!

!
!

ANNUAL HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT:

TRENDS IN 2013
CROATIA

Youth Initiative for Human Rights Croatia

March 2014

!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
ANNUAL HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT

TRENDS IN 2013
CROATIA
Youth Initiative for Human Rights Croatia
March 2014
Zagreb, Croatia
Photographs on the cover from: index.hr and novilist.hr
Map graphic on the cover from: commons.wikimedia.org

INTRODUCTION
This annual human rights report is strategically focused on the trends posing challenges to
certain groups in the Croatian society, rather than describing in detail specific human rights
issues.
The purpose of this report is to draw attention of important stakeholders to these trends in
order to enable them to monitor and act adequately, and in a timely manner. Furthermore, its
purpose is to remind those responsible to ensure that human rights are respected and
promoted in Croatia on their national and international obligations, as well as standards for
protection of human rights.
Identifying the trends, rather than specific one-time events allows us to direct strategic
attention and actions towards ensuring that violations these trends could identify do not
escalate into gross or systematic human rights abuses.
The trends this report deals with are: (a) failure to promote and protect the rights of national
minorities, (b), failure to promote educational activities for human rights, fundamental
freedoms and tolerance, and (c) failure to promote and protect rights of LGBT persons.
Although YIHR normally produces transitional justice reports, this report does not deal
systematically with transitional justice issues such as war crimes prosecution and protection
of victims of war crimes, as this process saw slight improvement in 2013. It is the opinion of
YIHR that the problems in this process, albeit still grave in issues such as (i) remaining
discriminatory practices, (ii) inadequate witness protection mechanisms, and (iii) serious
issues in prosecution of wartime sexual violence, do not constitute a worrying negative trend
in human rights protection. Currently, YIHR is also working on a report dedicated to
transitional justice processes in Croatia in 2013.

I RIGHTS OF NATIONAL MINORITIES

(a) The Obligation of the State to Protect and to Promote Minority Rights and Ethnic
Tolerance & (b) The Obligation of the State to Protect and to Promote Linguistic Rights of
National Minorities
In 2013, there were several initiatives and events that together, in the opinion of YIHR,
constitute a negative trend in the protection and promotion of rights of national minorities. A
significant disparity from previous periods when such trends were noticed is that the issues
did not arise as a direct consequence of the actions of the Government and formal
institutions, but rather from the actions of civic and non-formal groups and individuals.
However, in several cases, it has been observed that the Government and formal institutions
did not take effective and adequate steps to promote and protect human rights of national
minorities.
Major Issues
Roma in Croatia continued enduring discrimination in everyday situations and in access to
housing, labour market, social welfare benefits etc. A major issue that preserves this trend is
remaining discriminatory practices in education. In 2010, the Grand Chamber of the European
Court of Human Rights found that the Roma-only classes in Croatian schools constitute a
violation of Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (Case of
Or!u! and Others v. Croatia Application no: 15766/03). To date, there have been no
significant changes in the organization of education for Romani children.
The Serbian minority still faces discrimination on a number of issues, especially in status
rights and public affairs. The (potential) Serbian returnees are still exposed to complicated
and lengthy procedures in recognition of their status rights. Furthermore, Serbs testifying or
being prosecuted for war crimes at local Croatian courts still face discriminatory practices
such as systemic refusal to take mitigating circumstances into consideration for ethnic
Serbian defendants as opposed to ethnic Croatian defendants.
In November 2013, a group of citizens who organised The Headquarters for the Defense of
the Croatian Vukovar initiated a signature-collection campaign aimed at limiting the rights to
equal and official use of the language of national minorities. They proposed a public
referendum to be organized about the following question: Do you agree that Article 12,
paragraph 1 of the Constitutional Act on the Rights of National Minorities should be amended
to read: Equal official use of the language and script used by members of a national minority
shall be exercised on the territory of a local government unit, state administration and
judiciary when the representatives of a certain minority make at least one half of the
population of the respective unit. In December, the group delivered what they claim to be
over 600,000 signatures of citizens supporting this initiative to the Croatian Parliament, asking
for the referendum to be formally initiated. This entire campaign was marked by a notable
anti-Serbian sentiment, generalizing Serbs as the aggressors in Croatia.
Legal Background
(a) The Obligation of the State to Protect and to Promote Minority Rights and Ethnic
Tolerance
1. The obligation to take effective steps in protecting and promoting minority rights has been
established under various international instruments for the promotion and protection of
human rights, i.e. the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR), the
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic,
Religious and Linguistic Minorities, the Framework Convention for the Protection of
National Minorities (FCPNM).
2. The relevant provisions of international (global) human rights instruments particularly
dealing with the protection of minority groups are created within the framework of the
United Nations: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Declaration on
the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.

