Keywords: Kosovo; Metohija; Serbia; peace; war; strategy; independence; Priština; Albanian language; sovereignty; Boris Tadić; Vienna; Serbia - Russia; EU; OUN; America; crisis; consensus; diplomacy;
DOBROSUSEDSTVO U MIRU ILI U RATU? (Infopress - Priština) 12 GODINA ZAMRZAVANJA? (Express - Priština) STRATEGIJA PREMIJERA SRBIJE PROTIV ZAPADA (Zëri - Priština) MOGUĆI SCENARIO ZA NEZAVISNOST KOSOVA (Start - Tirana) DRAGA PRIŠTINO, ALBANSKI JEZIK IMA I REČCU “NE” (Gazeta shqiptare - Tirana) SUVERENITET NJIMA, NEZAVISNOST NAMA (Start - Tirana) 5. JANUAR 2020. GODINE (Express - Priština) ZAŠTO TADIĆ ŽELI DA BUDE PONOVO IZABRAN NA POLOŽAJ PREDSEDNIKA SRBIJE U DECEMBRU? (Zëri - Priština) STRATEGU U BEČU (Express - Priština) RUSKO-SRPSKO TAPKANJE U MESTU I KRETANJE EU (Zëri - Priština) ŠTA ĆE SE POVODOM KOSOVA DOGODITI U SB OUN TOKOM DECEMBRA? (Zëri - Priština) KOSOVO - TEST AMERIČKE ODLUČNOSTI (Koha ditore - Priština) KOSOVO OSTAJE SA SRBIJOM (Epoka e re - Priština) NEMAČKI KORAK (Koha ditore - Priština) KAKVE SU NAMERE SRBIJE SA PRIMEDBAMA KOJE JE STAVILA NA 14 TAČAKA “TROJKE”? (Zëri - Priština) SOCIJALNA KRIZA - PREDIGRA ZA REŠAVANJE STATUSA KOSOVA (Infopress - Priština) POSPANOST MATIČNE DRŽAVE (Epoka e re - Priština) CENA UPORNOSTI ZA MEĐUNARODNI KONSENZUS (Shqip - Tirana) ZAMKE DIPLOMATA (Kosova sot - Priština) IZBACI BESNIKA, UBACI BESNIKA?! (Shqip - Tirana)
More...
Keywords: proletariat; communism; Yugoslavia; political party; plebiscites; independence; initiative; liberalism; SKOJ; Croats; Spain; students; Prague; Argentina; emigrants;
Plebiscit naroda; Komunizam - nije uvozna roba. Boljševička neustrašivost i načelnost. Smjelosti, samostalnosti i inicijative! Protiv političke sljepoće i liberalizma. SKOJ na novom putu. Komunisti i hrvatski narod. Neka se znade istina. Narod je progovorio. Na povodcu klasnog neprijatelja. Karijera jednog provokatora. Odluka prezidiuma I.O.K.I. i biroa I.K.K. K.I. Za solidarnost s narodnom Španijom. Stjegonoše slobode i napredka. Politički osudjenici borcima Internacionalne Brigade. Slovenski fantje v obrambi svobode španskog ljudstva. Naši zemljaci u Španiji. Pismo dobrovoljca studenata iz Praga. Iseljenicima u Argentini. Za patronat nad našim borcima u Španiji.
More...
Keywords: Serbia; memorandum; responsibility; SANU; regime; Serb question; political history; Slobodan Milošević; national program;
(Serbian edition) The Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SANU) came to the political forefront some 10 years ago. Criticized by the “old regime” for the manner in which it raised the Serb question and its project of national homogenization (1986), and then encouraged by the “new regime” to continue its efforts, the Academy as an institution consented in the most critical years which determined the future of the common Yugoslav state (1987-1991) to act as a “collective mind” in judging and positively evaluating the execution of the “project” by Slobodan Milošević. It was this moment in the Academy’s political activity that caused internal turmoil and led to the crystallization of several groupings within its politically active membership. If the primary rift in 1992 was marked by being for or against Milošević personally, with both sides on the whole approving his “national project,” the breach is now much deeper at all levels. Nowadays the opinions of the members of the Academy differ on virtually all issues: the evaluation of Milošević’s rule, the point at which it became “bad” or “less bad,” the role of the Academy in society, the Memorandum, the nature of the wars in Yugoslavia, what constitutes victory or defeat, the importance and responsibility of intellectuals, population problems, and even election of their own officers. The Academy no longer comes out with common political stands, its present and former presidents deny that it is a “collective mind” and often cite ignorance of the situation as the reason why they cannot make public statements. Members even react to addresses delivered by officers at the Academy’s assemblies and meetings. It is therefore impossible today to reply to questions regarding the political orientation of the Academy, whether or not it at present has a “national program,” how it envisages Serbia’s future, since one would inevitably have to ascribe the views of a particular group of politically active academicians to the institution as a whole. Just as there was no doubt that such a group existed up to 1991 and encountered little overt opposition within the Academy, it is now certain that there are no more undisputed (national-political) authorities in the institution; only individuals remain with their personal opinions which are binding on no one but themselves. After a long series of failures, erroneous prognoses and an impermissibly uncivilized public settling of accounts, their personal authority as the “minds of the nation” has at best been seriously shaken, if it exists at all. For the reasons cited above, this paper is an overview of the stands predominating among the leading members of the Academy, its former and current presidents, and the stands of the politically active academicians. These academicians were in what used to be the dominant current in the Academy and are now only individuals who have closed their political circle – from their former belief that the generation which was nearing its allotted span had been called upon to reveal to the nation the road it should take, to the realization that the responsibility for all the defeats that have occurred in the meantime lies either on one man or is “collective.” Of their once staunch support for Slobodan Milošević, all that remains are their confused replies to the question: “Why do I protest?”
More...
Keywords: Serbia; Vojvodina; NGO; minorities; refugees; nationalism; radicalization; ethnicity; financial standing; inequality; mind-set;
Presence of over half a million refugees and displaced persons in Serbia is a palpable and live criticism of our recent national program and its implementation. Their fate demonstrates that the nation is not homogenous, that there are no common national interests, but rather different goals with different price tags. It bears stressing that the price paid by the aforementioned population groups was the highest one. Conduct and fate of refugees and their choices, if any, in a drastic way indicate disastrous failure of the idea of annexation of so-called Western Serb countries to the ethnic Serb state. In those terms they are the most convincing critique of domestic nationalism, for they indicate consequences thereof better than any other population groups. If one is to believe different facts and figures, more than three fourth of refugees and displaced persons until recently wanted to stay in Yugoslavia, and only one fifth expressed their wish to return to their homes. Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia through its continuing project "I want to go home" helped a sustained return of a large number of refugees, in the face of inertia and political obstacles in several involved countries. Moreover the NGO through this survey tried to look into ways of future return of refugees and displaced persons from Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo.
More...
Keywords: BiH; judiciary; reform; civil society; justice sector reform strategy; report on Implementation of the action plan; 2011; OCD; VSTV;
U februaru 2010. godine pet partnerskih organizacija civilnog društva potpisale su Memorandum o uspostavi mehanizama za praćenje i ocjenu provođenja Akcionog plana Strategije za reformu sektora pravde u Bosni i Hercegovini (SRSP-a) sa predsjedavajućim Konferencije ministara pravde u BiH i predsjednika Visokog sudskog i tužilačkog vijeća BiH i Pravosudne komisije Distrikta Brčko BiH. Uspostavljeni mehanizam je jedinstven ne samo u BiH, već i u zemljama u okruženju, te se kao takav oslanja na najbolje prakse demokratskih društava zapadne Evrope u pogledu participativnog monitoringa i evaluacije javnih politika od strane organizacija civilnog društva (u daljem tekstu: OCD). Pet organizacija civilnog društva potpisnica Memoranduma koje su se obavezale na provođenje sistematskog praćenja, ocjene i izvještavanja o provedbi reformskih mjera i aktivnosti Akcionog plana Strategije za reformu sektora pravde u BiH, su Asocijacija za demokratske inicijative - ADI, Helsinški komitet za ljudska prava u Bosni i Hercegovini - HK BiH, Udruženje „Vaša prava Bosne i Hercegovine", Biro za ljudska prava Tuzla i Centri civilnih inicijativa - CCI. Oslanjajući se na višegodišnje zagovaračko iskustvo u području demokratizacije i zaštite ljudskih prava, te na poznavanje problematike u sektoru pravde u BiH, ove organizacije su se uključile u proces praćenja, evaluacije i izvještavanja o ovoj važnoj reformskoj politici, kako bi na taj način doprinijele što efikasnijoj uspostavi sistema pravde u BiH, koji je odgovoran prema svim građanima BiH, u potpunosti usklađen sa EU standardima i najboljom praksom, te garantuje vladavinu zakona u našoj zemlji. Uspostavljanje i funkcionisanje nezavisnog mehanizma praćenja, ocjene i izvještavanja o provedbi SRSP za organizacije civilnog društva u proteklih gotovo osamnaest mjeseci predstavlja nedvosmislen pokazatelj pozitivnih promjena i otvaranja institucija u sektoru pravde u BiH prema civilnom društvu. Tom je dodatna potvrda i „Memorandum o razumijevanju za uspostavljanje donatorskog Fonda za provođenje Strategije za reformu sektora pravde u Bosni i Hercegovini“, na koji je, nakon dužeg vremena, Vijeće ministara BiH sredinom prošlog mjeseca dalo saglasnost i uputilo ga Predsjedništvu BiH u daljnju proceduru. Ovim Memorandumom je, između ostalog, predviđeno da se iz sredstava budućeg SRSP Fonda izdvoji cca 30.000,00 EUR na godišnjem novou za OCD, koje su uključene proces praćenja, ocjene i izvještavanja o provedbi SRSP. U proteklih gotovo osamnaest mjeseci, navedenih pet organizacija civilnog društva izradilo je tri tromjesečna, dva polugodišnja i jedan godišnji izvještaj o praćenju i ocjeni provođenja AP SRSP u BiH. Ovaj polugodišnji izvještaj OCD-a predstavlja nezavisnu procjenu provedbe reformskih mjera i aktivnosti Akcionog plana SRSP-a od strane nadležnih institucija za period 1. januara - 30.juni 2011. godine. Svaka se organizacija obavezala za praćenje provedbe SRSP u okviru pojedinog strateškog stuba, što se podudara s prioritetnim područjem djelovanja svake organizacije. Tako ADI prati reformske aktivnosti vezane uz Stub 1 - Pravosuđe; Helsinški komitet za ljudska prava prati Stub 2 - Izvršenje krivičnih sankcija; Udruženje „Vaša prava Bosne i Hercegovine" se fokusira na Stub 3 - Pristup pravdi; Biro za ljudska prava Tuzla prati Stub 4 - Podrška ekonomskom rastu, a CCI analizira mjere utvrđene u okviru Stuba 5 - Dobro rukovođen i koordiniran sektor. Iako je od usvajanja SRSP u BiH implementiran određeni broj planiranih aktivnosti, proces provedbe Akcionog plana Strategije karakteriše niz poteškoća koje se, između ostalog, ogledaju u još uvijek nedovoljnim institucionalnim kapacitetima za planiranje i analizu, još uvijek nedovoljno efikasnom sistemu horizontalne, a naročito vertikalne sektorske koordinacije i saradnje na nivou BiH, entiteta, kantona i Brčko Distrikta BiH, nedovoljnom stepenu posvećenosti, kako samoj implementaciji utvrđenih SRSP aktivnosti, tako i procesu praćenja, procjene i izvještavanja o njezinoj realizaciji. Također, analizirajući izvještaje Tehničkog sekretarijata za praćenje provođenja AP SRSP u BiH, dolazi se do zaključka da ne postoji ujednačen stepen njihove realizacije na nivou BiH, entiteta, kantona i Brčko Distrikta BiH. Ovaj negativni trend je uočljiv