Citizens – who referred to the wrong provisions of the Protector of Citizens Act, specifically the ones governing the review of complaints filed by individuals who believe their human rights have been violated – let the BCHR and the public know that he has no intention of addressing this concerning issue.

This was the second time BCHR asked the Protector of Citizens to review the efficiency of the Health Ministry’s management of the COVID-19 epidemic. In June 2020, it requested of the Ombudsman to review the work of the Health Ministry after BIRN said that Serbia underreported the number of COVID-19 deaths and infections in the March-May 2020 period. Several months later, the Protector of Citizens notified the BCHR that he would not initiate such a review “in view of the fact that the Ministry of Health said it would re-examine the entire procedure of entering and processing data in the COVID-19 Information System”. After pressures from reporters to address the issue, the Ombudsman in mid-October 2020 “asked” the Health Minister to notify him of the Ministry’s findings of the re-examination at an unspecified time in the future. To recall, the Health Minister said that the re-examination of the number of COVID-19 deaths and infections would be undertaken once the pandemic was over.