3. As it is set in Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, inter
alia national minorities and linguistic minorities are entailed to enjoy full respect of their
rights and should be protected to do that in the community with other members of their
group:
In those States in which ethnic! or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to
such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of
their group, to enjoy their own culture (!) or to use their own language.
4. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic,
Religious and Linguistic Minorities further elaborates and specifies the scope of States
obligation to protect and to promote the rights of minorities.
5. Protection and promotion of minority identities are essential for the effective exercise of
minority rights and for the preservation of those identities in society at large. Pursuing that
end, Article 1 obliges the State to take resolute and effective measures to protect and to
promote identity of minorities:
1. States shall protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural! and
linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories and shall encourage
conditions for the promotion of that identity.
2. States shell adopt appropriate legislative and other measures to achieve those
ends.
6. Furthermore, Article 2 of the same Declaration obliges the State to widen its protection
beyond the nucleus of minority rights, i.e. minority identity:
1. Persons belonging to national or ethnic! and linguistic minorities (!) have the
right to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion, and to use
their own language, in private and in public, freely and without interference or any
form of discrimination.
2. Persons belonging to minorities have the right to participate effectively in cultural!
social, economic and public life.
3. Persons belonging to minorities have the right to participate effectively in decisions
on the national and, where appropriate, regional level concerning the minority to
which they belong or the regions in which they live, in a manner not incompatible with
national legislation.
(!)
7. As a general rule, Article 4 of the abovementioned Declaration establishes the obligation
of the State to protect and to promote human rights of national minorities:
1. States shall take measures where required to ensure that persons belonging to
minorities may exercise fully and effectively all their human rights and fundamental
freedoms without any discrimination and in full equality before the law.
2. States shall take measures to create favourable conditions to enable persons
belonging to minorities to express their characteristics and to develop their culture,
language, religion, traditions and customs, except where specific practices are in
violation of national law and contrary to international standards.
(!)
5. States should consider appropriate measures so that persons belonging to
minorities may participate fully in the economic progress and development in their
country.
8. On the regional (European) level the relevant provisions of human rights instruments for
the protection of national minorities are created within the framework of (i) Council of
Europe, i.e. the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, and (ii)
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, i.e. Document of the Copenhagen
Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE.
9. The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, obliges the State
similarly to the UN Declarations, to take positive measures with the aim of preservation
and development of minority group identities i.e. Article 5:
1. The Parties undertake to promote the conditions necessary for persons belonging
to national minorities to maintain and develop their culture, and to preserve the
essential elements of their identity, namely their! language, traditions and cultural
heritage.
(!)
10. Furthermore, Article 6 establishes an obligation of the State to act as a facilitator in
intercultural dialogue and to promote spirit of tolerance. State has to protect inter alia