i u ovom izvještajnom periodu, zbog čega postoji bojazan će oni nivoi vlasti u BiH čija kontinuirana predanost provedbi AP SRSP mjera i aktivnosti nastavi izostajati, i koji će uslijed toga značajno zaostati u realizaciji reforme, u značajnoj mjeri naruše koherentnost cjelokupnog sistema pravde u BiH. Ovaj izvještajni period karakterišu povećane političke tenzije koje su se neminovno odrazile na sveukupan stepen realizacije aktivnosti u ovom stubu Strategije. Naime, Narodna skupština Republike Srpske je 13.04.2011. godine, na prijedlog predsjednika Republike Srpske, usvojila Odluku o raspisivanju referenduma prema kojoj su se građani ovog entiteta trebali izjasniti o nametnutim zakonima visokog predstavnika, posebno o zakonima o Sudu BiH i Tužilaštvu BiH. Donošenje ove odluke izvazalo je veliko negodovanje političkih zvaničnika u ostatku BiH, prije svega u Federaciji BiH. Ipak, nakon oštrih kritika međunarodne zajednice zbog ove odluke Narodne skupštine RS-a, i intenzivnih diplomatskih aktivnosti, postignut je kompromis u smislu pokretanja strukturalnog dijaloga o pravosuđu u BiH u skladu sa poglavljem 23. Sporazuma o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju BiH sa EU. Nakon ovog dogovora, Narodna skupština RS je stavila van snage svoju odluka o raspisivanju referenduma, što je naknadno rezultiralo organizacijom prvog konsultativnog sastanka u okviru procesa strukturalnog dijaloga između predstavnika državne vlasti, te vlasti oba bh. e ntiteta u BiH sa predstavnicima EU o budućnosti pravosuđa u BiH u procesu EU integracija. Važno je napomenuti da je Evropska komisija, u okviru strukturalnog dijaloga, uručila predstavnicima BiH upitnik na koji se trenutno pripremaju odgovori. Očekuje se da će se nacrt odgovora tj. tehničkih informacija na upit Evropske komisije razmatrati na predstojećoj Ministarskoj konferenciji. Konačni tekst odgovora institucija sektora pravde u BiH na upit Evropske komisije trebao bi biti dostavljen Evropskoj komisiji do kraja avgusta 2011. godine. Međutim, u više navrata zvanično iskazani stav Vlade RS i ministra pravde RS, gdin. Džerarda Selmana, u pogledu (ne)legalnosti i (ne)legitimnosti Vlade Federacije BiH, kao i pokušaji diskvalifikacije učešća federalnog ministra pravde iz vođenja strukturalnog dijaloga o reformi pravosuđa u BiH sa predstavnicima Evropske unije, ni na koji način nisu pomogli nužno potrebnom relaksiranju prilično napete političke situacije u sektoru pravde u BiH u proteklih šest mjeseci. Sveukupno gledano, pokretanje strukturalnog dijaloga također je ukazalo na dijametralno različite stavove između nosilaca vlasti u RS i FBiH o najvećem broju pitanja vezanih za budućnost pravosuđa u BiH, kao npr. pitanje apelacione jurisdikcije Ustavnog suda BiH, pitanje ustavnosti Suda i Tužilaštva BiH, pitanje primjene KZ BiH ili KZ SFRJ u predmetima ratnih zločina, pitanje donošenja zakona na državnom nivou o podjeli državne imovine i zakona o imovinskim pravima državne imovine, pitanje uspostave Vrhovnog suda BiH, da bi na kraju sve kulminiralo povlačenjem podrške Vlade RS u pogledu izgradnje državnog zatvora BiH usljed promijenjenih uslova za njegovu izgradnju, dok je istovremeno Opština Istočna Ilidža povukla svoju odluku o ustupanju zemljišta za izgradnju zatvora i sada potražuje milionska sredstva za ranije besplatno ustupljeno zemljište. Nadalje, iako u tehničkom mandatu, Vijeće ministara BiH je na svojoj 153. sjednici održanoj 14.6.2011. godine, utvrdilo Prijedlog memoranduma o razumijevanju za uspostavljanje donatorskog Fonda za provođenje Strategije za reformu sektora pravde u Bosni i Hercegovini, te je zadužilo Ministarstvo pravde BiH da isti dostavi Predsjedništvu BiH u daljnju procedure ratifikacije, dok je za potpisnika predložen gdin Baria Čolak, ministar pravde BiH. Ovo je nedvojbeno veoma pozitivan iskorak, mada se mora istaći da nije postojao niti jedan opravdani razlog da se ova odluka Vijeća ministara BiH ne donese i mnogo ranije. Međutim, iako je davanjem saglasnosti na Memorandum nepovratno tra siran put ka uspostavi SRSP Fonda, sam čin, nadati se, skorog ratificiranja i potpisivanja Memoranduma ne daje povod za bilo kakvu vrstu “euforije”. Naime, imajući u vidu da su se donatori kroz ovaj Memorandum obavezali primjenjivati procedure Bosne i Hercegovine za upravljanje finansijama i projektnim ciklusom, analiza kapaciteta i vještina kadrova u institucijama sektora pravde u oblasti upravljanja javnim finansijama i projektnim ciklusom, s djelimičnim izuzetkom Ministarstva pravde BiH i VSTV BiH, ostavlja sumnju da će se implementacija donatorskih sredstava putem ovog Fonda odvijati željenom dinamikom i na najučinkovitiji mogući način. Ovo se naročito odnosi na entitetska ministarstva pravde i Pravosudnu komisiju Brčko Distrikta BiH koji gotovo da i nemaju kapacitete koji bi na efikasan i djelotvoran način preuzeli vodstvo u upravljanju projektnim ciklusom. Također, većina institucija sektora pravde, uključujući MP BiH i VSTV BiH, još uvijek nije uspostavila kapacitete i utvrdila adekvatne interne procedure javne unutrašnje finansijske kontrole (uspostava kapaciteta i procedura za vršenje unutrašnje kontrole i unutrašnje revizije), ili su to učinili samo djelimično. Osim toga, konačnim potpisivanjem Memoranduma neće biti riješena mnogobrojna pitanja upravljanja SRSP Fondom bez kojih isti neće moći funkcionisati. Tako se npr. još uvijek treba izraditi i usaglasiti Poslovnik o radu Upravnog odbora SRSP Fonda i Poslovnik o radu Tehničkog sekretarijata SRSP Fonda, utvrditi jedinstveni obrasci za izvještavanje, te donijeti Pravilnik o kriterijima za odabir prioriteta za finansiranje iz SRSP Fonda i Smjernice za korištenje sredstava iz SRSP Fonda. Iskustva Fonda za reformu javne uprave ukazuju da su od posebne važnosti dva posljednje pomenuta upravljačka dokumenta čija su nedovoljno jasno i neprecizno definisana pravila i procedure bila uzrok dužeg zastoja u implementaciji sredstava iz Fonda za reformu javne uprave. Iz ovdje navedenih razloga, kao imperativ se postavlja potreba promptne izgradnje, odnosno jačanja postojećih kapaciteta, institucija sektora pravde u BiH za upravljanje projektnim ciklusom. Važno je napomenuti da se u cilju izbjegavanja dupliciranja kapaciteta, isti trebaju nadograditi uspostavom jedinica za podršku višim službenicima za programiranje pomoći EU (eng. “SPO”), naravno tamo gdje su ovi službenici formalno imenovani. Ovo svakako predstavlja obavezu BiH koja proizilazi iz Strategije za primjenu decentralizovanog sistema implementacije (DlS) za upravljanje programima pomoći Evropske zajednice u Bosni i Hercegovini, a koju, na žalost, većina institucija u BiH, pa tako ni institucije u sektoru pravde u BiH, još uvijek nisu ispunile. U cilju prevazilaženja ovih nedostataka, bilo bi dobro da donatori Fonda, u suradnji sa Delegacijom EU u BiH, razmotre mogućnost financiranja projekta tehničke pomoći, koji bi, osim pružanja pomoći u rješavanju gore navedenih pitanja, bio na raspolaganju institucijama sektora pravde u periodu od barem 12 mjeseci od uspostave Fonda u smislu pružanja mentorske podršku i usmjeravanja odgovornih institucija kroz sve faze upravljanja projektnim ciklusom za projekte, koji se financiraju iz SRSP Fonda. Na ovaj način bi se osiguralo da institucije sektora pravde na efikasan i djelotvoran način preuzmu vodstvo u implementaciji budućih aktivnosti SRSP Fonda u drugoj godini funkcioniranja spomenutog Fonda. Kada je riječ o nedostacima u procesu praćenja i izvještavanja o realizaciji AP SRSP na koje OCD ukazuju od svog prvog izvještaja, značajno je napomenuti da su institucije sektora pravde prihvatile komentare i preporuke OCD i u međuvremenu pokrenule aktivnosti na unapređenju postojećeg sistema. USAID JSDP II projekat je angažirao međunarodnog konsultanta koji je izvršio analizu i dao preporuke u vezi unapređenja postojećeg sistema praćenja i izvještavanja. Na osnovu tih preporuka, Tehnički sekretarijat za praćenje provedbe AP SRSP u BiH donio je Smjernice za praćenje i evaluaciju provođenja AP SRSP u BiH. U okviru Aneksa ovih Smjernica, sadržani su kriteriji za ocjenjivanje napretka provedbe programa/aktivnosti. Također, jednu od novina predstavlja i uspostava elektronskog dokumentacijskog sistema putem kojeg će institucije sektora pravde u budućnosti dostavljati svoje izvještaje. S obzirom da je modificirani sistem tek uspostavljen, bilo bi ishitreno u ovom trenutku davati ocjenu uspješnosti njegove primjene. Ipak, iz kontakata ostvarenih sa članovima FRG, uočljivo je da postoji nedeovoljno razumijevanje novog sistema kod većeg broja institucija. Neophodno je napomenuti da je USAID JSDP II projekat u dva navrata nudio pružanje obuke članovima svih 5 FRG, ali da isti nisu iskazali interes, što se neminovno odrazilo na (ne)razumijevanje novog sistema i kvalitet prilično šturih i ponekad nejasnih institucionalnih izvještaja. Ove okolnosti i dalje dovode u pitanje vjerodostojnost i pouzdanost informacija sadržanih u institucionalnim i objedinjenom izvještaju institucija sektora pravde, kao i samu svrhu i smisao jednog ovako složenog i zahtjevnog posla koji zahtjeva visoko stručne analitičke sposobnosti u svakoj od institucija sektora pravde u BiH. Pozitivan pomak u odnosu na prethodni izvještajni period predstavlja činjenica da je veći broj kantonalnih ministarstava prihvatio i koristio novu bazu podataka - OWIS (Dokumentacioni sistem za praćenje implementacije AP SRSP - OWIS)1. Očekivati je da će intenzivnijim korištenjem ovog software-a doći do daljeg unapređenja kvaliteta institucionalnih izvještaja o praćenju SRSP u BiH u narednom periodu. U fokusu izgradnje kapaciteta institucija sektora pravde u proteklih nekoliko godina bila je funkcija strateškog planiranja. Kao što je to ukazivano u prethodnim izvještajima OCD, ostvareni rezultati u tom pogledu su ipak ograničeni, što između ostalog rezultira još uvijek nedovoljno efikasnom i neblagovremenom implementacijom mjera i aktivnosti iz AP SRSP u BiH. Ipak, u ovom izvještajnom periodu došlo je do pozitivnog postignuća u Federaciji BiH čija Vlada je, uz tehničku pomoć UNDP Programa za jačanje kapaciteta za strateško planiranje i razvoj javnih politika, donijela Uredbu o procesu strateškog planiranja, godišnjeg planiranja i izvještavanja u federalnim ministarstvima (“Službene novine FBiH” broj 22/11). Ovom Uredbom su obavezana sva federalna ministarstva da do novembra 2011. godine izrade i dostave Vladi FBiH svoje institucionalne strateške planove. Nadati se da će donošenjem ove Uredbe, kao i sa dolaskom novog ministra, doći do zaokreta u Federalnom ministarstvu pravde (FMP), koje će, kada već nije iskoristilo priliku da svoj strateški plan izradi u okviru Projekta tehničke podrške AECID-a prošle godine, ispoštovati ovu Uredbu i izraditi institucionalni strateški plan u okviru kojeg će preuzeti mjere i aktivnosti iz AP SRSP. Kada je riječ o Ministarstvu pravde RS, nužno je da što prije uhvati korak sa FMP i donese svoj institucionalni strateški plan koji će biti usklađen sa AP SRSP u BiH. U suprotnom, sasvim je izvjetan scenarij na koji je ukazivano u perthodnim izvještajima OCD, da će ovo ministarstvo postati uskim grlom procesa implementacije SRSP u BiH. Na kraju, značajno je napomenuti da izgradnja kapaciteta i vještina za razvoj javnih politika u institucijama sektora pravde, uključujući procjenu uticaja javnih politika i propisa tek predstoji. U tom smislu, USAID JSDP II projekat je prošle godine pomogao uspostavu foruma za izradu politika između MP BiH i Sekretarijata VSTV BiH. Ovu inicijativu je svakako neophodno proširiti i na entitetska ministarstva pravde i PK BD BiH, kao i kantonalna ministarstva pravde. Iskustva drugih zemalja u regionu