LITTLE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL ON TENANCY

UNCLAS ZAGREB 002544 SIPDIS FOR EUR/SCE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREF HR SUBJECT: LITTLE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL ON TENANCY RIGHTS REF: A. ZAGREB 2144 ¶B. ZAGREB 1474 Summary -------------- ¶1. On December 1-2 the OSCE Croatia Mission's Return and Reintegration Unit briefed their field staff, regional OSCE staff (Belgrade and Sarajevo),and regional UNHCR staff on the status of implementation of the GOC's plan to address the issue of lost Occupancy Tenancy Rights (OTR). OTR has been one of the most important and politically sensitive obstacles to sustainable return of refugees and IDPs. The GOC long denied that OTR was even an issue to consider -- then finally, without consultation with the international community, the GOC announced a program (reftels) in June for affected refugees and IDPs to qualify for redress. There has been no implementation to date, the deadline for applying has been extended, and the OSCE doubts that anyone will be able to move into an apartment before 2005. End Summary. OSCE Training Seminar on Tenancy Rights -------------- ¶2. On June 12, the GOC announced a program that would provide housing solutions to those refugees and IDPs who -- due to displacement after independence and during the fighting -- lost their "tenancy rights" enjoyed under the old Yugoslav system of socially-owned apartments (Ref B). The OSCE and UNHCR have argued for years with the GOC that OTR is the last significant obstacle to completing the process of return for the approximately 185,000 refugees who remain in Serbia-Montenegro and the 22,000 who remain in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The OSCE estimates that residents who lost OTR include 23,700 families of Croatian Serbs from urban areas of Croatia (that remained always under control of the GOC),and up to 10,000 families in war-affected areas. ¶3. In its draft Status Report 13, which is scheduled for presentation to the permanent council of the OSCE in Vienna on December 18, the OSCE reports that neither of the GOC's programs, one for inside war-affected areas -- known as Areas of Special State Concern (ASSC) after the law of the same name -- and the other for outside the ASSC, are not yet operational. The program announced June 12 for areas outside ASSC included an initial deadline for applications of December 31, 2003. The international community strongly implored the GOC to extend the deadline, and eventually it was, to December 31, 2004. The OSCE and UNHCR believe an extensive information campaign will be required in order to inform potential applicants, the majority of which reside in Serbia-Montenegro. UNHCR will support live talk shows on national public and private television in Serbia-Montenegro. However, the GOC's public outreach campaign is not likely to begin before early spring. ¶4. Complicating any governmental action at this time is the fact that the current ruling coalition in Croatia lost in the parliamentary elections held November 23. It may take weeks to form a new ruling coalition, and it may be well into January before Ministers and other higher level authorities are identified and on the job. Most observers expect Lovre Pejkovic, Assistant Minister and Head of the Office for Displaced Persons, Returnees, and Refugees (ODPR) in the Ministry of Public Works to keep his position in the new government. However, the OSCE speculates that Pejkovic will not have a budget for OTR programs before at least March, no apartments will be built before the end of 2004, and the first successful applicant for housing will not move into an apartment before 2005. ¶5. Axel Jaenicke, the Head of the Return and Reintegration Unit at the OSCE Mission to Croatia, was pessimistic about implementation. He repeatedly pointed out that implementation is dependent solely on the goodwill of the GOC, because the Government's so-called "Conclusion" and "Implementation Plan" are decision documents only and do not carry the weight of law. Potential applicants have no legal security and cannot seek redress in a court of law. As if orchestrated to prove Jaenicke's point, in introductory remarks before the OSCE training seminar, Pejkovic reversed prior GOC policy and announced that potential applicants who have a pending court case on a housing matter will at the same time also be able to apply to ODPR for a housing solution under an OTR program. Previously the GOC said no applications would be accepted from those with pending court cases. Jaenicke said he did not expect the GOC to provide written confirmation on this change -- an example, in his critique, of the non-legal basis for the GOC's programs, and how much they rely on the whim of those currently in power. Dissatisfaction with the EC Role -------------- ¶6. Jaenicke was surprisingly critical of the EC at various points throughout the two-day OSCE training seminar. The invited EC representative showed up late the first day and stayed only briefly. At least at the working level, there is tension between the two missions on the issue of tenancy rights -- in contrast to otherwise cozy relations, particularly between the two mission heads. The OSCE, particularly if there is a positive avis out of Brussels next spring that paves the way for a quicker EU accession, is an institution on the way out in Croatia. Peter Semneby, the Head of Mission, expects full funding for the current mandate in 2004, but states plainly that major downsizing will begin in 2005. The EC, on the other hand, represents the key to Croatia's desired future as a normal European state. Jaenicke went so far as to tell the 80 participants that the OSCE "does not have a stick here," and it will be up the EC to monitor implementation and "challenge" the goodwill of the GOC. However, he suggested that to rely on the EC to monitor implementation was wishful thinking, because the EC has no field capacity in Croatia whatsoever. Comment -------------- ¶7. Occupancy Tenancy Rights is a vexing issue with a lot of gray area. The OSCE's skepticism about the GOC's plan to address the issue is certainly warranted. Given the GOC's record of underestimation, slow implementation, and missed deadlines, it is very likely that there will be little progress on tenancy rights in 2004. If the number of applicants exceeds the GOC's stated expectation of 5,000 then it is also likely that the GOC will not have the capacity to complete the program by the stated deadline of 2006. We will continue to work with our local OSCE and EU colleagues, to press the GOC for action on tenancy rights, and to keep the issue on the accession agenda. FRANK NNNN