Even though the possession of an ID card is a guaranteed right and a duty of national citizens with permanent residence in Serbia, obtaining it may be related to numerous difficulties.

N.N. is an internally displaced person from Kosovo and a member of Roma ethnic minority who was living without an ID card for 15 years, because he did not possess evidence of registered permanent residence and a document with a photo based on which his identity would be determined. The ID card was issued to N. N. only when, with Praxis assistance, he obtained the photocopy of the records on previously issued ID card in Pristina. Prior to that, N. N. was not able to exercise the right to health care and social protection despite being in the state of social vulnerability. In addition, he was threatened with impossibility of applying for the social housing programme after the announced closure of the collective centre we has residing in.

H. G. is facing the similar difficulties. She possesses the evidence of registration of permanent residence, but police officers from the Police Department in Niska Banja competent for Pristina region referred her to obtain the records on issued ID card from her previous permanent residence in Kosovo. Insisting on obtaining evidence from Kosovo causes unnecessary costs for the party, which is particularly unjustified given that she is an internally displaced Roma women without incomes whose identity may be confirmed by the members of her family or other witnesses of identity.

Possession of an ID card is a precondition for the access to many rights in Serbia. However, Praxis has determined that members of vulnerable groups are left without an ID card for a long period of time, because they are required to enclose evidence whose obtaining causes high costs or is a great burden on parties for other reasons.

D. M, registered in books of citizens that were destroyed during the conflict as of 1999 in Kosovo, has obtained the citizenship certificate only after six months following the procedures that lasted six years.

In September, D. M. initiated the re-registration procedure before the administrative body in Krusevac. Three years after submitting the request and only after the appeal was filed and the administrative dispute initiated for the silence of administration, was the first-instance decision reached on rejecting the request of D. M. and referring her to submit the request for determination of citizenship. D. M. thus lost three years and just received the negative decision by which she was referred to address another body in order to try to acquire the citizenship.

At the beginning of 2012, D. M. initiated the procedure for determining the citizenship before the Ministry of Interior, which lasted more than two years. Once the decision on determining the citizenship was reached, eight months passed before the competent registrar registered the citizenship of D. M. and issued the citizenship certificate, but only after three urgency letters and appeal for silence of administration.

Although she was registered in books of citizens and is not responsible for destroyed registries, D. M. received citizenship certificate only after six years following the request for registration in reconstructed books of citizens. In the meantime, she was deprived of the access to the rights whose exercise requires the possession of the evidence on citizenship. A great number of other persons registered in registries that were later destroyed or are unavailable are facing this problem. Efficient solution to their problem has not been found for more than 15 years, even though it negatively affects daily life of individuals and the possibility to exercise basic human rights.

D. M, registered in books of citizens that were destroyed during the conflict as of 1999 in Kosovo, has obtained the citizenship certificate only after six months following the procedures that lasted six years.

In September, D. M. initiated the re-registration procedure before the administrative body in Krusevac. Three years after submitting the request and only after the appeal was filed and the administrative dispute initiated for the silence of administration, was the first-instance decision reached on rejecting the request of D. M. and referring her to submit the request for determination of citizenship. D. M. thus lost three years and just received the negative decision by which she was referred to address another body in order to try to acquire the citizenship.

At the beginning of 2012, D. M. initiated the procedure for determining the citizenship before the Ministry of Interior, which lasted more than two years. Once the decision on determining the citizenship was reached, eight months passed before the competent registrar registered the citizenship of D. M. and issued the citizenship certificate, but only after three urgency letters and appeal for silence of administration.

Although she was registered in books of citizens and is not responsible for destroyed registries, D. M. received citizenship certificate only after six years following the request for registration in reconstructed books of citizens. In the meantime, she was deprived of the access to the rights whose exercise requires the possession of the evidence on citizenship. A great number of other persons registered in registries that were later destroyed or are unavailable are facing this problem. Efficient solution to their problem has not been found for more than 15 years, even though it negatively affects daily life of individuals and the possibility to exercise basic human rights.

