On the Continuation of Illegal Evictions in the Republic of Croatia

As the Republic of Croatia looks towards becoming a full member of the European Union, it must be remembered that as a legal state, Croatia must fulfill certain constitutional obligations in guaranteeing the rights of its citizens. Despite constant government assurances that all citizens of Croatia are treated equally and with justice, human rights violations along ethnic lines continue. One of the most pressing human rights issues in Croatia continues to be the illegal eviction of Croatian citizens from their houses or apartments.

The style of evictions varies from region to region in Croatia, but members of the Croatian military are almost always involved. Once in a home, the evictors use their military connections to assure that they will not be removed. In the Zagreb area, evictions are often carried out under a civilian police presence, and can sometimes be prevented or postponed through court intervention. In Split, however, evictions tend to be more direct and violent. The fact that the civilian police have no jurisdiction in "military affairs" serves only to complicate matters.

In the past, many of the targeted apartments were former Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) property, though not all. Recently, however, local human rights activists have observed a rise in evictions of persons from privately-owned property, simply because the evictors desired to own those properties. Sometimes the method is to first evict the person or family, and to then come up with an excuse as to why they should not be let back into their homes. This has resulted in unfounded "enemy activity" cases against some of the evicted persons.

The following cases are representative of thousands of illegal evictions in Croatia. They show that even in instances where the victims have court decisions upholding their right to move back into their homes, local authorities are often unwilling to uphold these decisions. It is often at the local level that human rights are thus violated. However, local authorities act under the auspices of a national government which has shown little will to improve the situation.

As Croatia seeks entrance into the European Union, a representative group of local human rights activists and victims of eviction is trying to bring the plight of evicted persons to the attention of international authorities. It is their hope that pressure might be put on the government of Croatia to uphold its constitutional duty and return illegally evicted persons to their homes. Furthermore, it is hoped that a just solution can be found for all persons in need of housing, in order to prevent future illegal evictions.

Case: J. J.

J. J. is a Croatian citizen of Serb ancestry, mother of two adult children. In April 1991, while Mrs. J. was in Rebro Hospital in Zagreb being treated for an illness, members of the Croatian army broke into her apartment in Vinkovci, appropriating her property and all of her possessions.

To this day, one of these soldiers still lives in her apartment, and she has not been able to return home or retrieve her possessions. She has been trying for the past three years to get government assistance to move back into her flat, so far to no avail. After a court decision she was finally given the right to buy her apartment, which she has done. As of 25 March 1994, Mrs. J. has had full legal ownership of her occupied apartment (which was never JNA property).

In 1991 Mrs. J. received the same status of "displaced person" as other citizens of Vinkovci. She has also received written support for her case from the office of the President of the Republic of Croatia. Despite Presidential support and legal ownership of her apartment, Vinkovci municipal authorities have refused to help her, showing a clear (and even stated) anti-Serb bias throughout their response to her legal struggles.

Case: S. P.

S. P. is a teacher, translator and a self-supporting mother. Mrs. P. is of Serb origin, but has always considered herself nationally undeclared. She had been employed as a lecturer at the Military Academy in Zagreb for almost 24 years. When, in 1991, the JNA chose one side of the conflict she quit her job, and has been unemployed since. She occasionally succeeded in getting part time jobs, but this was not enough to support her and her daughter. In 1992 her Polish friends took her daughter J. to Krakow, where she attends secondary school. In March 1993, Mrs. P. was evicted from her flat (where she and J. had lived for 14 years) by members of the Croatian army. All of her property was confiscated. After a long legal struggle, she succeeded in getting an administrative court ruling to return to her flat. This did not help, as the local authorities showed themselves unwilling to enforce this decision. Having no means to support herself and no flat in which to live, Mrs. P. left for Poland where she taught for two years at Krakow's poly-technical university, supporting her daughter. In November 1995, Mrs. P. returned to Croatia, and is at the moment working on a six month project, Crisis Intervention in the former Krajina.

Case: M. B.

