Achievements and Future Steps in Prevention

of Torture of Migrants and Refugees in South-

East Europe Region

Postignuća i budući koraci u prevenciji torture

migranata i izbeglice u zemljama Jugoistočne
Evrope
 Austria
Prevention of ill-treatment of refugees and migrants - achievements and future steps

Austrian Ombudsman Board (AOB) in its role as the Austrian National Preventive
Mechanism (NPM) has been responsible for protecting and promoting human rights in
the Republic of Austria since 1 July 2012. The AOB along with six regional commissions
monitor institutions in which there is or can be a deprivation or restriction of personal
liberty, such as shelters for unaccompanied minors. The Act of the Austrian
implementation of OPCAT is broader than the protocol itself. The Austrian Federal
Constitution even allows the NPM to monitor and examine the behavior of organs
authorized to issue direct orders and carry out coercive measures, such as forced returns.

Since 2015 the AOB has been following a strong focus in the protection of migrants and
refugees, especially those who are very vulnerable such as unaccompanied minor
refugees. ted.

Starting in January 2015 the Commissions of the AOB constantly visited and monitored
centres and shelters for unaccompanied minors, such as the Traiskirchen Initial Reception
Centre, a centre where mainly people during their Dublin proceeding are accommodated.
According to the AOB´s commissions the conditions in Traiskirchen were not fulfilling
the reception conditions under the Basic Provision Agreement. This led to a press
conference at which AOB´s Commission together with representatives of NGO´s and
children´s and youth advocates laid mayor emphasis on how damaging especially mass
accommodation can be from a children´s welfare point of view.

In 2015 Commission 6, which is responsible for the Traiskirchen Initial Reception carried
out six visits to the facility. At peak even 1100 unaccompanied minors were housed. The
situation was particularly critical between July and September 2015 when many children
and adolescents where living as homeless persons and subsequently living in tents on the
grounds of the Traiskirchen Centre. During that period of urgent needs - also thanks to
the city of Vienna - all unaccompanied minor refugees where transferred to
accommodations which fulfil the Basic Provision Agreement. During this phase the
AOB`s Commission together with civil society contacted the locally responsible authority
and provided list of names of the affected.

In November 2015 Commission 3 visited the federal support facility in Leoben (Styria).
In this facility 400 people were accommodated- 300 of them unaccompanied- where
completely unsuitable conditions for unaccompanied children and adolescents were
monitored. Minors reported that they went on hunger strike and even a large scale brawl
did occur. The NPM continued to oppose the accommodation of unaccompanied minor
refugees in facilities of this kind.

Immediately thereafter, all unaccompanied minor refugees and families with small
children were transferred out of this camp. These rapid actions were taken also thanks to
a very close cooperation between the NPM / AOB and the media, which also raised the
topic in public.

In order to achieve a good protection of children on the run it is crucial to make use of all
available instruments.

Apart from making use of the NPM mandate the AOB in its traditional role of ex post
control of public administration has the possibility to mandate the AOB´s commissions
to investigate on behalf of the AOB in inspections procedures (ex officio procedures). This
clearly extends the AOB´s room for manoeuvre, because the AOB´s constitutional
mandate of ex-post control allows to visit and monitor institutions even if it is not a place
where deprivation or restriction of personal liberty (according to the OPCAT mandate)
occurs.

According to the expert report the monitoring of Asylum shelters only falls under the
Austrian NPM mandate if unaccompanied minors are involved. Otherwise these
institutions are not being seen as places where a person´s liberty is deprived.

Nevertheless the AOB´s post control mandate allows the AOB to instruct the
Commissions with visits of asylum shelters - even if no unaccompanied minor is
accommodated – or so called “hot-spots”.

So if the AOB comes to know of a suspicion of maladministration for example through

the media the post control mandate enabled the AOB or the Commission respectively to
visit for example “Spielfeld” a (former) hotspot at the Austrian – Slovenian boarder (ex-
officio investigation).

The protection of people on the run and unaccompanied minors has been crucial and of
high priority in AOB´s work since 2015 and will be in the future. For this reason it is of
special importance to continue using all available tools and instruments:

Make use of the NPM mandate

Do ex officio investigations – because refugees and especially children do not tend to file
complaints
to continue working closely with the media and cooperating with the NGOs and civil
society
 Bulgaria
Activities and achievements of the ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria acting as
a National Preventive mechanism (NPM) on the problems regarding refugees and
migrants in the country

During 2016 the ombudsman acting as a NPM was monitoring all the places of detention
for migrants (Distribution center in Elhovo and two Specialised Centers for Temporary
Accommodation of Foreigners (Detention centers) in Sofia (for 400 people) and in
Lyubimets (for 300 people) and six open centers for accommodation of asylum seekers.
Bulgarian institutions continue to experience serious difficulties with the reception,
registration and provision of basic internationally recognized humanitarian needs of the
asylum seekers in Bulgaria, such as living conditions; medical and dental care; food and
security, translation, etc. Overcrowding of the premises for foreigners in the detention
centers, significant deterioration of the living conditions, lack of privacy for the residents,
insufficient medical services to the foreigners are among the issues that remain
unresolved for yet another year. Especially alarming is the finding of the NPM regarding
the accommodation of a huge number of families with children at the detention centers
and the lack of provision of food and supplies for babies and infants. A large percentage
of the people entering Bulgaria are children, which places high demands on our country
to ensure standards that currently cannot be covered. Constant position of the
Ombudsman is that the detention centers are unsuitable places for children, they do not
have the necessary conditions and specially trained staff. In this regard the NPM
recommends that alternative forms of migration detention are to be considered in relation
to this group of people.

Main focus in the work of the ombudsman was related to the rights of the unaccompanied
minors in Bulgaria. In August 2016 the Ombudsman as NPM published a special thematic
report on the rights of unaccompanied children - refugees. Emphasis of the inspections
was the provision of care, representation of the unaccompanied children, access to health
and education services, safe and secure environment and social support. In spite of the
lack of a register of unaccompanied children refugees, their number has increased
compared to the total number of asylum seekers. Key finding of the Ombudsman as NPM
is that as an EU member state and country which has ratified the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child,Bulgaria needs to improve the system for reception and care of
unaccompanied minors in order to ensure their life, health, safety and interests as a
particularly vulnerable group of children. The unaccompanied children refugees do not
have sufficiently protected space, access to education, adequate information regarding
the procedure for international protection. Serious problem that was observed by the
NPM was related to the representation of the unaccompanied minors who seeked and
recieved asylum. According to Art. 25 of the Law on Asylum and Refugees the
unaccompanied minors who are foreigners seeking or having received international
protection in the Republic of Bulgaria must have a representative from the municipal
administration, appointed by the mayor or by an authorized official. The actual situation,
however, showed that some of the centers did not have appointed representative to
protect the interests of the unaccompanied children refugees, while others had only
appointed representatives to formally perform their activities due to the large number of
children for which they are responsible. The NPM focuses on the need to be created a
model in which the functions of the representatives are entrusted to NGOs with the
purpose for developing a professional representation, and to establish a mechanism of
control over the latter. The NPM recommended that the competent authorities should
take urgent actions for the adoption of a Project for establishing a coordination
mechanism for interaction between institutions and organizations to ensure the rights of
unaccompanied children of foreigners residing in Bulgaria, including asylum and
international protection.

