مرحباً بكم في الأمم المتحدة 
OHCHR 
بيانات صحفية هيئات المعاهدات
اللجنة المعنية بحقوق الإنسان تنظر في تقرير الجبل الأسود
15 تشرين الأول/أكتوبر 2014
للمشاركة
15 October 2014
The Human Rights Committee today completed its consideration of the initial report of Montenegro on its implementation of the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Presenting the report, Slavica Rabrenovic, Director-General of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice, said Montenegro was committed to promoting and protecting human rights at the national and international level. It became a Human Rights Council Member in 2013, and a year earlier started negotiations to become a European Union Member State, with all the human rights commitments that would entail. Ms. Rabrenovic detailed positive developments including judicial reform, the reduction of the backlog in cases, and anti-discrimination measures and initiatives to combat gender discrimination and domestic violence. Other advances were in the areas of refugees, internally displaced persons and asylum seekers, improving conditions in places of detention and implementing a probation system.
During the discussion, Committee Experts said as a new State which only gained independence in 2006 Montenegro had made great progress, and asked detailed questions about constitutional and institutional reform. Measures to eradicate discrimination and segregation of the Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian populations in Montenegro, as well as measures to regularize and house internally displaced persons and other migrants were discussed. Experts asked about the prosecution of war crimes dating back to the early 1990s conflict and access to legal aid. Hate speech against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons and freedom of the press were discussed, as well as measures to promote gender equality and tackle domestic violence and early and forced marriage, in particular among Roma populations.
In concluding remarks, Cornelis Flinterman, Committee Rapporteur acting as Chairperson of the Committee, expressed deepest appreciation for this first dialogue which was constructive and informative and commended the committed and serious manner in which the delegation addressed the Committee’s concerns.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Rabrenovic said the delegation was pleased to have presented its many reforms and advances in the area of civil and political rights, but Montenegro was aware that there was still room for improvement; it would not only write about its plans but would truly live and breathe the reforms.
The delegation of Montenegro included the representatives of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Human and Minorities Rights, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Interior, Supreme Court, Police Directorate, Office for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, the Deputy Special Prosecutor for combating organized crime, corruption, terrorism and war crimes, and the Permanent Mission of Montenegro to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The next public meeting of the Committee will take place at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 16 October when the Committee will continue its readings of its Draft General Comment on Article 9 of the Covenant. The Committee’s review of the final country report scheduled this session, the fourth report of Israel (CCPR/C/ISR/4), will take place at 10 a.m. on Monday, 20 October.
Report
The Committee is reviewing the initial report of Montenegro (CCPR/C/MNE/1).
Presentation of the Report
SLAVICA RABRENOVIC, Director-General of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice, said Montenegro was committed to promoting and protecting human rights at the national and international level and civil and political rights enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights were contained in the constitution. Montenegro became a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2013, and a year earlier started negotiations to become a member of the European Union, with all the human rights commitments that would entail.
One of the most positive developments was the reform of the judicial system, said Ms. Rabrenovic. The Judicial Reform Strategy for 2014-2018 was adopted on 3 April 2014 along with other new legislation to strengthen judicial independence, rationalize the court network and make courts more transparent, and establish the judicial council as an independent and autonomous body. A significant development was the use of mediation as an alternative to the courts. The reduction in the backlog of cases had resulted in progress made on the right to trial within a reasonable time, with most cases being completed within three months, as commended by the European Commission. Ms. Rabrenovic spoke about open-door activities for resident Ambassadors in Montenegro, the practice of giving regular press conferences by the President of the Supreme Court, and others, to present the work of the courts, and the publishing of court decisions online. The number of complaints regarding the judiciary had decreased by 70 per cent since 2006, she noted.
Anti-discrimination measures included amendments this year to the Prohibition of Discrimination and the Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms Laws to cover persons with disabilities, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons and members of the Roma and other minority communities. Ms. Rabrenovic noted that a separate law to prohibit discrimination against persons with disabilities would be adopted soon, and would complement the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. She also noted that the Government cooperated with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender organizations on measures to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation and to that end had organized a workshop with representatives. The 2007 Law on Gender Equality and the Action Plan for Gender Equality were a major part of the Government’s initiatives to combat gender discrimination, alongside awareness-raising campaigns to achieve de facto gender equality as well as training on women’s economic empowerment, political participation, and prevention of violence against women. New measures to tackle domestic violence had been introduced to the Criminal Code: the introduction of restraining orders and the possibility to remove the perpetrator from the living space. Victims and witnesses received an array of support.
To tackle the issue of refugees and asylum seekers, a draft law on citizenship had been proposed, and the Law on Foreigners in particular envisaged the integration of displaced persons and internally displaced persons. The Government sought a durable solution and was working with partners including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the United Nations Refugee Agency as well as the affected persons themselves. Recently more than 700 internally displaced persons participated in workshops on related issues, noted Ms. Rabrenovic. Housing was a significant issue and a Housing Fund had been established to resolve the housing issue for over 6,000 people, providing housing to over 1,000 of the most vulnerable families. Trafficking in persons in Montenegro was not at the level of ‘a phenomenon’ but there were individual cases. To combat trafficking, a strategy was adopted for the period 2012 to 2018. Furthermore, two additional offences were added to the Criminal Code: trafficking in human body parts and advertising for trafficking in human body parts.
Ms. Rabrenovic spoke about measures to improve the detention system, to promote the rights of detainees and to monitor prisons and other institutions. She explained that a probation system had been launched, with support from experts from Germany and the Netherlands, as an effort to offer alternative sanctions to detention, for example voluntary work in the public interest. Significant steps had been made to protect and promote the freedom of the press and other forms of public information, which was guaranteed under the constitution. Ms. Rabrenovic noted that the initial report was coordinated by the Ministry of Justice with the participation of several other Ministries as well as the Supreme Court of Montenegro, the Police Directorate, the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms and a number of non-governmental organizations. Montenegro had achieved significant steps in the field of human rights and tried to be in line with all the international standards. She hoped her brief overview showed the results Montenegro had achieved so far in implementing the Covenant.