Praxis' legal mobile team visited the following:

October

• 29 October – Roma settlements, Kostolac
• 23 October – Roma settlements, Kragujevac
  

September

• 23 September – Roma settlements, Beocin
• 17 September – Roma settlements, Sabac
• 10 September – Roma settlements, Prokuplje
•   2 September – Roma settlements, Krusevac
  

August

• 27 August – Roma settlement "Ullica Milinka Kusica“, Ivanjica
• 26 August – Roma settlements, Krusevac
• 25 August – Roma settlement "Crvena Zvezda“, Nis
• 25 August – Roma settlement "Surducka“, Zrenjanin
• 20 August – Roma settlement "Vezirovac“, Cuprija
• 19 August – Roma settlement "Zemun polje“, Zemun
• 14 August – Roma settlements, Zemun
• 13 August – Roma settlements, Smederevo
• 12 August – Roma settlements, Knjazevac
• 10 August – Roma settlement "Bresnica“, Kragujevac
•   5 August – Roma settlement "Veliki rit“, Novi Sad
•   5 August – Roma settlements, Knjazevac

July

• 27 July – Roma settlement "Dobricka ulica“, Prokuplje
• 22 July – Roma settlements, Bela Palanka
• 16 July – Roma settlements, Surcin
• 16 July – Roma settlement "Fekovica brdo“, Sjenica
• 15 July – Roma settlements, Bela Palanka
•   9 July – Roma settlements, Sombor
•   9 July – Roma settlement "M.N.Cale“, Bujanovac
•   7 July – Roma settlement, Kostolac
•   3 July – Roma settlements, Kovin
•   2 July – Roma settlements, Bor

June

• 30 June – Roma settlements, Grocka
• 29 June – Roma settlement “Kosovska ulica”, Razanj
• 25 June – Roma settlement “OMV pumpa”, Cukarica/Belgrade
• 25 June – Roma settlement "Dublje", Valjevo
  
• 24 June – Roma settlements, Leskovac
• 23 June – Roma settlements “Karadjordjeva ulica” and “Dunavska ulica”, Negotin
• 23 June – Roma settlements “Vasariste” and “Zvecka”, Obrenovac
• 19 June – Roma settlement “Seliste”, Brus
• 18 June – Roma settlement “Bogovina”, Boljevac
• 18 June – Roma settlement “Vijadukt”, Rakovica/Belgrade
• 17 June – Roma settlement “Reva politika”, Palilula/Belgrade
• 17 June – Roma settlements, Leskovac
• 16 June – Roma settlements “Resnik” and “Ulica 7. Juli”, Babusnica
• 15 June – Roma settlements “Atenica” and “Ljubic polje”, Cacak
• 11 June – Roma settlement “Ulica Starine Novaka”, Batocina
• 11 June – Roma settlement “Grmec”, Zemun
• 10 June – Roma settlement “Kijevo”, Rakovica/Belgrade
•   9 June – Roma settlements, Becej
•   9 June – Roma settlement “Ulica Pora”, Uzice
•   5 June – Roma settlement “Jezdovica kosa”, Prijepolje
•   4 June – Roma settlements, Pecinci
•   3 June – Roma settlements, Bac
•   3 June – Roma settlements, Lebane
•   2 June – Roma settlement “Jelasnica”, Surdulica28 May – Roma settlements, Vrsac

May

• 28 May – Roma settlements, Vrsac
• 28 May – Roma settlement ”Ulica Bana Milutina”, Pozega
• 27 May – Roma settlements, Lebane
• 26 May – Roma settlement “Rajcilovac”, Bosilegrad
• 22 May – Roma settlement “Burdus Mala”, Svilajnac
• 21 May – Roma settlement “Ulica Dusana Trifunovica”, Svrljig
• 21 May – Roma settlement “Tovarisevo”, Backa Palanka
• 20 May – Roma settlements, Indjija
• 19 May – Roma settlements, Ilindza/Alibunar
• 19 May – Roma settlements “Veliki Izvor” and “Gojkova Jaruga”, Zajecar
• 18 May – Roma settlements “Pojate” and “Ulica Stevana Sindjelica”, Cicevac
• 14 May – Roma settlements, Jabuka/Pancevo
• 14 May – Roma settlements “Bukovik” and “Djurdjevdanska Ulica”, Arandjelovac
• 13 May – Roma settlement “Antena”, Novi Beograd
• 13 May – Roma settlements, Kursumlija
• 12 May – Roma settlement “Ulica Stevana Mokranjca”, Jagodina
• 12 May – Roma settlements, Mali Idjos
•   8 May – Roma settlement “Ulica Jurija Gagarina”, Vladicin Han
•   7 May – Roma settlement “Djurdjevo”, Zabalj
•   7 May – Roma settlement “Kocane”, Doljevac
•   5 May – Roma settlements, Kursumlija
  