Another important issue in the work of the Bulgarian ombudsman acting as a NPM was
related to the monitoring of forced returns of third countries nationals (one operation by
plane to Pakistan – 4 returnees and one operation by land to the Bulgarian – Macedonian
border – 2 returnees).

Future steps for 2017:

In the next year the NPM will continue its work monitoring border police departments
regarding the concerns about push backs near Bulgaria - Turkey border and the
departments near the Bulgarian – Serbian border to prevent ill-treatment of refugees and
migrants.

Also the ombudsman acting as a NPM plans to continue with the important mission of
building in the Republic of Bulgaria an effective monitoring system established in
accordance with Article 8 (6) of the Return Directive.

Another issue that is highty important for the NPM to monitor is related to the closed-
type centres during asylum proceedings. In October 2015 the Bulgarian Parliament
adopted amendments to the Asylum and Refugees Act and were created closed-type
centres for asylum seekers, including minors. The NPM is further of the opinion that
the amendments create a parallel detention regime similar to the one applied to
foreigners who have been imposed coercive administrative actions and who are detained
in the special centres for temporary accommodation of foreigners under the Foreigners
in the Republic of Bulgaria Act. The NPM will monitor closely the procedural guarantees,
lawfulness of the detention and period of detention of asylum-seekers.
 Croatia

„ Zaštita ljudskih prava izbjeglica i migranata u zemljama JI Europe- preventivni

pristup“

Postignuća

Iza nas je iskustvo prve europske izbjegličke krize, a pred nama je neizvjesnost novih
kriza. Izbjeglička kriza u Hrvatskoj je započela u rujnu 2015., u trenutku kada je Mađarska
dovršila izgradnju bodljikave žičane ograde i zatvorila granične prijelaze sa Srbijom.
Dotadašnje kretanje izbjeglica tzv. balkanskom rutom od Grčke i Makedonije prema
granici s Mađarskom promijenilo je smjer prema Hrvatskoj. U razdoblju od šest mjeseci,
od 16. rujna 2015. do 8.ožujka 2016. kroz zemlju je prošlo 658.068 izbjeglica od kojih je
većina iz Sirije, Afganistana i Iraka.

Veliki broj izbjeglica koji se već u prvim danima kretao između 1.000 i 10.000 osoba
dnevno, zahtijevao je brz odgovor državnih institucija i potrebu koordiniranog i
usklađenog djelovanja.

Nakon početnih neslaganja i ozbiljnih međudržavnih sporova oko postupanja s velikom

brojem izbjeglica države balkanske rute dogovorile su i uspostavile humanitarni
koridor.

Kao nacionalna institucija za zaštitu ljudskih prava, središnje tijelo za suzbijanje

diskriminacije i tijelo koje obavlja poslove Nacionalnog preventivnog mehanizma našli
smo se u situaciji da moramo aktivirati dodatne resurse kako bismo odmah na početku
postali aktivni dionici u zaštiti i promociji prava izbjeglica pristiglih na naš teritorij.
Osnovali smo timove i od prvog dana krenuli sa nenajavljenim obilascima mjesta na
kojima su se izbjeglice nalazile. Pratili smo na koji se način poštuju njihova ljudska prava
i dostojanstvo, a posebno kako im se pruža humanitarna pomoći, osigurava primjereni
smještaj i zdravstvena zaštita, imaju li mogućnost traženja međunarodne zaštite te kakvo
je postupanje policije prema njima.

Među 555.700 izbjeglica koliko ih je prošlo teritorijem Hrvatske od 16.09.do 31. 12. 2015.
samo njih 24 zatražilo je međunarodnu zaštitu. Trend prema kojoj Hrvatska nije država
destinacija za tražitelje međunarodne zajednice traje već godinama, više od 80% tražitelja
međunarodne zaštite napušta naš teritorij prije odluke o zahtjevu za azilom.

Zatvaranje humanitarnog koridora u ožujku 2016.označilo je i kraj humanitarne krize u

Hrvatskoj. Nakon toga, jedan manji dio izbjeglica zatekao se u Hrvatskoj u potpuno
novim okolnostima. Naime, 320 osoba nakon zatvaranja koridora ostale su u Zimsko
tranzitnom centru u Slavonskom Brodu. Njihov status tada je uređen sukladno Zakonu
o strancima, odnosno svi su dobili rješenje o povratku uz izrečenu mjeru zabrane
napuštanja centra što je formalno pravno predstavljalo mjeru alternative detencije.
Međutim, nakon višekratnih obilazaka centra od strane predstavnika NPM-a, utvrđeno
je da su uvjeti u kojim se nalaze izbjeglice uvjeti de facto detencije. Sličan problem osnove
i uvjeta smještaja osoba u detenciji koji formalno pravno to nije, pojavljivao se i u drugim
državama koje su uspostavile „hot spotove“ za dugotrajni boravak. U Hrvatskoj je ovaj
problem riješen 15. travnja 2016. zatvaranjem Zimskog tranzitnog centra u Slavonskom
Brodu a osobe koje su se tada u njemu nalazile, ovisno o utvrđenom statusu premještene
su regularne institucije: u Prihvatni centar za strance ili Prihvatilište za tražitelje azila.

Kao Nacionalni preventivni mehanizam tijekom 2016. obišli smo Prihvatilište za tražitelje
azila u Zagrebu (kapacitet za smještaj 600 osoba) i Prihvatilište za tražitelje azila u Kutinu
namijenjeno smještaju ranjivih skupina ( kapacitet 100 ) te Prihvatni centar za strance
Ježevo (kapacitet za smještaj 100 osoba). O svim uočenim poteškoćama pisat ćemo u
izvješću za 2016.