Questions by the Experts
The delegation was welcomed by an Expert who appreciated and noted the impressive gender balance. Thanking Montenegro for its detailed report, the Expert said it was evident Montenegro had taken the list of issues very seriously in compiling its replies. However, the lack of participation of civil society was disappointing. How had the State party ensured the Covenant itself was widely disseminated? It was extremely important to have not just official Government data but data from civil society.
Montenegro was a new State, having only gained independence a few short years ago, in 2006. Since then it had made great efforts to reform its legislation to comply with its international obligations, not least stemming from its Universal Periodic Review by the Human Rights Council. The Committee commended Montenegro for complying with many of recommendations accepted at its Universal Periodic Review. Montenegro had paid particular focus to the rights and situation of minorities, including the Roma, and to displaced persons. It had also made great progress in combating discrimination through the adoption of new laws and launching of programmes, which were part of its efforts to bring its situation in line with European Union standards ahead of its bid for membership.
However, there were areas for improvement, said an Expert, asking about reports that in practice not all detainees received their full set of rights, in particular their right to access legal aid. Were detainees informed, by the police officer concerned for example, on their right to legal aid? The Committee appreciated that there had been information campaigns aimed at minorities and vulnerable groups on their right to legal aid and asked how effective they had been.
On the right to a fair trial, an Expert noted that of a backlog of 30,000 court cases, the courts had managed to dispose of 24,000 cases. That was a very impressive figure, particularly regarding the State party’s assurances that the quality of judgements had not suffered.
Only 13 per cent of Members of Parliament in Montenegro were women, said an Expert, asking about gender equality and the representation of women in decision-making positions in the public sphere, judiciary and educational institutions.
Steps taken to address the high prevalence of domestic violence in Montenegro were noted by the Committee, including new legislation and the provision of shelters. There were a lot of protective measures but not enough preventive measures; were there any policies to treat perpetrators of domestic violence as well as to support victims?
Montenegro had taken many positive steps towards combating and preventing violence against children, said an Expert, but still corporal punishment was not prohibited by law. Had any such bill been drafted?
The contribution of non-governmental organizations to the Committee’s work was important, and the fact that just one non-governmental organization, Amnesty International, had contributed to the Committee’s review was disappointing. It was important not to focus on just one source but to have a variety.
The delegation was asked about measures to prosecute and sanction all perpetrators of documented war crimes. Some cases remained outstanding, said an Expert, for example no members of the Yugoslav People’s Army had been charged for the 6 December 1991 shelling of Dubrovnik from Montenegrin territory. Furthermore, the longevity of proceedings, in some cases, led to a denial of the defendant’s right to trial within a reasonable time, which could in turn lead to a denial of justice for the victim, he added. He also asked why enforced disappearance was not criminalized.
Of the four war crimes cases detailed in the report – Bukovica, Kaluderski laz, Deportacija and Morinj – three had been closed with a final verdict while in one case the appeal procedure was in progress. Regarding the Bukovica case, an Expert said it was the first verdict to be reached under international law and all persons were acquitted. It left victims without access to an effective remedy, could the delegation please comment?
The State party provided a detailed reply on steps taken to address cases of torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement personnel, but not so much in regard to the Roma. Could the delegation provide more information on that? An Expert also asked what procedures prisoners could follow to complain about the use of force while in a place of detention.
Response by the Delegation
The Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, who served as the Ombudsman of Montenegro, was an independent position in line with the Paris Principles who worked in particular to tackle rights violations such as torture with a variety of Experts, including those from the non-governmental organization sector. The Action Plan for the Accession to the European Union envisioned further strengthening of the judiciary, in particular human rights training.
All of the war crime cases had an international element, and evidence needed to be found from other States, which took a long time as it depended upon the goodwill of the States and bodies. Montenegro had tried to do that in the shortest time possible. It had organized the courts, technical and administrative support, so those cases could be completed as soon as possible. The delegate gave further details on certain war crime cases, such as the Morinj case which he said had been finalized, including on the issue of the illegal transport of Muslims. In other cases perpetrators were found guilty and given the maximum penalty of 15 years.
Clearing the backlog of court cases had been a priority, said a delegate and today only 3,015 cases were older than three years. Only two or three very complex cases had been returned to the courts, he added.
A delegate spoke about measures to protect children from abuse, and said there was a specialized prosecutor who dealt solely with those cases. Within the institution of the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, a deputy of the Ombudsman was appointed to be directly responsible for the protection of children’s rights. Children could make complaints directly to that institution. An annual conference on children’s rights was organized, and an annual report published, and awareness-raising campaigns to educate children about their rights were carried out.
A delegate outlined legal obligations on the authorities to acquaint detainees, in a language they understood, about the reasons for their detention, about their right to have a lawyer, and the right to inform a person of their choice and have consular assistance, among other information. Information booklets were produced in six different languages including the Roma language, the delegate added. There had been at least eight cases where police officers had been dismissed because of the criminal abuse of their position, confirmed a delegate.
The institute for the enforcement of penal sanctions had four organizational units, which could investigate and monitor detention facilities. Prison sentences were between six months and 20 years, said a delegate, providing other statistics on the number of prisoners in various institutions. The Supreme Court submitted biannual reports to the Ministry of Justice on the monitoring process.
On non-governmental organizations, a delegate explained that there was a law on non-governmental organizations and also rule books on cooperation with such organizations. Laws could not be drafted without the participation of at least one non-governmental organization, and those organizations were very active in many areas, including human rights and child rights. Montenegro was one of the 46 countries which adhered to the ‘Open Door Participation’ an initiative of the United States President Barack Obama, he noted.
A delegate spoke about legislation to criminalize the incitement to hatred based on several grounds, including race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.
Measures to protect victims of trafficking, who in most cases were also the witnesses, were in place, and victims were briefed on their access to free legal aid.