  

April

• 30 April – Roma settlements “Dusanova ulica”, “Prebreza” and “Alabana”, Blace
• 28 April – Roma settlements, Pirot
• 28 April – Roma settlement “Orlovsko naselje – social apartments”, Zvezdara/Belgrade
• 23 April – Roma settlement “Jablanicka ulica”, Lebane
• 23 April – Roma settlements, Koceljeva
• 22 April – Roma settlement “Tosin bunar”, Novi Beograd
• 22 April - Roma settlements “Sever”, “Erozija” and “Kestenova ulica”, Bor
• 21 April – Roma settlements “Sljivik” and “Kolonije”, Beocin
• 21 April – Roma settlement “Midzor”, Bela Palanka
• 16 April – Roma settlements, Backi Monostor/Sombor
• 16 April – Roma settlements, Bor
• 15 April – Roma settlements, Novi Becej
• 14 April – Roma settlement “Slavko Zlatanovic”, Leskovac
• 14 April – Roma settlements, Zemun
•   9 April – Roma settlements “Kajmakcalanska ulica”, “Jug Bogdanova ulica”, “Cerska ulica” and “Karadjordjeva ulica”, Smederevska Palanka
•   9 April – Roma settlement “Dalas”, Tutin
•   8 April – Roma settlement “Fekovica brdo”, Sjenica
•   7 April – Roma settlement “Baraka socijalnog stanovanja”, Presevo
•   6 April – Roma settlement “Karadjordjevo brdo”, Paracin
•   3 April – Roma settlements “Cukaricka suma”, Cukarica/Belgrade

March

• 31 March – Roma settlement “Ulica Jalijska”, Sremska Mitrovica
• 26 March – Roma settlement “Koricani”, Kragujevac
• 25 March – Roma settlements, Kikinda
• 25 March – Roma settlements, Bojnik
• 24 March – Roma settlement “Barlovo”, Kursumlija
• 19 March – Roma settlements “7. Jul” & “Brezonik”, Bor
• 18 March – Roma settlements, Lazarevac
• 18 March – Roma settlements, Bojnik
• 12 March – Roma settlement “Recica”, Zitoradja
• 11 March – Roma settlement “Aleksinacki rudnik”, Aleksinac
• 11 March – Roma settlements “Vuka Vrcevica” & “Reva Politika”, Palilula/Belgrade
• 10 March – Roma settlements, Obrenovac
• 10 March – Roma settlement “Fekovica brdo”, Sjenica
•   5 March – Roma settlement “Banjska ulica”, Bujanovac
•   4 March – Roma settlement “Gornji Brestovac”, Bojnik
•   4 March – Roma settlements, Subotica
•   3 March – Roma settlement “Kucevski lug”, Raska
•   3 March – Roma settlement “Dom za vesanje”, Zeleznik/Belgrade

February

• 26 February – Roma settlement “Minicevo”, Knjazevac
• 25 February – village Bavaniste, Kovin
• 24 February – Roma settlements “Crni Marko” and “Marko Oreskovic”, Vlasotince
• 23 February – Roma settlements “Vasa Nikolic” and “Sumatovacka ulica”, Aleksinac
• 20 February – Roma settlements, Topola
• 19 February – Roma settlement “Ciganski Rid”, Vranje
• 19 February – Roma settlement “Stakleno brdo”, Pozarevac
• 18 February – Roma settlement “Mali rit”, Pancevo
• 13 February – Roma settlement “Balajnac”, Merosina
• 12 February – Roma settlement “Crvena Zvezda”, Nis
• 11 February – Roma settlement “Dobricka ulica”, Prokuplje
• 10 February – Roma settlements, Smederevo
•   9 February – Roma settlement “Prcilovac”, Aleksinac
•   9 February – Roma settlement “Mudrakovac”, Krusevac
•   6 February – Roma settlements “Stadionska ulica” and “Grdicka kosa”, Kraljevo
•   5 February – Roma settlement “Rupe”, Ruma
•   5 February – Roma settlement “Solunska ulica”, Prokuplje
•   4 February – Roma settlement “Horgos”, Kanjiza
•   4 February – Roma settlement in Ribaric, Tutin