Izazovi

Zbog svega navedenog postajemo sve svjesniji razlika u nacionalnim sustavima po

pitanju azilantskih politika, socijalnih prava, ekonomskih prilika i uvjeta radnog tržišta.
Naročito su došle do izražaja slabosti Dublinskog sistema koji izbjeglice veže uz teritorije
članica ovisno o geografskim činiteljima samih migracijskih tijekova, a ne uz kvalitetu
sustava. Naime, rubne države EU članice koje su najviše izložene migrantskim
tijekovima, kao prve države ulaza najvećim su dijelom odgovorne za postupak
priznavanja međunarodne zaštite a pri tome imaju najmanje iskustva, a često i
nedovoljno ekonomskih, administrativnih i drugih kapaciteta nužnih za njihovo
zbrinjavanje

Zbog svih nedostataka koje je pokazao Zajednički europski sustav azila u razdoblju
izbjegličke krize EK je predstavila prijedloge njegove reforme. Njen cilj je izgraditi sustav
koji bi trebao biti podjednako prilagođen vremenima mira i situacijama velikog
migracijskog pritiska.

U ovom trenutku sve države koje se nalaze na migrantskim rutama prema EU, a naročito
države članice više ne vjeruju u mogućnost raspodjele izbjeglica temeljem načela
solidarnosti jer se takva raspodjela pokazuje sporim i nedostatnim odgovorom.
Nepovjerenje država na migrantskim rutama prema raspodjeli hrani se i činjenicom da
prijedlog Europske komisije o obveznoj raspodjeli ne uživa potporu većine država
članica, odnosno neke od njih se izričito protive obvezujućim kvotama i zauzimaju se za
solidarnost na dobrovoljnoj osnovi. Tako da ostaje upitno kako će proći prijedlog EK o
reformi Dublinske uredbe u ovakvom obliku, a naročito kažnjavanje država znatnim
kaznama u slučaju neprihvaćanja izbjeglica.
U ovakvim neizvjesnim okolnostima uloga pravobraniteljskih institucija naročito kroz
mandat NPM izgleda neizvjesno s obzirom na sadržaj aktivnosti koje bi trebale
provoditi, međutim time samo još više raste važnost funkcije koju ove institucije moraju
obavljati a to je zaštita ljudskih prava u izvanrednim i nepredvidljivim okolnostima, a
naročito sprečavanja mučenja i drugih okrutnih, neljudskih ili ponižavajućih postupaka
ili kažnjavanja.

Kosovo*

National Preventive Mechanism against Torture – Achievements

Law No. 05/L-019 on Ombudsperson was adopted by the Assembly of the Republic of
Kosovo on 26 June 2015. Article 17 of this Law sets forth that the Ombudsperson acts as
National Preventive Mechanism against torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatments and punishments.
On 16 January 2016, Ombudsperson, Mr Hilmi Jashari, signed a decision for the
establishment of the National Preventive Mechanism against Torture.
The Republic of Kosovo is not a member of the United Nations and Council of Europe.
Subsequently, it is not a signatory of the above-mentioned conventions; however, some
of these conventions are included in Article 22 of Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo
and have priority over domestic legal acts.
In addition, the Mechanism has been functioning in accordance with domestic legislation,
such as:
Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo,
Law on Ombudsperson,
Criminal Code of the Republic of Kosovo,
Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kosovo,
Law on Execution of Penal Sanctions,
Law on Police,
And also, Administrative Instructions related to this area.
In 2011, Ombudsperson, along with two Non-Governmental Organisations, signed an
Agreement of Cooperation and acted as a Task Force of National Preventive Mechanism
against Torture, until its creation.
1
NPMT of Kosovo foresees that this mechanism should be comprised of the head/ legal
officer and two other legal officers, one psychologist, one sociologist and one doctor.
While it is currently comprised of the head, legal officers and
2

a psychologist, there is also one doctor engaged in it temporarily, but there is no social
worker.
Although NPMT team carries out other general tasks related to the general mandate of
the Ombudsperson, it managed to visit to date the Detention Centre in Lipjan,
Correctional Centre in Lipjan (females and juvenile facility), Correctional Centre in
Dubrava, Border Points, Airport, Asylum of refugees and two Mental Health Centres,
and it is currently preparing the related reports.

We have published leaflets on NPMT, and we have also published the prisoners’ rights
in a laminated format, taken from Criminal Code, which will be put on the places where
persons deprived of liberty are held.
During this period, we have carried out previous work, conducted regular and ad hoc
visits, opened complaint boxes, held interviews, submitted reports concerning cases, and
we have also submitted a temporary sanction measure and one Amicus Curie for the
Court.
The upcoming plans

For the upcoming year (2017), we will have to initially produce internal working
documents (although they are included in the Ombudsperson’s Regulations); we will
staff the Mechanism’s vacant positions with permanent doctors and social workers, while
colleagues who are engaged in general duties of the Ombudsperson should be
transferred to the Mechanism.
We will be engaged in a Council of Europe project, for strengthening the NPMT, we plan
to carry out inspections of all Police Stations, elderly homes and the inspection of places
we have visited this year, to confirm the implementation of recommendations.
Translation of Mandela Rules in Albanian and in other official languages in Kosovo, and
training provided to closed institutions.
 Kosovo*
Dostignuća
Zakon Br. 05/L-019 o Ombudsmanu je usvojen od Skupštine Republike Kosovo dana 26
juna 2015. Član 17 ovog zakona predviđa da Ombudsman deluje kao Nacionalni
Mehanizam za Sprečavanje Torture Postupanja i drugih surovih, neljudskih ili
ponižavajućih postupaka ili kažnjavanja ili kažnjavanja.