ukazuju da je za uspješnu reformu kapaciteta za razvoj javnih politika potrebna promjena u kulturi organizacije i svijesti nosilaca političkih funkcija. Kada je riječ o institucijama sektora pravde u BiH, jedan od recidiva prošlog sistema koji je još uvijek prisutan u značajnoj mjeri jeste i nedostatak iskustva službenika u smislu korištenja vlastitog prosuđivanja, s obzirom da su državni službenici školovani, odnosno obučavani, da primarno primjenjuju pravila propisana zakonima i drugim propisima, ili u najboljem slučaju da potražuju određene podatke i informacije. Strategija reforme javne uprave ukazuje na opštu deficitarnost ovakvih specijaliziranih i visoko-stručnih kadrova u cijeloj BiH i postavlja zahtjeve za njihovu izgradnju. Razvoj javnih politika i procjena uticaja su koliko nauka toliko i određena vrsta umjetnosti i prije svega traže analitičke sposobnosti i inventivnost. Obrisi ovakvih kapaciteta se naziru u pojedinim institucijama sektora pravde u BiH (npr. Ministarstvo pravde BiH i Sekretarijat VSTV BiH) i potrebno im je, uz dodatno stručno usavršavanje, dati mogućnost da dođu do značajno većeg izražaja. Iako je opšte-poznato da je donošenje konačnih odluka odgovornost nosilaca političkih funkcija, sasvim je evidentno da će ministrima u narednim godinama, sa intenziviranjem aktivnosti na implementaciji zahtjeva koji proizilaze iz procesa evropskih integracija, sve više biti potrebni visoko stručni savjeti i podrška stručnjaka - analitičara - koji su sposobni za mnogo više od pukog osvrtanja na postojeće zakone i druge propise. Biće im potrebno da na raspolaganju imaju procjenu mogućih uticaja određene javne politike, kao i politički neutralnu i objektivnu procjenu moguće reakcije građana na tu politiku. Iz tih razloga, fokus institucija sektora pravde u BiH u narednom periodu, pored izgradnje kapaciteta za strateško planiranje, treba usmjeriti i na izgradnju kapaciteta za razvoj javnih politika i procjenu uticaja. Pet partnerskih OCD ovom prilikom izražava nadu da će ovaj polugodišnji Izvještaj za period 01.01.-30.06.2011. godine biti koristan i poslužiti kao izvor informacija kako nadležnim institucijama, tako i donatorima u sektoru pravde u daljnjoj provedbi reformskih mjera u sektoru pravde u BiH, te da će predložene preporuke koje slijede u nastavku biti razmatrane i usvojene na 6. Konferenciji ministara pravde u BiH i predsjednika Visokog sudskog i tužilačkog vijeća BiH i Pravosudne komisije Brčko Distrikta BiH. Na kraju, želimo se zahvaliti svim institucijama, donatorima i drugim nevladinim organizacijama aktivnim u sektoru pravde na dostavljenim informacijama, dokumentima i odgovorima na tražene upite, bez čije pomoći bi ovaj izvještaj bio nepotpun. Također, zahvaljujemo se na dosad primljenim konstruktivnim komentarima, koji se odnose na do sada pripremljene izvještaje OCD, koje smo dobili od strane nadležnih institucija za provođenje SRSP, koji su u značajnoj mjeri reflektirani u ovom polugodišnjem izvještaju.
More...
Keywords: BiH; judiciary; justice; law; human rights; death penalty; independence of judiciary; discrimination; hate speech; transitional justice; minorities; war crimes; witness protection; sexual violence; evaluation; recommendations;
Since its inception in 1948, with the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international human rights regime was based on traditional mechanisms of protection of rights developed by the United Nations (UN), which gave a significant role to the states. Namely, the states are primary actors not only in the international processes of implementation and monitoring of human rights but also in guaranteeing the rights and running the process of self-monitoring and reporting. In the absence of capacities of the UN bodies to directly monitor the human rights situation in all Member States, when member states fail to be sufficiently self-critical NGOs, whose fundamental role is to monitor and report on human rights protection and advocate for better protection thereof by local government institutions and international organizations, play an important role. Efficient protection of human rights requires a strong engagement of civil society at both, national and international levels, as civil society organizations are the only entities that continuously monitor the situation on the ground and work on raising awareness about existing rights and call the decision makers for accountability in case of their violation. Justice Network in Bosnia and Herzegovina defined the role of monitoring and reporting on human rights in domestic and international institutions as their primary form of action. Justice Network, which brings together 52 non-governmental organizations whose primary objective is to support government institutions in strengthening the efficiency, independence and accountability of the judicial system of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as quality information, education and advocating for the interests of citizens in the justice sector, has identified monitoring and reporting on human rights as an essential mechanism by which it seeks to realize its goals. Development of judicial system in BiH, which effectively protects human rights and promotes the rule of law is not possible without a detailed and continuous evaluation of the system for monitoring of compliance of national legislation with international standards. Taking as a basis the results of monitoring of the human rights situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Justice Network will encourage the activities that allow a stronger influence of citizens through civil society organizations in the process of making of new decisions and implementation of existing regulations in the field of justice. In this way, the Justice Network will give its contribution in encouraging an active participation of its members and civil society in the development of an independent, efficient, accountable and lawful actions of the judiciary in Bosnia and Herzegovina. To this end, the Justice Network has created working groups tasked to analyze and monitor the work of justice sector institutions. The Working Group responsible for analyzing the public policies in the area of justice sector produced several research papers, which were published within a publication called Access to Justice in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These studies were intended to inform both professional and general public about the problem of access to justice in Bosnia and Herzegovina observed from different angles. They particularly deal with the evaluation of effectiveness of judicial system in BiH, when it comes to exercise of certain rights such as: right to free legal assistance, free access to information in the justice sector, protection of the rights deriving from labor relations; protection of the political rights of national minorities in BiH through the judiciary, protection of witnesses / victims of war crimes; re-socialization of juvenile offenders, and the necessity of harmonization of court practice in order to ensure an equal access to justice for all citizens. To complement this analytical work, a Working Group responsible for development of a “Universal Periodic Review” (UPR) on the situation of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina was established, as well as A Justice Network, which conducted a monitoring of justice sector institutions responsible for implementation of the recommendations from UPR, which Bosnia and Herzegovina assumed in the field of justice. Representatives of the Association for Democratic Initiatives, the Center for Information and Legal Aid of Zvornik, the Human Rights Centre of the University of Sarajevo, the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in BiH, the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Republika Srpska, the Youth Initiative for Human Rights, the Association of associates and advisers in the courts and prosecutor offices in BiH, the BiH Association of Judges, the Association of Women Judges of BiH, and the Association “Women to Women” have worked jointly on monitoring the implementation of recommendations of the UN Council for Human Rights in judicial sector of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a result of this work a publication titled Human Rights and Judiciary in Bosnia and Herzegovina: A report on implementation of the recommendations for justice sector in Bosnia and Herzegovina from the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council (2010 - 2011) was developed. Recognizing the importance of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) as a new international instrument for fight for human rights, which the UN Council for Human Rights applies in the process of monitoring human rights in the UN member states, the Justice Network in Bosnia and Herzegovina adopted the UPR as a tool in their work already in April 2010. After consultations between the members, the Justice Network joined the UPR process through the development of UPR recommendations for BiH, which were presented by a three-member Delegation of the Justice Network on the 14th session of the UN Council for Human Rights held on 11 June 2010 in Geneva. In addition to the preparation of recommendations and presentation thereof in Geneva, the Justice Network organized and delivered training on this mechanism for representatives of civil society and the justice sector. Also, two roundtables were organized for the same target group, one in Sarajevo and one in Banja Luka, in which conclusions have been defined for effective implementation of UPR recommendations in the BiH judiciary. The Report on Human Rights and Judiciary in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a continuation of work on the application UPR mechanism, but at the same time, it is also a unique publication of this kind. The aim of publishing of this report is to give an insight into the process of implementation of recommendations issued by the UN Council for Human Rights, or by its member states, which were created in a process of Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Monitoring of implementation of the UPR recommendations by the members of the Justice Network focuses on the judicial system, and includes only those recommendations that have been identified as crucial for improving the justice sector in BiH. In addition to making a general review of protection of human rights through the judiciary, the authors also identified recommendations for decision makers aimed at encouraging the authorities to apply UPR recommendations in justice sector more efficiently and promptly in order to fulfill the assumed commitments of Bosnia and Herzegovina towards the international community and its citizens. We hope that this report will be a useful source of information not only to judiciary but also to NGO sector, and we hope it will initiate and develop the interest of civil society organizations in taking concrete actions in the field of justice. Justice Network will certainly continue its activities aimed at monitoring of human rights protection in the justice sector, and will seek to develop further activities related to reporting to local government institutions and international organizations within the Universal Periodical Review (UPR). We use this opportunity to thank all those who were involved in the preparation of analyses and development of this publication. Special thanks goes to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which provides technical support to the BiH Justice Network and its members through the Justice Sector Development Project II (JSDP II).
More...
