The sitting was co-organized with the Roma Women’s Centre “Bibija” as part of the campaign Month of Roma Women’s Activism.

Opening the sitting, the Chairman of the Committee on Human and Minority Rights and Gender Equality Meho Omerovic said that the Roma population faces a slew of problems some of which are especially difficult because they hit the most vulnerable among the population – children. Early marriages among children are a violation of some of the most basic human rights such as the right to education, protection of reproductive health, selection of partners and above all the right to a childhood, said Omerovic and stressed that this problem should be at the very top of our priorities and the state of Serbia needs to define measures and activities to suppress child marriages.

UNICEF Deputy Representative Severine Leonardi said that 23 girls below the age of 18 get married every minute in the world. In Serbia, this mainly happens in rural and the poorest communities, generally among the Roma population, said Leonardi stressing that over 50% of Roma girls get married before the age of majority. Change can be initiated through cooperation between the Government and NGOs, private sector and the Roma community and it is very important to empower every Roma girl and offer support to every family through the social welfare system, Severine Leonardi concluded.

Jelena Jovanovic, Deputy President of the National Council of the Roma National Minority, said that Roma women are the most vulnerable and sensitive group of women in our society and their education and schooling is the course to follow to open up their prospects for a dignified life, education and health protection.

Coordinator of Roma Women’s Centre “Bibija” Slavica Vasic presented her organization’s activities and campaigns. She stressed that hands-on work with Roma women in the field is of paramount importance.

The representative of the Roma Women Network Radmila Nesic and member of SASA Institute of Ethnography Dr Ivan Djordjevic presented the results of research “Child marriages in the Roma population in Serbia”, conducted March - June 2017 in 5 locations in Serbia, where in depth interviews provided an insight into the real life of the Roma community. The research showed that reducing and finally eradicating child marriages has to be a joint task, enterprise and effort undertaken by all the social factors - social work services, education system, the population, and even individuals.

In the course of the debate the participants agreed that child marriages are a dangerous phenomenon and that education, as the key to the empowerment and protection of Roma children’s rights, is vital for the prevention of child marriages.

Praxis presented its activities focused on prevention and elimination of child, early and forced marriages and pointed at the presence of discriminatory acting on all levels. Praxis also highlighted the necessity to raise awareness of all relevant actors - parents, children, professionals and wider public, with an active role of media as drivers of change.

For more information, see the announcement here.

On 23 March 2018, a conference “Youth Engagement in the Danube Region” was organized in Stuttgart, gathering partners and associates of the foundation Agapedia, as a part of the implementation of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region. The conference gathered the Minister for Education of the Baden-Württemberg region, Germany, as well as the representatives of organizations and institutions from the countries in the Danube Region. Network of Organizations for Children of Serbia - MODS was represented by Sasa Stefanovic, Director of MODS, Jasmina Mikovic from Praxis who is the President of the Steering Committee of MODS and Aleksandra Grubin, Project Manager from SOS Children’s Villages in Serbia.

A multitude of initiatives and networks have for many years successfully brought together young people across all 14 countries of the Danube region; enabling cross-cultural exchange on issues as diverse as environmental protection, language learning, the future of the European Union or the challenges posed by digitalization. Yet, many initiatives are project-based and have only limited awareness of other undertakings. The Danube Strategy in itself provides only limited support in this particular field. In the past, there have been several attempts to create more stable framework conditions and networks. The emergence of the Regional Youth Cooperation Office (RYCO) as part of the so-called Berlin Process to improve cooperation among Western Balkan countries and the European Union marks an important milestone in this regard.

For more information, see the announcement here. 

Eurochild’s National Partner Networks (NPN) Group, which gathers 21 child rights networks from Europe, met in Brussels from 19 till 20 March 2018. The Network of Organisations for Children of Serbia (MODS) was represented by Jasmina Miković from Praxis, who chaired the first day of NPN meeting.

On that occasion, civil society organizations from 25 European countries that work with and for children met key EU level stakeholders in Brussels to discuss how the EU can ensure better outcomes for children and their families through the post-2020 EU budget. Under the platform of the Opening Doors for Europe’s Children campaign, they brought evidence from the ground on how EU funds have been used in the current Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). The publication urges the EU to maintain, strengthen and expand its pivotal role towards children’s deinstitutionalisation and the transformation of child protection systems in Europe. 