Dana 16 januar 2016, Ombudsman, g. Hilmi Jashari, potpisao je odluku o osnivanju

Nacionalnog Mehanizma za Sprečavanje Torture.
Republika Kosovo nije članica Organizacije Ujedinjenih Nacija i Saveta Evrope. Prema
tome, nije potpisnica navedenih konvencija, ali neke od ovih konvencija su uključene u
članu 22 Ustava Republike Kosovo i one preovlađuju u odnosu na lokalna pravna akta.
Takođe, Mehanizam funkcioniše u skladu sa domaćim zakonodavstvom, kao što su:
Ustav Republike Kosovo
Zakon o Ombudsmanu
Krivični Zakonik Republike Kosovo
Zakon o krivičnom Postupku Republike Kosovo
Zakon o Izvršenju Krivičnih Sankcija
Zakon o Policiji
i prema Administrativnim Uputstvima koje se odnose na ovu oblast.
U 2011 godini, Ombudsman zajedno sa dve nevladine organizacije, je potpisao sporazum
o saradnji i delovao je kao Radna Grupa Nacionalnog Mehanizma za Sprečavanje
Torture, do njegovog osnivanja.
NMST Kosova predviđa da OVAJ mehanizam u svom sastavu ima
rukovodioca/pravnika i dva druga pravnika, jednog psihologa, sociologa i lekara. Dok
trenutno ima rukovodioca, pravnika i psihologa. Privremeno je angažovala jednog lekara
i nema socijalnih radnika.
Iako ekipa NMST obavlja druge opšte poslove vezano sa ukupnim mandatom
Ombudsmana, do sada je uspeo da poseti Pritvorni Centar u Lipljanu, Popravni Centar
u Lipljanu (gde se drže maloletnici i žene), Kazneno Popravni Centar u Dubravi,
Granične Tačke, Aerodrom, Azil za Izbeglica, i dva centra za mentalno zdravlje i u toku
su pripreme izveštaja.
Objavili smo letke o NMST, kao i u plastifikovanom obliku smo objavili prava
zatvorenika, preuzete iz Krivičnog Zakonika i koji će se ppostaviti na mestima gde se
drže lica lišena slobode.
3

Tokom ovog perioda, obavili smo ranije poslove, obavljajući redovne posete i ad hoc
posete, otvarajući kutije za žalbe, obavili intervjue, slali izveštaje o slučajevima, poslali
smo jednu privremenu meru i jednog Amicus Curie (Prijatelja Suda) sudu.
Planovi za budućnost
Za narednu (2017) godinu, prvo treba da se usvojimo unutrašnja radna dokumenta (iako
su iste uključene u propisima Ombudsmana), sledi kompletiranje osoblja mehanizma sa
stalnim lekarom i socijalnim radnikom, kao i da se kolege koji su angažovani u opštim
poslovima Ombudsmana prenesu u mehanizam.
Bićemo angažovani u projektu Saveta Evrope, za ojačanje NMST, planiramo sprovođenje
inspekcija svih policijskih stanica, staračkih domova, kao i inspekcije mesta koje smo
posetili ove godine da bismo pratili sprovođenje preporuka. Prevođenje Mandela Rules
pavila na albanskom jeziku i drugim zvaničnim jezicima na Kosovu i obuka za zatvorene
institucije.

3
*This designation is without prejudice to positions on status and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and ICJ Advisory
opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence
 Macedonia

Achievements
Granted freedom of movement

First and foremost, as subject of an assessment of the NPM were the persons intercepted
on the territory of Macedonia and placed in the Temporary Transit Centers.

It was found that these people are staying there for a longer period of time, in particular
beginning from March this year, with no legal status, being unable to move freely at the
same time.

These persons’ treatment is different, depending on which Transit Center they are placed
in, despite the fact that it is the same category of people and the same system of
institutional organization in both of the Transit Centers.

The Ombudsman strongly reacted to the authorities against the discriminatory treatment
of refugees and migrants through reports and letters.

As a result of our efforts, the persons accommodated in the Transit Center Vinojug were
granted freedom of movement.

Access to the right of asylum

During the visits at both of the Temporary Transit Centers, NPM detected continuous
practice of preventing access to the asylum procedure to those who express intention to
seek asylum.

Given our efforts and interventions, the practice of preventing access to the asylum
procedure has been terminated and now the representatives from the Sector for asylum
within the the Ministry of Interior, are present on site in the Temporary Transit Centers
Vinojug and Tabanovce, whenever these persons express intention to seek asylum.

3. Accommodation of the asylum seekers in the Center for asylum seekers

Furthermore, during the visits the NPM detected practice of retention of the asylum
seekers in the Transit Centers, rather than transferring them in the Center for asylum
seekers.

Following the Ombudsman’s intervention to the authorities all the asylum seekers,
previously placed in the living containers near the Temporary Transit Centers Vinojug
and Tabanovce, were transferred to the Center for asylum seekers, which provides much
better housing.

Amendments to the Law on Asylum and Temporary Protection

Amendments to the Law on Asylum, which were passed in April this year (2016), were
quite “unfriendly” towards the migrants and refugees who intend to seek asylum in the
country.

Considering these provisions as restriction to the access to the right of asylum and
contradictory to the EU acquis, the Ombudsman together with the non-governmental
organizations, in June 2016 filed an initiative to amend the Law on Asylum, requiring
abolishment of the restrictive provisions and alignment of the Law on asylum with the
international standards.

Improvement of the conditions

As part of the monitoring, the NPM regularly monitors the housing conditions in the
aforementioned centers in order to prevent inhuman treatment of these persons.

In this regard, the NPM constantly emphasizes the necessity to improve the housing
conditions in the centers and they have been improved by far. The efforts of the
international organizations and the NGO sector have certainly contributed thereby.

Future steps

In terms of future goals and ideas of the NPM, they are as follows:

Continuous monitoring in all of the places for accommodation of refugees and migrants
on the territory of Macedonia.

Regular actions aimed at comprehensive protection of the rights of the refugees and
migrants, according to the domestic law, including the Convention on the Status of
Refugees (1951) and the Protocol thereto (1967).

Providing formal education for the migrants and refugees accommodated in the Transit
Centers.

One of the key objectives of the Ombudsman is “emptying” the Reception Center for
Foreigners.

During the visits, the NPM team found that this Center is violating the law by acting
upon orders of the competent institutions.
Namely, this center accommodates people upon verbal orders from institutions that have
nothing to do with the procedure for accommodating and retaining a foreigner in the
Reception Center for Foreigners.

Thus, the efforts of the Ombudsman, currently as well as in the future will be aimed at
“emptying” of the Center, since there is no person currently placed there on legal
grounds.

The ultimate goal for the next year will be documenting the status of the persons currently
accommodated / retained in the Transit Centers.

Determination of their status is important in order to be able to exercise their rights.

They will no longer be treated as persons illegally intercepted in the Republic of

Macedonia, but in accordance with the legislation in respect of their fundamental rights
and freedoms.

Makedonija
Dosadašnja dostignuća

Omogućena sloboda kretanja

Predmet ocene NPM tima su bila lica zatečena i smeštena u Privremenim tranzitnim
centrima.

Zaključeno je da se ova lica već duže vreme, t.j. od marta ove godine, drže bez regulisanja
njihovog pravnog statusa i bez mogućnosti da se slobodno kreću.

Pritom, uspostavljen je i različiti tretman ovih lica, zavisno od toga da li se nalaze u

jednom ili drugom tranzitnom centru, i pored toga što se radi o jednakoj kategoriji ljudi
i o istom sistemu institucionalne organizacije u oba tranzitna centra.

