Human Rights Committee

Seventy-first Session

1912^th Meeting (AM)

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TAKES UP INITIAL REPORT OF CROATIA

Full integration into European and Euro-Atlantic institutions and helping ensure the long-term stability of South-east Europe were Croatia’s main strategic goals, the Human Rights Committee was told this morning, as it met to take up Croatia’s initial report on compliance with the 1976 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Lidija Lukina Karajkovic, Assistant Minister of Justice, Administration and Local Self-Government of Croatia, told the Committee that in the past

10 years Croatia had gone through major historical transitions, including a war of aggression, the creation of new State structures and transition to a market economy.  The Government had started promoting true and fully functioning democracy since the recent parliamentary elections.  It had undertaken a number of initiatives aimed at improving the human rights situation of all citizens.

She said Croatia’s Constitution had proved to be a valid foundation for the legal system.  It ensured the grounds of the multi-party democracy and the welfare State, but it had also demonstrated weaknesses, particularly regarding regulation of the political system.  Amendments and supplements to the Constitution undertaken in 2000 sought to address those weaknesses, such as by changing the parliamentary system, decentralization of the State and strengthening the rule of law.

Other members of the Croatian delegation, responding to written questions posed by Committee members, spoke on derogations from the provisions of the Constitution during states of emergency, return of refugees and property, missing persons and prosecution of war crimes, among other issues.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its consideration of Croatia’s report.

Background

The Committee had before it the initial report of Croatia on its compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(document CCPR/C/HRV/99/1).  The report contains an overview of measures that have been adopted to give effect to the rights provided for by the Covenant since Croatia became an independent State in October 1991.

The report states that upon the holding of the first multi-party elections in Croatia following the break up of the former Yugoslavia, the Republic started the process of transformation towards a system of parliamentary democracy and market economy.  The Constitution of Croatia guarantees the realization of the right to self-determination in the economic sphere and prescribes that the Croatian National Parliament and the people decide directly and independently on the regulation of economic, legal and political relations in the Republic, and on the preservation of natural and cultural wealth and its utilization. 

Croatian legislation provides for the realization of the internal dimension of the right to self-determination by setting an obligation to hold elections, as well as through the exercise of active and passive electoral rights of individuals, the report states.  The Constitution guarantees to the members of minorities freedom to express their nationality, freedom to use their language and script and cultural autonomy.  The Constitutional Law on Human Rights and Rights of Ethnic and National Communities or Minorities guarantees a larger number of specific minority rights, including the right to education in minority languages, to public and private use of minority languages and scripts, access to the media, participation of members of minorities in public life, and special representation of members of minorities in the Croatian National Parliament.

The report states that, as expressed in Article 3 of the Constitution, freedom, equal rights, national equality, love of peace, social justice, respect for human rights, inviolability of ownership, conservation of nature and the human environment, the rule of law and a democratic multi-party system are the highest values of the constitutional order of Croatia. 

For several years, the report states, the Government has been implementing a series of measures and actions in the promotion and protection of human rights.  On the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the adoption of General Declaration on Human Rights, for example, round tables dedicated to the theme of the General Declaration were held at the Law School of the University of Zagreb, in the Institute of Social Sciences, as well as in the Old Townhall.  Further, a conference on the significance of local and non-governmental organizations in the promotion of human rights was held in the European Home in Zagreb between

11 and 12 May 1998.

The Criminal Code of Croatia states, among other things, that whoever -- on the basis of a difference of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other conviction, national or social origin, property, birth, education, social or other status, affiliation to an ethnic or national community or minority in the Croatia -- denies and limits the rights and freedoms of citizens laid down in the Constitution, law or other regulations, or whoever, on the basis of such a difference or affiliation, grants citizens any privileges or advantages, shall be punished by imprisonment for six months to five years.  The same punishment is prescribed for a person who denies or limits a member of a people, ethnic or national group or a minority the right to freely express his or her nationality or the right to cultural autonomy.

Equal rights of men and women is proclaimed in the Constitution, the report states.  The realization of the constitutionally proclaimed prohibition of discrimination based on sex assumes the prohibition of discrimination and the equality of sexes in the realization of all the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms.  Accordingly, this subject matter is regulated by the entire Croatian legislation.  In addition, Croatia is a party to theConvention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and has established a Commission for the Issues of Equality, responsible for the development of a national policy aimed at strengthening of the role of women in society.