The EU is at a critical juncture, as it prepares to decide on its priorities for investment post-2020. Despite its efforts in funding reforms in child protection in its current Multi-annual financial framework, we are far from providing children the best care solutions. The negotiations on EU budget and funding programmes beyond 2020 is a unique chance for the EU to end the era of institutional care – unnecessary, outdated and harmful type of care that segregates children from society. The next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) offers a real opportunity to build on lessons learnt and deliver on existing EU promises.

The undoubted EU added value of investing in the social inclusion of the most vulnerable people, catalysing child welfare and child protection reforms and triggering the transition from institutional towards more individualised community-based care (also known as deinstitutionalisation) has been widely acknowledged by Europe’s civil society (see the Opening Doors for Europe’s Children recent recommendations to the EU, Eurochild’s recommendations on investing in children through the post-2020 MFF and the European Expert Group’s position paper on the funding of the European Union post-2020).

To continue this progress, coherent with the EU’s human rights obligations, more has to be done. The EU must reinforce its support towards realisation of common values and objectives, such as respect for human rights, poverty reduction or social inclusion, when negotiating the post-2020 budget and funding programmes over the next 18 months.

For more information, see the announcement here.

Tokom juna 2019. godine Praxis je učestvovao u ciklusu obuka koje su realizovane na projektu „Podrška lokalnoj integraciji ekstremno ugroženih interno raseljenih lica, izbeglica i tražilaca azila u Srbiji“, koji sprovodi Amityu partnerstvu sa UNHCR-om i Ministarstvom za rad, zapošljavanje, boračka i socijalna pitanja. Obuke su održane u Leskovcu, Smederevu, Nišu i Kraljevu, a namenjene su stručnjacima zaposlenim u centrima za socijalni rad i povereništvima Komesarijata za izbeglice i migracije sa ciljem proširivanja njihovih znanja o antidiskriminacionim propisima važnim za rad sa izbeglicama, interno raseljenim licima i tražiocima azila u Srbiji. 

Koncept obuka, koji je pripremila i realizovala Marija Dražović iz Praxisa, obuhvatio je uvid u pravni i institucionalni okvir uključujući izvore međunarodnog prava i dobre prakse, kao i domaćeg zakonodavstva. Imajući u vidu složenost pojma diskriminacije, kao i bogatstvo i šarolikost normi koje uređuju zaštitu prava na ravnopravnost, izlaganje je zasnovano na sveobuhvtanom pristupu problemu diskriminacije uz poseban osvrt na zaštitu izbeglih i interno raseljenih lica i tražilaca azila. Pored navedenog, učesnici su upoznati sa dostupnim mehanizmima zaštite prava na ravnopravnost, kao i sa nedostacima koji su identifikovani kroz analizu usklađenosti domaćeg okvira sa međunarodnim obavezama i dobrom praksom, ali i sa nedostacima koji su se javili u praksi. Najznačajnija pažnja tokom izlaganja je ipak posvećena problemima u implementaciji postojećeg okvira i mogućnostima odnosno preporukama za unapređenje primene.

Obuke su bile veoma korisne jer su otvorile pitanje poznavanja pojma, okvira i prakse u ovoj oblasti i ukazale da postoji značajan prostor za unapređenje položaja osetljivih grupa koje su izložene diskriminaciji gotovo svakodnevno. Posebno je diskutovano o ulozi zaposlenih u institucijama koji svakodnevno pružaju usluge građanima u iskorenjivanju i suzbijanju diskrimnacije. Ovo je naročito važno imajući u vidu da su građani u velikoj meri izloženi diskrimnaciji u oblasti pružanja usluga u postupcima pred organima javne uprave što shodno zakonu predstavlja posebno težak oblik diskriminacije.

Za više informacija, videti saopštenje ovde.

Poverenik za zaštitu ravnopravnosti, po pritužbi Praxisa, utvrdio je da su OŠ „Branko Radičević“ u Bujanovcu, Opštinska uprava Opštine Bujanovac i Ministarstvo prosvete, nauke i tehnološkog razvoja, svako sa aspekta svoje nadležnosti, povredili odredbe članova 6. i 19. Zakona o zabrani diskriminacijejer nisu sproveli adekvatne i efikasne mere kako bi sprečili i otklonili formiranje odeljenja koja čine isključivo romski učenici u pomenutoj školi. 