M. B. is a Croatian citizen living in Osijek. Mrs. B. has tenancy rights for a flat owned by the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Croatia. She submitted a request to buy the ownership of the flat, which resulted in a legal suit against her by the Public Prosecutor of the Republic of Croatia to stop the tenancy rights of her former husband S. M., according to article two whereby a person charged for participating in enemy activity against the Republic of Croatia loses his/her tenancy rights. Mr. M. was in the JNA but the fact that he did not take part in enemy activities and that there was no criminal charge against him to prove this, has been disregarded. M. B. left her flat in Osijek in April 1992 to visit her daughter in Germany, where she stayed 14 days. Upon her return, she found her flat occupied by the K. family. Members of the Croatian army did not allow her to enter the flat. Mrs. B. lodged a complaint to the Constitutional court of the Republic of Croatia, which in 1993 recognized her as the legal tenant, overruling the decision of the Military housing commission. The housing commission then awarded the K. family another flat, but sealed Mrs. B.'s flat. Mrs. B. was offered a small inadequate attic with no light, and her flat was awarded to Z. K., in spite of existing legal regulations.

The Constitutional principles of equality are now in question and collective responsibility has been imposed.

Case: D. K.

D. K. is a Croatian citizen. She is married and has one daughter. Her house in Barilovic near Karlovac was looted and destroyed by explosives. She was dismissed on 4 September 1991 from a catering company "Zagrebacki plavi," despite having more than 27 years of work experience. The labor litigation has been in court for over four years.

Her husband M. K., a university graduate, was retired at the age of 45 from his post of chief of shift at the police station, having been given the explanation that his services were no longer required.

On 6 November 1991, while D. K. was attending her mother-in-law's funeral, a policeman who was a former colleague of her husband broke into their apartment and is living there to this day. The legal proceedings concerning this break-in were ruled in their favor on 30 June 1992, but the impostor is still living there. Mrs. K. has been renting a flat since, and has gone to all levels of jurisdiction in the Republic of Croatia without success. From 1 April 1992 to date, the payment of her husband's pension has been stopped, even though she has full authorization to collect it. She and her daughter have been receiving threats and pressure from individuals with the aim of expelling them. The fine in a court proceeding against a man who had threatened to "break off their heads" amounted to only 20 kuna.

Appendix- Vojko Ivica
How Can We Stop the New Wave of Housing Evictions?

The answer to this question would be: by internationalizing cases of forced and illegal moves into other people's flats.

If we begin from the fact that the right to a flat is one of the constitutive human rights protected by the constitution, we should not under-emphasize what is happening with this right.

Since this is a flagrant violation of a fundamental human right, the right to a flat, the violations of which (supported by data) are strictly controlled and regulated by the authorities, this determines the title and the dire need for the internationalization of present, former and future cases of violations of the mentioned rights. Speaking of illegal and forced evictions, which unfortunately are part of our everyday life, we cannot avoid saying that this is a blatant attack on the integrity of a person and their legal rights. The most important point we wish to make is that legal institutions of the system have not been put at the service of the protection from the cases of illegal and forced evictions and put under control (which we know is required by law) but are abusing the above, justifying it by a state of war, but in fact are very consciously using the situation bringing into question or even depicting in this way the morality of a people, of a nation.

NGOs for human rights on the territory of the Republic of Croatia have really done a considerable amount of work in view of their means and competencies. Everything undertaken at the local, regional and republic-state level did not give required and expected results even in cases of legally binding court decisions on the return of a tenant into his/their flat.

Of course, all this relates to illegal evictions that are being carried out by persons in Croatian army uniforms.

The military police usually cooperates with forced and illegal intruders, or at least watches the above with rapport, while reality has shown that they are not willing to cooperate when the return of illegally evicted tenants is in question.

It is noticeable that both the military and civilian police behave in accordance with the orders of their superiors, which is the most worrying, because their behavior is not a case of individual reflections but of collective behavior -in the style of "carrying out the orders." For example, the above mentioned was unable to use his own flat because of forced and illegal entry by members of the Croatian army.

