The following story may seem complicated to you, and you are right. It is complicated just like the procedures that some people have to go through in order to be registered in birth registry books, to obtain personal documents and be able to access their basic rights.

This is a story about Sara ^[1] who is not registered in birth registry books and does not possess any personal document. At the same time, this is a story about novelties in the legal system of Serbia, which additionally hinder registration in registry books for some persons.

Due to the fact that Sara is not registered in birth registry books, access to most rights has been prevented or significantly hindered since her birth. At the time when Sara was born, her mother was not registered in birth registry books and did not have personal documents, due to which she could not register her daughter at birth. The hospital in which Sara was born did not notify the registry office of the fact of her birth.

Since the exact date of Sara’s birth was not recorded in the official records, and since her parents - uneducated and socially excluded members of the Roma community - did not remember the date of her birth, today it remains unknown when exactly Sara was born. We know only that she was born in 2004 and that she will come of age this year. She hopes that this year she will finally manage to get registered in birth registry books, thus finally gaining the opportunity to access all those rights that have always been out of her reach.

Unfortunately, she spent the entire previous year unsuccessfully attempting to register in birth registry books. At the beginning of 2021, Sara's mother tried to get free legal aid in the municipal service in order to initiate a court procedure for determining the date and place of her child's birth, but she did not succeed in getting such assistance on her own. Only after Praxis (which is not allowed to provide assistance in court procedures under the Law on Free Legal Aid) submitted a written request, the Free Legal Aid Service drafted a request for determination of the date and place of Sara's birth, and in February 2021 a procedure was initiated before the court.

However, in late April, the court dismissed the request, referring to the Conclusion of the Civil Division of the Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) on the jurisdiction of non-contentious courts in the procedure of registration in birth registry books, in which the SCC took the position that a non-contentious court could conduct a procedure for determining the date and place of birth only if an administrative procedure of subsequent registration in birth registry books had been previously conducted and if the request had been rejected by a final decision.

Therefore, the following month, a procedure of subsequent registration in birth registry books was initiated for Sara before the administrative body. However, shortly afterwards, this body informed the party that the request had been forwarded to the court (which had previously dismissed the request), stating that the court, and not that body, was in charge of conducting the procedure. Thus, both the court and the administrative body determined that they could not conduct the procedure.

However, after Praxis lodged a complaint with the Administrative Inspectorate for illegal actions of the administrative body, and sent to the administrative body a written notification of its obligation to conduct the procedure of subsequent registration, this procedure continued. However, in July 2021, the administrative body adopted a decision dismissing the request because the mother and the witnesses did not go to give a statement when asked to do so and did not provide the evidence requested by the administrative body, such as a health card, medical report or school certificate, although Sara did not or could not have such evidence because she was not registered in birth registry books.

Although the administrative body adopted a negative decision, it was still not enough to reopen a court procedure, because the Supreme Court of Cassation took the position that the request in the administrative procedure should be rejected and not dismissed, as happened in this case. Therefore, with the help of Praxis, an appeal was lodged against the decision dismissing the request. This appeal was adopted by the second instance body and the case was returned to the first instance body for a new procedure.

In the renewed procedure before the administrative body, the party and the birth witnesses gave statements, but towards the end of the year, the request for subsequent registration was rejected, with the explanation that it was not possible to determine the date of the child's birth based on these statements.

Since the condition for reopening a court procedure was met, Sara's mother again addressed the Free Legal Aid Service, which drafted a new request for determining the date and place of birth, with the support of Praxis, which shared with the Free Legal Aid Service staff its experience gained during many years of conducting such procedures and pointed out some important details of the procedure. The request was submitted to the court in late February 2022.

Therefore, Sara is again in the same situation she was in a year ago: she has initiated a court procedure that should allow her to register in birth registry books. In the meantime, she had to conduct a procedure before the administrative body, without any prospects of a positive outcome, which was clear from the very beginning. Sara originally initiated a procedure before the court (and not before the administrative body) precisely because it was certain that the administrative procedure would not be conducted successfully.

The example of Sara (and many other persons who are not registered in birth registry books) shows to what extent the aforementioned position of the Supreme Court of Cassation was not purposeful and to what extent it complicates the regulation of the status of legally invisible persons and the obtaining of their personal documents. Sara wasted an entire year on the administrative procedure, which, even with the assistance received by Praxis, was difficult to complete and get a rejecting decision. Looking at the course of the procedure, it is clear that she would not be able to do it without legal assistance and that due to the encountered obstacles she would most probably give up further attempts to register in birth registry books.

Persons who are not registered in birth registry books are among the most vulnerable population groups in Serbia. Due to the lack of personal documents, they are either unable to access almost all of their rights or such access is significantly hindered. These are people who live in extreme poverty, who are legally ignorant, usually illiterate, without any experience in addressing public authorities and unable to conduct, without assistance, procedures that would allow them to register in birth registry books. Therefore, although free legal aid is necessary for them, the Law on Free Legal Aid has made access to such aid more difficult by imposing assistance-related restrictions on non-governmental organisations that undocumented persons have relied on for years, while the system of other legal aid providers usually does not function. On the other hand, the procedures conducted with the aim of registration are often complicated, time-consuming and burdened with various irregularities.

