|
SARAJEVO, April 2 (FENA) – Many issues in BiH make one’s eyes fill with tears, especially when the politicians look back over the cases of police reform and constitutional reform, or in the case of the division of children at schools based on the nationality. The saddest thing, however, is the misery of the people who have returned to their homes or those who would still like to return, said Ambassador Douglas Davidson, the OSCE BiH Head of Mission on Monday in Sarajevo.
Ambassador Davidson, delivering the opening speech at the Igman Initiative session discussing the topic, “Open Issues between BiH, Serbia, Croatia and Montenegro,” said that the Dayton signatories foresaw the right to return and the right to reclaim property through the provision of an entire annex in the Agreement, but that the authorities have not opened their arms to returnees in the first years after the war.
However, the International Community has never given up their desire for sustainable returns in the region, so a million people have returned to their homes in BiH, which is a large number of people compared to some other cases in the world.
According to Davidson, the International Community changed the approach in this part of Europe as regards returns, and insisted on the return of property, which has been the focus of the OSCE Mission for a full five years.
As a result of the implementation of property laws, 100,000 people have had their properties restored, and some even live in them. Others have exchanged or sold their houses, but there are many cases of property not being used, with the owners awaiting developments in the situation.
Even when people return, it does not necessarily mean that things are progressing, due to the problems faced with the reconstruction of houses, and difficulties with schooling and employment, Ambassador Davidson said.
He added that the countries of the region, BiH, Croatia and the former union of Serbia and Montenegro, signed the Sarajevo Declaration in 2005 with the aim of completing return by the end of 2006.
However, this has never been realised, for the signatories could not agree on two issues – the issue of the property rights and documentation issued in Croatia from 1991 – 1995.
These issues are mostly related to Croatia which sees no obstacles to the process of the return of property, but unlike BiH, the right to property is not the same as owning a property.
Ambassador Davidson emphasized that the main reason that the Sarajevo Declaration was not implemented is due to the lack of a joint approach on property repossession in the region.
Some Serbs from Croatia have been evicted to BiH, and now have no place to stay. According to the latest data, there are about 7,500 Serb refugees from Croatia in BiH, but a further 11,000 to 12,000 of them live without any formal recognition or status.
Josip Vrbosic, Croatian Ambassador in BiH said that the Croatian Government is fully co-operative in the implementation of the Sarajevo Declaration.
All the private property in Croatia has been returned to its owners, and about 130,000 refugees have returned to Croatia, Vrbosic said.
In Croatia the right to property is not the same as ownership of property, and the European Court of Human Rights has supported such a stance, so the issue of housing is resolved by the distribution of apartments, Vrbosic said.
Norwegian Ambassador Jan Braathu was the second speaker and he emphasized the importance of resolving the issues from the past so that a good base for future relationships could be established.
The past should not be forgotten, but it must not remain an obstacle in the way of the countries of the region.
Ambassador Bratthu said that the issue of European integration is connecting the countries of the region.
Such aspirations will result in a common future, and the adoption of European standards should continue in the region, he added.
The Partnership for Peace Programme is another way in which the countries of the region can jointly co-operate. According to Baarthu, the concept of safety is expressed through this programme, with an emphasis on the fact that the safety of one country cannot be built upon the instability of another.
|