Keywords: BiH; human rights; 2013; 2014; UN; law; judiciary; justice; Republika Srpska; constitution; discrimination; free legal aid; courts and segregation; war crimes; constitutional courts; corruption; freedom of speech; judiciary independence;
Od svog nastanka, 1948. godine, sa nastankom Univerzalne deklaracije o ljudskim pravima, međunarodni režim za ljudska prava zasnivao se na tradicionalnim mehanizmima zaštite prava razvijenih od strane Ujedinjenih nacija (UN), koje su dale značajnu ulogu državama. Naime, države su primarni akteri u međunarodnim procesima provedbe, ali i monitoringa ljudskih prava, odnosno države i istovremeno garantuju prava, ali i vode proces praćenja i izvještavanja. U nedostatku kapaciteta UN tijela da direktno prate stanje ljudskih prava u svim zemljama članicama, onda kada zemlje članice propuste biti dovoljno samokritične, pokazalo se da važnu ulogu igraju nevladine organizacije, čija je jedna od osnovnih uloga monitoring i izvještavanje o zaštiti ljudskih prava i zagovaranje njihove bolje zaštite kod domaćih institucija vlasti i međunarodnih organizacija. Efikasna zaštita ljudskih prava zahtijeva snažan angažman civilnog sektora i na državnom, ali i na međunarodnom nivou, jer su organizacije civilnog društva jedini subjekti koji kontinuirano prate stanje na terenu, te rade na podizanju svijesti o postojećim pravima i pozivaju donosioce odluka na odgovornost u slučaju njihovog kršenja. U tom pogledu revidiran je i proces praćenja i izvještavanja o stanju ljudskih prava od strane Ujedinjenih nacija (UN) i od 2008. godine uspostavljen je novi instrument: Univerzalni periodični pregled (UPP) od strane Generalne skupštine UN-a rezolucijom 60/251 2006. godine, koja UPP definiše kao novi međunarodni instrument u borbi za ljudska prava kojeg UN Vijeće za ljudska prava primjenjuje u procesu praćenja stanja ljudskih prava u državama članicama UN-a. Svake četiri godine, svih 192 države članice UN-a, bivaju predmetom UPP pregleda kroz koji se na univerzalan i jednoobrazan način vrši procjena ispunjavanja međunarodnih obaveza i opredjeljenja u pogledu ljudskih prava u cilju stvaranja demokratskog pritiska na vlade država da unaprijede situaciju u svojoj državi u pogledu ljudskih prava, te da se bore protiv neravnopravnosti i svih oblika diskriminacije. UPP se provodi kroz proces interaktivnog dijaloga kroz koji zemlja, čije se stanje ljudskih prava prati, prezentira svoj izvještaj, odgovara na pitanja i dobiva preporuke od drugih zemalja. Potom se neformalno usvaja izvještaj koji uključuje sve preporuke date zemlji u pregledu, a koji se ponovo zvanično usvaja na sljedećoj redovnoj sjednici Vijeća za ljudska prava. Oko 16 zemalja UN-a jesu predmet pregleda u okviru svake sjednice Vijeća, a 48 ih je predmet pregleda svake godine. Pored država, UPP pruža i mogućnost uključivanja nevladinih organizacija u ovaj proces. Naime, aktivnosti prije i nakon pregleda izvještaja ključne su za implementaciju konkretnih preporuka iz ishodnog dokumenta i tokom ovog perioda nevladine organizacije mogu ostvariti značajan uticaj kroz aktivnosti monitoringa, analize i zagovaranja. Neki od instrumenata učešća nevladinih organizacija u UPP procesu su: angažman u konsultacijama s vladom svoje države; podnošenje izvještaja interesnih grupa prema Vijeću za ljudska prava; lobiranje drugih država za davanje određenih preporuka; prisustvovanje sjednicama UPP radne grupe, kao i prisustvovanje i učestvovanje u sjednicama Vijeća za ljudska prava; te popratne aktivnosti vezane za zagovaranje za implementaciju preporuka. Prepoznavajući važnost novo-uspostavljenog mehanizma za praćenje ljudskih prava, ali i ulogu, koju su u istom dobile nevladine organizacije, Mreža pravde u BiH prihvatila je UPP kao instrument u svom radu, već u aprilu 2010. godine. Nakon konsultacija između članica, Mreža pravde se uključila u UPP proces kroz izradu UPP preporuka za BiH, koje su predstavljene od strane tročlane delegacije Mreže pravde na 14. sjednici UN Vijeća za ljudska prava, 11. juna 2010. godine u Ženevi. Pored pripreme preporuka i njihovog predstavljanja u Ženevi, u organizaciji Mreže pravde, održana je i obuka o ovom mehanizmu za predstavnike civilnog društva i sektora pravde. Također, za istu ciljanu grupu održana su dva okrugla stola u Sarajevu i Banja Luci na kojima su definisani zaključci koji naglašavaju potrebu za efikasniju primjenu UPP preporuka u pravosuđu BiH. Polazeći od ovih zaključaka, tokom strateškog planiranja Mreže pravde u 2010. godini, dogovoreno je da monitoring i izvještavanje o stanju ljudskih prava kod domaćih i međunarodnih institucija predstavlja primarni oblik djelovanja Mreže. Time je Mreža pravde - koja okuplja 64 nevladine organizacije, a čiji je osnovni cilj da pruža podršku institucijama vlasti u jačanju efikasnosti, neovisnosti i odgovornosti pravosudnog sistema Bosne i Hercegovine, kao i kvalitetnog informisanja, obrazovanja i zastupanja interesa građanki i građana u sektoru pravde - identificirala monitoring i izvještavanje o ljudskim pravima kao osnovni mehanizam pomoću kojeg nastoji realizirati svoje ciljeve. Razvoj pravosudnog sistema u BiH koji efikasno štiti ljudska prava i promiče vladavinu prava, nije moguć bez detaljne i stalne procjene rada sistema koja prati usklađenost domaćeg zakonodavstva i međunarodnih standarda. Sa ovim ciljem osnovana je i Radna grupa za izradu izvještaja „Univerzalni periodični pregled (UPP) o stanju ljudskih prava u Bosni i Hercegovini“ Mreže pravde, koja već od 2010. godine provodi proces monitoringa institucija sektora pravde na osnovu procjene provedbe UPP preporuka na koje se obavezala Bosna i Hercegovina u oblasti pravosuđa. Po četvrti put predstavnici nekoliko nevladinih organizacija, a ove godine predstavnici Asocijacije za demokratske inicijative, Centra za informativnopravnu pomoć Zvornik (CIPP), Centra za istraživačko novinarstvo (CIN), Centra za ljudska prava Univerziteta u Sarajevu, Udruženja «Pravnik», Udruženja stručnih saradnika i savjetnika u sudovima i tužilaštvima u BiH, i Udruženja za međunarodno pravo - zajednički su radili na monitoringu provedbe preporuka UN Vijeća za ljudska prava u pravosuđu BiH u sektoru pravosuđa u periodu od 2013. do 2014. godine. Kao rezultat ovog monitoring rada objavljuje se već po četvrti put publikacija Ljudska prava i pravosuđe u Bosni i Hercegovini: Izvještaj o provedbi preporuka u sektoru pravosuđa u BiH iz Univerzalnog periodičnog pregleda Vijeća za ljudska prava Ujedinjenih nacija (2011. – 2012.). Izvještaj Ljudska prava i pravosuđe u Bosni i Hercegovini predstavlja nastavak već započetnog rada na primjeni UPP mehanizma i istovremeno predstavlja jedinstvenu publikaciju ove vrste. Cilj objavljivanja navedene publikacije jeste uvid u proces provedbe dobivenih preporuka UN Vijeća za ljudska prava, odnosno od strane njenih država članica, a nastalih kroz proces Univerzalnog periodičnog pregleda (UPP). Monitoring procesa provedbe UPP preporuka od strane članica Mreže pravde, fokusira se na pravosudni sistem, odnosno uključuje samo one preporuke koje su identifikovane kao krucijalne za unaprjeđenje sektora pravosuđa u BiH. Pored općeg pregleda zaštite ljudskih prava kroz pravosuđe, autori su identifikovali i preporuke za donosioce odluka s ciljem da podstaknu institucije vlasti na efikasniju i ažurniju primjenu UPP preporuka u sektoru pravde i kako bi ispoštovale obaveze koje je preuzela Bosna i Hercegovina prema međunarodnoj zajednici, ali i prema svojim građanima. Nadamo se da će Izvještaj biti koristan izvor informacija, ne samo predstavnicima pravosuđa, nego i nevladinom sektoru, te da će inicirati i razvoj interesovanja za konkretne akcije kod organizacija civilnog društva za djelovanje u oblasti pravosuđa. Mreža pravde će svakako nastaviti i u budućnosti sa aktivnostima monitoringa zaštite ljudskih prava u sektoru pravde, te će nastojati razviti i daljnje aktivnosti kada je u pitanju izvještavanje u okviru Univerzalnog periodičnog pregleda (UPP) prema domaćim institucijama vlasti ali, i međunarodnim organizacijama. Uzevši kao osnovu rezultate monitoringa o stanju ljudskih prava u Bosni i Hercegovini navedenih u Izvještaju, Mreža pravde je provodila i prateće zagovaračke aktivnosti kako bi se jačao uticaj građanki i građana kroz organizacije civilnog društva na proces donošenja novih odluka i implementaciju postojećih propisa u oblasti pravde. Na ovaj način, Mreža pravde nastoji dati svoj doprinos u poticanju aktivnog odnosa svojih članica i civilnog društva u cjelini ka razvoju nezavisnog, efikasnog, odgovornog i zakonitog djelovanja pravosuđa u BiH. Koristimo ovu priliku da se zahvalimo svima koji su bili uključeni u realizaciju pripreme analiza i izradu publikacije. Posebno se zahvaljujemo Američkoj agenciji za međunarodni razvoj (USAID), koja kroz Projekat razvoja sektora pravosuđa II pruža tehničku podršku Mreži pravde u BiH i njenim članicama.
More...
Keywords: BiH; law; judiciary; justice; civil society; justice sector reform; implementation; annual report; 2011; human rights; free legal aid;
In early 2010, the Memorandum on establishing mechanism for monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the Action Plan of Justice Sector Reform Strategy in Bosnia and Herzegovina (JSRS) was signed by the chair of the Ministerial Conference in BiH and presidents of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council BiH and the Judiciary Commission of Brčko District BiH. The established mechanism is unique not only in BiH but also in the surrounding countries. As such, it relies on the best practices of democratic societies of Western Europe in terms of participative monitoring and evaluation of public policies by civil society organizations (hereafter referred to as CSO). The memorandum determined the responsibility of five civil society organizations for systematic monitoring and assessment of the implementation of reform measures and activities of the Action Plan of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy. Those organizations are: Association for Democratic Initiatives – ADI, Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina – HCHR BiH, Association “Your Rights Bosnia and Herzegovina”, Human Rights Office Tuzla and Centres of Civil Initiatives – CCI. In late October 2011, the sixth organization, PAR Excellence Sarajevo, joined the Memorandum and this mechanism of independent monitoring of the implementation of AP JSRS BiH. Relying upon the long-term advocacy experience in the field of democratization and protection of human rights, as well as on the knowledge of issues in the BiH justice sector, these organizations got involved in the process of monitoring, evaluation and reporting on this extremely important reform policy, in order to contribute to an efficient establishment of the justice system in BiH, which is responsible towards all citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, fully harmonized with EU standards and best practices, and ensures the rule of law. This is the second annual report on the monitoring and assessment of the implementation of AP JSRS in BiH by partner civil society organizations and it represents an independent assessment of the implementation of reform measures and activities from the JSRS AP by relevant justice sector institutions for the period from January 1 to December 31, 2011. Each organization committed to monitoring the implementation of JSRS within one strategic pillar, which coincides with each organization’s field of work. Therefore, ADI monitors the reform activities related to Pillar 1 – Judicial System; Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in BiH monitors the Pillar 2 – Execution of criminal sanctions; Association “Your Rights Bosnia and Herzegovina” focuses on Pillar 3 – Access to justice; Human Rights Office Tuzla monitors Pillar 4 – Support to economic progress; and CCI analyses the measures within Pillar 5 – Well-managed and coordinated sector. The institutions of the justice sector in BiH entered the third year of implementation of AP JSRS. The overall aggravated political-economic situation in BiH, viewed in close correlation with insufficient human and financial resources and insufficient and inefficient horizontal and vertical sector coordination, made timely and consistent implementation of AP JSRS in BiH even more difficult. That resulted in a rather low overall level of implementation of reforms in BiH justice sector in the previous year. While the issues of complex sector structure, insufficient institutional capacities and restricted budget funds were considered the main causes of slow and limited progress in the previous period, one of the key causes of this situation this year, apart from the abovementioned ones that are evident and constant, are the diametrically opposed stances of the political officeholders in BiH over the status, organisation, structure, jurisdictions, the existing legislative framework and sustainability of certain institutions of BiH justice sector, especially of judiciary institutions on the state level of BiH. Previously expressed declarative political support has now turned into an open political resistance, in consequence of which, crucial reforms in BiH justice sectors are being “put on hold” and the focus was redirected at launching initiatives and conducting exhausting debates about demands of political representatives of the Republic of Srpska for the revision of the previous reform achievements by returning them to the previous state. It was assumed that the consensus reached during the development and adoption of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy in BiH would present a certain incentive to the representatives of executive, legislative and judicial authority in BiH to approach the implementation of these reforms in a coordinated and intensified way. It was also assumed that the established mechanisms for the implementation of the JSRS AP would motivate the justice sector institutions to invest additional efforts with the aim of timely and consistent implementation. However, it can be stated that that has not happened, not even after three years of the implementation. The proactive engagement by all members of the Technical Secretariat for the monitoring of the implementation of the JSRS AP in BiH (TS JSRS) is still missing and is usually limited to activities that are almost always performed during the TS meetings (i.e. once in three months). On the other hand, the technical and administrative activities are still mostly done by the Sector for Strategic Planning, Aid Coordination and European Integration of BiH MoJ (SSPACEI). In that respect, it is most likely that in the event of discontinuation of SSPACEI’s commitment to this process, the entire system of monitoring the implementation of JSRS AP at the sector level might collapse since it currently functions mostly owing to the abovementioned Sector of BiH MoJ. With the exception of the last cycle of FWG meetings when a certain progress was noticed, in the previous three quarterly cycles of meetings of each FWG, the representatives of certain institutions in each of the five FWGs continually did not attend the meetings and participate actively. As a result, the degree of implementation of AP JSRS is constantly decreasing and additional slowdown was noticed in 2011. The report of the European Commission on the progress in BiH in 2011 , among other things, states: “Overall lack of political will and appropriate planning continues to impede the efficient implementation of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy (JSRS) for the period 2009-2013. Shortcomings involve insufficient distribution of human and financial resources and generally poor coordination between relevant institutions. “, as well as that it is: „(...) It is necessary to speed up the implementation of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy.