Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Commend Serbia’s Human Rights Monitoring Body, Ask about Structural Discrimination against the Roma and the Detention of Asylum Seekers and Migrants
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined sixth to ninth periodic reports of Serbia under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Committee Experts commended the State on establishing a follow-up office for the recommendations of United Nations human rights mechanisms, and asked questions on structural discrimination against the Roma and the detention of asylum seekers and migrants.
Régine Esseneme, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, and other Experts welcomed the establishment of the follow-up and monitoring office on United Nations treaty bodies’ recommendations.
Bakari Sidiki Diaby, speaking on behalf of Ibrahima Guisse, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the Roma community faced structural discrimination and marked socio-economic disadvantages. Nearly one in five Roma households did not have regular access to safe drinking water and 55 per cent were not connected to sewage networks. What measures were in place to combat the low attendance rates of Roma students and ensure the availability of services for the Roma?
Mr. Diaby said Serbia’s law provided for the deprivation of liberty of asylum seekers and migrants in “reception centres for foreigners”, which were in practice closed detention centres. Reports pointed to inadequate detention conditions for migrants, a lack of access to food and health services, and ill-treatment by guards. How would the State ensure that detention was carried out as a last resort?
Introducing the report, Demo Beriša, Minister of Human and Minority Rights and Social Dialogue of Serbia and head of the delegation, said the reporting period was marked by the implementation of numerous projects promoting the inclusion of the Roma. Significant financial resources had been allocated to measures aimed at social inclusion, and notable results had been achieved in the areas of birth registration, the issuance of personal identification documents, and education.
In the dialogue, the delegation added that over the past few years, the number of Roma children in preschool and primary school had increased by 17 per cent. The State party had developed protocols on responding to incidences of discrimination against ethnic minority groups in schools, and an early warning system to prevent school dropouts.
There were no informal or secret detention units in Serbia, the delegation said. The border police did not have any detention units, but operated reception centres for migrants and asylum seekers, which held around 300 persons in total. The State party had devised a plan for strengthening access to health care for foreigners in reception centres, and a plan of police activities for protecting migrants and asylum seekers from torture and abuse.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Esseneme thanked the delegation for the courteous and constructive dialogue. She said the Committee and the State party were pursuing a common goal: to improve the achievement of human rights in an inclusive fashion.
Mr. Beriša, in concluding remarks, said the State party had presented its efforts to protect all human rights, especially through the prohibition of discriminatory behaviour and the improvement of protective mechanisms. It would pay due attention to the Committee’s recommendations.
Gün Kut, Committee Chair, said in concluding remarks that the issues presented in the dialogue required constant vigilance and collaboration. The Committee would work on developing concluding observations based on the dialogue, which it counted on the State party to implement.
The delegation of Serbia consisted of the Minister of Justice and representatives of the Ministry of Human and Minority Rights and Social Dialogue; Ministry of Justice; Ministry of Education; Ministry of Information and Telecommunications; Office for Kosovo and Metohija; Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Interior; Commissariat for Refugees and Migration; Ministry of Labour, Science and Technological Development; and the Permanent Mission of Serbia to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Serbia after the conclusion of its one hundred and seventeenth session on 1 May. The programme of work and other documents related to the session can be found here. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the meetings can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Wednesday, 15 April at 3 p.m. to consider the combined twelfth to fourteenth periodic reports of Slovenia (CERD/C/SVN/12-14).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined sixth to ninth periodic reports of Serbia (CERD/C/SRB/6-9).
Presentation of Report
DEMO BERIŠA, Minister of Human and Minority Rights and Social Dialogue of Serbia and head of the delegation, said the Republic of Serbia remained firmly committed to the full realisation of all principles and values of the United Nations, as well as to the consistent application of international law. A standing invitation had been extended to the Special Procedures, and visits by Special Rapporteurs were regularly facilitated. In 2025, for the first time, visits were undertaken by the delegation of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and the Working Group on Business and Human Rights, and Serbia had also hosted the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. It supported efforts aimed at identifying sustainable and long-term solutions for the financing of United Nations activities.