Formiranje segregisanih odeljenja školske 2018/19 godine je svakako bio povod za obraćanje poverenici, ali je, pored toga, Praxis ukazao da segregacija postoji na nivou škole duži niz godina, da odeljenja koja čine isključivo romski učenici postoje u gotovo svim razredima, da postoji očigledna nesrazmera zastupljenosti romskih učenika i njihovih roditelja u Učeničkom parlamentu, Savetu roditelja i Školskom odboru, da su godišnji planovi škole opterećeni sterotipnim i diskriminatornim konstatacijama, kao i da lokalna sredina nije podržavajuća za pripadnike romske zajednice. U toku postupka pred poverenicom utvrđeno je da su navodi Praxisa osnovani i preporučene su mere koje je potrebno sprovesti,  koje osim desegregacije imaju za cilj uključivanje pripadnika romske nacionalne manjine u rad školskih tela i obuku  svih zaposlenih na temu diskriminacije, kao i mere čiji je cilj razvijanje duha tolerancije, poštovanja različitosti i nediskriminatornog ponašanja.

Segregacija u OŠ „Branko Radičević“ u Bujanovcu nije usamljen slučaj i od Srbije se očekuje da posebno razmotri problem segregacije u obrazovanju, kako je i Evropska komisija skrenula pažnju državi u izveštaju iz 2019. godine. Na ovaj specifičan društveni problem koji ozbiljno ugrožava prava deteta, Praxis je nastojao da ukaže i ranije podnošenjem pritužbi Poverenci za zaštitu ravnopravnosti. Međutim, poverenica je izbegavala da utvrdi diskriminaciju bez obzira na postojanje segregacije u slučaju OŠ „Vuk Karadžić“ u Nišu ili je bila mišljenja da je povređeno pravo na obrazovanje iz Zakona o osnovama sistema obrazovanja i vaspitanja ali ne i da su povređene odredbe Zakona o zabrani diskriminacije kao što je to bio slučaj povodom pritužbe u OŠ „Jovan Jovanović Zmaj“ u Surdulici.

Imajući u vidu dosadašnji stav po pitanju postojanja diskriminacije u slučajevima segregacije romskih učenika još više naglašavamo važnost odluke poverenice u konkretnom slučaju i verujemo da će mišljenje koje je donela imati značajan uticaj na postupanje i rad državnih ustanova, odnosno da će doprineti suzbijanju i iskorenjivanju ove štetne društvene pojave. 

Za više informacija, pogledajte saopštenje ovde.

The Anti-Discrimination Coalition and partner organizations demand from the competent authorities to withdraw from the adoption procedure the proposed Amending Act on the Anti-discrimination Law because representatives of vulnerable and discriminated groups, as well as the general public, had no opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed legal solutions. The text of the draft Act has an extremely large number of shortcomings; therefore, it is necessary to postpone its adoption and enable all stakeholders to provide their respective feedback.

The Government of the Republic of Serbia has recently prepared a proposed Amending Act on the Anti-discrimination Law. Contrary to the legal rules governing the drafting and adoption procedure of draft laws, the parties interested in the content of the Act were not allowed to participate in its drafting, nor was a public discussion on the proposed solutions held before the Government formally adopted them. This is also stated in item 9. Analysis of the effects of the Act that was submitted to the National Assembly along with the proposed Amending Act.

The lack of a wide debate on the new legal solutions directly prevented interested parties from making a constructive contribution to the quality of the proposed Act, and above all,  from contributing to the elimination of its numerous shortcomings, which can be divided into four different groups.

The first group consists of shortcomings which are linguistically meaningless or impossible linguistic structures, but also of spelling mistakes. For example, the text uses the word "doesnotjustify" (translator’s note: the whole phrase is written as one word) and states that "harassment...which is aimed at or constitutes a violation of dignity... is forbidden" (translator’s note: in the original, an impossible language structure is used). 