January

• 29 January – Roma settlement “Vozegrnci”, Novi Pazar
• 28 January – Roma settlement “Veliki rit”, Novi Sad
• 27 January – Roma settlement “Ilina voda”, Kragujevac
• 27 January – Roma settlements “Surducka” and “Dudara”, Zrenjanin
• 22 January – Roma settlements, Kostolac
• 22 January – Roma settlement “Fekovica brdo”, Sjenica

On 10 December 2014, the Ministry for Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs adopted the instruction for acting of social welfare centres (SWCs) in procedures for determining the personal name.

Even though the right to personal name and registration in the birth registry book is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and Convention of the Rights of the Child, there is still a significant number of children in Serbia, and even those of age, who do not have their personal name determined. Consequently, they cannot obtain birth and citizenship certificates with their personal name being written. The possession of these documents is the precondition for enjoyment of a great number of basic human rights such as the right to health care and social protection or the right to employment.

The adopted instruction should eliminate the greatest number of problems, which Praxis identified by representing a great number of persons without personal name determined, and at which it pointed to the Ministry.

The application of this instruction is expected to lead to complied, efficient and legal acting of social welfare centres. 

For more information see the announcement: Novelties Introduced by the Instruction for Acting of SWCs in Procedures for Determining the Personal Name

On 10 December 2014, the Ministry for Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs adopted the instruction for acting of social welfare centres (SWCs) in procedures for determining the personal name.

Even though the right to personal name and registration in the birth registry book is the right guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and Convention of the Rights of the Child, there is still a significant number of children in Serbia, and even those of age, who do not have their personal name determined. Consequently, they cannot obtain birth and citizenship certificates with their personal name being written. The possession of these documents is the precondition for enjoyment of a great number of basic human rights such as the right to health care and social protection or the right to employment.

The adopted instruction should eliminate the greatest number of problems, which Praxis identified by representing a great number of persons without personal name determined, and at which it pointed to the Ministry.

The Ministry’s instruction, inter alia, has envisaged the following:

• only SWCs are competent for determination of personal names of children whose parents have not determined their names within the deadline of 30 days upon birth
• only SWCs, upon the registrar’s initiative, are obliged ex officio to initiate the procedure for determining the personal name
• SWC is obliged to appoint a temporary guardian to children without parental care during the procedure
• Undocumented parents must be allowed to participate in the procedure for determining the name of their children
• SWCs are obliged to determine personal names to persons of age who do not have their personal names determined
• Territorial jurisdiction is established in the place where the reason for procedure arouse if the party has no permanent or temporary residence registered.

The application of this instruction is expected to lead to complied, efficient and legal acting of social welfare centres. 

Procedure for adoption of the minor B. B. born in 2001 in Pristina and registered in the UNMIK registries was carried out by Social Welfare Centre in Subotica in December 2004. As the fact of her birth was not registered in birth registries for Pristina administered by the registry office in Nis, it was necessary to carry out the procedure for subsequent birth registration.  The 
subsequent birth registration was carried out only in 2008, almost four years after the adoption. However, the fact of adoption was not registered on that occasion.

Soon after the adopter of the minor girl addressed Praxis for assistance in 2013, Praxis sent the request for registration of the fact of adoption and the request for new registration in birth registries to the Directorate for Civil Status and General Affairs of the City of Nis (hereinafter: Directorate). Praxis received the answer that new registration could not be carried out unless correction were made in the decision on adoption, in accordance with the Law on Registry Books which came into force in 2009, which envisages that new registration after the adoption is carried out on the basis of the place of birth.

In September 2014, after a series of unsuccessful addressing, Praxis filed a complaint against the work of the Directorate to the Administrative Inspectorate of the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government and Department for Inspection, Department for Family Care and Social Protection of the Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs. After almost a month, a decision was reached approving the new registration of B. B. in birth registries.

Praxis notes that B. B. is a girl of Roma ethnicity with disabilities and illegal delay of the procedure additionally threatened her already difficult position. 