The concluding observations adopted by treaty bodies were systematically disseminated to all competent national authorities in Serbia for follow-up and implementation, which was overseen since 2014 by the Council for Monitoring the Implementation of Recommendations of United Nations Human Rights Mechanisms. In September 2023, the National Assembly ratified the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The ratification procedure of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure was currently underway.
Serbia was not in a position to monitor the implementation of the Convention in the Autonomous Province of Kosovo and Metohija, as the administration of the Province had been entrusted in its entirety to the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. In Kosovo and Metohija, there was an ongoing process of institutional and systematic erosion of the civil and political rights of Serbs, leading to a new wave of displacement, with an additional 20 per cent of the remaining Serb population having left within a period of just two years. Ethnic discrimination was being carried out across all three branches of government — legislative, judicial and executive — resulting in the denial of the rights of Serbs to their national, religious and cultural identity.
Constitutional amendments in the field of the judiciary, accompanied by the adoption of judicial legislation, had established a legal framework in Serbia in which every individual was able to exercise and protect their rights before the courts in a prompt, accessible and reasonable manner, with the judiciary being free from political influence.
The law on amendments and supplements to the law on the prohibition of discrimination, which entered into force on 31 May 2021, further aligned legislation with the European Union’s Acquis communautaire and strengthened the role and functioning of the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality as an independent State authority responsible for protection against discrimination. A new law on the protector of citizens (Ombudsman) was also adopted in November 2021. Further, during the reporting period, several strategic documents were adopted, including the strategy for the prevention and protection against discrimination, as well as the new strategy for the social inclusion of Roma.
Serbia was a multi-ethnic and multicultural State, in which, alongside the majority Serbian population, members of national minorities and various religious and linguistic groups resided. One key priority for the State was to promote tolerance and intercultural dialogue, and to undertake measures aimed at enhancing mutual respect, understanding and cooperation. According to the most recent Population Census conducted in 2022, most ethnic communities recorded a decrease in their population compared to the previous census carried out in 2011.
Members of national minorities, for the purpose of exercising their right to self-governance in the fields of education, culture, information and the official use of languages and scripts, elected national councils. Following the most recent elections, 24 national councils were currently operating in Serbia. In 2025, 396 million dinars in funding for their work was secured from the State budget and the budget of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina. Members of national minorities were guaranteed education in their mother tongue from pre-school to higher education. In 42 local self-government units, 12 minority languages were in official use. On a monthly basis, more than 18,000 hours of radio and television programming were broadcast in 16 languages, and over 100 print media outlets were published. The adoption of a new action plan for the realisation of the rights of national minorities was currently underway.
The reporting period was marked by the implementation of numerous projects promoting the inclusion of the Roma, in cooperation with European partners. Significant financial resources had been allocated to measures aimed at social inclusion, while institutional capacities had been strengthened, including at the level of local self-governments. Notable results had been achieved in the areas of birth registration, the issuance of personal identification documents, and education. Measures were being undertaken to improve the legislative framework, strengthen the competencies of employees across all systems, and to provide continuous support measures for Roma children and pupils to tackle segregation of the Roma.
Serbia had a solid normative framework but faced challenges in the implementation of legislation. It would continue to invest efforts to address this across all areas. The State party was committed to achieving zero tolerance for any form of discrimination affecting all vulnerable social groups.
Questions by Committee Experts
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the last dialogue between Serbia and the Committee took place in 2017, and the State party submitted its latest report in 2021. Several events had occurred since then which had a direct impact on groups vulnerable to racial discrimination. The Committee welcomed the adoption of the strategy for the prevention and protection from discrimination for the period 2022 to 2030 and the strategy for social inclusion of Roma men and women 2022 to 2030. The aim of the dialogue was to clarify a number of issues related to racial discrimination and pursue dialogue with Serbia to ensure better implementation of the Convention.