The Conclusion of the Supreme Court of Cassation has led to the situation where in order to exercise the right to register into birth registry books and obtain personal documents, legally invisible persons need to take an even longer, more difficult and uncertain path.

[1] Her real name has been changed to protect her privacy

The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has expressed deep concern over the large number of children that cannot be registered in birth registry books and persons that are unable to register permanent residence at the addresses of social welfare centres, due to which their access to social services is limited.

The Committee therefore called on Serbia to take urgent measures to remedy this situation and to provide undocumented persons with access to social protection and health care, education and other social services. 

In this regard, the Committee called on Serbia to urgently review the regulations governing registration in birth registry books in order to enable all children born in Serbia to be registered in birth registry books, as well as to allow internally displaced persons from Kosovo living in informal settlements to register permanent residence at the addresses of social welfare centres. The Committee attached special importance to these recommendations, requesting Serbia to report on its compliance with them in a much shorter period compared to the majority of other recommendations.

This is, among other things, emphasized in the Concluding Observations of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on the Third Periodic Report of Serbia on the Implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Committee issued almost identical recommendations to Serbia in 2014 as part of the Concluding Observations on the Second Periodic Report of Serbia, but the state did not comply with these recommendations even eight years later. This year's Concluding Observations recommend that Serbia should take measures to address also other issues related to access to socio-economic rights that Praxis has pointed out to the Committee in its report.

As regards access to free legal aid, the Committee expressed concern about the inadequate provision of free legal aid by local self-governments and the unclear legal procedure for providing free legal aid by civil society organisations, which makes it very difficult to provide assistance to those most in need, and issued recommendations to eliminate these shortcomings. The Committee also stressed that it was necessary to raise awareness of the public, especially marginalised groups, about the availability of free legal aid and the procedure for exercising rights.

As regards social protection, the Committee called on Serbia to remove discriminatory requirements, i.e. the requirements that may have a discriminatory effect on the exercise of the right to social assistance and parental allowance (such as mandatory vaccination and school attendance), while pointing out to the necessity of simplifying the procedures for exercising rights.

The Committee also expressed concern over the fact that persons without registered permanent residence were denied access to health care, although this was contrary to the law, and recommended that the state should provide all citizens with access to primary health care.

The Committee also stressed that the state should take all measures to eliminate child marriages and sensitise the public to the harmful consequences of this practice, as well as to ensure that the legal provision stipulating 18 years as the minimum age for marriage was applied without exception. 

Praxis reiterates that undocumented persons and members of the Roma national minority in Serbia face many obstacles that hinder or prevent their access to socio-economic rights, but also expresses its satisfaction for the fact that almost all of its recommendations for resolving these problems were included in the Committee’s Concluding Observations. Praxis also calls on the competent authorities to implement the recommended measures without delay, thus improving the situation of these people, who are among the poorest and most disadvantaged citizens of Serbia.

Održali smo sastanak sa predstavnicima javnog i civilnog sektora u Kragujevcu sa ciljem da se razmotre prilike i mogući modaliteti uključivanja građana u proces kreiranja i praćenja lokalnih javnih politika i postigne konsenzus u pogledu uspostavljanja delotvornih modela građanskih konsultacija kako bi se unapredila participativnost i inkluzivnost konsultativnih procesa na lokalnom nivou. O ovom sastanku, na kome su razmenjeni stavovi i ideje u pogledu budućih koraka na planu unapređenja transparentnosti u radu lokalne samouprave, možete pročitati u Danasu kao i na portalima Naša mesta i Veliki park.

#WeBER 2.0

O našem „Godišnjem izveštaju o dečjim brakovima u Srbiji za 2021. godinu sa posebnim osvrtom na praksu javnih tužilaštava“ u kom su prikazani podaci o postupanju tužilaštava u odnosu na krivična dela prinudno zaključenje braka i vanbračna zajednica sa maloletnikom, a na osnovu odgovora koje su javna tužilaštva sa teritorije Republike Srbije dostavila po zahtevima za pristup informacijama od javnog značaja, možete opširinije pročitati u Danasu i na portalu Ozonpress.

Within the project „Legal Assistance to Persons at Risk of Statelessness in Serbia”, funded by UNHCR, Praxis prepared the report “2021 annual report on child marriages in Serbia with special focus on the practice of public prosecutor’s offices”. 

This year's report presents data on the proceeding of public prosecutor's offices in relation to the criminal offences of coercion into marriage and cohabiting with a minor, based on the answers submitted by public prosecutor's offices from the territory of the Republic of Serbia to freedom of information requests.

According to the obtained data, every third criminal complaint for the criminal offence of cohabiting with a minor results in a motion to indict, but in the previous three years no suspicions of coercion into marriage have been reported in the Republic of Serbia.

Uneven actions and inconsistency in the work of the police and public prosecutor's offices, reflected in proposing a suspended sentence in two-thirds of motions to indict, indicates serious problems related to the effectiveness and expediency of prevention and sanction mechanisms since they are unable to provide adequate protection of child’s rights.