Narodni pravobranilac je putem Izveštaja i pisama reagovao do nadležnih organa o ovom

diskriminirajućem tretmanu izbeglica i migranata.

Kao rezultat naših napora omogućena je sloboda kretanja i osoba smeštenih u Tranzitnom
centru Vinojug.
Omogućivanje pristupa pravu na azil

U toku izvršenih poseta u oba prihvatna tranzitna centra, NPM tim je uvideo da je praksa
neomogućavanje osobama koje izražavaju nameru za podnošenje zahteva za azil da budu
upošte približene do postupka za pravo na azil.

Posle naših intervencija nadležno ministarstvo je zaustavilo praksu onemogućavanja

pristupa postupku za azil, a i predstavnici Sektora za azil u nadležnom ministarstvu su
prisutni u Privremenim tranzitnim centrima Vinojug i Tabanovce uvek kada lica koja su
tamo smeštena izraze nameru za azil.

Smeštaj tražioca azila u Centru za tražioce azila

U toku poseta, NPM tim je uvideo zadržavanje tražioca azila u samim tranzitnim
centrima, umesto njihovo prebacivanje u odgovarajućem centru za smeštaj tražioca azila.

Narodni pravobranilac je intervenisao kod nadležnih organa, posle čega su svi tražioci
azila koji su prethodno bili smešteni u prikolice u blizini Privremenih tranzitnih centara
Vinojug i Tabanovce bili prebačeni u Centar za tražioce azila gde su, između ostalog, i
bolji kapaciteti za smeštaj.

Izmene Zakona o azilu i privremenoj zaštiti

Izmene Zakona o azilu i privremenoj zaštiti, provedene aprila ove godine (2016), su
prilično “neprijateljske” za migrante i izbeglice koje imaju nameru da traže azil u
Republici Makedoniji.

Narodni pravobranilac smatra da ove odredbe ograničavaju pristup pravu na azil i da su

u sukobu sa evropskim zakonodavstvom, zbog čega smo zajedno sa nevladinim
organizacijama juna 2016. godine podneli inicijativu za izmenu Zakona o azilu i
privremenoj zaštiti, kojom smo zatražili brisanje ograničavajućih odredbi i usaglašavanje
Zakona o azilu i privremenoj zaštiti sa međunarodnim propisima.

Poboljšanje materijalnih uslova

Deo uobičajenog monitoringa NPM tima je i redovni uviđaj u materijalne uslove smeštaja
zadržanih lica, sa ciljem eventualne prevencije nehumanog tretmana zadržanih lica.

U tom pravcu, NPM tim stalno reaguje za poboljšanje materijalnih uslova u Centrima za
smeštaj izbeglica i migranata i neosporno je da se materijalni uslovi konstantno
poboljšavaju. Uticaj na poboljšanje sveukupnih materijalnih uslova naravno imaju i
napori međunarodnih organizacija i organizacija u nevladinom sektoru.
O budućim ciljevima

U pogledu budućih ciljeva i ideja, NPM tim Narodnog pravobranioca planira:

Da produži sa daljim pojačanim nadzorom svih centara za smeštaj izbeglica i migranata

na teritoriji Republike Makedonije.

Redovne aktivnosti sa ciljem kompletne zaštite prava izbeglica i migranata, garantovana

domaćim zakonodavstvom i Konvencijom o statusu izbeglica (1951) i njenim Protokolom
(1967).

Obezbeđivanje formalnog obrazovanja za migrante i izbeglice smeštene u tranzitnim

centrima.

Jedan od ključnih ciljeva Narodnog pravobranioca je „pražnjenje“ Prihvatnog centra za

strance.

U toku redovnih poseta NPM tim je mogao da uvidi da se ovaj centar osobito suočava sa
problemima prekršivanja zakonske regulative od strane nadležnih institucija.

Naime, u ovom centru se smeštaju lica na osnovu usnih naredbi institucija koje nemaju
nikakvu dodirnu tačku sa postupkom za smeštaj i zadržavanje stranaca u Prihvatnom
centru za strance.

Zbog toga, napori Narodnog pravobranioca u sadašnjoj, ali i u sledećoj godini, su u smeru
potpunog pražnjenja centra, zbog toga što sada ni jedno lice koje je tamo nije smešteno
na osnovu važećeg Zakona o strancima.

Krajnji cilj Narodnog pravobranioca Republike Makedonije je rešavanje statusa lica koja
su momentalno smeštena/zadržana u tranzitnim centrima.

Utvrđivanje njihovog statusa ja važno za proces ostvarivanja njihovih prava.

Ovo je zbog toga što sa jedne strane neće više biti tretirana kao lica koja su se nelegalno
našla na teritoriji Republike Makedonije, a sa druge strane će, na ovaj način, migranti i
izbeglice biti tretirani shodno odgovarajućoj zakonskoj regulativi, a istovremeno biće
zaštićene i njihove osnovne slobode i prava.
 Slovenia

Activities of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia on the so

called ‘refugee issues’
Achievements & future steps

Visits to institutions housing illegal aliens and/or asylum seekers

During the so called refugee crisis, while the so called humanitarian corridor being in
full effect, the Ombudsman visited a number of the transit/reception centers or stations
in the country, some of them on more than one occasion. This was done both in the role
of the Ombudsman itself, as well as that of national preventive mechanism.
Nonetheless, given the intense course of events at the time, limitations in regards to
available staff and duties related to also other work, it was not possible to carry out
such monitoring round-the-clock.

For example, while being shown facilities used for the purpose of registration of the
previously-not-yet-registered foreigners (who at the time, were arriving together with
others by organized scheduled train transports) at the Šentilj checkpoint, we were also
given information, that in the previous month, seven of them filed an application for
international protection – basically a negligible figure, given the daily number of several
thousand persons arriving daily. However, our interviews with random foreigners
revealed no complaints in regard to access to asylum, nor have we witnessed them
otherwise while being there. Our monitoring experience confirmed widely held public
belief in the country at the time, that Slovenia presents to these people little interest, as
basically all of them seemed interested only in one thing – when will they be able to
continue their journey north(west) of the border.
As a matter of fact, just as omnipresent was nervousness and irritation of these people,
caused by fear of the unknown and uncertainty about just where exactly they are and
for how long still. This was the reason, that our national preventive mechanism, after
visiting the Dobova perception center(s), for example, recommended to the Ministry of
Interior that more informative posters and brochures with probably the most relevant
information, including how they can apply for international protection, be put up or
distributed. The Ministry concurred and informed us, that material with basic
information on location and international protection procedure shall be provided.