The second group of shortcomings indicates that the amendments are not proposed in accordance with the law drafting rules. For example, in a contradictory manner, the act authorizes the Commissioner to process names and other personal data of the parties in the ongoing court discrimination-related proceedings, but at the same time imposes the obligation to anonymize those data before the submission of the court judgments to the Commissioner.

The third group consists of legal and systemic shortcomings that prevent the adequate implementation of the Act, such as deleting general procedural guarantees pertaining to the complaint proceedings, thus jeopardizing the rights of the parties in the proceedings and paving the way for arbitrary decision-making on the part of the Commissioner. 

Finally, the fourth group of shortcomings are of legal and political nature and cast doubt on the actual intent of the author of the proposed amendments, such as the authorization of the Commissioner to decide not to act upon a complaint if he/she finds that the purpose of the proceedings can be achieved by issuing a public warning, or the introduction of misdemeanor fines ten times higher than the currently prescribed ones, without any reasoning behind it.

Since the number of these shortcomings exceeds the number of proposed amendments, and especially taking into account the fact that their adoption would significantly aggravate the status of the parties concerned with this Act, we consider it necessary to withdraw the proposed Act for adoption without any delay, and then enable all interested parties to participate in the improvement of the legal text at hand.

The Anti-Discrimination Coalition consists of the Center for the Advancement of Legal Studies, Civil Rights Defenders, Labris -Organization for Lesbian Human Rights, the Network of Human Rights Committees (CHRIS Network), the Association of Disabled Students, Gayten LGBT, Praxis and the Equality.

The list of organisations supporting the initiative can be downloaded here.

On 12 February 2019, the study Equality in Practice - Implementing Serbia’s Equality Laws was presented in the Media Centre in Belgrade as one of the results of the two-year project entitled Improving the Equality Legal and Policy Framework in Serbia and Monitoring Implementation of Equality Norms and Policies, implemented by partner organisations: Praxis, London-based organisation Equal Rights Trust and Sandžak Committee for the Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms, with the support of the European Union.

The study was prepared by the Equal Rights Trust in cooperation with two professional consultants: Prof. Nevena Petrušić, PhD and Lawyer Kosana Beker.

The study addresses the issue of continuous discrimination in Serbia, analyses the exiting legal and political framework and assesses its effectiveness in practice.   In the absence of similar study, the aim of this comprehensive study is to serve as a key reference point and evidence base for all those who work on combating discrimination and promoting fundamental human rights and freedoms. On the other hand, the study aims to influence the government and the judicial system with its own authority and to serve as an effective tool in advocating for improving the efficiency of the anti-discriminatory framework.

The study is based on extensive research conducted over 12-month period including: field research conducted by civil society organisations in different regions of Serbia; focus groups with survivors of discrimination, lawyers and civil society organisations in Niš, Belgrade, Novi Pazar, Pančevo and Vranje; over 55 one-to-one interviews with key stakeholders including lawyers, government and private sector representatives.  In addition, the study includes the analysis and assessment of the compliance of Serbia’s anti-discrimination framework with the country’s international and regional obligations, and the analyses of the extent to which Serbia has adopted the practical measures that are necessary to ensure that its equality laws provide protection in practice.

For more information, see the announcement here.

The Commissioner for Protection of Equality, acting upon a complaint lodged by Praxis, established a discriminatory action of the Assembly of the City of Kraljevo because by its Decision on Helping Children with Disabilities, it deprived the pupils from internally displaced families residing in the City of Kraljevo of the right to the compensation of the costs of transport, dormitory accommodation and meals, and part of the costs covered by the City in case of necessity for a person accompanying the person with disability.   More specifically, the Assembly of the City of Kraljevo ruled out the possibility for internally displaced pupils with disabilities residing in the City of Kraljevo to exercise the said rights under equal conditions by determining permanent residence as one of the criteria for exercising these rights.  Due to this condition, the Decision violated Articles 7 and 22 of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination, which was established in the complaint procedure by the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality who then recommended to the Assembly of the City of Kraljevo to take all measures within its purview to make the decision in question applicable to the pupils who were internally displaced persons with temporary residence registered in the territory of the City of Kraljevo.

It is very important to emphasise, as stated in the Commissioner’s Decision, that status must not be a limiting factor for the exercise of any rights enjoyed by other citizens, and that special attention should be paid to internally displaced children with disabilities who may be exposed to multiple discrimination based on several personal characteristics.