On the subject of violence against women, the report states, periodic reviews and analysis of laws are planned in order to provide for their efficiency in dealing with such violence, with emphasis given to the prevention of violence and to the prosecution of offenders.  The plans also include the provision of accommodation and assistance to girls and women exposed to violence, as well as provision of medical, psychological and other counseling services and free or low-cost legal assistance wherever necessary.

Continuing, the report gives an overview of Croatia’s position with regard to derogations from the Covenant in times of emergency, the fact that there is no capital punishment in Croatia, the prohibition against torture and the modalities of criminal sanctions.  Slavery and similar arrangements are prohibited by the Constitution, as is the restriction of liberty, except upon a court decision in accordance with the law.

The Constitution also provides for equal protection of all citizens and aliens before Croatia’s courts, governmental agencies and other bodies vested with public authority, the report states.  The Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia ensures uniform application of laws and equal justice.

Croatia’s Constitution also guarantees freedom of thought and expression, according to the report.  Censorship is forbidden and journalists are guaranteed the right to freedom of reporting and access to information.  Also guaranteed are freedom of thought, expression, conscience and religion. 

Introduction of Report

LIDIJA LUKINA KARAJKOVIC, Assistant Minister of Justice, Administration and Local Self-Government of Croatia, after introducing members of the delegation, said it was an honour to present the efforts and achievements of Croatia during its 10 years of existence.  She described in detail the circumstances leading to the independence and sovereignty of Croatia on

8 October 1991, including Serbian aggression, ethnic cleansing and refugee problems, and events afterwards.  She said Croatia had become a member of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and had been admitted to membership of the United Nations.  In 1996 Croatia had become a member of the Council of Europe.  It was taking steps towards becoming a member of the European Union.

After elections for Parliament last year, the president died and presidential elections had to be held, as well, she continued.  The newly-elected Parliament and President had the difficult task of fulfilling democratic reforms and paving a path towards membership in the European Union.  Protection of human and minority rights was a priority for the Government programme of

2000 to 2004.

In the course of the past 12 months, the Government had been commended for its efforts and had taken a transparent course in resolving all issues of human rights and protection of minorities.  Some of the international monitoring processes had been successfully terminated.  The Council of Europe, for instance, had decided to close its monitoring procedure.  Conditions had been created for Croatia to be excluded from the omnibus resolution on human rights. 

She said the Constitution had proved to be a valid foundation for the legal system.  It ensured the grounds of the multi-party democracy and the welfare State, but it had also demonstrated weaknesses, particularly regarding regulation of the political system.  Amendments and supplements to the Constitution in 2000 sought to address those weaknesses, such as by changing to the parliamentary system, decentralization of the State and strengthening the rule of law.  The focus of power was to be transferred from the President to Parliament.  Parliamentary democracy had been secured, even though the President was still directly elected.  The President could dissolve Parliament before the end of its mandate, but Parliament maintained the right to act on such a decision.  All constitutional changes were aimed at achieving decentralization and transformation to a true democratic system.

The Constitution’s revisions brought a more precise separation between the three branches of Government, she said.  In order to guarantee the autonomy of local and regional governments, the Constitution prescribed that the central Government should be restricted and provided the conditions for reform of local and regional government.  The relationship among the three branches of power had been strengthened, she said. 

She noted that the judiciary had been guaranteed its autonomy.  Its efficiency and legality of operations had been strengthened, she added.  Through the revision process, the Government had been granted a larger authority, which included proposing legislation and directing the operation of the security services.  The relations between the two houses of Parliament had been adjusted to ensure its smoother functioning.

The changes made to the Constitution ensured a greater degree of public control over public offices, she said.  She also drew attention to the importance of the constitutional provision for the holding of public referendums.  She added that the revision of the Constitution had been necessary to fulfil the promises the ruling coalition had made to the electorate.  The revision would help make Croatia a multi-party democracy, with respect for human rights, the environment and the rule of law.  It would help it to become a State in no way different from contemporary democratic States in the western world -- one which would ensure the quality of life of all its citizens.