persons belonging to national minorities against all acts and threats of discrimination,
hostility and violence:
1.The Parties shall encourage a spirit of tolerance and intercultural dialogue and
take effective measures to promote mutual respect and understanding and cooperation among all persons living on their territory, irrespective of those persons
ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious identity, in particular in the fields of education,
culture and the media.
2. The Parties undertake to take appropriate measures to protect persons who may
be subject to threats or acts of discrimination, hostility or violence as a result of their
ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious identity.
11. Within the existing framework of human rights instruments protecting the rights of national
minorities it is particularly relevant to address the Document of Copenhagen Meeting of
the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, i.e. Article 33:
The participating States will protect the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious
identity of national minorities on their territory and create conditions for the promotion
of that identity.
(!),
and Article 36:
(!)
Every participating State will promote a climate of mutual respect, understanding, cooperation and solidarity among all persons living on its territory, without distinction as
to ethnic or national origin or religion, and will encourage the solution of problems
trough dialogue based on the principles of the rule of law.
12. On a sub-regional level (Central Europe), under the authority of the Central European
Initiative, the most relevant provisions designed for the protection of minority rights are
enshrined in the CEI Instrument for the Protection of Minority Rights.
13. Taking effective measures to protect the rights on national minorities is also an obligation
of the State under the CEI Instrument. In accordance with the Article 6 of the Instrument,
the State has a duty to prevent and to protect against any violence (including incitement)
based on, inter alia, ethnic or national origin or identity:
States shell take effective measures to provide protection against any acts that
constitute incitement to violence against persons or groups based on national, racial,
ethnic, or religious discrimination, hostility or hatred, including anti-Semitism!
(b) The Obligation of the State to Protect and to Promote the Linguistic Rights of National
Minorities
1. The obligation of the State to protect and promote linguistic rights of national minorities is
well established under significant number of both international multilateral and bilateral
treaties and instruments for the protection of human rights of national minorities.
2. Most prominent norms regarding the protection of linguistic rights are enshrined in the
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and in the European
Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.
3. Article 10 paragraph 2 of the Framework Convention establishes the right to official and
equal use of minority languages in those areas of the State where national minorities are
present traditionally, or in substantial number, and upon their request:
In areas inhabited by persons belonging to national minorities traditionally or in
substantive numbers, if those persons so request and where such a request
corresponds to a real need, the parties shall endeavor to ensure, as far as possible,
the conditions which would make it possible to use the minority language in relations
between those persons and the administrative authorities.
4. Furthermore, in Article 11 paragraph 3 of the Framework Convention, the States are
obliged to ensure, where appropriate, the display of topographical and other indications of
public content in minority language and script:
In areas traditionally inhabited by substantial numbers of persons belonging to a
national minority, the Parties shall endeavour, in the framework of their legal system,
including, where appropriate, agreements with other States, and taking into account
their specific conditions, to display traditional local names, street names and other
topographical indications intended for the public also in the minority language when
there is a sufficient demand for such indications.

5. The obligation of the State to protect the linguistic rights of national minorities, i.e. the
right to equal and official use of minority languages and scripts is well established.
Although it is evident that the State enjoys a margin of appreciation when it comes to
determining the criterion for exercise of abovementioned right, i.e. numerical threshold,
the Advisory Committee of the Framework Convention in its Thematic Commentary No. 3
is giving an authoritative interpretation of the limits of the States margin of appreciation:
57 Numerical thresholds must not constitute an undue obstacle to the
official use of certain minority languages in areas inhabited by persons
belonging to national minorities either traditionally or in substantial numbers. In
particular, a requirement that the minority group represents at least half of the
population of a district in order to admit use of the minority language contacts with
local administrative authorities is not compatible with the Framework Convention.
Where thresholds exist, they must not be applied rigidly and flexibility and caution
should be exercised. (...) Overall, the Advisory Committee encourages states to give
careful consideration to the setting up of thresholds for determining the areas
inhabited by persons belonging to national minorities in substantial numbers and
welcomes measures taken by the authorities to lower any such thresholds as
appropriate.
(!)
65 (...) While states have a margin of appreciation in determining the
threshold, this must not be exercised in such manner as to constitute a
disproportionate obstacle with respect to certain minority languages. For instance, the
Advisory Committee found that the requirement of an absolute or relative majority in
urban, municipal or local communities raised concern in terms of its compatibility with
Article 11 of the Framework Convention.
6. Article 7, paragraphs 1, 2, and 4 of the European Charter for Regional or Minority
Languages proscribes the obligation of the States when it comes to providing legal
protection and positive measures of action that needs to be taken in order to preserve
and to encourage development of minority languages and scripts, i.e. to remove all legal
obstacles and unjustified restriction to the equal and official use of minority languages
and scripts:
1. In respect of regional or minority languages, within the territories in which such
languages are used and according to the situation of each language, the Parties shall
base their policies, legislation and practice on the following objectives and principles:
(!)
c) the need for resolute action to promote regional or minority languages in order to
safeguard them;
d) the facilitation and/or encouragement of the use of regional or minority languages,
in speech and writing, in public and private life;
(!)
2. The Parties undertake to eliminate, if they have not yet done so, any unjustified
distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference relating to the use of a regional or
minority language and intended to discourage or endanger the maintenance or
development of it.
(!)
4. In determining their policy with regard to regional or minority languages, the Parties
shall take into consideration the needs and wishes expressed by the groups which
use such languages (...)

II PROMOTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS THROUGH EDUCATION

The Obligation of the State to Promote Human Rights, Fundamental Freedoms and
Tolerance trough Education
The education system in Croatia continued its negative trend in failing to promote human
rights, fundamental freedoms and tolerance through education. The major issues are in (a)
the lack of and concerns in the implementation of civic education, (b) application of religious
education in public schools, and (c) history education that is still heavily burdened by
nationalist, highly politicised, and exclusive narratives.
Major Issues
Lack of and obstacles in the implementation of civic education in elementary and high school
curricula in Croatia represents a significant systematic difficulty of the Croatian educational
system. Although the Experimental Curriculum on Civic Education was developed, and for the
first time implemented trough 2013, encompassing around 445 pupils from fourth, seventh
and eight grades of elementary schools and second grade of high schools. The subsequent
independent research conducted to examine and evaluate the Experimental Curriculum
indicated that the pupils have a poor understanding and knowledge of the role of a citizen and
the government in democratic processes. Beside that, the research results showed worrying
gap in the knowledge of pupils regarding their rights and duties in a democratic society, as
well as about human rights in a broader sense. Consequently, there is clear empirical
evidence pointing towards the vital need for civic education of pupils in Croatia. However, it
remains unclear when this Experimental Curricula will become part of teachings in all
Croatian elementary and high schools due to a chronic lack of financial resources needed for
vocational training of teachers, and organizing schools infrastructure for a new class.
Religious education in Croatia is not compulsory in neither elementary, nor high schools. The
Constitution and other relevant laws in place grant the right for all State recognized religious
communities to arrange their religious teachings in those schools where there is demand from
either the pupils or their parents. Although, the State has an obligation to ensure all
necessary requirements for introduction of religious education in schools, almost all religious
groups (beside Roman Catholics) are facing problems in exercising their right to religious
education. That predominantly exists as a problem in smaller towns and rural areas. When it
comes to non-religious or no-confessional pupils in elementary schools and/or their parents,
they face systematic problem, which is more pronounced in smaller towns or rural areas,
regarding willingness of schools to organize educational contents in the period in which other
pupils attend religious education classes. Although schools are obliged to organize time for
students who are not attending religious education classes (usually trough classes of
education on ethics) they are constantly falling to provide this. Given there is no State policy
regarding organizing secular classes about history of religions, or classes about education on
ethics, non-religious students are disadvantaged and discriminated against. Sometimes this
also leads to students taking up religious education classes to give them something to do.
History education in Croatian curriculum is still decidedly one-sided. The most problematic
parts of the curriculum, and available (officially approved) history books, are relatively recent
and are problematic with respect to their presentation of the 1990s war in Croatia. The
Homeland War is presented as fully just, citing individual incidents of crimes. When
discussing war crimes, the crimes committed by the Serbian forces and the JNA (Yugoslav
Peoples Army) are almost exclusively mentioned. Actions by the Croatian forces which
resulted in heinous crimes (such as the operation Storm and actions Flash and Pocket 93)
are only presented as liberating and just. The authors of history books go as far as to state
1
that around 150.000 Serbs organized and left for not wanting the Croatian Government. The
Croatian participation in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially the conflict between
Croatian and Bosnian forces (1992 1994), is reduced to a minimum and there is complete
denial of the connection between the forces of Bosnian Croats with the Government in
Zagreb, even though this has been confirmed by the ICTY in numerous cases.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1