Questions by the Experts
CORNELIS FLINTERMAN, Committee Rapporteur acting as Chairperson of the Committee, informed the Committee and delegation that Chairperson Nigel Rodley had been taken ill, and as the three Vice-Chairs of the Committee were on the speaking list for today’s meeting he would temporarily assume the duties of Chair. The Committee wished Mr. Rodley a speedy recovery.
An Expert welcomed and acknowledged the great progress made by Montenegro in integrating into the European Community and its fast-tracked process towards membership of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). For such a very young State Montenegro had already reached very high international standards, in particular in implementing international treaties it was a party to. Those efforts were well recognized by the Committee which was also deeply sympathetic to the challenges faced by the State party.
Hate speech had been incorporated into the Criminal Code as a form of discrimination, carrying penalties in the form of fines, noted an Expert. He asked about hate speech against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, particularly by Church officials. Had there been any cases of the conviction of a person for discriminating against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons? Some non-governmental organizations claimed there was a gap between law and practice, as encapsulated in the Gay Pride Marches of 2013 in Podgorica and Budva, where there was some violence and arrests, but few convictions pursuant to the events.
How did the Government work to prevent violence and intimidation against journalists, especially those investigating organized crime cases? The right to freedom of association and to form trade unions was enshrined in the constitution, and the right to strike was also recognized in the constitution, said an Expert. Was the draft law on the right to strike now in force? The law was drafted following a social dialogue between the Government and Trade Unions and provided sanctions for the ‘abuse of the right to strike’ of a maximum prison sentence of three years.
Montenegro had the means to regularize aliens, displaced persons, internally displaced persons, asylum seekers and migrants. The Committee noted Montenegro’s efforts to reduce the number of requirements for regularization, such as the need for the person to have a certain amount of money, in a bid to regularize more people. However, the requirement for documentation from their countries of origin remained. The problem was that concerned persons often did not have the means to travel back to their country of origin to acquire that documentation. Furthermore, the Asylum Law was reportedly quite limited; could the delegation update the Committee on what had been done to improve the job prospects of persons who had been given asylum?
There were many displaced persons, including internally displaced persons, in Montenegro coming mainly from Bosnia, Croatia, Herzegovina and Kosovo. To regularize, they had to integrate with the status of ‘foreigner with permanent resident’. Montenegro was commended for its current moratorium until December 2014 to encourage their regularization. However, the Committee was concerned that a second option ‘voluntary return to the place of origin’ was often incentivized by the State. Could the delegation please comment? He also asked about the new ‘biometric’ registration scheme.
Roma in Montenegro were a varied and dispersed ethnic minority that included some 20,000 people, most of whom spoke Romani, and some Serbian or Albanian as their first language. Many Roma and Ashkali people escaped to Montenegro during or after the 1998 to 1999 Kosovo conflict, after which many were seen by Albanians as allegedly siding with Serbia. Ashkali were an Albanian-speaking majority and often assimilated with Roma. Egyptians were another Roma-related group, and together they were commonly abbreviated as “RAE communities”. Montenegro was commended for its National Strategy for the Improvement of the Position of Roma and Egyptians in Montenegro 2012 to 2016, which an Expert said was complete with provisions which sometimes went above and beyond the standards in use in South Eastern Europe.
However, according to international reports Roma in Montenegro still faced discrimination and exclusion in several respects. Unemployment rates were typically around 40 per cent – and sometimes much higher – and those who were employed were usually in low-paid positions. According to the World Bank more than 50 per cent of the Roma in Montenegro lived below the poverty line. How had Montenegro addressed that socio-economic emergency?
What had Montenegro done to issue birth, citizenship, marriage and death certificates to paperless Roma, and in particular those arriving from Kosovo? According to the latest United Nations data almost 40 per cent of Roma, Ashkali and Egyptians in Montenegro lacked birth and/or citizenship certificates, 70 per cent of them children. In addition, paperless refugees were at risk of statelessness.
What had been done to improve the living conditions of the Roma, to stop evictions and to help those communities access services? Had the Konic Refugee Camp, which was home to a large RAE population, been closed? What had been the impact so far of the National Strategy, particularly to bring segregation to an end and ensure the Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian minorities could become part of a fair political representation system?
On access to education, less than a tenth of Roma children had the possibility and motivation to attend school regularly, said an Expert, and those who did attend were usually taught apart from other pupils. Roma children and youth from Kosovo who did not speak Serbian or Montenegrin found themselves in very difficult conditions, he added.
The unemployment rate of the RAE populations was reported to be between 40 and 80 per cent, which was not only a consequence of their lack of education and academic qualifications but covert discrimination by employers. For example the majority of people living in the Konic Refugee Camp were unemployed. They faced stigma from the start as they were officially described as ‘difficult to employ’ people. How did the Government intend to change that culture of discrimination and improve the job prospects of the RAE populations?
The Expert asked about the issue of forced and underage marriages within the RAE populations and trafficking of young Roma girls for sale into domestic servitude. There was a tradition of getting children as young as six years old ‘engaged’ leading to a child marriage a few years later, he commented.
Despite the prohibition of forced labour, child labour was still present in Montenegro, often in the form of child begging, and non-governmental organizations had voiced concerns at the lack of protective measures, and sanctions against parents who allowed their children to work. What was Montenegro’s position?
An Expert asked about juvenile justice in the criminal system, what the age of criminality was, how many youth courts there were and how many specialized judges of juveniles.
Response by the Delegation
Trafficking in persons was a global problem which was recognized in Montenegro as a crime against humanity. Montenegro took a multi-disciplinary approach to tackle the problem with the first step of promoting cooperation between all national stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations. Montenegro was one of the first countries in the region to adopt the Strategic Document to Fight Trafficking. The strategy outlined national policies for the period 2012 to 2018, defined goals and established how it could alongside complementary action plans on fighting organized crime, illegal migration, supporting gender equality and the rights of the child, as well as for the Roma and Egyptians.
