U okviru aktivnosti društvenog uključivanja za devojčice i žene iz Leskovca organizovan je izlet i obilazak Vranja, Vranjske Banje i Bujanovca. 23 učesnice ove ekskurzije, u Vranju su prvo posetile naselje Gornja čaršija gde su obišle spomenik poznatom trubaču Bakiji Bakiću, koji je proneo slavu vranjske trube širom sveta. Učesnice su zatim posetile Pašin konak, jedno od najstarijih zdanja u Vranju gde je danas smešten Narodni muzej.

Nakon razgledanja grada, Starog Vranja, Muzej-kuće književnika Borisava Stankovića, Vranjske Banje, i obilaska izletišta “Pržar”, grupa se zaputila u Bujanovac gde je nastavljeno sa druženjem i obilascima kulturne baštine. Mnoga od ovih mesta i znamenitosti učesnice su videle i obišle prvi put, ne skrivajući zadovoljstvo brojnim utiscima koje su ponele sa ovog izleta.

Posebnu zahvalnost za realizaciju ovog događaja dugujemo organizaciji ROSA i našoj saradnici Lauri Saitović.

Ova aktivnost socijalne inkluzije realizovana je u okviru projekta „Prevencija i eliminacija dečjih brakova u Srbiji“ koji finansiraju Ambasada Kraljevine Holandije u Srbiji i Ministarstvo za ekonomsku saradnju i razvoj Savezne Republike Nemačke (BMZ) u okviru programa Nemačke razvojne saradnje „Inkluzija Roma i drugih marginalizovanih grupa u Srbiji“.

U okviru projekta “Pravna pomoć licima u riziku od apatridije u Srbiji” finansiranom od strane UNHCR-a, Praxis je i tokom 2022. godine sprovodio aktivnosti usmerene na prevenciju i eliminaciju dečjih, ranih i prinudnih brakova. U sklopu tih aktivnosti, Praxis je održao još jedan ciklus radionica za učenike viših razreda osnovnih škola i to u Apatinu, Subotici, Pančevu, Smederevu, Nišu, Sapcu, Novom Sadu i Kostolcu usmerene na podizanje svesti o uzrocima, potencijalnim rizicima i štetnim posledicama dečjih, ranih i prinudnih brakova, kroz prizmu značaja obrazovanja.

Radionice su bile koncipirane tako da su počinjale temom uzroka osipanja iz obrazovanja, nastavljale se pričom o bračnim ulogama i asocijacijama na brak, dok se, naposletku, govorilo i o načinu reakcije na dečje brakove, odnosno kome se sve deca mogu obratiti, kao i ko je u društvu odgovoran za reakciju na ovu pojavu, koja može poprimiti i kvalifikacije krivičnog dela.

Osmu godinu radionica a šestu u školama na ove teme smo započeli radionicom u OŠ „Jovan Cvijić“ u Kostolcu, kao i radionicom održanom sa korisnicima Svratišta za decu i mlade Grada Novog Sada, koji su imali su potpuno jasan stav da su dečji brakovi prihvaćeni i podržani od strane njihove zajednice i roditelja. Ovakva situacija nam je još jednom pokazala da je neophodno, osim rada sa decom, preventivno delovati, i u samom naselju, na opštu zajednicu.

Na radionicama održanim u OŠ "Žarko Zrenjanin" iz Apatina i OŠ "Ištvan Sečenji" iz Subotice deca su posebno istakla da je pre donošenja neke bitne odluke potrebno razmotriti sve aspekte i okolnosti do kojih takve odluke mogu dovesti. Upravo ovaj vid dečijeg kritičkog razmišljanja, koji je pocrtao preventivnu ulogu ovih radionica, pratio je njihovo uključivanje u vežbe na temu asocijacija na brak i bračne uloge, ali i na kasnije razmatranje zakonskog okvira koji se odnosi na pojavu dečjih brakova. Deca su su nam prenela nameru da se aktivno založe za svoje vršnjake u slucaju saznanja o eventualnim slučajevima stupanja njihovih drugarica i drugara u prinudni ili dečji brak.