(...)“. Even though the CSOs independent reports, the reports of the justice sector institutions and the conclusions of the Ministerial Conference continually point at the almost identical key problems and obstacles, it is worrying that very little is done in practice to overcome those problems and implement the conclusions of the Ministerial Conference (MC). That represents an additional potential risk that may devalue the credibility as well as the very purpose of sustaining the MC. By analysing the progress achieved in the previous reporting period in each of the strategic areas, the conclusion arises that reforms, due to the increasing lack of political will, are still almost exclusively conducted on the operational-technical level, meaning that the programs and activities that are considered less “politically sensitive” are those that are being implemented, which results in a very limited overall progress. In addition to that, one cannot resist the impression that even in those areas where certain level of progress is noticable, such programs and activities are mostly implemented as part of a certain donor project in the justice sector and therefore the credits for their complete or partial realization could not exclusively be assigned to justice sector institutions. Moreover, this may also be an indication that the institutional ownership of JSRS is still insufficiently developed. In addition to that, by analysing the reports of the TS JSRS, the conclusion is reached that there is no harmonized degree of their realisation on the level of BiH, entities, cantons and Brčko District BiH (e.g. the FBiH sector of criminal sanction execution is lagging behind the RS sector). If this continues, those levels of authority in BiH that are continuously not committed to the implementation of the JSRS AP programs and activities will slow down the coordinated implementation of the reform as a result. Also, they will disrupt the coherency of the entire BiH justice system and the principles of the equal treatment and approach to the efficient justice for all citizens on the entire BiH territory. Taking all of this into consideration, it is quite likely that the final deadline for the full implementation of JSRS, the end of 2013, will be impossible to meet and that the prolongation of the realization of numerous programs and activities by revising AP JSRS is inevitable. It is evident that the existing budgets of justice sector institutions are scarce and insufficient for the implementation of such complex Strategy. The additional aggravating circumstance is the decision of the group of donors (Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA), the British Embassy to BiH and the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation and Development (AECID)) about the withdrawal from the initiative of establishing a joint donor fund for the support to the implementation of AP JSRS in BiH. In consequence of the unjustifiably long process of consideration and decision-making by the members of executive authority in BiH to the Memorandum on establishing the JSRS Donor Fund, the group of the abovementioned donors decided to withdraw from this initiative during the third quarter of 2011. Taking into consideration the overall reduction of donor funds available to BiH and to the BiH justice sector as well, as a result of redirecting the donor community priorities to financing other countries but also as a result of the global economic crisis, it is needless to emphasize the size of the contribution that this donator fund would have made in terms of compensating for fairly limited budget funds necessary for the implementation of the ambitious plan of the justice sector reform in BiH. In the light of these circumstances, it is recommended that the 7th Ministerial Conference and the president of the HJPC BiH and JC BD adopt the conclusion and deliver it promptly to the Fiscal Council of BiH in order for it to consider the possibility that the Document on Global Framework of Fiscal Balance and Policies in BiH for 2012-2014 includes the need for ensuring additional financial means in BiH justice sector, and especially the need for ensuring additional funds for financing priority JSRS programs and activities to an extent that is sufficient for at least a partial compensation for those funds that had been ensured by donators in previous years. Finally, it is important to emphasize that starting the EU-BiH Structured Dialogue on Justice Reform in June 2011 resulted in a certain degree of relaxation of political relations in BiH justice sector. Two meetings have been held by now and their outcome leaves some space for mild optimism that a more constructive discussion between all key participants could take place in the following period about all shortcomings in the justice sector as well as that the conditions set to the justice sector in the process of joining the EU could be fulfilled by coordinated finding of joint solutions based on compromises. Even though the six partner CSOs did not take part at the previous two meetings of EU-BiH Structured Dialogue on Justice, two consultation meetings were held (November 3, 2011 and December 19, 2011) at the invitation of the representatives of the EU Delegation in BiH. The EU Delegation representatives presented a set of recommendations from previous meetings and gave an opportunity to partner CSOs to give their comments and suggestions. Also, the EU Delegation representatives invited the representatives of six partner CSOs to become included in this process starting from the next meeting that is planned to take place in late March 2012. At the same time, the representatives of six partner CSOs committed to transferring and promoting all relevant information on EUBiH Structured Dialogue and also to representing views of other civil society organizations active in BiH justice sector in connection to this process. In that respect, it was agreed that the EU Delegation in BiH and the representatives of six partner CSOs should ask from justice sector institutions to adopt this initiative at the upcoming Justice Sector Ministerial Conference and that the representatives of CSOs become invited to participate in this process starting from the first following meeting. Recommendations related to the Strategic Pillar 1 – Judicial System: 1. Taking into consideration the recommendations from the second meeting of the Structured Dialogue, it is necessary to urgently make changes to the existing AP JSRS and add new activities, the implementation of which will result in the realization of the mentioned recommendations; 2. In order to implement the recommendation of the EU for the institutional reform of the appellate system in the Court of BiH, new strategic program should be included in the strategic subfield 1.1. – Independence and harmonization; 3. Also, concerning the implementation of the recommendation of the EU for reducing a large number of unsolved old cases about the transfer of contentious probate cases to notaries, it is necessary to include new strategic program in the strategic subfield 1.2. - Efficiency; 4. It is necessary to intensify efforts by Federal Justice Ministries for adoption of the Law on Prosecution of Federation of BiH and, in addition to holding a thematic conference and consultations with the cantonal MJ, to start activities around alignment of attitudes of cantonal MJs about the transfer of jurisdictions from cantonal MJ to FMJ in terms of financing and establishing a unified Law on Prosecution on the level of the Federation BiH; 5. Concerning the alignment of the principles of the program budget in all judiciary institutions in accordance with the existing guidelines that are given to all institutions, it is necessary to monitor the application of those guidelines by HJPC and provide technical support and staff education in order to further support their implementation through cooperation of HJPC and CEST; 6. In accordance with the analysis of existing capacities of institutions in budget preparation and execution, it is necessary to begin the amendments to the existing rulebooks on the systematisation of workplaces and plan adequate funds in budgets of the institutions in order to ensure adequate human resources in the upcoming period; 7. In relation to reducing a large number of unsolved cases prior to amending the existing ones or passing new regulations in the Law on Enforcement Procedure related to the position, role and status of the court executor, it is necessary to ensure the passing of a certain number of amendments to the existing Law on HJPC; 8. In terms of reducing the number of unsolved cases related to the execution of legally binding judgements, it is necessary to find a way to ensure budget funds for their execution; 9. It is necessary to urgently work on completing the current system for electronic filing of small claims and ensure that representatives of communal companies, in addition to courts, have access to the system; 10. Prior to making a decision on the establishment of new courts and prosecutor’s offices, it is necessary to first reassess the existing organizational structure and start strengthening the capacities of the existing courts and prosecutor’s offices by increasing the number of judges and prosecutors and to start the formation of new organizational units only if that is not possible; 11. In order to ensure adequate material and technical conditions for the functioning of courts and prosecutor’s offices, it is necessary to urgently update the existing architectural-technical plans in order to determine what is necessary for their reconstruction; 12. It is necessary to ensure that when transferring/adding new jurisdictions from AP JSRS to CESTs that adequate budget funds necessary for additional training are provided. Recommendations related to the Strategic Pillar 2 – Execution of Criminal Sanctions: It is recommended: 13. to the Parliament of the Federation BiH to speed up the procedure of passing the Law on Execution of Criminal Sanctions; 14. to the MJ FBiH to increase measures for making and passing regulations with the aim of ensuring an increased application of community service and other types of alternative punishments and of ensuring materialtechnical conditions; 15. to the MJ RS to increase efforts and provide funds for equipping and human resourcing with the aim of putting into function the Special Hospital for Forensic Psychiatry in Sokoc; 16. to MJ BiH to invest additional efforts, through the Implementation Unit, in order to speed up the realization of this important project; 17. to entity MJs to speed up processes of establishing entity administration departments; 18. to the MJ BiH to speed up the harmonization of attitudes and start the making and passing of the joint plan of financing heath protection of prisoners in cooperation with the ministries of heath. Recommendations related to the Strategic Pillar 3 – Access to Justice: 19. The Association “Your Rights Bosnia and Herzegovina” recommends taking more efficient measures for the implementation of the Action Plan by carriers of certain strategic programs/activities, by reinforcing the coordination between the state carriers of activities and entity and cantonal institutions and Brčko District. It is necessary that the ministries of justice of entities and cantonal ministries as well as JC BD become more actively involved in the implementation of the Action Plan, include strategic programs and activities in their work program, which would create a stronger obligation for the implementation. 20. Regarding the Framework Law on Free Legal Aid, it is necessary to influence the authorities in BiH to adopt that law with the aim of ensuring equal rights of citizens on the entire BiH territory. 21. To influence the passing of cantonal laws on free legal aid in those cantons that do not have this law, 22. To ensure the alignment of the existing regulations or passing new ones in order to provide the access to free legal aid to as many citizens as possible, 23. To ensure that the passing of the Law on Free Legal Aid establishes an independent body or board for providing aid on the entire BiH territory. The representatives of associations specialized for providing free legal aid would also be included in the independent body, 24. In an adequate way ensure that legal help is provided by independent organs, including lawyers and associations specialized for providing free legal aid; 25. Concerning the structured dialogue, to ask from institutions of the justice sector to include six partner civil society organizations in the process of structured dialogue about the judicial system, 26. In parallel with development of standards of work with court users, it is also necessary for HJPC to develop an efficient system for monitoring their application and compose a guidebook with accompanying annexes for each service, with the aim of improving the quality of service provided by courts, establishing the system of monitoring the fulfilment of standards as the control of quality of court services. 