This is being done in the following way: several armed persons in Croatian army uniform (5 -to 10 of them), violently and behaving in a brutal manner, insulting and degrading, threatening of murder in the case the above mentioned was to undertake any action to return to his flat.

To this day, traces of force are visible on the entrance door (from bars and bats).

Short case description:

During a one-day absence (of the holder of the tenancy right) from the flat, a Croatian soldier from the 4th guard brigade with 4-5 people in military uniform, illegally moved into the flat by force. The military police that was called came, and instead of stopping the illegal entry, offered to keep the keys until the legal tenant returned. Once the legal tenant was informed of these events, he returned and went to the military police to get his keys. However he did not get them under the pretext that case would immediately be dealt with. Why?

In the meantime, the name of the tenant at the front door of the flat was changed. All attempts of the tenant to remove the illegal tenant that moved in by force were futile.

Accompanied by the military police, he come to get his personal belongings and found the flat open. He took the opportunity to change the lock and thus stay in his flat with further infringement .

In the evening, persons in military uniforms returned with the intention of breaking into the flat again. The tenant spent the following day informing different departments and institutions of the situation and the need for help, but to no avail.

When a group of about ten persons in Croatian army uniforms arrived, all armed even with machine guns, and when they destroyed the front door with iron bars and bats, the military and civilian police were called in.

The military police stood by the illegal intruder uttering gross insults and threats (at the tenant). They even pulled out a telephone cable, while the machine gun was pointed at the person who was calling for help.

Under such threats the tenant was forced to leave the flat, while the military police, instead of giving him assistance and protection, told him they would not guarantee for his life if he came back to the apartment. With the assistance of the military police, the tenant was thrown out into the street without anything, while the intruders destroyed and looted all of his belongings.

Court Epilogue

The court ruling dated 5 May 1993 became legally binding. The intruder was to move out from the apartment within 3 days and under threat of forced eviction, with the note that an appeal would not postpone the date of execution of this ruling.

Comment

The military police forcibly evicted the legal tenant under threat and has not enforced the court ruling dated 5 May 1993 from 1993 to this date.

This speaks sufficiently on the cooperation of military authorities and illegal and forced evictors and those they protect.

Eight court legal evictions that were set were not sufficient to move out the illegal tenant, whereas the legal tenant was evicted immediately, and was lucky enough not to have been physically mistreated, because insults and mistreatment are the commonplace occurrences.

II. E.g. - The case of a family, whose flat was illegally occupied by a Croatian soldier. This eviction was especially brutal and vulgar and these persons where also physically mistreated. The eviction occurred in 1993 and constitutes one of the rare case where the tenants managed to return to their flat following a court ruling.

However, after their first absence from the flat because of death in the family, a Croatian soldier again illegally and forcibly moved into the flat. Even though the legal tenant has a note from the chief of police of the Split-Dalmatian sector allowing him to use his flat unobstructed, the flat to this date cannot be used by its legal tenants. The appropriate authorities were duly informed in detail, but to no avail.

III. E.g. In March 1996 the legal tenant was prevented from using the flat because of illegal and forced entry of a member of the Croatian army. The injured party called the civilian and military police to intervene. In spite of the presence of the military and civilian police, the illegal and forced intruder and his escort started insulting, threatening them (the legal tenants) if they were to attempt anything in order to gain the right to return to their flat. Furthermore, the legal tenant (an elderly person of frail health) was beaten, as a warning that the intruders were truly serious in their intentions.

Because of threats, even death threats, they could do nothing else but to leave their own flat.

If the authorities, the military and civilian police, were to do their job in accordance with their legal authority there would be no problem with evictions.

Since their behavior follows the interests and the recommendations of the authorities, they cannot be stopped.

The evicted person was a welfare case, a pensioner and of frail health and has lived in this flat from 1976.

We are fighting for a social and legal state where all its citizens will have constitutional equality before the law.

For the Centre for Human Rights
28 April 1996
Split

Ivica Vojko

The above text may freely be reproduced, copied, or translated, in whole or in part, as long as the source is stated as the Balkan Peace Team.