Anyway, also later on, the Ombudsman made several visits to places housing illegal
aliens and/or asylum seekers. These visits were either proactive (i.e. done on our own
initiative) or reactive (in one case, we noticed news in the media on the protest at the
Asylum home – and went to see for ourselves just what exactly was happening). Special
attention was being paid to unaccompanied minors - we first made a thematic visit to
the Asylum home concentrating on this category and then, after the Government issued
the decision to house them from September 2016 on in two student homes, also visited
these two (on a first day the visit encompassed talks with the staff and general
interviews with those unaccompanied minors who could talk in English, while on the
second day of the visit we carried out interviews with them with help of the translator;
then we also payed visit to relevant centers for social work).

The Ombudsman also visited Centre for foreigners and both newly established
branches of the Asylum home – the one in Ljubljana for single adult asylum seekers and
the one in Logatec for families. Reports on the visit, together with relevant
recommendations for improvement are of course being made.
Delays in administrative decision making

Certain NGOs brought into the open their findings that currently more than one third
of approximately 300 applicants in the country still awaits for the first-instance decision
more than six months already (including around 10 unaccompanied minors, whose
applications should be, in accordance with the law, dealt with priority). Their analysis
further showed, that from 1. 1. 2015 to 30. 8. 2016, i.e. in the period of 20 months,
around 200 (substantive) decisions were made, so around 10 per month. There were
also around 10 decision-makers at the relevant time, meaning that roughly each of them
issued one decision per month.

The described state of affairs seemed quite alarming, regardless of the reason(s) for it.
Effects of such prolonged uncertainty in such matters are undoubtedly clear. Possibly
equally worrying has been the reaction of the Ministry so far – it concluded their
response to the above with a suggestion, that should the applicants want to ease and
consequently accelerate the proceedings, they should take into account their obligations
from Article 89 of ZMZ-1 and accordingly substantiate their application as soon as
possible and truthfully present circumstances and facts, etc. In addition to that, the
Ombudsman was already dealing with some similar cases, as e.g. the one involving an
unaccompanied minor – who filed his application for international protection already in
February, but there has still not yet been at least a personal interview with him carried
out – while already approaching was the end of September (the Ombudsman already
received a confirmation on part of the Ministry about that the delay, accompanied with
explanation that it is “due to high number of applications for international protection”).

We addressed to one of the mentioned NGOs that individual complaints with the
Ombudsman can be filed for the reason of unjustifiable procrastination of the procedure
and we are now already in the process of making relevant inquiries at the Ministry of
the interior. We plan to establish the reasons behind the longevity of so many of the
procedures.

Monitoring of the asylum procedures

The Ombudsman is also currently carrying out monitoring of the decision making in
the asylum procedures, as taking into account the emergence of the so called ‘refugee
crisis’ and high(er) number of applications for international protection, we were of the
view that also the quality of the decision making in the asylum procedures constitutes
‘a broader issue, important for human rights’ (which according to second paragraph of
Article 9 of the Human Rights Ombudsman Act is also one of the basis upon which the
Ombudsman can start the proceedings).

Now, after obtaining from the Ministry for internal affairs all (anonymized) decisions in
the asylum proceedings from January 2014 to April 2016 (in addition to also some other
information), we are currently making an analysis of their quality. A demanding and
time-consuming project for sure – but we also surely hope it to be a worthwhile one…

Furthermore, while not within the framework of the above mentioned monitoring
project, we can also point out an individual example of the Ombudsman’s engagement
in the substantive regard. In it, the Ombudsman made use of the Article 25 of the
Human Rights Ombudsman Act and addressed his amicus curiae writing to the
Administrative court (in regards to the evidentiary proceedings of the first instance in
relation to age of the applicant). Eventually, the case was returned back to the first
instance.

There were also other cases of the Ombudsman intervening in asylum procedures. One
of them involved a Syrian family, which at the time was already nine months waiting in
uncertainty, which country will deal with their applications for international protection
and made an appeal that Article 17 of the Dublin Regulation be used in Slovenia (the
parents came to the country from Croatia, the child then being born in Slovenia and
mother having some quite serious mental problems, as established by the psychiatrist).
The Ombudsman asked the Ministry of internal affairs for the reasons why the Republic
of Slovenia has not in this case took over the responsibility to deal with the applications
for international protection, given all the circumstances of the case. Even though the
Ministry stood firm by its original position and did not make use of the option from the
mentioned Article 17 of the Dublin Regulation, the case was eventually returned back by
the Constitutional Court.

The issue of bank accounts

Eventually it has come to the Ombudsman’s attention that problems with opening bank
accounts for persons with international protection are occurring. Supposedly, since June
2015 Syrian, Iraqi and Afghan citizens were unable to open a bank account. Ombudsman
not having any jurisdiction in relation to banks themselves, turned to the Bank of Slovenia
(the central bank of the Republic of Slovenia - a legal entity governed by public law)
instead, presenting the problem and expressing the view that if the above is indeed the
case, then such a practice would constitute discrimination on the basis of nationality in
breach of the Constitution.

While the response of the Bank of Slovenia was rather meagre (that as they understand
it, the described problems are above all a consequence of the money laundering and
terrorism financing risk management, that there is a possibility that as a matter of their
internal policy the banks made the decision that they will not do business with certain
clients, etc.), not long after the amendments of the Payment Services and Systems Act
were passed in the Parliament, in accordance with which there is now an explicit
provision stating that (also) asylum seekers and persons whose expulsion is not possible
due to legal or actual reasons, have the right to open and use a basic bank account,
regardless of their residence.

However, despite the described new legal basis binding the banks, the Ombudsman is
aware that problems in practice still remain at least to a certain extent, as we’ve dealt with
some cases quite recently, in which banks still refused to open an account to certain
individuals due to no apparent justified reason.

Worrisome recent events in view of legislation

Recently, Ministry proposed amendments also of the Aliens Act, according to which it
would be possible, in event of exceptional circumstances, at the proposal of the
Government to the Parliament, to close the country’s borders shut for six months (with
an option of prolongation for another six months, and so on). This was highly
questionable in regards to (in)compatibility with the refugee law, which the
Ombudsman also expressed in its writing to the Ministry. In the end, the proposed
amendment was withdrawn even before the parliamentary proceedings – it however
remains to be seen, what form the next such attempts will take.