The Office for Fighting Trafficking in Human Beings and the Working Group for monitoring the implementation of the strategy were responsible for over-seeing anti-trafficking efforts, said a delegate. Procedures for the identification, support, protection, bringing criminal proceedings, regional and international cooperation, coordination and partnerships had been established. In addition to supporting victims and prosecuting perpetrators, the Government was prioritizing awareness-raising among the public.
As Montenegro lay at the gateway to the European Union it may be of interest as a destination country, especially once it became an European Union Member State, commented the delegate. Therefore Montenegro was paying a lot of attention to increasing the expert capacity of its institutions, in particular the capacity of the police and social workers, as part of its anti-trafficking measures.
Child beggars, usually of the Roma population, were considered to be a common problem among countries of the region. Most child beggars came from other countries in the region, Serbia and Kosovo, especially during the tourist season. Research was conducted which confirmed the worst fears, that the child beggars were one of the most vulnerable categories of society. The children were found to be most exploited by their own parents. In response the Government was now doing all it could to get the children off the streets, back into the educational system and to provide peer support. The Government also worked with their parents in order to improve their future prospects, and conducted an awareness-raising programme advising people not to give money to the child beggars which only exacerbated the problem. Montenegro had ratified United Nations Conventions on the prevention of organized crime, on prevention of trafficking in persons and on the rights of the child, as well as several related Optional Protocols, which had been incorporated into criminal law, noted a delegate.
The State was separated from the Church in the constitution, but religious organizations were guaranteed the right of freedom of religious belief, and the State did not interfere into relations between religious communities, including between the Montenegrin and Serbian Orthodox Churches, although it did encourage tolerance. The current law on freedom of religion dated back to 1977, therefore a new law was currently being drafted, said an Expert, describing the draft articles.
On tackling hate speech against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, a delegate confirmed that discrimination based on a person’s sexual orientation and gender identity was prohibited in the Criminal Code and carried a sanction of up to three years in prison. Two Memorandums of Cooperation had been signed with non-governmental organizations working on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in the last few years, and the Government worked closely with civil society on the protection of the rights of that portion of the population.
Regarding the allegations about the Podgorica and Budva Gay Pride Parades, a delegate said that high-quality safety procedures were in place so that adversaries of the parades could not breach a so-called ‘safety zone’. He noted that several international institutions praised Montenegro for its management of the Gay Pride Parades.
It was forbidden to deprive anyone of the right to strike, confirmed a delegate, and to do so carried a sanction of one year’s imprisonment.
A delegate who worked in the area of organized crime, corruption, terrorism and war crimes spoke about the use of secret surveillance and wiretapping to tackle organized crime, but said in practice prosecutors were very cautious about using such methods. The first priority was respecting privacy rights, as well as all other human rights, and thus secret surveillance was only used in the most severe cases. Furthermore, such evidence would not be used in public criminal proceedings, but only in closed procedures. The material would be destroyed afterwards in the presence of a prosecutor and a judge.
The age of criminal responsibility was 14 years, at the time of committing the offence, so a 14 to 16 year old was known legally as a ‘junior minor’ while a ‘senior minor’ was aged 16 to 18 years at the time of the offence. All persons who dealt with juvenile delinquents in criminal justice had to have received special training on the rights of the child. There were special judges who dealt with juvenile cases. Currently there was not a single minor in the criminal justice system or in detention, the delegation confirmed.
The visit to Montenegro by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression was a very important one, as was his consequent report, said a delegate. The report noted a number of positive results in the pluralism of Montenegrin media but also made a number of recommendations, some of which had already been acted on, such as the decriminalization of defamation in 2011. Montenegro intended to privatize the leading media company and newspaper, which was currently State owned. However, following a failed first round of tenders, this July bankruptcy procedures were started for that company.
A delegate outlined ways in which the authorities sought to protect journalists and media workers from violence and threats, especially those who were investigating cases of organized crime and corruption. He showed the Committee a recent analysis conducted as a preventive activity.
The number of displaced persons and internally displaced persons was one quarter of the total population of Montenegro, so the Law on Foreigners, the Law on Citizenship and the adoption of various strategies were the backbone of measures to resolve the problem. The complexity of the problem was overcoming the capacities of the national institutions but Camp Konic had received special focus. The new law on asylum was envisioned to be adopted by the end of 2015, noted a delegate.
Education was key to improving the quality of life of the RAE populations, said a delegate, especially at pre-school and elementary levels. To ensure children from RAE population, especially Roma, regularly attended school, a pilot project was launched three years ago, as part of the inclusive education programme, to send children to preparatory pre-schools. The results were positive; more children were now attending pre-school and at the same time improving their language and socialization skills. School materials, text books and hygiene packages were distributed, as well as a handbook co-written with mediators from the Roma population.
A moratorium was pronounced on the enrolment of children to the Camp Konic school in favour of transporting children, via mini bus into elementary schools in the Podgorica area to promote their integration into society. Some 200 children from Camp Konic attended mainstream schools every day. There had also been an increase in the number of children attending high school, many of whom received scholarships and other assistance. Universities ran affirmative action programmes and so far 11 Roma students had completed degrees.
The delegation noted that any questions not answered fully in the dialogue today would be submitted to the Committee in writing within 48 hours after the end of the meeting.
Concluding Remarks
SLAVICA RABRENOVIC, Director-General of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice of Montenegro, thanked the Committee and said the delegation was pleased to have presented its many reforms and advances in the area of civil and political rights, but Montenegro was aware that there was still room for improvement; it would not only write about its plans but would truly live and breathe the reforms.
CORNELIS FLINTERMAN, Committee Rapporteur acting as Chairperson of the Committee, said the delegation had been under pressure to answer a large amount of questions and expressed deepest appreciation for this first dialogue which was constructive and informative and commended the committed and serious manner in which the delegation addressed the Committee’s concerns. Some of the concerns raised today would find their way into the Committee’s concluding observations, said Mr. Flinterman, hoping that its recommendations may prove to be of significance in the promotion of civil and political rights in Montenegro.
