January 2004
Croatia's bid for membership in the European Union, a central political objective, has been hampered by its human rights record. Key concerns for Human Rights Watch include slow progress in the return of displaced and refugee Serbs, insufficient cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and failure to fairly and rigorously pursue domestic war crimes trials for abuses committed during the 1991-95 war. The task of enhancing Croatia's human rights record now falls to the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) following its victory in the November 2003 parliamentary elections. HDZ's nationalistic past leaves most observers skeptical as to its willingness to bring about the desired improvements.
|
Refugee Returns
Between 300,000 and 350,000 Croatian Serbs left their homes during the 1991-95 war in Croatia, mostly for Serbia and Montenegro, and Bosnia. The total number of returns registered by the Croatian government as of July 2003 was 102,504. The actual number of returnees is significantly lower because, after a short stay in Croatia, many depart again for Serbia and Montenegro or Bosnia. (See "Broken Promises: Impediments to Refugee Return."
Due to discrimination in the return process, most minority refugees and displaced persons have not been able to repossess their occupied homes, nor have they received alternative housing or monetary compensation. According to the Croatian government, 4,271 cases of repossession of government allocated private property, mostly owned by ethnic Serbs, were still unresolved at the beginning of October 2003. Croatia has prevented virtually all Croatian Serbs who lost tenancy rights to their apartments during and after the war from reoccupying their apartments or receiving substitute housing. In June 2003, the cabinet adopted a decree enabling former tenancy rights holders to rent or purchase government-built apartments at below-market rates. The purchase rates stipulated by the June 2003 decree, however, are beyond the financial means of most prospective returnees, and other forms of reparation or compensation for past dispossession remain unavailable to them.
Many Serb homes were damaged or destroyed during the war. Government reconstruction of war-damaged Serb homes did not begin until late 2002, after more than 100,000 damaged and destroyed Croat homes had already been rebuilt. Three-quarters of the houses to be reconstructed during 2003 were Serb-owned. Occupants of government property allocated to Serbs routinely loot fixtures and moveable property before leaving. Although legislation authorizes state attorneys to seek compensation for damage, they rarely take action.
Employment Discrimination
Economic opportunities for minority returnees are limited by discrimination in public services or local government. A December 2002 constitutional law on minority rights obliges the state to ensure proportional representation of minorities in the administration and the judiciary at state, county, and municipal levels but its impact remains to be seen.
Justice
Despite Croatia's willingness to provide documentary evidence to the ICTY, the government has failed to hand over Ante Gotovina, a Croatian Army general indicted for crimes against Croatian Serbs between July and November 1995. ICTY prosecutor Carla del Ponte and the Croatian press are skeptical about government claims that police have been unable to track him down.
Croatian courts have dealt with only a handful of war crimes perpetrated against ethnic Serbs, usually resulting in acquittals and absurdly low sentences for ethnic Croat indictees. The Lora trial from 2002, and trial for crimes in Paulin Dvor, ongoing at this writing, dramatically exposed the absence of adequate witness protection measures in Croatia, as frightened key witnesses declined to offer relevant testimony. Croatia has demonstrated far more enthusiasm for the domestic prosecution of Croatian Serbs for war crimes. More than 1,500 have been indicted, often on ill-founded charges. The arrest of returning Serb refugees on war crimes charges has been particularly problematic. Although most arrests of Serb returnees have ended in dropped charges or acquittals, the threat of arrest and prolonged detention has deterred others from returning.
Key International Actors
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) mission to Croatia has attempted to develop a dialogue with the government while issuing reports critical of its return-related practices. Its six-month report presented in December 2003, the OSCE welcomed progress in legislation regarding refugee return and minority rights. The report, however, noticed slow progress in return of refugees and property repossession, the issue of tenancy rights, and lingering problems with the judiciary and in implementation of the rule of law, including in domestic war crimes prosecutions.
On September 26, 2003, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (CoE) abolished post-monitoring dialogue with Croatia, following a positive report by the president of the CoE Monitoring Committee, which was later endorsed by the full committee at its session in September.
Croatia applied for European Union (E.U.) membership in February 2003. The E.U. has consistently emphasized that improvements in government policies regarding the return of Serb refugees is a precondition for improved relations. The March 26, 2003, Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) report, in which the European Commission identified political and economic reforms required to allow Croatia's progress toward a closer relationship with the E.U., found that "[i]n practice, only limited progress has been achieved in the return process, and de facto integration of the Serb minority." E.U. Council Conclusions following the June 16-17, 2003, meeting of E.U. foreign ministers in Thessaloniki likewise made clear that progress was "required on refugee return, in which very little was achieved in the last year, in particular with regard to the integration of the Serb minority." On the issue of war crimes accountability, the SAP report of March 2003 found that "[t]he Government's attitude in the co-operation with ICTY remains lukewarm," and called on the Croatian government to ensure full co-operation with ICTY. Ratification of the Croatia-E.U. Stabilization and Association Agreement, signed in late 2001, remains pending before the parliaments of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, due to Croatia's failure fully to cooperate with the ICTY.
The U.S. government has expressed skepticism regarding Croatia's claim that the ICTY fugitive Ante Gotovina was outside Croatia. In May 2003, the government of Croatia decided not to enter an agreement, requested a year earlier by the United States, exempting U.S. citizens from transfer from Croatia to the International Criminal Court.