After the 2000 elections, many legislative initiatives had been undertaken, such as amendments to the Act on the Status of Displaced Persons and Refugees, in order to delete discriminatory elements and guarantee reconstruction of damaged property.  Amendments were also made to the Special State Concern Act regarding housing for returning refugees.  New legislation for strengthening the independence of judges had also been enacted.  There were trials underway regarding Croats accused of war crimes.

In November 2000 the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had conducted a survey on a sample of the refugee population in order to obtain information on the situation of the refugee population and minority return.  A large number of Serbs had returned voluntarily to Croatia, according to that survey.  Most of the returnees felt they had enjoyed protection of their rights on the basis of refugee status.  Most of them were still receiving assistance, but few had received assistance in the revival of agricultural production.

According to the survey, 15 per cent of the returnees said they felt insecure after their return, but 94 per cent said they would stay in the place to which they had returned.  Several incidents regarding refugee returns had occurred at the beginning of 2000, but they were isolated cases and the number of incidents had decreased.  Most returnees indicated as their greatest problem the lack of employment and income.  Those problems were connected with the difficult economic and social problems of the areas to which they had returned. However, most returnees said they were better off in Croatia and considered their living conditions improved after their return.

The biggest challenge the Government faced was the fight against corruption and organized crime, she said.  A draft bill to battle corruption and organized crime, among other draft bills, would bring domestic legislation in that regard in line with international standards.  Corruption, as the main instrument of organized crime, must be prevented at all levels of the economy.  The Government had adopted a proposal on the establishment of an office to combat corruption and organized crime.  The rule of law, the establishment of a specialized body, increase in the efficiency of prosecution of corruption and economic measures were included in a plan of action.

She said Parliament had adopted a new Police Act.  Before that, it had not had an effective law to govern police conduct.  The present text was the result of many years of effort.  The Act had its origins in the Constitution and international human rights law.  All instruments of force were listed and conditions for their use prescribed.  The Act regulated, among other things, the admission of officers to service, their ranks, salaries, rights, obligations and responsibilities.  Experts from the Council of Europe had participated in the drafting of the Act.

In the past 10 years, Croatia had gone through major historical transitions, including a war of aggression, the creation of new State structures and a transition to a free market economy.  There were still many challenges to be resolved, such as the return of refugees.  Job creation, reconstruction of property destroyed during the war, recovery of the economy and social assistance programmes were being undertaken. 

The Government had started promoting true and fully functioning democracy since the recent Parliamentary elections, she said.  Full integration into the European and Euro-Atlantic institutions and the long-term stability of South East Europe were the Government’s main strategic goals.  The Government had undertaken a number of initiatives aimed at increasing democracy and improving the human rights situation of all its citizens. 

Croatia considered the return of refugees and displaced persons the most important humanitarian issue it faced.  The promotion and protection of minority rights was also very important.  Special attention was being paid to non-governmental organizations and other civil initiatives.  A new climate had been created in which non-governmental organizations were partners with the Government in such efforts as furthering minority rights, gender equality, and so forth.  The Government had shown its commitment towards advanced democracy.  Economic difficulties were the main obstacle.

Response to Written Questions

BRANKO SMERDEL Professor at Croatia’s Zagreb Law Faculty, answering a question about the status of the Covenant in the State party’s domestic law, said that according to the Constitution, international treaties were part of the international legal order and should be above domestic law in terms of legal effect.  In drafting the Constitution, it was agreed that the constitutional order should be in accordance with the norms of the United Nations and all standards of human rights instruments should be included.  The Covenant was part of the international legal order of Croatia.  Judges were authorized to apply provisions of the Covenant.

All basic provisions and rights of the Covenant had been observed in the drafting of the Constitution, he said.  Some objections to the Constitution’s language, made by international organizations, had been considered.  As a consequence, in article 14, the word “citizens” had been replaced by the word “everyone”.  The Republic of Croatia was a member of the European Convention on Human Rights and claims could be made with the European Court. 

The Constitutional Court in Croatia would first examine possible violations of the Constitution, then alleged violations of the European Convention and after that, alleged violations of the Covenant.  He quoted several Court rulings and decisions to that effort.  The Constitutional Court had invoked several provisions of the Covenant, he said.  He also gave examples of petitioners claiming that his or her human rights, as set out in the Covenant, had been infringed by domestic law or administrative action.