_________
The Human Rights Committee today completed its consideration of the initial report of Montenegro on its implementation of the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Presenting the report, Slavica Rabrenovic, Director-General of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice, said Montenegro was committed to promoting and protecting human rights at the national and international level. It became a Human Rights Council Member in 2013, and a year earlier started negotiations to become a European Union Member State, with all the human rights commitments that would entail. Ms. Rabrenovic detailed positive developments including judicial reform, the reduction of the backlog in cases, and anti-discrimination measures and initiatives to combat gender discrimination and domestic violence. Other advances were in the areas of refugees, internally displaced persons and asylum seekers, improving conditions in places of detention and implementing a probation system.
During the discussion, Committee Experts said as a new State which only gained independence in 2006 Montenegro had made great progress, and asked detailed questions about constitutional and institutional reform. Measures to eradicate discrimination and segregation of the Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian populations in Montenegro, as well as measures to regularize and house internally displaced persons and other migrants were discussed. Experts asked about the prosecution of war crimes dating back to the early 1990s conflict and access to legal aid. Hate speech against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons and freedom of the press were discussed, as well as measures to promote gender equality and tackle domestic violence and early and forced marriage, in particular among Roma populations.
In concluding remarks, Cornelis Flinterman, Committee Rapporteur acting as Chairperson of the Committee, expressed deepest appreciation for this first dialogue which was constructive and informative and commended the committed and serious manner in which the delegation addressed the Committee’s concerns.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Rabrenovic said the delegation was pleased to have presented its many reforms and advances in the area of civil and political rights, but Montenegro was aware that there was still room for improvement; it would not only write about its plans but would truly live and breathe the reforms.
The delegation of Montenegro included the representatives of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Human and Minorities Rights, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Interior, Supreme Court, Police Directorate, Office for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, the Deputy Special Prosecutor for combating organized crime, corruption, terrorism and war crimes, and the Permanent Mission of Montenegro to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The next public meeting of the Committee will take place at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 16 October when the Committee will continue its readings of its Draft General Comment on Article 9 of the Covenant. The Committee’s review of the final country report scheduled this session, the fourth report of Israel (CCPR/C/ISR/4), will take place at 10 a.m. on Monday, 20 October.
Report
The Committee is reviewing the initial report of Montenegro (CCPR/C/MNE/1).
Presentation of the Report
SLAVICA RABRENOVIC, Director-General of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice, said Montenegro was committed to promoting and protecting human rights at the national and international level and civil and political rights enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights were contained in the constitution. Montenegro became a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2013, and a year earlier started negotiations to become a member of the European Union, with all the human rights commitments that would entail.
One of the most positive developments was the reform of the judicial system, said Ms. Rabrenovic. The Judicial Reform Strategy for 2014-2018 was adopted on 3 April 2014 along with other new legislation to strengthen judicial independence, rationalize the court network and make courts more transparent, and establish the judicial council as an independent and autonomous body. A significant development was the use of mediation as an alternative to the courts. The reduction in the backlog of cases had resulted in progress made on the right to trial within a reasonable time, with most cases being completed within three months, as commended by the European Commission. Ms. Rabrenovic spoke about open-door activities for resident Ambassadors in Montenegro, the practice of giving regular press conferences by the President of the Supreme Court, and others, to present the work of the courts, and the publishing of court decisions online. The number of complaints regarding the judiciary had decreased by 70 per cent since 2006, she noted.
Anti-discrimination measures included amendments this year to the Prohibition of Discrimination and the Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms Laws to cover persons with disabilities, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons and members of the Roma and other minority communities. Ms. Rabrenovic noted that a separate law to prohibit discrimination against persons with disabilities would be adopted soon, and would complement the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. She also noted that the Government cooperated with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender organizations on measures to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation and to that end had organized a workshop with representatives. The 2007 Law on Gender Equality and the Action Plan for Gender Equality were a major part of the Government’s initiatives to combat gender discrimination, alongside awareness-raising campaigns to achieve de facto gender equality as well as training on women’s economic empowerment, political participation, and prevention of violence against women. New measures to tackle domestic violence had been introduced to the Criminal Code: the introduction of restraining orders and the possibility to remove the perpetrator from the living space. Victims and witnesses received an array of support.
To tackle the issue of refugees and asylum seekers, a draft law on citizenship had been proposed, and the Law on Foreigners in particular envisaged the integration of displaced persons and internally displaced persons. The Government sought a durable solution and was working with partners including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the United Nations Refugee Agency as well as the affected persons themselves. Recently more than 700 internally displaced persons participated in workshops on related issues, noted Ms. Rabrenovic. Housing was a significant issue and a Housing Fund had been established to resolve the housing issue for over 6,000 people, providing housing to over 1,000 of the most vulnerable families. Trafficking in persons in Montenegro was not at the level of ‘a phenomenon’ but there were individual cases. To combat trafficking, a strategy was adopted for the period 2012 to 2018. Furthermore, two additional offences were added to the Criminal Code: trafficking in human body parts and advertising for trafficking in human body parts.
Ms. Rabrenovic spoke about measures to improve the detention system, to promote the rights of detainees and to monitor prisons and other institutions. She explained that a probation system had been launched, with support from experts from Germany and the Netherlands, as an effort to offer alternative sanctions to detention, for example voluntary work in the public interest. Significant steps had been made to protect and promote the freedom of the press and other forms of public information, which was guaranteed under the constitution. Ms. Rabrenovic noted that the initial report was coordinated by the Ministry of Justice with the participation of several other Ministries as well as the Supreme Court of Montenegro, the Police Directorate, the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms and a number of non-governmental organizations. Montenegro had achieved significant steps in the field of human rights and tried to be in line with all the international standards. She hoped her brief overview showed the results Montenegro had achieved so far in implementing the Covenant.