Njihovi vršnjaci iz OŠ „Borisav Petrov Braca“ iz Pančeva i OŠ „Dr Jovan Cvijić” iz Smedereva znali su za pojavu dečjih, ranih i prinudnih brakova u svojim sredinama. Akcenat radionica u ovim gradovima bio je na podizanju svesti o štetnosti ove pojave, prevenciji, pravilnom načinu donošenja odluka i načinu reakcije na saznanje o dečjim brakovima. Održane radionice još jednom su potvrdile da je neophodno kontinuirano raditi sa decom na ovu i druge teme od značaja za njihovo osvešćivanje i osnaživanje, kako bi izbegli ustaljene štetne obrasce ponašanja.

Učesnici radionice na temu dečjih, ranih i prinudnih brakova koju smo održali u Nišu u OŠ „Vuk Karadžić” bili su potpuno upoznati sa pojavom i prisustvom dečjih brakova u svojoj sredini, a bili su svesni i postojanja ugovorenih brakova, dok nisu bili upoznati da je vanbračna zajednica sa maloletnim licem krivično delo. Stoga, potrebno je i nadalje raditi na osvešćivanju da sumnja na rani, dečji ili prinudni brak zahteva reagovanje, te da je u tim situacijama potrebno obratiti se roditeljima, nastavnicima, stručnim i zvaničnim službama.

Prvi put smo održali radionicu na ove teme i u OŠ „Vuk Karadžić“ iz Mačvanskog Pričinovića nadomak Šapca. Iako je ova radionica bila sprovedena sa decom ranog uzrasta, učesnici su bili veoma zainteresovani za temu osipanja iz obrazovanja kojom smo započeli radionicu. Već na samom početku, učesnici su kod teme uzroka napuštanja škole, sami pomenuli brak kao jedan od razloga. Posebno su bili aktivni kada smo pričali o pojmu braka i bračnih obaveza. Ova radionica bila je sjajan primer prevencije dečjih brakova, jer je održana sa decom koja nisu u direktnom riziku, ali koji se u budućnosti mogu susresti sa ovom pojavom.

“Deca ne mogu da nauče da brinu o deci, dok ne nauče da brinu o sebi”- jedna je od poruka koju su deca izdvojila kao zaključak sa ovih radionica održanih na temu dečjih, ranih i prinudnih brakova.

Naim Selimi was born in March 2022 in the maternity hospital in Vranje. His parents failed to register him in the birth register after his birth, because Naim's mother, Senada, does not have personal documents. The boy's parents repeatedly tried to enroll their son in the birth register,  but they were verbally refused, and the reason given was that the mother was not registered in the birth register and did not have an identification document.

Naim's mother, Senada, was born in Germany, but she could not be registered in birth registry of Serbia, because she fails to regulate the issue of citizenship. Senada initiated a procedure to determine citizenship before the Ministry of Internal Affairs, but they refuses to carry out the procedure until Senada provides proof that her mother is also a citizen of Serbia. Senada has proof that her father is a citizen of Serbia, however, she cannot provide such proof for her mother because the registers in which her mother was registered remained inaccessible to the Serbian authorities after the war conflicts in Kosovo in 1999.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs informed Senada that the procedure for determining citizenship should also be initiated for her mother, but in this procedure, the chances of success would be even lower than for Senada, because it would be necessary to provide evidence of the citizenship of Senada's mother's parents (Senada's grandparents), because their documents are not accessible to the Serbian authorities either. The Ministry of Internal Affairs has indicated that Senada's request to determine citizenship will be rejected if she fails to obtain proof of her mother's citizenship.