Mira Kolar-Dimitrijevi", Hrvoje Petri" i Jak!a Ragu#, Povijest 4 (Meridijani, Zagreb, 2004) str. 230-231, 237.

Legal Background
1. The Obligation to promote human rights, democracy and education on human rights is of
essential importance and needs to be transferred onto all individuals, intuitions and
organs of society by the Preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
(!) Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL
DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all
peoples and nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society,
keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to
promote respect for those rights and freedoms and by progressive measures,
national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and
observance!
2. In Article 26, the Universal Declaration is stating the purpose of promoting the respect for
human rights and democracy trough education on human rights values:
Education shell be directed to full development of the human personality and to the
strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall
promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or
religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the
maintenance of peace.
3. Bearing in mind principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration, Member States of the
United Nations agreed to shape their educational policies and curriculums in accordance
with human rights values. Those pledges became obligations under international human
rights law, prescribed by Article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights:
1. The State Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to
education. They agree that education shall be directed to the full development of the
human personality and the sense of its dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for
human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree that education shall
enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promoting understanding
tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups!
(!)
4. Furthermore, the relevance and importance of education for human rights, fundamental
freedoms and tolerance is also emphasized in Article 5 of the UNESCO Convention
Against Discrimination in Educations:
1.The States Parties to this Convention agree that:
(a) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and
to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; it
shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial
or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the
maintenance of peace;(!)
5. More specifically, with regard to the obligation to promote education on human rights,
fundamental freedoms and tolerance, the State is especially obliged to promote learning
and knowledge about minorities in the society at large.
6. In that respect, Article 4 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons
Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities obliges the State to
take positive measures that will promote minority identities trough educational system:
States should, where appropriate, take measures in the field of education, in order to
encourage knowledge of the history, traditions, language and culture of the minorities
existing within their territory. (!)
7. The States are also under obligation to promote tolerance and respect in schools
regarding the human rights of LGBT people. The Council of Europes Committee of
Ministers in Article 32 of its Recommendation CM/Rec (2010)05 on measures to combat
discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity states:
Taking into due account the over-riding interests of the child, appropriate measures
should be taken to this effect at all levels to promote mutual tolerance and respect in
schools, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. This should include
providing objective information with respect to sexual orientation and gender identity
(!). Furthermore, member states may design and implement school equality and
safety policies and action plans and may ensure access to adequate antidiscrimination training or support and teaching aids. (!)