27. In the following period, to increase activities of OCDs in monitoring the implementation of AP JSRS in BiH by collecting information from individual sources, such as the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, courts in both entities, Centre for Legal Aid of the Republic of Srpska, CEST of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Srpska, EU Delegation, OHR/EUSR. Recommendations related to the Strategic Pillar 4 – Support to Economic Growth: 28. To ensure sufficient financial funds in entity budgets in 2012 for consistent implementation of the action plan for strategic area 4 – supporting economic growth, 29. To complete the analysis on the necessary alterations of the court systems, making and implementation of the full implementation plan on the basis of questionnaires completed by judges and lawyers and present it to all key actors in the justice sector, including the representatives of the civil society in BiH in order to give them an opportunity to give their comments and suggestions, 30. To promptly appoint persons in charge of mediation, coordination and monitoring of the activity of mediation in all entity ministries of justice, 31. To ensure political will for passing the set of laws on the level of the FBiH (Law on Property Rights FBiH, Law on Cadastre FBiH, Law on Amendments to the Law on Land Registry FBiH) which will enable a more efficient reform of land administration, 32. To adopt the strategies and policies in the area of land administration that are a condition for approving financial funds for the continuation of the reform of land administration; 33. Technical department for monitoring the implementation of AP JSRS to consider and incorporate into the new revised AP JSRS the recommendations of civil society organizations contained in the annual report of CSO on the monitoring of the implementation of AP JSRS. Recommendations related to the Strategic Pillar 5 – Well-Managed and Coordinated Sector: 34. CCI again appeals to the ministers in the BiH justice sector to take full responsibility for a consistent realization of assumed reform obligations that are stated in the AP JSRS and other strategic documents relevant to the justice sector, which is significant for further progress of our country toward the EU. 35. All institutions in the justice sector in BiH, including cantonal justice ministries, should be included in EU-BiH structured dialogue on the judicial system, especially if taking into account their jurisdictions and responsibilities for the functioning of the judicial system in FBiH. In addition to that, the process of structural dialogue has to be depoliticized and a much larger involvement of key judicial institutions in BiH, primarily of HJPC BiH, has to be enabled, in order to avoid the possibility of further jeopardizing the independence of the judiciary system in BiH. 36. It is recommended that the request of the representatives of six partner CSOs for becoming included in the process of the EU-BiH structured dialogue on justice reform should be approved at the 7th Justice Sector Ministerial Conference scheduled for February 28, 2011. Also, it is recommended to invite the six partner CSOs to participate in this process starting from the following meeting planned for late March 2012. 37. It is recommended that the 7th Justice Sector Ministerial Conference adopt the conclusion and deliver it to the Fiscal Council of BiH in order for it to determine the need in the Document on Global Framework of Fiscal Balance and Politics in BiH for 2012-2014 for ensuring additional financial means in BiH justice sector, and especially the need for ensuring additional funds for financing priority JSRS programs and activities to an extent that is sufficient for at least a partial compensation for those funds that had been ensured by donators in previous years. 38. It is necessary that the Federal Ministry of Justice, in accordance with the FBiH Government Decree on the process of strategic planning, annual planning and reporting in federal ministries, makes a three-year institutional strategic plan within which it will take over measures and activities from AP JSRS. Concerning the RS Ministry of Justice, it is necessary that it keeps pace with the FMoJ and that it passes its institutional strategic plan which would also be aligned with AP JSRS in BiH. Cantonal justice ministries and JC BD BiH have to update their institutional strategic plan in accordance with the third revised AP JSRS, drafts of which are made within the project of technical assistance of the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation and Development (AECID) and to formally adopt them by the end of March 2012 at the latest. All mentioned institutions should ensure a close connection between their strategic plans and budget framework documents, and ensure that operative plans are timely and consistently transferred to the annual work plans of each of the mentioned institutions. 39. Federal Ministry of Justice has to intensify activities on human resourcing of the Sector for Strategic Planning. Simultaneously, RS MoJ, JC of BD BiH should amend their rulebooks on internal organization with the aim of establishing internal organizational units or at least some workplaces for strategic planning, monitoring and reporting. Introducing the system of institutional strategic planning should be completely integrated or at least closely connected with the process of program budgeting. 40. It is necessary to intensify the activities of the policy forum between BiH MoJ and the HJPC of BiH Secretariat and to include in its work entity and cantonal ministries of justice and representatives of JC of BD BiH in their full capacity. 41. In accordance with the requirements of the Public Administration Reform Strategy in BiH, it is necessary that MoJ BiH, FMoJ, MoJ RS, cantonal MoJs and JC BD BiH make an analysis of their exiting organisational and staff capacities for policy-making and to ensure the establishing of the most appropriate organisational structure for performing those tasks on the basis of that analysis (depending on the scope of work and personnel available for performing that task). Then, on the basis of the analysis, each ministry should amend its rulebook on internal organization and job systematisation in order to establish suitable internal organisational structure or individual work places for performing that task, along with determining suitable job descriptions. Taking into account the ever-present budget restrictions in terms of impossibility of employing new civil servants and with the aim of avoiding possible additional accumulation of administration, it is recommended that the filling of these work positions should be done by internal transfers and/or amendments to the workplace description of the existing civil servants who already partially do this work as part or in parallel with their regular assignments. Only when conducted analyses argumentatively point to the impossibility of these solutions, ministries should start employing new personnel. The methodology of development of public policies, including policy impact assessment, should be developed in parallel with these activities. With the aim of achieving coherency of the solution on the level of the sector, the optimal solution would be a unified methodology that could afterwards be transposed in each institution of the justice sector by an internal act (e.g. a rulebook). The Decree of the Government of the Federation on the way of preparation, impact assessment and policy selection in the process of the making of acts proposed and passed by the Government of the FBiH and federal ministries (“Official Gazette FBiH” number 35/11) could serve as a model for the making of this methodology. Also, considering the complexity of the process of policy development and impact assessment, it is recommended that a suitable handbook be made as part of the methodology and also to ensure additional specialised training and mentorship to the appointed personnel at the ministries with the aim of deepening their technical knowledge and skills needed for performing these tasks. It is evident that institutions of the justice sector in BiH will not be able to implement all these activities alone and it seems justified that a suitable technical support be ensured by bilateral and multilateral donors active in the justice sector in BiH. 42. It is necessary to finally open a question and, with an utterly serious and responsible approach, start solving the issue of restructuring cantonal ministries of justice and administration2 and through conversations between representatives of relevant institutions and political leaders to avoid politisation of this important process, which will certainly contribute to the better implementation of JSRS. In this respect, it is recommended that the 7th MC adopts the conclusion by which the issue of restructuring cantonal ministries will be discussed at one of the upcoming thematic conferences, in the presence of all ministers and other persons who are included in the process of implementation of JSRS, which will strengthen the initiative for prompt solving of this important issue. 43. It is necessary to start activities for strengthening the capacities in BiH MoJ, in their departments in FMJ, MJ RS and JC BD BiH in the field of approximation of BiH justice sector legislation with the EU Acquis Communautaire, which should be one of the priorities in the implementation of JSRS AP. Recommendations related to the quality of the monitoring of the implementation of the Action Plan JSRS: Consistent and timely implementation of the Action Plan for the implementation of the JSRS in BiH urgently requires: 44. With the aim of overcoming noticed shortcomings in the process of monitoring and reporting on the realisation of AP JSRS, it is recommended that the 7th MC adopts the conclusion by which it will oblige all institutional carriers of the process of monitoring and reporting on the realisation of the AP JSRS in BiH to participate in the training on practical aspects of the application of OWIS system of monitoring and reporting that would be organized by USAID JSDP II project. 45. Ministries of justice in BiH and entities, HJPC and JC BD should invest maximum effort in order for Technical Department for monitoring the implementation of AP JSRS in BiH (TD) to finally start functioning in its full capacity, which implies allocation of larger financial funds necessary for the work of the TD, changing its structure of members, including the replacement of passive institutional members who cannot take full responsibility for assumed obligations in the context of a more efficient implementation of JSRS. 46. Even though the conclusions of the MC are binding and have to be fulfilled in the given time period and SSPACEI has to be notified on their implementation, the level of their implementation is still low and those conclusions are very often repeated. If a certain institution does not implement a certain conclusion of the MC, it has to provide the reason for that at the following MC and the MC has to conduct a debate and determine a suitable countermeasure for a consistent implementation of its conclusion. Otherwise, it could happen that credibility and the purpose itself of this body is “devalued”. 47. It is necessary to ensure active participation of all members of functional workgroups during scheduled meetings because it is unacceptable that meetings of FWG are held with a quorum barely being present. The FWG 5 had a quorum at several previous meetings, there were no postponements of the meetings, but it is evident that the representatives of the MJ RS do not attend those meetings. One of the main causes of this situation is a chronic lack of capacities in most institutions. By redistribution of the existing capacities and by more efficient planning and coordination within those institutions, shortcomings can be overcome, at least in the shortterm. 48. It is necessary to significantly improve vertical coordination and cooperation between the Federal Ministry of Justice and cantonal ministries of justice, which still represents one of key obstacles in proper implementation of JSRS in BiH. It is evident that, regardless of the existing jurisdictions of those institutions, their cooperation should be much better. 49. There is a continuous need for establishing a better coordination and exchange of information within institutions that are included in the process of the implementation of JSRS, especially on the level of cabinets of assistants of ministers, secretaries of the ministries and between all relevant sectors for a more efficient implementation of JSRS in BiH. In that regard, all ministries of justice should pass special internal acts or amend the existing ones within which they could develop mechanisms of inter-institutional cooperation, coordination and information exchange. CONCLUSION Despite pronounced political tensions in the justice sector in BiH in the past twelve months, certain progress has still been noticed in each of the strategic areas of JSRS. However, the fact remains that much more could have been done in this time period. With gradual relaxation of political tensions triggered by the start of the EU-BiH structured dialogue on the future of the judicial system in BiH, the hope remains that the current course will change and that the reform process that will contribute to progress in the implementation of AP JSRS will intensify. It is crucial that the 7th MC sends a clear message to all local institutions and BH public that consistent and timely implementation of AP JSRS is the only way if BiH justice sector really wants to contribute to the building of the European future for BiH citizens. Otherwise, each further lack of dedication, unequivocal support and constructive approach to the realization of the Action Plan of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy in BiH will present a setback in the process of achieving strategic aims and satisfying growing demands for the rule of law and equal approach to efficient justice for all BiH citizens. Civil society organizations will, in partnership with relevant representatives of government and non-governmental sector in BiH, continue to implement systematic and continuous monitoring, analysis, reporting, and public advocating. Also, they will continue to, through full participative role in decision-making process, give substantial contribution to consistent and timely implementation of AP JSRS with the aim of establishing and functioning of the justice system in BiH as an incentive for a more intense economic growth, rule of law and respecting the highest standards of human rights protection and freedom for all citizens of BiH.
More...