He then turned to derogation provisions in the Constitution, for which there were two key articles -- 101 and 17.  Article 17 provided for a derogation of certain constitutional guarantees.  The decision on derogations lay with the Parliament –- which must approve it by a two-thirds majority -- and only secondary with the President, if the Parliament was unable to convene.  During a state of war or other threat to the State, individual freedoms and rights guaranteed by the Constitution might be restricted.  The restriction must be adequate to the level of danger, and discrimination was not permitted. 

Article 101, he noted, authorized the President to issues decrees with the force of law.  Those decrees must be in conformity with the Constitution and international human rights documents.  The Article must be strictly interpreted, he noted.  During the period of armed conflict and rebellion the President had issued a number of decrees, including the establishment of a military court and prosecutor, on the grounds of an immediate threat to the Government.  The decrees had been repealed in 1996.

Answering a question on views that might be adopted by the Committee under the Optional Protocol, he said for the purposes of reporting and implementing the views, the special Department of Human Rights had been established in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in 1994, which also disseminated information.  The Government would inform Parliament of the recommendations.  Recently, the Government had also established a special Commission on Human Rights.

BRANKO SOCANAC, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Croatia, said property to be returned to owners had priority under the decree on special State concerns, and the return of refugees without housing was also envisioned.  Obstacles for the unimpeded and unconditional return of refugees had been removed.  There had been more than 270,000 returnees, the majority of which were Serbian, both cross-border and internally.  In 2000, more than 32,000 people had returned, of which 18,000 were Serb returnees.

Applications for return were still being filed, primarily by people in Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, he continued.  They were being dealt with within a month and the majority of applications had been granted, although not everybody had yet returned.  The problems of Croatian documents had been eliminated, and a significant number of potential returnees still possessed Croatian documents.  In 2000, there had been an improvement in the atmosphere surrounding returnees as a result of Government actions, resulting in a significant increase in the number of minority returns.

Regarding the return of property, he said in 2000 significant efforts had been made, resulting in the return of 900 housing units.  More than

11,000 applications had been received.  This year, the Government had started to review decisions regarding the allocation of property, including visits to each housing unit to establish the facts, and 7,498 decisions on temporary property had been reviewed out of a total of 22,000 decisions issued during 1995 to

1998.  According to estimates, 7,000 housing units would be necessary for alternative housing accommodations.  The Government had provided about 2,000 alternative housing units for temporary arrangements.  Identification of cases of multiple or illegal occupation was a priority.  Reconstruction of more than 10,000 units was envisaged this year, he said.

The increased trend towards return demonstrated that it was no longer a political issue, he said.  It was primarily an economic and social problem.  There was a 60 per cent unemployment rate in areas affected by war.  The process of return had been accelerated, but it was important to improve the number of housing units.  The economic recovery of war-affected areas was now paramount.

DAMIR KUKAVICA (Croatia), on the issue of ethnically motivated killing, said that during the period of armed conflict there had been a number of criminal acts with fatal consequences.  All such cases reported had been criminally investigated and court proceedings initiated.  He noted that in the last few years the total number of reported murders had been decreasing.  There were fewer and fewer cases of ethnically motivated murder. 

Ms. KARAJKOVIC (Croatia), on efforts to cooperate with the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, said that in 2000 the Parliament had adopted a declaration on cooperation with the Tribunal.  The Government had thus shown its determination to pursue efficient cooperation, which was evident from the concrete examples available.  She noted, as an example of that cooperation, that the Tribunal’s Prosecutor’s Office had been permitted to perform exhumations in Croatia.  Also, all documents related to Bosnia and Herzegovina had been transferred to the State archives and made available to Tribunal investigators.  She added that liaison officers had also been appointed to assist the Prosecutor’s Office.

Mr. SOCANAC (Croatia) spoke on the question of missing persons.  He said that following the conflict, after detention in different camps, several thousand persons had been liberated.  Since 1995, the Government had established the fate of thousands of persons who had been listed as missing, largely through the exhumation of graves.  Mass graves had been found in all previously occupied areas of Croatia.  The largest number of mass graves had been found in the Croatian Danube region. 

He then addressed the issue of the persons who had gone missing during military operations in Croatia in the summer of 1995.  Different figures for the number of missing individuals had been put forward, he noted.  With the goal of determining what had happened to the persons in question, Croatia had given information to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, even though the persons in question were from Croatia.