III RIGHTS OF LGBT PERSONS

The Obligation of the State to Protect LGBT People Against Discrimination and Hate Speech,
and to Promote Tolerance and Respect for Human Rights of LGBT People
In 2013, the Croatian public witnessed a great debate about rights of LGBT persons. After the
referendum held on 1 December 2013, marriage in Croatia is constitutionally reserved only
for heterosexual couples, following a wide social campaign by right wing and religious groups.
Major Issues
Right-wing religious civic groups supported by right-wing opposition political parties, and the
2
Croatian Catholic Church instigated the debate with an aim of changing the Constitution in a
way that marriage is clearly and exclusively limited to a union between a man and a woman.
3
Their self-declared argument was to preserve the value of family. However, their subsequent
arguments and actions clearly showed that the intention was in-fact to limit the increase in
rights, which LGBT persons in Croatia exercise. On the national referendum initiated by these
groups, it was decided that the Constitution should be changed to read that marriage is an
exclusive union between a man and a woman. Even though this initiative only confirmed the
already existing definition of marriage in the Family Law, on a symbolical level it served to
send a powerful and disturbing message of strong antagonism towards sexual minorities in
Croatia, with 65 per cent of all the votes approving the proposed Constitutional change.
The Government and the Parliament failed to exhaust all mechanisms accessible to protect
LGBT persons from discrimination and hate speech. Most notably, the Parliament used a
formal loophole not to refer the proposed referendum question to the Constitutional Court;
even after local human rights groups called for this action and delivered substantial
documentation to the Government bodies, the Parliament and the Constitutional Court.
This has, once again marked a negative social trend with respect to the level of protection of
LGBT persons from discrimination and hate speech.
Legal Background
1. The States obligation to protect against acts of discrimination also includes LGBT people.
Different treatment is prohibited if it is based on the sole account of someones sexual
orientation. In the Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
entitled Discriminatory Laws and Practices and Acts of Violence Against Individuals
based on their Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity the obligation to protect against
discrimination has again been emphasized:
16. In their general comments, concluding observations and views on
communications, human rights treaty bodies have confirmed that States have and
obligation to protect everyone from discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation
and gender identity. The fact that someone is lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender
does not limit their entitlement to enjoy full range of human rights.!
2. In the Council of Europes human rights framework, Article 14 of the European
Convention on Human Rights together with the case law of the European Court of Human
Rights prohibits discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity:
Article 14
The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be
secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language,
religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national
minority, property, birth or other status.
Case of Vallianatos and Others v. Greece (Application numbers: 29381/09 32684/09)
77. Sexual orientation is a concept covered by Article 14. The Court has
repeatedly held that, just like differences based on sex, differences based on sexual
orientation require particularly convincing and weighty reasons by way of
justification (see, for example, Smith and Grady, 90; Karner, 37 and 42; L. and

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2
3

http://www.kriz-zivota.com/blagoslov-iz-crkve-plakati-inicijative-u-ime-obitelji-mogu-i-na-crkve/
http://www.glas-koncila.hr/index.php?option=com_php&Itemid=41&news_ID=22434

V., 45; and X and Others, 99, (!) Where a difference in treatment is based on
sex or sexual orientation the States margin of appreciation is narrow (see Karner,
41, and Kozak, 92, (!) Differences based solely on considerations of sexual
orientation are unacceptable under the Convention (see Salgueiro da Silva Mouta,
36; E.B., 93 and 96; and X and Others, 99, (!)
3. Respecting the human rights of LGBT persons is an obligation of the State as well as it is
to promote the respect for human rights of LGBT persons among population at large. It is
clear from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights that the exercise of
the rights enshrined in the Convention should not be conditional upon the approval of the
majority:
81. The Court further reiterates that it would be incompatible with the underlying
values of the Convention if the exercise of Convention rights by a minority group were
4
made conditional on its being accepted by the majority. (!) !
4. The State is under the obligation to employ effective measures in order to combat hate
speech and other forms of expression tending to incite to hatred on the grounds of sexual
orientation or gender identity, and to nullify any action of the State agents that could be
seen as legitimizing those acts. Abovementioned obligation comes from Articles 6 and 7
of the Recommendation Cm/Rec (2010)5 of the Committee of Ministers to member states
on measures to combat discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity.
6. Member states should take appropriate measures to combat all forms of
expression, including in the media and on the Internet, which may be reasonably
understood as likely to produce the effect of inciting, spreading or promoting hatred or
other forms of discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons.
Such hate speech should be prohibited and publicly disavowed whenever it occurs.
All measures should respect the fundamental right to freedom of expression in
accordance with Article 10 of the Convention and the case law of the Court.
7. Member states should raise awareness among public authorities and public
institutions at all levels of their responsibility to refrain from statements, in particular to
the media, which may reasonably be understood as legitimising such hatred or
discrimination.
5. Furthermore, Article 8 of the Recommendation, recommends the State to undertake
positive measures in order to promote tolerance, understanding and respect for human
rights of LGBT persons among other civil society stakeholders:
8. Public officials and other state representatives should be encouraged to promote
tolerance and respect for the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
persons whenever they engage in a dialogue with key representatives of the civil
society, including media and sports organisations, political organisations and religious
communities.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4