Keywords: future status of Kosovo; conference; politics; Serbia; Albania; North Macedonia; Croatia; democratic society; regional stability; minority; international standards; decentralization; security;
The Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia organized a two-day conference “The Future Status of Kosovo” on June 13-14, 2005 in Prishtina. The conference not only stood for the third in the series of Serb-Albanian dialogues the Committee has staged over the past eight years, but also for the final and most important segment of the US Institute for Peace-supported project “Belgrade - Prishtina: Steps to Build Confidence and Understanding.” The idea behind the conference was to provide – on the eve of the announced startup of negotiations on Kosovo’s status – a realistic insight into the complexity of this major regional issue. The book’s contents – authentic discussions of the conference participants – practically figures for a public debate on a reality and real problems. Regardless of many a different stand, the conference participants, Serbs and Albanians alike, attempted to conceptualize a policy that moves towards a lasting solution and regional stability. A policy as such implies a sober assessment of Kosovo’s reality, as well as of possibilities, problems and constraints. The two-day conference, echoing more in Prishtina and somewhat less in Belgrade, assembled a number of outstanding political and public figures from Prishtina – Albanians, Serbs and people from Kosovo’s other ethnic communities, all of them concerned with their own future and ready to acknowledge major changes in the Kosovo society in the past six years. The same were the considerations of the participants from Belgrade, the people standing for Serbia’s alternative politics, and of Podgorica’s officials. Representatives of the international community and regional neighbors, Macedonia and Croatia, also partook in the conference and creatively contributed to the exchange of views. “Key international players were clear that that the startup of the talks about Kosovo’s future status is on the international agenda this year. And now it is on political leaders and institutions to demonstrate that they aim at building a stable, tolerant, multiethnic and democratic society in Kosovo, a society in which all communities will be living together in peace and in peace with their neighbors. It is time for all sides to let go short lived politics, join in a dialogue about real problems in good faith, with passion and constructiveness, and take all measures we know are necessary. This conference is a good start in the right direction. We need more such dialogues, said Soren Jessen Petersen, the UN Secretary General Special Representative, addressing the conference. The conference was organized in five panels: “Kosovo in the Context of Regional Stability,” “Minorities and International Standards in Kosovo,” “Decentralization and its Implications in Kosovo,” “Post-Conflict Rehabilitation” and “Status of Kosovo.” The first panel, “Kosovo in the Context of Regional Stability” chaired by Professor Enver Hasani, broached key security aspects, the role of Kosovo’s future army under civilian control, regional security challenges not only in the event of Kosovo’s independence, but also of Montenegro’s, the state of a ff airs in Kosovska Mitrovica as a major problem to be solved, etc. “Unconditional safety of minority communities is a key standard preconditioning stability and the pace of solving future status of Kosovo,” concluded, inter alia, the second panel “Minorities and International Standards in Kosovo,” chaired by lawyer Azem Vllasi. The discussion also highlighted that the return of all displaced persons and refugees was a priority task of all Kosovo institutions and factors. As for Kosovo Serbs, their integration into Kosovo society, as many put it, is their right, the same as their right to live safely in their homes is a fundamental human right without any alternative solution whatsoever. According to Vera Markovic, who chaired the third panel “Decentralization and its Implications in Kosovo,” the discussion that resembled a parliamentary debate indicated that political power was being gradually institutionalized. “It’s most encouraging that different positions on the decentralization plan do not divide the political sphere into Serbian and Albanian parts, but into groupings that include both Albanian and minority parties…I would say that the debate on decentralization testifies that Kosovo society obviously endeavors to let go the issues related to ‘outer freedom’ or freedom from domination and come to grips with the question of ‘inner freedom’ that cannot but benefit all minorities, ethnic and political alike,” said Vera Markovic. What marked the panel “Post-Con fl ict Rehabilitation,” but the entire conference as well, was the stance that position of minorities was a measure of any society’s democratic potential. In this context, as Dr. Olga Popovic-Obradovic put it, still rather high interethnic tensions make the situation in Kosovo extremely complex. Referring to preconditions of post-conflict rehabilitation, she singled out the issues brought forward by panelists, ranging from acknowledgment and condemnation of crimes and the policy that has given birth to it, lustration and individual accountability to culture as a lasting value linking people and nations. Summing up the “Status of Kosovo” panel, its chair, Sonja Biserko, said that the view that prevailed – at the panel and throughout the conference – was that some form of Kosovo’s independence was unquestionable. However, the panel itself, she added, was more focused on the sum and substance of Kosovo’s independence. It is impossible to ignore the past, the recent past in particular, as it brought about the situation under discussion. In other words, what should be recognized are not only developments in the recent past, but also the fact that the Greater Serbia project that generated ex-Yugoslavia’s disintegration persists as an illusion to come true once the international constellation changes. Therefore, Serbs should reconcile not only with Albanians, but also with all neighbors – Croats, Bosniaks and, in a manner of speaking, with some minorities in Serbia proper, according to Biserko. The conference ended by adopting a declaration welcoming the international community’s intention to tackle the future status of Kosovo as a priority issue of its agenda. Taking into account that the Contact Group has already defined the framework for negotiations that should ensure regional security and stability, and open the door to Western Balkans’ association with and ultimate membership of the European Union, “cognizant that such approach by the international community and favorable circumstance should not be allowed to pass by, and confident that this provides a unique momentum for all regional leaders to prove their political wisdom, constructiveness and genuine commitment to true interests of peoples and citizens,” participants in the conference, “call on Belgrade and Prishtina, as two directly involved parties, to engage in a substantial dialogue with maximum good will and to fully cooperate with representatives of the international community; request political actors on both sides to acknowledge Kosovo’s reality as the starting point for negotiations, while constantly bearing in mind legitimate interests of Serbs, Albanians and other communities in Kosovo, and to insist on the respect and full implementation of all international documents and standards dealing with human and minority rights,” quotes, inter alia, the unanimously adopted declaration.
More...
Keywords: Serbia; prison; Valjevo; Leskovac; Sremska Mitrovica; Požarevac; Novi Sad; quality of life; security; re-socialization; minor; woman; hospital;
Unapređivanje krivičnopravnog sistema, kao preduslov za izgradnju boljeg i bezbednijeg društva, jedan je od najvažnijih aspekata reforme pravosuđa koja se u Srbiji sprovodi poslednjih godina. Osim nesumnjivog značaja za zajednicu, posmatran u kontekstu ljudske bezbednosti ovaj segment reforme dodatno dobija na važnosti, jer je neminovno vezan za globalne procese i međunarodni pravni poredak. U isto vreme, i postupanje sa prestupnicima i zatvorenicima koji se nalaze na izdržavanju kazne, podleže brojnim zakonima i pravilima, konvencijama i drugim dokumentima koji se baziraju, kako na specifi čnoj unutrašnjoj i međunarodnoj legislativi, tako i na konceptu ljudskih prava. Imajući to u vidu, Helsinški odbor za ljudska prava je već 2002. godine počeo sa monitoringom zatvora u Srbiji, najpre kroz jednogodišnji projekat kojim je obuhvaćeno 13 zatvora, a potom kroz trogodišnji (2003-2006) regionalni projekat „Prevencija torture-podrška rehabilitaciji žrtava torture“, tokom koga je vršen kontinuirani monitoring svih zatvora u zemlji.
More...
Keywords: Serbia; high school students; value orientations; tradition; conservatism; homophobia; violence in school; human rights;
Analiza stavova i vrednosnih orijentacija srednjoškolaca je rezultat istraživanja na osnovu podataka prikupljenih u periodu april-jun 2011, u šest gradova u Srbiji. Da bismo se uopšte bavili vrednostima ove mlađe generacije u našem društvu, moramo se osvrnuti na neke strukturalne promene koje obeležavaju vreme njihovog odrastanja. Period u kome želimo da proučavamo stavove i vrednosne orijentacije srednjoškolaca u Srbiji, jeste period nakon decenije «demokratskih» promena u zemlji, period (još uvek) zakasnele transformacije. Došlo je do proglašenja nezavisnosti Crne Gore i Republike Kosovo a nestabilnost država regiona (Bosne i Hercegovine i još uvek nerešene granice sa Kosovom) su uzrok osećaja nesigurnosti u socijalnom ali i nacionalnom smislu, kod većine stanovništva Srbije. Govorimo i o periodu u kome se odvija revizija istorije i relativizacija, pa i promocija desnih ideologija (ravnogorski pokret i omladinske profašističke organizacije) i u kome su religija i crkva i dalje veoma važne za veliki deo naroda. Ne smemo da zanemarimo i povećan prodor globalizacijiskih faktora koji su relativno uticali na izgradnju demokratije u zemlji. Najupadljiviji faktor je zvanična odluka da se pristupi ulasku u EU. Kao rezultat postoji donekle približavanje državne politike interesima Evropske unije. Međutim, u zemlji problemi postoje: oligarhijski sistem, uticaj političkih stranaka i visoka korupcija – kako u privredi tako i u politici – kao i problemi zaštite prava marginalizovanih grupa koji sprečavaju izgradnju građanskog društva.
More...
Keywords: Civil servants; public administration; public institutions; civil society; discrimination; human rights; equality; constitution;
Princip ravnopravnosti i zabrane diskriminacije sadržan je u svim međunarodnim sporazumima o ljudskim pravima. Povelja Ujedinjenih nacija obavezuje sve članice na “poštivanje ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda za sve, bez razlikovanja rase, spola, jezika ili vjere”. Također, Univerzalna deklaracija o ljudskim pravima garantuje svim ljudima slobodu i jednakost u dostojanstvu i pravima, bez obzira na “bilo kakvu razliku kao što je rasa, boja kože, spol, jezik, vjera, političko ili neko drugo uvjerenje, nacionalno ili društveno porijeklo, imovina, rođenje ili neki drugi status”. Ustav Bosne i Hercegovine (BiH), Ustav Republike Srpske (RS), Ustav Federacije Bosne i Hercegovine (FBiH) i Statut Brčko distrikta Bosne i Hercegovine (BD BiH) sadrže odredbe o zabrani diskriminacije. Dodatno, Ustavom BiH je zagarantovana direktna primjena Evropske konvencije o zaštiti ljudskih prava i njenih protokola u BiH, te je utvrđen njihov prioritet nad svim ostalim zakonima. Pored toga, Aneksom I na Ustav navedeno je dodatnih 15 međunarodnih dokumenata, među kojima su i Međunarodni pakt o ekonomskim, socijalnim i kulturnim pravima, Konvencija o ukidanju svih oblika diskriminacije nad ženama, kao Konvencija o pravima djeteta. [...]
More...
Keywords: Human rights; Bosnia and Herzegovina; women’s rights; gender studies; gender equality; implementation of CEDAW; women’s human rights; law; politics; discrimination;
Dodatak trećem alternativnom izvještaju je nastao kao rezultat zajedničkih napora grupe aktivistkinja i aktivista iz nevladinih organizacija u Bosni i Hercegovini sa dugogodišnjim iskustvom u direktnom radu sa ženama čija su prava ugrožena ili direktno povrijeđena, kao i aktivnostima zalaganja za usvajanje rodno osjetljivih i odgovornih zakona i javnih politika u oblasti zaštite ženskih ljudskih prava i ravnopravnosti polova. Dodatak ima za cilj usmjeravanje pažnje na promjene u ključnim oblastima koje su predmet trećeg alternativnog izvještaja, a koje su se desile nakon 2010. godine, te na nezavisnu analizu i nove podatke koji nisu bili uključeni u treći alternativni izvještaj, a odnose se na stanje zaštite i ostvarivanja prava naročito višestruko marginalizovanih kategorija žena u Bosni i Hercegovini. [...]
More...
Keywords: Croatian Peasant Party;
The booklet, published in 1987 by "Središnji odbor Hrvatske Seljačke Stranke" (Central Committee of the Croatian Peasant Party) with office in Brussels (Belgium), is a report on the "World Meeting of the Croatian Peasant Party and Croatian Workers' Union" (Toronto, May 1987) with contributions by: Juraj Krnjević, Lovro Črep, Josip M. Torbar, Eugen Laxa, Tihomil Rađa, Mehmed Bašić, Đuro Đurković, Mirko Vidović, Dorothy Obradović, Krešimir Butković, Zvonko Mustapić, Stjepan Golubić, Juraj Boljkovac, Stjepan Košutić, Ivo Tomić, Ferid Salihović,
More...
Keywords: Croatia; war; 90s; civilian victims; right on reparation; international law; human rights;
Svaki rat za sobom ostavlja žrtve. Žrtve su namjerna ili slučajna meta svakog ratnog razaranja koja munjevito mijenjaju sliku stanovništva. Prema riječima bivšeg glavnog tajnika UN-a Kofija Annana ‘u mnogim današnjim sukobima civili su postali primarne žrtve nasilja’. U drugoj polovici 20. stoljeća sve su više u središtu političke i društvene pozornosti žrtve i teška stradanja u svjetskim i drugim ratovima i nizu etničkih sukoba. Prema Europskoj sigurnosnoj strategiji od 1990. naovamo gotovo 4 milijuna osoba stradalo je u ratovima, a od toga su 90% bili civili. Izvještaji Ujedinjenih naroda navode da je broj civilnih žrtava u ratovima devedesetih godina dramatično porastao, otprilike s 5 na 90% ukupnog stradanja. Unatoč ovoj procjeni, egzaktan broj civilnih žrtava rata nije poznat. Iako brojke nisu u toj mjeri sigurne, brojni izvještaji, kako službeni tako i akademski te oni međunarodnih organizacija za ljudska prava, govore o visokim postocima civilnih stradanja.
More...