Serbia

Achievements and Future Steps – the National Preventive Mechanism of the

Republic of Serbia

Achievements

Since the beginning of the refugee crisis, the National Preventive Mechanism for
Prevention of Torture of the Republic of Serbia organized around one hundred field
visits to locations where refugees and migrants reside, as well as to authorities that treat
them (59 visits in 2015, and 43 in 2016). Visits covered Police Administrations and police
stations within them, regional divisions of Border Police, asylum centers, reception
centers for migrants, Shelter for foreigners in Padinska Skela, “Nikola Tesla” Airport,
reception units for unaccompanied minor foreigners, social work centers, penitentiaries
and informal gathering locations of migrants at border crossings and within populated
areas.

Migrants and refugees in the Republic of Serbia are not placed in institution of detention
by authorities because of their status, or because of their illegal stay in the territory of the
Republic of Serbia. Every institution, apart from the Shelter for foreigners, are open,
which means that migrants and refugees can leave them whenever they want. However,
the NPM visited those places as well, together with informal gathering locations, because
of the great presence of police it could be places where migrants are deprived of their
liberty.

The NPM visit teams included experts for children’s rights, gender equality, and rights
of persons with disabilities. Also, the part of the NPM visits were representatives of the
Protector of Citizens – Ombudsman of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, and civil
society organizations – Belgrade Centre for Human Rights and Group 4844. The NPM
also achieved close cooperation with the UNHCR5 in the previous period of time.
Conversations with migrants were supported by interpreters for Arabic, Farsi and Urdu
language, who were engaged during visits
Field visits resulted in 52 reports with 93 recommendations for correction of observed
lacks and for the improvement of condition (36 recommendations in 2015 and 57 in 2016).
All the reports and recommendations, as well as authorities’ responses, are published on
the Ombudsman’s and the NPM’s websites (http://www.npm.lls.rs/).

It is necessary to point out that besides reports and recommendations, the Opinion on
Draft Law on Asylum and Temporary Protection was sent, and it is currently in the
process of drafting.

During the field visits, the accommodation and hygienic conditions were examined, as
well as nourishment, healthcare access, conditions for admittance to asylum centers and
reception centers, record keeping of center users, freedom of movement, namely
conditions for leaving centers, etc. The majority of recommendations were related to:
improvement of material accommodation and nourishment conditions; better protection
of minors, especially unaccompanied minors, women, persons with disabilities;
improvement of healthcare protection, including psychological support; improvement of
coordination of all services and organizations involved in taking care of refugees and
migrants; impunity for illegal entrance; engagement and availability of interpreters;
informing about rights and legal status; keeping appropriate records and registration of

4 Which are the members of the NPM.

5 Which gave to the NPM expert, logistic, and financial support.
persons entering Serbia; access to asylum procedure; increase of human resources for
working with migrants.

Numerous aforementioned activities overcome the NPM mandate defined by the

OPCAT. However, the Serbian NPM took the stand that circumstances of refugees’and
migrants’ weakness, as well as their unregulated status, followed with constant police
presence, brings about actual limitations of their freedom, which was a reason for
mandate delivery of the NPM envisioned through the OPCAT.

Because of continuous changes in the field, the NPM was forced to constantly revise and
adjust its working methodology. In the first half of 2015, the NPM monitored if
authorities’ treatment was in accordance with 27 systemic recommendations from 2014,
which had a goal to improve the treatment of these persons and migration management.
However, since the beginning of the refugee crisis, methodology changed significantly,
with special attention given to taking care of migrants in a manner which does not hurt
their dignity and which secures basic living conditions.

The NPM pays special attention on the accommodation conditions of children, pregnant,
and women in labor, as well as on the general healthcare of female migrants and children,
and also if officers working with migrants have finished training on migrant treatment,
and especially with vulnerable categories. The NPM also examines if responsible
authorities responded in appropriate and timely manner, in cases of domestic violence,
human trafficking, and other possible criminal acts aimed at migrants.

The NPM took part in numerous international and regional meetings devoted to the
improvement of refugees’ and migrants’ situation, and to strengthening of inter-state
cooperation in addressing this complex supranational phenomenon. The dialogue has
been established with numerous authorities, including the Committee on Labour, Social
Issues, Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction of the National Assembly of the Republic
of Serbia.

Future Steps

Taking into account that refugees and migrants are now staying longer in the Republic
of Serbia, unlike the last time when they only transited through the country and stayed
for few days, the problem of their treatment is far more complex now. They are staying
in Serbia for several months, insignificant number seeks asylum in Serbia, but majority
wants to transit towards developed countries of the European Union. Currently, there
are between 6,000 and 7,000 migrants in Serbia, 80 percent of them are located at reception
centers, others at informal gathering locations. New situation sets new challenges and
demands the adjustment of working methodology.
In the future period, the NPM will continue with field visits to places where refugees and
migrants are located or where they assemble, with the focus on the most vulnerable
groups of migrants (children, especially unaccompanied children, women, persons with
disabilities, elderly people, weary, victims of violence and trafficking, etc.). Also,
regarding the fact that migrants are staying longer in Serbia, there are more complaints
on the work of the authorities, even the allegations on maltreatment, so the NPM will in
the upcoming period try to influence, through findings and recommendations, on
authorities to establish formal mechanisms for submission and addressing the complaints
of migrants, both through internal and external control. For better awareness of migrants,
the NPM made leaflets about legal mechanisms for the protection of migrants’ rights,
which will be translated into their languages and distributed by the NPM during the field
visits to migrants and refugees locations. The NPM is planning to monitor forced return
operation.

Srbija

Postignuća
Od početka izbegličke krize Nacionalni mehanizam za prevenciju torture Republike Srbije
obavio je oko 100 poseta mestima u kojima se nalaze izbeglice i migranti i organima koji
postupaju prema njima (59 poseta tokom 2015. godine i 43 tokom 2016. godine). Posećene su
policijske uprave i policijske stanice u njihovom sastavu, regionalni centri granične policije,
centri za azil, prihvatni centri za migrante, Prihvatilište za strance u Padinskoj Skeli, Aerodrom
''Nikola Tesla'', prihvatne jedinice za smeštaj maloletnih stranaca bez pratnje, centri za socijalni
rad, zavodi za izvršenje krivičnih sankcija i neformalna mesta okupljanja migranata na
graničnim prelazima i u naseljenim mestima.

Migranti i izbeglice u Republici Srbiji nisu od strane nadležnih organa placed in detention in
institution of detention zbog njihovog statusa, kao i okolnosti da nezakonito borave na teritoriji
Republike Srbije. Sve ustanove, osim Prihvatilišta za strance, su otvorenog tipa, što znači da
migranti i izbeglice mogu samovoljno da ih napuste u svako doba. Međutim, NPM je takve
ustanove, kao i neformalna mesta okupljanja obilazio, jer zbog uobičajeno velikog prisustva
policije to mogu biti mesta na kojima su migranti lišeni slobode.