In addition to this, the Commissioner informed the Assembly of the City of Kraljevo that the language and terms were means of combating discrimination, and that it was necessary to recognise that the terminology used when talking about people with disabilities changed over time depending on approach. More specifically, the name of the Decision in question included some outdated terminology that was not in the spirit of anti-discrimination policy, such as "children with special needs", while some provisions of the Decision included terms such as "invalid", "blind and deaf persons", etc. The needs of all people are the same and only the ways of fulfilling them can differ, with disability being only one of the characteristics of a person. It is therefore unacceptable and insulting to focus on someone’s disability.

Before the Commissioner issued an opinion, the City of Kraljevo had not responded to the allegations of the complaint. This is one of a dozen of discriminatory decisions due to which Praxis lodged complaints against the Assembly of the City of Kraljevo. As usual, Praxis will continue to monitor further actions of the competent authorities in terms of aligning the disputed decisions with anti-discrimination legislation.

This is one more opportunity to address public authorities, stressing the importance of respecting human rights, adhering to the principles of non-discrimination and taking into account the needs of the most vulnerable citizens in the policy-making process.

Within the framework of the project Improving the equality legal and policy framework in Serbia and monitoring implementation of equality norms and policies, implemented by the partner organisations The Equal Rights Trust, Sandžak Committee for Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms and Praxis, and supported by the European Union through EIDHR, Praxis held two consultative community meetings entitled Identifying the major challenges in non-discrimination legislation, policies and practices in Serbia.  The meetings were held in Niš and Belgrade, on 8st and 14th November respectively. They were attended by 106 participants. 

Community meetings gathered members of vulnerable social groups, representatives of civil society organisations dealing with the protection of human rights and freedoms, students of legal clinics, human rights activists at the local level, as well as representatives of local authorities, institutions, organisations and independent institutions, but also all other stakeholders, with the aim of joint contribution to the development of advocacy campaign for addressing major challenges and shortcomings in the field of implementation of legal and strategic anti-discrimination framework in Serbia.

The concluding observations from the meetings were based on the exchange of experiences related to discrimination from the perspective of both right-holders and duty-holders and constituted part of the advocacy strategy at the local level. Through joint efforts during the discussion, participants defined advocacy space and measures at the local level, and substantial consensus was reached on the need for education in the field of discrimination of all relevant actors and the importance of such meetings in that respect.

For more information, see the announcement here.

Following a complaint for service delivery discrimination on the grounds of disability lodged by Praxis, the Commissioner for Protection of Equality initiated a misdemeanour procedure before the Basic Court in Kraljevo against the owner of the children’s playroom “Maša i Medved” from Kraljevo for committing the misdemeanour referred to in Article 52, paragraph 1 of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination. 

In fact, the playroom owner committed discrimination and misdemeanour by refusing to provide the service of using playroom to an 18-month-old girl because of her disability, i.e. by imposing conditions that were not imposed on other persons.   

Since such conduct of the playroom owner is contrary to the Constitution, the provisions of anti-discrimination legislation and international conventions, which are directly guaranteed by the Constitution, and given that such conduct undoubtedly constitutes an act of discrimination that violates the right to equality motivated by the physical disability of a minor, Praxis lodged a complaint requesting from the Commissioner to establish discrimination and recommend measures to eliminate the consequences of such conduct. The Commissioner initiated a misdemeanour procedure against the responsible person, which is an option envisaged by the institution's mandate, i.e. a measure of responding to discrimination and the prevention of discrimination. 

In addition to protecting the victims of discrimination, we believe that the Commissioner’s decision and the outcome of the initiated misdemeanour procedure will significantly contribute to raising the capacity and knowledge of service providers, both in the public and private sector, about the obligations they must comply with in accordance with anti-discrimination regulations. We also hope that it will empower potential victims of discrimination to seek more protection of the right to equality.     

It should be emphasised that Serbian anti-discrimination legislation has been criticised for the lack of legal remedies addressing the cause of discrimination and it has been pointed out that the remedies are largely focused on the victims of discrimination. The Commissioner’s decision to initiate a misdemeanour procedure is also very important from that aspect since international good practice stresses the need for structural remedies that are beyond the provision of individual damage compensation to victims.