He noted that the conditions for exhumation were the same regardless of nationality -- the basic criteria for carrying out exhumations was the accessibility and availability of information.  Since 1991, Croatia had been actively cooperating with, among others, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the United Nations Human Rights Commission on the issue.

MARIN MRCELA, Judge, Croatia’s Zagreb County Court, said the Criminal Code proscribed a number of acts that might be committed by police or other officials –- including torture, infringement of the inviolability of dwelling places, maltreatment in the execution of duty and unauthorized recording or eavesdropping.

There were several possibilities for making complaints in the case of such offenses, he said.  The relevant authorities examined individual cases to see if a wrong had be done.  Injured persons could file a crime report directly to the police or State Prosecutor.  If the State Prosecutor declined to indict or didn’t move on the indictment for three months, the person could go directly to the court.  Also, a civil lawsuit could be filed.  An application for compensation in the case of unjustified arrest or detention for damage could be filed, he then noted, describing the procedures for such a course.

He also answered questions about progress made in investigating and prosecuting members of police, security and armed forces and others who had committed offences of rape and other violence against women, and other crimes against the civilian population in the period of armed conflict.  The Ministry of the Interior had intensified its investigations of those crimes.  Special departments for investigation of war crimes had been established in the Interior Ministry.  A law was being drafted on the establishment of a separate department in the Office of the Prosecutor, as well as on separate investigation departments and trial chambers.  Ongoing efforts to shed light on war crimes was a priority.  In the course of 2000 and the first two months of 2001, criminal proceedings had been instituted against 37 persons.

Regarding the trafficking of women for sexual exploitation through the territory en route to other States, he said that provisions of article 178 of the Criminal Code did indeed apply to persons who were initially recruited in others States.  Article 14 of the Criminal Code prescribed that provisions should be applied only if the perpetrator was found within the territory.  In practice, there had not been any cases, because women would be voluntarily brought into the country as tourists, and then engage in prostitution.  A person unlawfully transferring another person across the border would be punished, among other things, for the criminal offence of international prostitution.

Although there had not been any cases, he said law enforcement was well-equipped to pursue such cases.  There were new procedures for collecting information concerning such offences by surveillance and technical recording of communications, houses and persons.  Such procedures were ordered by the investigative judge, on the proposal of the public prosecutor.

Mr. KUKAVICA (Croatia) explained the laws and regulations covering “security measure of expulsion” and “security measure of removal” imposed on foreigners.  He said appeal was not possible, since such removal was based on a criminal proceeding, the sentence of which had to be final.  Competent authorities would determine a time limit in which the person was obliged to leave Croatia.

Regarding a question about temporary residence of aliens, he said a foreigner with a transit visa might stay for seven days.  Holders of an entry visa for tourism or business might stay for three months.  A border pass was also issued for three months.  Foreigners who wanted to stay longer and had come for education, research, employment or medical treatment, or had married a Croat citizen, had to submit an application for an extension of stay.  Extension might only be granted for the reason submitted at the initial request for a visa, and evidence that the foreigner had means of subsistence had to be included. 

Ms. KARAJKOVIC (Croatia) took up the issue of the backlog of cases pending before Croatia’s courts.  She said a working group had been established in the Ministry of Justice with the aim of helping speed up court proceedings.  The problem of backlogs was the most acute problem facing the Croatian system of justice.  An efficient judicial system was a prerequisite for the formation of a market economy, she noted.  A number of regulations had been passed or were pending to address the issue.  Measures had been taken to address shortcomings immediately, she said.  Long-term measures had also been envisaged. 

She stressed that the provisions of the Police Act specified that measures applied against minors must be undertaken by specifically trained officers.  Parents and guardians must be present, except under special circumstances.

She then turned to a question posed by experts on alleged difficulties that had been experienced in the enforcement and implementation of court orders, in particular in the eviction of illegal occupants of land by police.  She said the procedure followed by the courts in the enforcement of claims was regulated by the Execution Act.  The court ordered that an execution of such a claim should be made only in the presence of enforceable documents.  The court could impose a fine or detention on persons who were obstructing such execution, she noted.  Defendants had the right to lodge appeals on the ruling.

* *** *