Questions by the Experts
The delegation was welcomed by an Expert who appreciated and noted the impressive gender balance. Thanking Montenegro for its detailed report, the Expert said it was evident Montenegro had taken the list of issues very seriously in compiling its replies. However, the lack of participation of civil society was disappointing. How had the State party ensured the Covenant itself was widely disseminated? It was extremely important to have not just official Government data but data from civil society.
Montenegro was a new State, having only gained independence a few short years ago, in 2006. Since then it had made great efforts to reform its legislation to comply with its international obligations, not least stemming from its Universal Periodic Review by the Human Rights Council. The Committee commended Montenegro for complying with many of recommendations accepted at its Universal Periodic Review. Montenegro had paid particular focus to the rights and situation of minorities, including the Roma, and to displaced persons. It had also made great progress in combating discrimination through the adoption of new laws and launching of programmes, which were part of its efforts to bring its situation in line with European Union standards ahead of its bid for membership.
However, there were areas for improvement, said an Expert, asking about reports that in practice not all detainees received their full set of rights, in particular their right to access legal aid. Were detainees informed, by the police officer concerned for example, on their right to legal aid? The Committee appreciated that there had been information campaigns aimed at minorities and vulnerable groups on their right to legal aid and asked how effective they had been.
On the right to a fair trial, an Expert noted that of a backlog of 30,000 court cases, the courts had managed to dispose of 24,000 cases. That was a very impressive figure, particularly regarding the State party’s assurances that the quality of judgements had not suffered.
Only 13 per cent of Members of Parliament in Montenegro were women, said an Expert, asking about gender equality and the representation of women in decision-making positions in the public sphere, judiciary and educational institutions.
Steps taken to address the high prevalence of domestic violence in Montenegro were noted by the Committee, including new legislation and the provision of shelters. There were a lot of protective measures but not enough preventive measures; were there any policies to treat perpetrators of domestic violence as well as to support victims?
Montenegro had taken many positive steps towards combating and preventing violence against children, said an Expert, but still corporal punishment was not prohibited by law. Had any such bill been drafted?
The contribution of non-governmental organizations to the Committee’s work was important, and the fact that just one non-governmental organization, Amnesty International, had contributed to the Committee’s review was disappointing. It was important not to focus on just one source but to have a variety.
The delegation was asked about measures to prosecute and sanction all perpetrators of documented war crimes. Some cases remained outstanding, said an Expert, for example no members of the Yugoslav People’s Army had been charged for the 6 December 1991 shelling of Dubrovnik from Montenegrin territory. Furthermore, the longevity of proceedings, in some cases, led to a denial of the defendant’s right to trial within a reasonable time, which could in turn lead to a denial of justice for the victim, he added. He also asked why enforced disappearance was not criminalized.
Of the four war crimes cases detailed in the report – Bukovica, Kaluderski laz, Deportacija and Morinj – three had been closed with a final verdict while in one case the appeal procedure was in progress. Regarding the Bukovica case, an Expert said it was the first verdict to be reached under international law and all persons were acquitted. It left victims without access to an effective remedy, could the delegation please comment?
The State party provided a detailed reply on steps taken to address cases of torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement personnel, but not so much in regard to the Roma. Could the delegation provide more information on that? An Expert also asked what procedures prisoners could follow to complain about the use of force while in a place of detention.
Response by the Delegation
The Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, who served as the Ombudsman of Montenegro, was an independent position in line with the Paris Principles who worked in particular to tackle rights violations such as torture with a variety of Experts, including those from the non-governmental organization sector. The Action Plan for the Accession to the European Union envisioned further strengthening of the judiciary, in particular human rights training.
All of the war crime cases had an international element, and evidence needed to be found from other States, which took a long time as it depended upon the goodwill of the States and bodies. Montenegro had tried to do that in the shortest time possible. It had organized the courts, technical and administrative support, so those cases could be completed as soon as possible. The delegate gave further details on certain war crime cases, such as the Morinj case which he said had been finalized, including on the issue of the illegal transport of Muslims. In other cases perpetrators were found guilty and given the maximum penalty of 15 years.
Clearing the backlog of court cases had been a priority, said a delegate and today only 3,015 cases were older than three years. Only two or three very complex cases had been returned to the courts, he added.
A delegate spoke about measures to protect children from abuse, and said there was a specialized prosecutor who dealt solely with those cases. Within the institution of the Protector of Human Rights and Freedoms, a deputy of the Ombudsman was appointed to be directly responsible for the protection of children’s rights. Children could make complaints directly to that institution. An annual conference on children’s rights was organized, and an annual report published, and awareness-raising campaigns to educate children about their rights were carried out.
A delegate outlined legal obligations on the authorities to acquaint detainees, in a language they understood, about the reasons for their detention, about their right to have a lawyer, and the right to inform a person of their choice and have consular assistance, among other information. Information booklets were produced in six different languages including the Roma language, the delegate added. There had been at least eight cases where police officers had been dismissed because of the criminal abuse of their position, confirmed a delegate.
The institute for the enforcement of penal sanctions had four organizational units, which could investigate and monitor detention facilities. Prison sentences were between six months and 20 years, said a delegate, providing other statistics on the number of prisoners in various institutions. The Supreme Court submitted biannual reports to the Ministry of Justice on the monitoring process.
On non-governmental organizations, a delegate explained that there was a law on non-governmental organizations and also rule books on cooperation with such organizations. Laws could not be drafted without the participation of at least one non-governmental organization, and those organizations were very active in many areas, including human rights and child rights. Montenegro was one of the 46 countries which adhered to the ‘Open Door Participation’ an initiative of the United States President Barack Obama, he noted.
A delegate spoke about legislation to criminalize the incitement to hatred based on several grounds, including race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.
Measures to protect victims of trafficking, who in most cases were also the witnesses, were in place, and victims were briefed on their access to free legal aid.