Senada, through no fault of its own - because citizens should not be held responsible for the state's failure to preserve the registers - found itself in a situation where it cannot resolve the issue of its citizenship. In addition, although in Senada's case, the application of the provision of the law according to which Serbian citizenship is also acquired by persons who were born abroad, whose one parent was a citizen of Serbia, and the other is of unknown or stateless citizenship, the Ministry of Internal Affairs refuses to apply this basis for acquiring citizenship.

Every child must be registered in the birth register immediately after birth and every child has the right to a personal name and citizenship from birth. These rights are guaranteed by ratified international conventions and our Constitution and Family Law.

However, children are continuously born in Serbia and cannot be registered in the register immediately after birth. The reason for this lies in two by-laws that regulate the birth registration procedure, which stipulate that information about the parents is entered in the birth register based on their certified copy from the registers and identity cards. Guided by those by-laws, rather than ratified international conventions and domestic regulations of greater legal force, and at the same time ignoring the principle that the best interest of the child must always come first - registry offices refuse to register right after birth children whose mothers do not have personal documents, and the risk of statelessness is transmitted from generation to generation. Senada and her child still cannot be registered in the birth register, and as a result of which they do not have the opportunity to exercise their basic rights.

U okviru aktivnosti društvenog uključivanja za devojčice iz Bačke Palanke organizovan je izlet i obilazak nekih od znamenitosti Beograda. Učesnice su same jednoglasno izabrale da destinacija izleta bude Beograd, koji za njih ne predstavlja samo glavni grad, već i nešto veliko i skoro nedostižno, epicentar dešavanja, i po njihovim željama je napravljen plan putovanja.

Po dolasku u prestonicu, devojčice su prvo obišle Kalemegdan i zoološki vrt, a zatim su uživale u šetnji Knez Mihailovom ulicom. Sve vreme su bile ushićene obilaskom, koristeći priliku da se fotografišu na mestima koja su do tada imale priliku da vide samo putem televizije.

Mnoge devojčice su sa ovako sadržajnog izleta istakle ručak u hotelu, jer su ih na samoj recepciji dočekali rečima:„Da li ste vi iz Tovariševa?", da bi se zatim prema njima ophodili kao sa najznačajnijim gostima, poslužujuci im sjajna jela i dezerte, ugađajući svim njihovim prohtevima. Odnos i poštovanje koji su doživele u hotelu skoro sve učesnice su navele kao prvo isustvo tog tipa, ističući da su se osećale počastvovano, prijatno i važno.

Nakon ručka u hotelu, učesnice su posetile Avalski toranj, a pogled koji se pružao sa vidikovca ih nije ostavio ravnodušnim. Na kraju, grupa je posetila i Hram Svetog Save u večernjim satima. Devojčice su nam prenele da su prezadovoljne izletom i pune utisaka koje su sumirale i u narednim danima, a posebno im je bilo drago što su uvidele i neke od mogućnosti koje postoje u životu.

Posebnu zahvalnost za realizaciju ovog događaja dugujemo Udruženju građana Čarain i našoj saradnici Šeći Kolompar.

Ova aktivnost socijalne inkluzije realizovana je u okviru projekta „Prevencija i eliminacija dečjih brakova u Srbiji“ koji finansiraju Ambasada Kraljevine Holandije u Srbiji i Ministarstvo za ekonomsku saradnju i razvoj Savezne Republike Nemačke (BMZ) u okviru programa Nemačke razvojne saradnje „Inkluzija Roma i drugih marginalizovanih grupa u Srbiji“.

Ahmed Sakić ^[1] is a returnee upon the readmission agreement from Belgium, from where he was returned to the territory of Kosovo and Metohija with his wife and six children in August 2017. In November of the same year, he moved with his family to a settlement near Mladenovac. Ahmed lives with his family in a household consisting of his parents, as well as his brother with his wife and a child.