Case of Alekseyev v. Russia (Aplication nos: 4916/07, 25924/08 and 14599/09).

RECOMMENDATIONS
YIHR requests all stakeholders:
(a) Rights of National Minorities
1. To strongly urge Croatian Government to take all necessary legislative and policy
measures in order to end segregation and discriminatory practices in Croatian schools
and to create favorable conditions for inclusion of the Romani children into Croatian
society.
2. To urge the Croatian Government to undertake all necessary steps in order to remove all
unnecessary procedures amounting to the disproportionate and unjustified length of
procedures for the recognition of the status of a returnee.
3. To remind the Croatian Government to undertake all necessary steps to guarantee equal
treatment of witnesses and defendants irrespective of their ethnicity.
4. To strongly recommend to the Croatian Government to treat a proposed referendum
initiative (anti-Cyrillic) along with the referendum question in accordance with the highest
standards of democratic procedures; ultimately, in the case of uncertainty whether the
question is in line with the Constitution, and to refer it to the Constitutional Court for
consideration and final judgment.
5. To encourage the Croatian Government in promoting employment of national minorities in
practice as well as policy.
(b) Promotion of Human Rights through Education
1. To urge the Croatian Government to secure all necessary financial and structural
resources, as a precondition for introduction and effective implementation of the Civic
Education Curricula into elementary and high schools.
2. To urge the Croatian Government to take all necessary measures in order to ensure the
adequate educational activities for non-confessional/non-religious pupils during religious
education classes which they are not attending, and to form a comprehensive curricula on
secular/non-confessional education on history of religions.
3. To strongly urge the Croatian Government to take all necessary steps in order to create
adequate conditions for effective exercise of religious education for pupils belonging to
religious minority groups, especially in smaller towns and rural areas.
4. To strongly urge the Croatian Government to undertake revision of the contemporary
history education curricula on the basis of the judicially established facts about war
crimes, crimes against humanity etc. committed during the 1990s wars. Those judicial
facts should be included into history textbooks. The revised curricula should be shaped
with the aim to ensure and emphasize history teaching from a variety of social
perspectives.
(c) Rights of LGBT Persons
1. To encourage the Croatian Government in amending the Bill on Life Partnership with a
provision that would grant the access of same-sex life partners to adoption and to make
all necessary steps in order to pass the Bill into the Law without compromising current
level of proposed rights drafted in the Bill.
2. To remind the Croatian Government of its obligation to investigate all cases of hate
speech on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity that might have occurred
immediately before, during and after the referendum campaign, and to prosecute all those
accountable.
3. To strongly urge the Croatian Government to undertake all necessary measures in order
to promote human rights of LGBT persons among population at large, and especially to
undertake activities aiming to raise awareness among public authorities and institutions
about harmful effect of any action or/and statement that could be seen as legitimizing
intolerance towards LGBT persons and wide spread homophobia.