Significant knowledge about child marriages, but also about the major obstacles to combating this phenomenon, which are described in this report, was obtained through the activities carried out with children and the meetings held with the representatives of social welfare centres and schools.

The report “2021 annual report on child marriages in Serbia with special focus on the practice of public prosecutor’s offices” may be found HERE.

Nevladina organizacija Praxis, u saradnji sa Minority Rights Group Europe, će u martu 2022. godine organizovati novu rundu treninga namenjenih sledećim ciljnim grupama:

• Diplomiranim pravnicima/pravnicama koji imaju interesovanja za oblasti zaštite od diskriminacije i socijalne pravde, kao i za rad sa romskom zajednicom;
• Predstavnicima romskih organizacija civilnog društva, kao i organizacija koje se bave zaštitom prava pripadnika romske nacionalne manjine na lokalnom i nacionalnom nivou;
• Romskim aktivistima i aktivistkinjama iz cele zemlje koji imaju iskustva u radu sa romskom zajednicom na lokalnom ili nacionalnom nivou i koji bi želeli da unaprede svoje znanje o nacionalnom antidiskriminacionom zakonodavstvu i načinima pružanja podrške žrtvama diskriminacije.

Treninzi za svaku od navedenih ciljnih grupa biće podeljeni u sledeće celine:

• Uvodni sastanak (online događaj u trajanju do maksimalno 1 sat), u okviru kog će se učesnici/ce upoznati sa ciljevima projekta i samog treninga, kao i sa tehničkim detaljima korišćenja online platforme.
• Onlajn kurs (u trajanju od 2 nedelje), prilagođen svakoj ciljnoj grupi pojedinačno. Tokom ove dve nedelje učesnici će moći da prate i završe trening prema sopstvenom ritmu: ne postoje „predavanja“ ili „seminari“, učesnici će raditi na interaktivnoj onlajn platformi. Svaka celina sadrži niz vežbi koje pomažu učesnicima da procene svoje znanje. Tokom trajanja treninga, učesnici će imati podršku voditelja kursa.

Treninzi se organizuje u okviru projekta „Do ravnopravnosti Roma kroz unapređen pristup pravima“, koji ima za cilj unapređenje stanja u oblasti zaštite pripadnika romske nacionalne manjine od svih oblika diskriminacije podizanjem svesti javnosti, a naročito ključnih aktera o štetnosti ove društvene pojave, zatim poboljšanjem primene antidiskriminacionog zakonodavstva i osnaživanjem Roma da koriste dostupne mehanizme zaštite prava na ravnopravnost.

Polaznici koji uspešno prođu sve delove obuke, dobiće sertifikat o završenom treningu.

Prijavu na trening možete poslati na adresu This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. do 04. marta 2022. godine u 17h, uz naznaku na koji trening se prijavljujete. O tačnom datumu početka treninga u martu ćemo Vas naknadno obavestiti.

Within the project ”Legal Assistance to Persons at Risk of Statelessness in Serbia”, funded by UNHCR, Praxis prepared the report “Overview of obstacles to exercising the right to registration in birth registry books, acquisition of citizenship and registration of permanent residence in 2021”. The report presents an overview of the achievements and remaining challenges in the field of exercising the right to registration in the birth registry books, acquisition of citizenship and registration of permanent residence.

The problem of legally invisible persons in Serbia is still not close to a solution, which is supported by the data that, in 2021, a total of 162 persons who are not registered in birth registry books addressed Praxis for assistance. 

The systemic obstacle jeopardizing the exercise of the right to timely birth registration has not been removed last year either. For this reason, Serbia is still facing a situation in which new-born children are not registered in the birth registry book immediately after birth and are, hence, deprived of or have hindered access to numerous rights, including the rights to health care and social protection. The report indicates that there are still problems in the court procedures for determining the time and place of birth, in procedures for determination of personal name, registration of children born abroad in the birth registry book, as well as during subsequent birth registration and Re-registration procedures. At the same time, they are an obstacle to the acquisition of citizenship, along with other immediate problems listed in this report that occurred in relation to the exercise of the right to citizenship. 

The report also points to obstacles related to registration of permanent residence, one of the most common being avoiding jurisdiction. In addition, option of registration of permanent residence at the address of a spouse or parents, the competent bodies do not take into consideration, while in some municipalities, social welfare centres stopped giving consent to registration of permanent residence at their address.

The report “Overview of obstacles to exercising the right to registration in birth registry books, acquisition of citizenship and registration of permanent residence in 2021” may be found HERE.

The Roma community in Serbia continues to endure challenges when it comes to birth registration and citizenship acquisition. The risk of statelessness in the Roma community easily spans generations, hampering their access to basic benefits and rights and exacerbating their social exclusion and marginalization.

Ivanka Kostic, long-time executive director of Praxis, and now a member of the Board of Directors, wrote about legal mechanisms in Serbia that perpetuate vicious circles of Roma statelessness, presenting recommendations for the work ahead. 

Blog “Vicious circles of Roma statelessness in Serbia – A road map” may be found at the following link. 

Download: HERE