Questions by the Experts
CORNELIS FLINTERMAN, Committee Rapporteur acting as Chairperson of the Committee, informed the Committee and delegation that Chairperson Nigel Rodley had been taken ill, and as the three Vice-Chairs of the Committee were on the speaking list for today’s meeting he would temporarily assume the duties of Chair. The Committee wished Mr. Rodley a speedy recovery.
An Expert welcomed and acknowledged the great progress made by Montenegro in integrating into the European Community and its fast-tracked process towards membership of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). For such a very young State Montenegro had already reached very high international standards, in particular in implementing international treaties it was a party to. Those efforts were well recognized by the Committee which was also deeply sympathetic to the challenges faced by the State party.
Hate speech had been incorporated into the Criminal Code as a form of discrimination, carrying penalties in the form of fines, noted an Expert. He asked about hate speech against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, particularly by Church officials. Had there been any cases of the conviction of a person for discriminating against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons? Some non-governmental organizations claimed there was a gap between law and practice, as encapsulated in the Gay Pride Marches of 2013 in Podgorica and Budva, where there was some violence and arrests, but few convictions pursuant to the events.
How did the Government work to prevent violence and intimidation against journalists, especially those investigating organized crime cases? The right to freedom of association and to form trade unions was enshrined in the constitution, and the right to strike was also recognized in the constitution, said an Expert. Was the draft law on the right to strike now in force? The law was drafted following a social dialogue between the Government and Trade Unions and provided sanctions for the ‘abuse of the right to strike’ of a maximum prison sentence of three years.
Montenegro had the means to regularize aliens, displaced persons, internally displaced persons, asylum seekers and migrants. The Committee noted Montenegro’s efforts to reduce the number of requirements for regularization, such as the need for the person to have a certain amount of money, in a bid to regularize more people. However, the requirement for documentation from their countries of origin remained. The problem was that concerned persons often did not have the means to travel back to their country of origin to acquire that documentation. Furthermore, the Asylum Law was reportedly quite limited; could the delegation update the Committee on what had been done to improve the job prospects of persons who had been given asylum?
There were many displaced persons, including internally displaced persons, in Montenegro coming mainly from Bosnia, Croatia, Herzegovina and Kosovo. To regularize, they had to integrate with the status of ‘foreigner with permanent resident’. Montenegro was commended for its current moratorium until December 2014 to encourage their regularization. However, the Committee was concerned that a second option ‘voluntary return to the place of origin’ was often incentivized by the State. Could the delegation please comment? He also asked about the new ‘biometric’ registration scheme.
Roma in Montenegro were a varied and dispersed ethnic minority that included some 20,000 people, most of whom spoke Romani, and some Serbian or Albanian as their first language. Many Roma and Ashkali people escaped to Montenegro during or after the 1998 to 1999 Kosovo conflict, after which many were seen by Albanians as allegedly siding with Serbia. Ashkali were an Albanian-speaking majority and often assimilated with Roma. Egyptians were another Roma-related group, and together they were commonly abbreviated as “RAE communities”. Montenegro was commended for its National Strategy for the Improvement of the Position of Roma and Egyptians in Montenegro 2012 to 2016, which an Expert said was complete with provisions which sometimes went above and beyond the standards in use in South Eastern Europe.
However, according to international reports Roma in Montenegro still faced discrimination and exclusion in several respects. Unemployment rates were typically around 40 per cent – and sometimes much higher – and those who were employed were usually in low-paid positions. According to the World Bank more than 50 per cent of the Roma in Montenegro lived below the poverty line. How had Montenegro addressed that socio-economic emergency?
What had Montenegro done to issue birth, citizenship, marriage and death certificates to paperless Roma, and in particular those arriving from Kosovo? According to the latest United Nations data almost 40 per cent of Roma, Ashkali and Egyptians in Montenegro lacked birth and/or citizenship certificates, 70 per cent of them children. In addition, paperless refugees were at risk of statelessness.
What had been done to improve the living conditions of the Roma, to stop evictions and to help those communities access services? Had the Konic Refugee Camp, which was home to a large RAE population, been closed? What had been the impact so far of the National Strategy, particularly to bring segregation to an end and ensure the Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian minorities could become part of a fair political representation system?
On access to education, less than a tenth of Roma children had the possibility and motivation to attend school regularly, said an Expert, and those who did attend were usually taught apart from other pupils. Roma children and youth from Kosovo who did not speak Serbian or Montenegrin found themselves in very difficult conditions, he added.
The unemployment rate of the RAE populations was reported to be between 40 and 80 per cent, which was not only a consequence of their lack of education and academic qualifications but covert discrimination by employers. For example the majority of people living in the Konic Refugee Camp were unemployed. They faced stigma from the start as they were officially described as ‘difficult to employ’ people. How did the Government intend to change that culture of discrimination and improve the job prospects of the RAE populations?
The Expert asked about the issue of forced and underage marriages within the RAE populations and trafficking of young Roma girls for sale into domestic servitude. There was a tradition of getting children as young as six years old ‘engaged’ leading to a child marriage a few years later, he commented.
Despite the prohibition of forced labour, child labour was still present in Montenegro, often in the form of child begging, and non-governmental organizations had voiced concerns at the lack of protective measures, and sanctions against parents who allowed their children to work. What was Montenegro’s position?
An Expert asked about juvenile justice in the criminal system, what the age of criminality was, how many youth courts there were and how many specialized judges of juveniles.
Response by the Delegation
Trafficking in persons was a global problem which was recognized in Montenegro as a crime against humanity. Montenegro took a multi-disciplinary approach to tackle the problem with the first step of promoting cooperation between all national stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations. Montenegro was one of the first countries in the region to adopt the Strategic Document to Fight Trafficking. The strategy outlined national policies for the period 2012 to 2018, defined goals and established how it could alongside complementary action plans on fighting organized crime, illegal migration, supporting gender equality and the rights of the child, as well as for the Roma and Egyptians.