Keywords: Zagreb during the Second World War; Kingdom of Yugoslavia; NDH; Independent State of Croatia and its creation; Exile of minorities from Zagreb; Zagreb Serbs; Zagreb Jews; Zagreb's ethnic minorities; Organizing the national liberation movement;
Pred vama je vodič po Zagrebu kojim želimo olakšati upoznavanje nekih ključnih mjesta stradanja i otpora u Drugom svjetskom ratu. Sažeti opisi povezuju povijesna istraživanja, odabrane ulomke iz književnih djela, dnevnika i osobnih sjećanja. U trenutku kad polako odlazi generacija koja je preživjela vrijeme najgoreg terora u povijesti grada nastojali smo stvoriti što više prostora za riječi i zapise svjedoka vremena i protagoniste povijesnih događanja. Razvoj ove publikacije podržalo je Veleposlanstvo Sjedinjenih Američkih Država u Republici Hrvatskoj, u sklopu programa "Osporavana povijest: novi pristupi obrazovanju o holokaustu". Documenta se pitanjem prezentacije ključnih događaja 20. Stoljeća bavi od svog osnivanja, tražeći najbolje načine približavanja prošlosti novim generacijama. Neki dosadašnji poduhvati uključuju obilazak mjesta sjećanja, počevši od 2010. i dokumentarnog filma Documenta Memoriae – Zagreb, redateljice Dijane Mlađenović dostupnog online na ovoj poveznici. U sagledavanju mjesta sjećanja i otkrivanju novih mogućnosti komemoriranja žrtava, posebno nas je poticao Saša Šimpraga, autor koncepta Virtualnog muzeja Dotrščina, s kojim od 2012. Sudjelujemo u organiziranju godišnjih memorijalnih intervencija dostupnim na poveznici www.dotrscina.hr. Paralelno s događanjima u prostoru parka, u javnom prostoru Trga bana Jelačića u rujnu 2012. mogao se razgledati prvi postav Virtualnog muzeja Dotrščina na temu Pisci I publicisti ubijeni na Dotrščini čija je autorica bila Nataša Mataušić, muzejska savjetnica Hrvatskog povijesnog muzeja.
More...
Keywords: BiH; human rights; freedom of peaceful assembly; freedom of speech; freedom of movement;
U sklopu projekta ,,Doprinos akademske zajednice zaštiti ljudskih prava u Bosni i Hercegovini” koji realizuje Pravni fakultet u Lukavici Univerziteta za poslovni inženjering i menadžment Banja Luka, u saradnji sa Asocijacijom za demokratske inicijative (ADI) iz Sarajeva, a uz finansijsku podršku Evropske komisije, u periodu od marta do jula mjeseca 2021. godine sprovedeno je istraživanje koje je za predmet imalo pravno dogmatsku analizu zakona i podzakonskih akata u oblasti poštovanja ljudskog prava na slobodu mišljenja i izražavanja, prava na slobodu mirnog okupljanja i udruživanja i prava na slobodu kretanja, kao i analizu implementacije odredaba ovih akata od strane bezbjednosnih i pravosudnih institucija (policije i sudova). Cilj istraživanja je bio da se mapiraju slučajevi institucionalnog kršenja tri naprijed navedena ljudska prava u Bosni i Hercegovini, kao i da se sagleda postupanje Institucije ombudsmana za ljudska prava na polju zaštite tri naprijed navedena ljudska prava i odrede mogućnosti za jačanje i popularizaciju učešća akademskih institucija i organizacija civilnog društva u unapređenju politika zaštite ljduskih prava u Bosni i Hercegovini. Kao krajnji ishod istraživanja izrađena je ,,Studija mapiranja institucionalnog kršenja ljudskih prava u Bosni i Hercegovini” kojom je mapirano više od 451 slučaj institucionalnog kršenja naprijed navedenih ljudskih prava (176 slučajeva institucionalnog kršenja prava na slobodu mišljenja i izražavanja, 102 slučaja institucionalnog kršenja prava na slobodu mirnog okupljanja i udruživanja i 173 slučaja institucionalnih kršenja prava na slobodu kretanja). Na osnovu nalaza Studije da se zaključiti da su loša zakonska rješenja, u smislu neusaglašenosti sa Evropskom konvencijom o zaštiti ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda i praksom Evropskog suda za ljudska prava, praćena lošim formulacijama podzakonskih akata kao i odsustvom internih procedura u smislu postupanja sigurnosnih institucija, dovela do slučajeva institucionalnog kršenja ljudskih prava koja su mapirana Studijom. Shodno navedenom, ,,Izvještaj o borbi za ljudska prava u Bosni i Hercegovni” predstavlja kvalitativnu analizu važećih zakonskih odredbi u odnosu na tri naprijed navedna ljudska prava koja su zagarantovana Ustavom Bosne i Hercegovine i meuđnarodnim ugovorima koji obavezuju Bosnu i Hercegovinu na njihovu zaštitu, urađenu na osnovu nalaza Studije kao i korištenjem informacija iz otvorenih izvora poput izvještaja Institucije ombudsmana za ljudska prava, izvještaja međunarodnih organizacija i domaćih OCD koje se bave praćenjem zaštite ljudskih prava u BiH, sadržaja naučnih i stručnih radova, novinarskih tekstova, razgovora sa predstavnicima organa vlasti i sl. Pored ovoga, u cilju obezbjeđivanja što sadržajnije slike stanja u oblasti zaštite tri naprijed navedena ljudska prava u Bosni i Hercegovini za potrebe izrade ovog izvještaja putem anonimne ankete sporvedeno je istraživanje o pitanju percepcije stanja tri odabrana ljudska prava u Bosni i Hercegovini među predstavnicima akademske zajednice i organizacija civilnog društva. Na osnovu naprijed navedenih informacija u izvještaju su date preporuke za ministarstva na svim nivoima i preporuke za Instituciju ombudsmena za ljudska prava u Bosni i Hercegovini u smislu smjernica za unapređenje politika zaštite ljudskih prava.
More...
Keywords: BiH; discrimination; protection; NGO; civil society; role; importance;
Usvajanjem Zakona o zabrani diskriminacije (u daljnjem tekstu: ZZD) u julu 2009. godine dopunjen je postojeći antidiskriminacioni okvir u Bosni i Herce govini. Time se i Bosna i Hercegovina priključila širokom krugu država koje eliminaciju diskriminacije nastoje da obezbijede kroz usvajanje sveobuhvatnog antidiskriminacionog zakonodavstva kojim se omogućava sudska zaštita od diskriminacije počinjene kako od države i njenih organa tako i od privatnih lica. Ovaj značajni zakon, pored ostalog, prepoznaje važnu ulogu koju nevladine organizacije mogu da odigraju na polju borbe protiv diskriminacije priznajući im, između ostalog, i određene procesne uloge u sudskom postupku za zaštitu od diskriminacije. Na međunarodnom i komparativnom planu, kao jedna od najznačajnijih aktivnosti nevladinih organizacija na polju borbe protiv diskriminacije ističe se njihova uloga u postupcima za zaštitu od diskriminacije. Razlog davanja mogućnosti organizacijama civilnog društva da učestvuju u postupcima za zaštitu od diskriminacije, u suštini, leži u činjenici da suzbijanje diskriminacije predstavlja djelatnost od javnog interesa, te da svaki dobro uređen sistem za zaštitu od diskriminacije treba da sadrži različite modalitete učešća nevladinih organizacija u postupcima za zaštitu od diskriminacije. Stoga djelovanje NVO-a u postupcima za zaštitu od diskriminacije možemo označiti kao specifičan vid parničenja u javnom interesu. Poseban značaj NVO-ima u ovom domenu, barem u zemljama Evropske unije, dale su direktive u oblasti diskriminacije, koje od država zahtijevaju da u svojim pravnim sistemima, u cilju obezbjeđivanja što efikasnije zaštite od diskriminacije, omoguće nevladinim organizacijama da djeluju u ime žrtava diskriminacije ili kao podrška ovim osobama u postupcima povodom zaštite od diskriminacije. Ove procesne uloge nevladinih organizacija su različito regulisane u različitim pravnim sistemima. Ipak, kao moguće oblike djelovanja nevladinih organizacija u ime žrtve generalno možemo da izdvojimo podnošenje tužbe u ime i za račun žrtve – dakle, pravno zastupanje, mogućnost pojavljivanja nevladine organizacije kao sutužioca uz žrtvu ili, pak, kao samostalnog nosioca tužbe uz pristanak žrtve. Pored navedenog, kao specifičan način djelovanja za račun žrtava diskriminacije izdvajaju se aktivnosti nevladinih organizacija u pravcu podnošenja kolektivne ili grupne tužbe. Veoma važan oblik podrške žrtvama diskriminacije u postupcima povodom diskriminacije svakako je i učešće organizacija civilnog društva kao umješača u postupku na strani žrtve ili, pak, kao prijatelja suda (amici curiae). Na kraju, jedan od ključnih doprinosa nevladinih organizacija u oblasti borbe protiv diskriminacije nesumnjivo je i njihova uloga u takozvanim strateškim parnicama pokrenutim radi obezbjeđenja podrške implementaciji antidiskriminacionih zakona ili rasvjetljavanju različitih koncepata sadržanih u antidiskriminacionom pravu. Imajući u vidu navedeno, ovaj izvještaj nastoji da analizira postojeća zakonska rješenja u svjetlu komparativnih iskustava te da ukaže na prepreke koje stoje na putu aktivnijem angažmanu nevladinih organizacija u sudskim postupcima za zaštitu od diskriminacije. Pored toga, izvještaj nastoji da ponudi određena rješenja koja bi dodatno motivisala nevladine organizacije da aktivno koriste procesne uloge koje su im dodijeljene ZZD-om, a u najboljem interesu žrtava diskriminacije. Izvještaj je prevashodno zasnovan na sekundarnom, komparativnom istraživanju fokusiranom na ulogu, aktivnosti i najbolju praksu organizacija civilnog društva u sudskom postupku zaštite od diskriminacije. Pored toga, analizirana su relevantna zakonska rješenja koja se tiču procesne uloge nevladinih organizacija u sudskom postupku zaštite od diskriminacije, kao i prve presude u predmetima diskriminacije u Bosni i Hercegovini. Analiza usvojenih zakonskih rješenja u Bosni i Hercegovini je izvršena u svjetlu komparativnih iskustava, prije svega iskustava zemalja u okruženju, s obzirom na to da upravo one sa Bosnom i Hercegovinom dijele sličnu pravnu tradiciju i slične probleme, ali i zemalja Evropske unije kojima se Bosna i Hercegovina nastoji pridružiti. Analiza je obuhvatila i druge slučajeve kada je to bilo potrebno radi odgovora na konkretna pitanja. Na kraju, konsultovani su i dostupni izvori o aktuelnom stanju u nevladinom sektoru u Bosni i Hercegovini, sa posebnim fokusom na organizacije koje se bave zaštitom ljudskih prava. U svom prvom dijelu, ovaj izvještaj analizira rješenja predviđena Zakonom o zabrani diskriminacije Bosne i Hercegovine u pogledu procesne uloge nevladinih organizacija u postupku antidiskriminacione zaštite. Drugi dio se fokusira na prepreke koje organizacijama civilnog društva onemogućavaju da se aktivnije uključe u sudske postupke za zaštitu od diskriminacije. Kroz pregled komparativnih iskustava, nastoji se ukazati na najvažnije uslove i kriterije za efikasno korišćenje opcije učešća nevladinih organizacija u postupku antidiskriminacione zaštite u Bosni i Hercegovini. Konačno, u zaključnim razmatranjima sumiraju se zapažanja ove analize te formulišu određene preporuke u pogledu zakonodavnih i praktičnih rješenja u ovoj oblasti u Bosni i Hercegovini.
More...
Keywords: Ukraine; Russia; war; military aggression; BiH; Constitution; radicalization; Central Bosnia; EU; USA;
1. Budućnost Evrope: Prijetnja vojnom agresijom na Ukrajinu i secesionizam u Bosni i Hercegovini 2. Osluškujući eho Putinove Rusije u Ukrajini 3. Provincijalizam i zloćudno uplitanje: Prevazilaženje političkih i institucionalnih barijera u odbrani ustavnog poretka BiH 4. Da li se radikalizacija isplati? 5. Srednja Bosna: ključ opstanka Bosne i Hercegovine 6. Od washingtonskog Marriotta do otpisanog političkog košarkaša 7. EU i SAD trebaju stvoriti prostor za novi društveni ugovor
More...