Due to the lack of documents, Ahmed Sakić and his wife could not get a job, they could not exercise their right to cash social assistance, or any other institutional support and assistance. Ahmed is occasionally engaged in seasonal jobs, which is an insufficient source of income to ensure the minimum existence of the family, which he would not have succeeded without the solidary support of other household members. After arriving in Mladenovac, the birth of Ahmed's wife was subsequently enrolled in the birth register in 2018, while the birth of their children is still not registered. The children do not attend classes in the nearby elementary school because Ahmed cannot provide them with the minimum conditions for attending classes, but also because of the absence of a proactive role of the school and the absence of help and support from local institutions.

Since his arrival in Mladenovac, Ahmed repeatedly addressed the Police Department in Mladenovac with requests for registration of residence, which this body of the Ministry of the Interior rejected with the explanation that Ahmed did not have the intention to permanently reside there. To examine the validity of the request and the intention to live there permanently, the police conducted field checks, during which Ahmed was found at the address. The evidentiary procedure was also conducted by inviting Ahmed to give statements, in which he stated the facts and circumstances that preceded his arrival in Mladenovac, as well as his current position and the position of his family.

On those occasions, Ahmed stated the reasons for submitting a request for residence registration: "The reason why I am applying at the provided address is that I am always here, and since I came to Serbia I have not gone anywhere, except when I went to Nis to get my identity card but I didn't manage to do anything, because they told me that I didn’t have the right to register in Nis" - said Ahmed.

Despite the indisputable evidence, the Police Department in Mladenovac rejected Ahmed's requests for residence registration, stating that there was no evidence indicating that the basis for submitting the request was to reside there permanently, claiming that Ahmed was trying to abuse rights, making numerous unfounded claims along the way. Also, during the procedure, this body expressed views coming from stereotypes about the members of the Roma national minority, predicting that Ahmed would abuse the residence registration if it were approved. Through such actions, the Police Department in Mladenovac had been discriminating against Ahmed for years, which is why, with the help of Praxis, he filed a complaint for discrimination to the Commissioner for Protection of Equality in early 2022.

Although we cannot claim with certainty, it still seems that the complaint to the Commissioner for Protection of Equality exerted additional pressure and led to a change in the attitude and way of acting of the Police Department in Mladenovac, which, in the repeated procedure for registration of permanent residence determined new circumstances and facts based on which it made a decision to approve the request for registration of permanent residence. Given that Ahmed's request was finally approved after many years, the procedure before the Commissioner was suspended.

Finally, further social exclusion and deprivation of Ahmed and his family, caused by the discriminatory behavior of the Police Department, was stopped. Only by registering his permanent residence did Ahmed become an equal citizen able to access basic rights, the exercise of which is particularly important for members of vulnerable groups. The right to health, education, work, social support, and community assistance are some of the basic rights, and the prerequisite for realizing those rights is to have registered permanent residence and to have an identity card, to which every citizen, without exception, is entitled, and the denial of which directly leads to social isolation.

 [1] His real name has been changed to protect his privacy.

The Commissioner for the Protection of Equality, following a complaint from Praxis, found that the Sports Company "Radnički doo" from Kragujevac violated the provisions of Articles 6 and 12, and in connection with Article 24 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination because it discriminated against Roma female employees on the basis of their nationality by canceling their employment and because the behavior of the employees at the Center for Sports and Recreation of Persons with Disabilities "Iskra" in Kragujevac, which operates within the Sports Company Radnički doo, created a humiliating and offensive environment.

In addition, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality recommended that the Sports company Radnički doo from Kragujevac remove the consequences of discriminatory treatment by rehiring the victims of discrimination, as well as to send them a written apology for the discriminatory treatment of the company and its employees. Furthermore, it was recommended to organize training for all employees of the company on the topic of prohibition and protection against discrimination, with special reference to the position and challenges faced by the Roma population, as well as to ensure that in the future, when carrying out their work, they do not violate the provisions of anti-discrimination regulations.