U sastav NPM timova za posete, uključivani su i eksperti za prava deteta, rodnu ravnopravnost
i prava osoba sa invaliditetom. Takođe, u posetama su kao deo NPM učestvovali i predstavnici
Pokrajinskog zaštitnika građana – ombudsmana i organizacija civilnog društva, Beogradski
centar za ljudska prava i Grupa 4846. NPM je u prethodnom period ostvario blisku saradnju i sa

6
koji su članovi NPM.
UNHCR7. Za razgovore sa migrantima tokom poseta bili su angažovani prevodioci za arapski,
farsi i urdu jezik.

Na osnovu poseta ukupno je sačinjeno 52 izveštaja, u kojima je upućeno 93 preporuke za

ispravljanje uočenih nedostataka i unapređenje stanja (36 preporuka iz 2015. godine i 57 iz 2016.
godine). Svi izveštaji i preporuke, kao i odgovori organa objavljeni su na sajtovima Zaštitnika
građana i NPM (http://www.npm.lls.rs/).

Potrebno je naglasiti da je pored izveštaja i preporuka, upućeno i Mišljenje na Nacrt zakona o

azilu i privremenoj zaštiti koji je još uvek u proceduri.

Tokom poseta ispitivani su smeštajni i higijenski uslovi, ishrana, pristup zdravstvenoj zaštiti,
uslovi prijema u centre za azil i prihvatne centre, vođenje evidencija lica u centrima, sloboda
kretanja, odnosno uslovi za izlazak iz centara itd.
Najveći broj preporuka odnosio se na sledeće: poboljšanje materijalnih uslova smeštaja i ishrane;
bolju zaštitu maloletnika, a naročito maloletnika bez pratnje, žena, osoba sa invaliditetom;
unapređenje zdravstvene zaštite, uključujući i psihološku podršku; unapređenje koordinacije
svih službi i organizacija koje su uključenje u zbrinjavanje izbeglica i migranata; nekažnjavanje
izbeglica za ilegalni ulazak; angažovanje i dostupnost prevodilaca; obaveštavanje o pravima i
pravnom položaju; vođenje odgovarajućih evidencija i registrovanje lica koja uđu u Srbiju;
pristup postupku azila; povećanje kadrvskih resursa za rad sa migrantima.

Navedene brojne aktivnosti u određenoj meri prevazilaze mandat NPM, utvrđen OPCAT.
Međutim, NPM Srbije je stao na stanovište da okolnost nemoći izbeglica i migranata, kao i
njihovog neregulisanog statusa, praćen stalnim nadzorom policije, dovodi do faktičkih
ograničenja njihove slobode, a što je bio razlog i za ostvarivanje mandata NPM predviđenog
OPCAT.

Zbog stalnih promena na terenu NPM je bio prinuđen da konstantno menja i prilagođava svoju
metodologiju rada. U prvoj polovini 2015. godine pratilo se da li je postupanje organa bilo u
skladu sa 27 sistemskih preporuka koje su upućene 2014. godine, u cilju unapređenja postupanja
prema ovim licima i upravljanja migracijama. Međutim, od izbijanja izbegličke krize,
metodologija se u značajnoj meri menja, a naročita pažnja se posvećuje zbrinjavanju migranata
na način na koji se ne povređuje njihovo dostojanstvo i obezbeđuju minimalni životni uslovi.

NPM posebnu pažnju obraća na uslove smeštaja dece, migrantkinja trudnica i porodilja, kao i
uopšte na zdravstvenu zaštitu migrantkinja i dece, kao i da li su službenici koji rade sa
migrantima prošli obuke o postupanju prema migrantima, a naročito ranjivim kategorijama.
NPM takođe ispituje da li su adekvatno i blagovremeno reagovali nadležni organi na slučajeve
nasilja u porodici, trgovine ljudima i drugih krivičnih dela kojima migranti mogu biti izloženi.

NPM je učestvovao na brojnim međunarodnim i regionalnim skupovima posvećenim

unapređenju položaja izbeglica i migranata i jačanju međudržavne saradnje u rešavanju ovog
veoma složenog nadnacionalnog fenomena. Uspostavljen je dijalog sa brojnim organima, kao i

7 koji je NPM pružio stručnu, logističku i finansijsku podršku.

sa Odborom za rad, socijalna pitanja, društvenu uključenost i smanjenje siromaštva Narodne
skupštine Republike Srbije.

Budući koraci
Imajući u vidu da se izbeglice i migranti sada duže zadržavaju u Republici Srbiji, za razliku od
prošlog perioda kada su samo prolazili kroz zemlju i ovde boravili svega po nekoliko dana, sada
je problem njihovog zbrinjavanja daleko složeniji i komplikovaniji. Oni sada u Srbiji ostaju po
nekoliko meseci, samo mali, gotovo neznatan broj njih želi da traži azil u Srbiji, ali većina dalje
želi samo da prođe dalje, ka razvijenim zemljama Evropske Unije. Trenutno se u Srbiji nalazi
između 6.000 i 7.000 migranata, oko 80% ih je smešteno u prihvatnim centrima, a ostali su na
neformalnim mestima okupljanja. Nova situacija postavlja nove izazove i zahteva prilagođavanje
metodologije rada.

I u narednom periodu NPM će nastaviti sa posetama mestima na kojima se nalaze ili okupljaju
izbeglice i migranti, a u fokusu rada NPM Srbije biće najranjivije grupe migranata (deca, naročito
ona bez pratnje, žene, osobe sa invaliditetom, stari, iznemogli, žrtve nasilja i trgovine ljudima i
dr.). Takođe, s obzirom da se migranti sve duže i duže zadržavaju u Srbiji sve je više žalbi na rad
postupajućih organa, pa i navoda o zlostavljanju, tako da će NPM u narednom periodu pokušati
da svojim nalazima i preporukama utiče na nadležne organe da uspostave formalne mehanizme
za podnošenje i rešavanje pritužbi migranata, kako kroz internu tako i kroz eksternu kontrolu. U
cilju bolje informisanosti migranata, NPM je izradio liflete o pravnim mehanizmima za zaštitu
prava migranata, koji će biti prevedeni na njihove jezike i koje će NPM deliti tokom poseta
mestima gde se oni nalaze. NPM planira i da u narednom periodu pratiti prinudne povratke.