Procedure for adoption of the minor B. B. born in 2001 in Pristina and registered in the UNMIK registries was carried out by Social Welfare Centre in Subotica in December 2004. As the fact of her birth was not registered in birth registries for Pristina administered by the registry office in Nis, it was necessary to carry out the procedure for subsequent birth registration. The  subsequent birth registration was carried out only in 2008, almost four years after the adoption. However, the fact of adoption was not registered on that occasion.

Soon after the adopter of the minor girl addressed Praxis for assistance in 2013, Praxis sent the request for registration of the fact of adoption and the request for new registration in birth registries to the Directorate for Civil Status and General Affairs of the City of Nis (hereinafter: Directorate). Praxis received the answer that new registration could not be carried out unless correction were made in the decision on adoption, in accordance with the Law on Registry Books which came into force in 2009, which envisages that new registration after the adoption is carried out on the basis of the place of birth.

In September 2014, after a series of unsuccessful addressing, Praxis filed a complaint against the work of the Directorate to the Administrative Inspectorate of the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government and Department for Inspection, Department for Family Care and Social Protection of the Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs. After almost a month, a decision was reached approving the new registration of B. B. in birth registries.

Praxis notes that B. B. is a girl of Roma ethnicity with disabilities and illegal delay of the procedure additionally threatened her already difficult position. 

In October 2014, Praxis reported to the Utility Inspection Department of the Mladenovac City Municipality the poster “Stop Asylum”, which violates the rights of asylum seekers and spreads xenophobia and intolerance.

The administrative body reacted quickly and in only 4 days it reached the decision ordering to “NN person within two days of receiving the decision” to remove the posters. The photos documenting that the utility inspector went to the field and established the facts were enclosed to the decision.

To be even more absurd, the administrative body cited in the decision the article of the Decision on Advertising Activities on the Territory of the City of Belgrade(hereinafter: Decision), contrary to which the poster was put, but not the article of the Decision which clearly indicates how to perform the administrative measure of removing the illegally placed posters when a person who placed them is unknown. Specifically, the Paragraph 5, Article 34 of the Decision unambiguously states that “if the inspector’s decision orders the removal of posters, and a person to whom the measure was issued does not act upon the decision, or the person who put the poster is unknown, the decision may be performed through the subject which the city or the city municipality entrusted with cleaning”.

Praxis filed a complaint to the Secretariat for Inspections of the Belgrade City Administration, which resulted in the second-instance decision in which this body rejects the complaint as ungrounded, while referring to the Paragraph 5, Article 34 of the Decision. Afterwards, Praxis filed a lawsuit to the Administrative Court.

While the administrative bodies “are exercising” the application of law, it is inadmissible that disputable posters are spreading panics among the citizens of Mladenovac and asylum seekers with the message “They are coming to us, and we?”.

In October 2014, Praxis reported to the Utility Inspection Department of the Mladenovac City Municipality the poster “Stop Asylum”, which violates the rights of asylum seekers and spreads xenophobia and intolerance.

The administrative body reacted quickly and in only 4 days it reached the decision ordering to “NN person within two days of receiving the decision” to remove the posters. The photos documenting that the utility inspector went to the field and established the facts were enclosed to the decision.

To be even more absurd, the administrative body cited in the decision the article of the Decision on Advertising Activities on the Territory of the City of Belgrade(hereinafter: Decision), contrary to which the poster was put, but not the article of the Decision which clearly indicates how to perform the administrative measure of removing the illegally placed posters when a person who placed them is unknown. Specifically, the Paragraph 5, Article 34 of the Decision unambiguously states that “if the inspector’s decision orders the removal of posters, and a person to whom the measure was issued does not act upon the decision, or the person who put the poster is unknown, the decision may be performed through the subject which the city or the city municipality entrusted with cleaning”.  

Praxis filed a complaint to the Secretariat for Inspections of the Belgrade City Administration, which resulted in the second-instance decision in which this body rejects the complaint as ungrounded, while referring to the Paragraph 5, Article 34 of the Decision. Afterwards, Praxis filed a lawsuit to the Administrative Court.

While the administrative bodies “are exercising” the application of law, it is inadmissible that disputable posters are spreading panics among the citizens of Mladenovac and asylum seekers with the message “They are coming to us, and we?”.