Besides representing a form of satisfaction for the complainants themselves, the opinion of the Commissioner for Protection of Equality in this case undoubtedly sends a strong message to all members of society about unacceptable and prohibited behaviors and actions that are discriminatory. This is particularly significant considering that numerous relevant sources show a high degree of exposure of members of the Roma national minority to discrimination, as well as the fact that it is often multiple and covert and particularly present in the field of work and employment. In this regard, we believe it is extremely important to emphasize that, when analyzing the facts and issuing the decision, the Commissioner applied the of rule of shifting the burden of proof from Article 45 of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination, and, when considering whether the complainants made an act of discrimination probable, the Commissioner took into account statistical data and the results of research on the position of Roma men and women in the society and the social distance towards them.

The complainants, members of the Roma national minority, were employed in mid-2019 in the aforementioned company on cleaning and maintenance, as part of the measure of work activation of work capable beneficiaries of financial social assistance. In the second half of 2021, after a change in the management structure in the company, there were changes in the attitude towards the complainants, but also towards other employed women of Roma nationality, in that the communication of superiors with them was reduced or completely absent, unfounded remarks were made verbally on their work, efforts were also made to reduce their contact with other staff members of the company in various ways, they were provided with special coffee cups, and, on December 3, 2021, one complainant was informed in a telephone conversation that the need for her work engagement and that of other Roma women had ended, while the need to hire a non-Roma gardener, who was employed at the same time as the four female Roma, had not ended. Trying to justify its actions, and responding to the allegations of the complaint, the company pointed out that the need for engagement of these women in hygiene maintenance had ended due to the reduction in the volume of work due to the pandemic and the conclusion of a hygiene maintenance contract with an agency based on the conducted public procurement. They further justified separating coffee cups as a "precautionary measure" due to the pandemic. However, analyzing the aforementioned allegations, the Commissioner concluded that the company had not provided evidence supporting these claims, since the company did not conduct an analysis that would precede the rationalization of the number of employees. On the contrary, at the time when there was an alleged reduction in the scope of work, the company concluded a contract with a hygiene maintenance agency, resulting in both the complainants and the employees of the agency working on these jobs at the same time. In addition, the company’s statement that it was obliged to carry out public procurement as per the regulations, because it is a user of public funds, cannot justify the said action because it is completely unclear why the public procurement was carried out only in 2021, and not in 2019 when the complainant's engagement began. In addition, there has never been public procurement for the job of the gardener. To sum it up, the company did not submit evidence from which it could be concluded that the termination of the complainants’ employment was due to the obligation to carry out public procurement, nor due to a reduction in the volume of work because of the pandemic, nor that the termination of the complainants’ employment was justified and necessary, and that it was not caused by the nationality of the complainants.

In addition, in relation to the attitude of other employees towards the complainants, i.e. separating them from other staff, preventing them from using common rooms and insisting that they drink coffee from special cups, the company did not submit evidence from which it could be unambiguouosly determined that the reason for such behavior was health protection since the company did not adopt an act prescribing such measures or other evidence indicating that such measures apply to all employees. Analyzing the allegations of the complaint, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality also took into account the fact that the decision to terminate the employment was communicated by telephone without providing additional explanation or the opportunity for the complainants to express their opinion on it. 

Considering the significance of this decision, we must not forget that the areas of work and employment are particularly important for the Roma population, bearing in mind that work that generates income, on the one hand increases economic independence and personal and family standards. On the other hand, employment has a special effect on socialization and their social participation. At the same time, the entry of members of the Roma national minority into the work process and the working environment itself changes the attitudes of that environment, assuring it of the economic justification of inclusion, and thus prevents further prejudices and stereotypes. 

We are convinced that the strong arguments that are contained in the explanation of the decision of the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality in this case will contribute to the prevention of discrimination towards individuals and groups belonging to different sensitive groups of society, as well as that it will empower numerous members of the Roma national minority to seek protection of their rights before this institution.

You may find the opinion of the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality here.