CONCLUSION
YIHR Croatia is highly concerned with the dominant state of the Croatian society that
encourages and takes part in discrimination of both ethnic and sexual minorities. Recent
research shows that younger generations are generally more conservative, xenophobic and
intolerant towards the minorities, with only 5,4% of them stating that would accept a Serb for
5
a husband or wife, 48%, if given a chance, would have no relation at all with Roma people ,
18% of respondents find homosexuals mostly unacceptable while another 18% find them
completely unacceptable. Furthermore, only 8,3% would name tolerance as the first and
foremost highest personal value, while personal dignity is the highest value for 42,8% of
6
those questioned .
This research is a clear confirmation of a trend we are now seeing in Croatia. Worryingly, the
coming generation is even less sensitive to human rights than the previous ones. This
generation grew up during a violent conflict and was shaped by extremist nationalist
narratives and myths. The purpose of this report is one of warning. In 2013, we have seen
several underprivileged groups rights exposed to arbitrary and non-sensitive judgment of the
majority or strong right wing and religious groups. Not just effective, but strategic steps need
to be taken by the relevant actors in Croatian society to ensure that these trends do not
continue to progress and create a situation of severe insecurity for groups and individuals in
Croatia.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
5
6

Ili!in, Vlasta, et al. "Mladi u vremenu krize." (2013); pg. 159

Ibid. pg. 157

ABOUT YIHR CROATIA

YIHR Croatia was established in late 2008 by a group of young human rights activists in
Croatia in consultations and with the support of then regional organization the Youth
Initiative for Human Rights. Since then, the regional organization underwent a transformation
that meant national offices/programs became autonomous organizations, which in 2010
established a regional network of the same name. Today, YIHR Croatia is one of five member
organizations of the YIHR Regional Network. These organizations cooperate closely through
the regional body (Regional Coordination), and through many joint projects and programs
implemented by YIHR Regional Networks member organizations.
YIHR Croatia is based in Zagreb, but its programs encompass other areas of Croatia as well,
especially in the areas that were affected by the war of 1990s. YIHR Croatia recently opened
a local office in Osijek and is currently in the process of opening another one in Petrinja.
Members of YIHR Croatia are young human rights activists, jurists, journalists, students,
authors, researchers and experts on transitional justice and international relations from
Croatia, and other countries in the region. YIHR Croatia also has an activist base in many
towns nation-wide.
YIHR Croatia has been dealing with transitional justice issues since its establishment. Its first
activities were related to promoting facts about war crimes amongst the youth. Since then,
YIHR Croatia has significantly increased its research capacities for professional, advocacy
and targeted reporting, assisting victims and their families in access to justice in individual
cases and in dealing with other specific issues within the scope of transitional justice. YIHR
has become recognised as an organisation critical and outspoken of anything other then the
highest standards in war crimes prosecution, paying respect to victims, and informing the
public about the facts of the 1990s war. YIHR Croatias Transitional Justice Program includes
several main activities, which are: (a) documenting, research and monitoring, (b) reporting, (c)
memorialization efforts, (d) truth-telling and outreach, and (e) the RECOM Initiative. Through
its Transitional Justice Program, YIHR Croatia developed strong cooperation with several
international organizations such as International Center for Transitional Justice, International
Commission on Missing Persons, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(Outreach Program and the Office of the Prosecutor), International Coalition of Sites of
Conscience (which YIHR Croatia is a member of because it is heading an initiative to build a
Memory Museum dedicated to civilians who lost their lives during the 1990s war in Petrinja),
Alliance for Historical Dialogue and Accountability at Columbia University, etc.
As a member organization of the YIHR Regional Network, YIHR Croatia has had a regional
focus since its establishment. Regional activities have always been a very important part of
YIHR Croatias work. YIHR Croatias regional and EU-related work in the period 2012-2015 is
organized through the following basic activities: (a) supporting regional cooperation of young
politicians, (b) participation in the pre-accession monitoring of Croatias path towards joining
the European Union, and (c) transfer of advocacy experience in the EU integration process.
As an organization dedicated to promotion and protection of human rights, YIHR Croatia
cooperates with various domestic and international organizations, institutions and offices that
have substantial influence on the policy agenda and decisions. It monitors the state of human
rights in cooperation with other organizations, and reports about it to relevant stakeholders.
Main activities of the Human Rights Advocacy Program, which is in charge of these activities
are: (a) monitoring and reporting, (b) advocating through networks, and (c) CSO capacity
building.