The Office for Fighting Trafficking in Human Beings and the Working Group for monitoring the implementation of the strategy were responsible for over-seeing anti-trafficking efforts, said a delegate. Procedures for the identification, support, protection, bringing criminal proceedings, regional and international cooperation, coordination and partnerships had been established. In addition to supporting victims and prosecuting perpetrators, the Government was prioritizing awareness-raising among the public.
As Montenegro lay at the gateway to the European Union it may be of interest as a destination country, especially once it became an European Union Member State, commented the delegate. Therefore Montenegro was paying a lot of attention to increasing the expert capacity of its institutions, in particular the capacity of the police and social workers, as part of its anti-trafficking measures.
Child beggars, usually of the Roma population, were considered to be a common problem among countries of the region. Most child beggars came from other countries in the region, Serbia and Kosovo, especially during the tourist season. Research was conducted which confirmed the worst fears, that the child beggars were one of the most vulnerable categories of society. The children were found to be most exploited by their own parents. In response the Government was now doing all it could to get the children off the streets, back into the educational system and to provide peer support. The Government also worked with their parents in order to improve their future prospects, and conducted an awareness-raising programme advising people not to give money to the child beggars which only exacerbated the problem. Montenegro had ratified United Nations Conventions on the prevention of organized crime, on prevention of trafficking in persons and on the rights of the child, as well as several related Optional Protocols, which had been incorporated into criminal law, noted a delegate.
The State was separated from the Church in the constitution, but religious organizations were guaranteed the right of freedom of religious belief, and the State did not interfere into relations between religious communities, including between the Montenegrin and Serbian Orthodox Churches, although it did encourage tolerance. The current law on freedom of religion dated back to 1977, therefore a new law was currently being drafted, said an Expert, describing the draft articles.
On tackling hate speech against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, a delegate confirmed that discrimination based on a person’s sexual orientation and gender identity was prohibited in the Criminal Code and carried a sanction of up to three years in prison. Two Memorandums of Cooperation had been signed with non-governmental organizations working on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in the last few years, and the Government worked closely with civil society on the protection of the rights of that portion of the population.
Regarding the allegations about the Podgorica and Budva Gay Pride Parades, a delegate said that high-quality safety procedures were in place so that adversaries of the parades could not breach a so-called ‘safety zone’. He noted that several international institutions praised Montenegro for its management of the Gay Pride Parades.
It was forbidden to deprive anyone of the right to strike, confirmed a delegate, and to do so carried a sanction of one year’s imprisonment.
A delegate who worked in the area of organized crime, corruption, terrorism and war crimes spoke about the use of secret surveillance and wiretapping to tackle organized crime, but said in practice prosecutors were very cautious about using such methods. The first priority was respecting privacy rights, as well as all other human rights, and thus secret surveillance was only used in the most severe cases. Furthermore, such evidence would not be used in public criminal proceedings, but only in closed procedures. The material would be destroyed afterwards in the presence of a prosecutor and a judge.
The age of criminal responsibility was 14 years, at the time of committing the offence, so a 14 to 16 year old was known legally as a ‘junior minor’ while a ‘senior minor’ was aged 16 to 18 years at the time of the offence. All persons who dealt with juvenile delinquents in criminal justice had to have received special training on the rights of the child. There were special judges who dealt with juvenile cases. Currently there was not a single minor in the criminal justice system or in detention, the delegation confirmed.
The visit to Montenegro by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression was a very important one, as was his consequent report, said a delegate. The report noted a number of positive results in the pluralism of Montenegrin media but also made a number of recommendations, some of which had already been acted on, such as the decriminalization of defamation in 2011. Montenegro intended to privatize the leading media company and newspaper, which was currently State owned. However, following a failed first round of tenders, this July bankruptcy procedures were started for that company.
A delegate outlined ways in which the authorities sought to protect journalists and media workers from violence and threats, especially those who were investigating cases of organized crime and corruption. He showed the Committee a recent analysis conducted as a preventive activity.
The number of displaced persons and internally displaced persons was one quarter of the total population of Montenegro, so the Law on Foreigners, the Law on Citizenship and the adoption of various strategies were the backbone of measures to resolve the problem. The complexity of the problem was overcoming the capacities of the national institutions but Camp Konic had received special focus. The new law on asylum was envisioned to be adopted by the end of 2015, noted a delegate.
Education was key to improving the quality of life of the RAE populations, said a delegate, especially at pre-school and elementary levels. To ensure children from RAE population, especially Roma, regularly attended school, a pilot project was launched three years ago, as part of the inclusive education programme, to send children to preparatory pre-schools. The results were positive; more children were now attending pre-school and at the same time improving their language and socialization skills. School materials, text books and hygiene packages were distributed, as well as a handbook co-written with mediators from the Roma population.
A moratorium was pronounced on the enrolment of children to the Camp Konic school in favour of transporting children, via mini bus into elementary schools in the Podgorica area to promote their integration into society. Some 200 children from Camp Konic attended mainstream schools every day. There had also been an increase in the number of children attending high school, many of whom received scholarships and other assistance. Universities ran affirmative action programmes and so far 11 Roma students had completed degrees.
The delegation noted that any questions not answered fully in the dialogue today would be submitted to the Committee in writing within 48 hours after the end of the meeting.
Concluding Remarks
SLAVICA RABRENOVIC, Director-General of the Directorate for Execution of Criminal Sanctions, Ministry of Justice of Montenegro, thanked the Committee and said the delegation was pleased to have presented its many reforms and advances in the area of civil and political rights, but Montenegro was aware that there was still room for improvement; it would not only write about its plans but would truly live and breathe the reforms.
CORNELIS FLINTERMAN, Committee Rapporteur acting as Chairperson of the Committee, said the delegation had been under pressure to answer a large amount of questions and expressed deepest appreciation for this first dialogue which was constructive and informative and commended the committed and serious manner in which the delegation addressed the Committee’s concerns. Some of the concerns raised today would find their way into the Committee’s concluding observations, said Mr. Flinterman, hoping that its recommendations may prove to be of significance in the promotion of civil and political rights in Montenegro.
_________
For use of the information media; not an official record