BAKARI SIDIKI DIABY, speaking on behalf of IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said that, according to official statistics, around 12 per cent of Serbia’s 6.6 million population belonged to ethnic minorities as of 2022, including around two per cent to Roma persons. However, some Roma individuals reportedly chose not to declare their ethnic identity due to stigma. The State did not collect ethnically disaggregated data; were there plans to do so? Was the principle of self-identification applied in the 2022 census? What measures were in place to collect data on non-citizens? Could data on ethnic minorities’ access to employment, health care and social protection be provided?
The Committee noted various policy frameworks aimed at addressing ethnic minorities’ difficulties in accessing employment, health care and social protection, including the strategy for the development of education and education in the Republic of Serbia until 2030; and the employment strategy of the Republic of Serbia 2021–2026. However, challenges remained in their implementation. How did ethnic minorities participate in the design of these policies? What other policies promoted minorities’ access to public services? Was there a coordinating body for their implementation? How was their effectiveness ensured?
Several administrative proceedings involving ethnic minorities had reportedly been carried out in Serbian, despite victims’ requests that they be carried out in Albanian. Authorities reportedly refused to register the names of minors in Albanian and Hungarian language and script in the birth register and identity documents. What measures were in place to ensure the effective implementation of the legislative framework on the use of the language of ethnic minorities in administrative procedures, the birth register and identity documents? Some school textbooks reportedly contained information that discriminated against ethnic minorities. How did the State prevent this? Could it provide updated information on the provision of mother-tongue education to national ethnic minorities?
National councils of national minorities reported faced difficulties in carrying out their mandates, including insufficient financing and personnel, and there were also cases where municipal government entities did not implement their recommendations. What resources were allocated to ensure the effective implementation of national councils’ mandates? How was cooperation with State entities promoted?
The Committee noted measures taken to diversify the military police, including recruitment campaigns and workshops to support candidates. However, there was a lack of data on the participation of ethnic minorities in the National Assembly, the judiciary, law enforcement and public positions. Minorities remained under-represented in the public sector, including in regions densely populated by minority populations. What measures were being taken to increase their participation?
Could information be provided on the implementation of the strategy for the social inclusion of Roma men and women 2022–2030? Which entity was responsible for its implementation, and were members of the Roma community involved in its design and implementation? The Roma community reportedly faced structural discrimination, exclusion, hate speech, and marked socio-economic disadvantages, reinforced by structural barriers such as low school attendance, high unemployment, poor housing, and limited access to health services. Nearly one in five Roma households did not have regular access to safe drinking water, more than 55 per cent were not connected to sewage networks, and about 14.5 per cent did not have access to electricity. Roma children were disproportionately represented in foster care and made up more than 31 per cent of those in conflict with the law.
As the civil registry act of 2025 did not guarantee the registration of children born to undocumented parents, children from internally displaced Roma families and informal settlements often remained unregistered for long periods of time. What measures were in place to address segregation in education and overrepresentation of Roma children in the criminal justice system, ensure the availability of support services for the Roma, and ensure the registration of Roma children at birth?
Attendance among Roma children in early childhood education remained extremely low and largely unchanged for more than a decade, and participation in upper secondary and higher education was also minimal. What measures were being taken to combat the high drop-out rates and low attendance rates of Roma students, and to increase access to higher education for Roma communities? How was the State party addressing the structural exclusion of Roma from the labour market?
Almost 20 per cent of Roma households lacked regular access to safe drinking water, more than 55 per cent lacked access to sewage systems, and about 14.5 per cent did not have electricity. There were reports of continued forced evictions of the Roma. How was the State addressing informal settlements in Roma communities and ensuring their access to public services? What measures were being taken to prevent forced evictions?
Child marriage in Serbia disproportionately affected Roma communities. Individuals could still marry at 16 with court approval, and most child marriages were through informal unions that escaped global legal regulation. Encouraging progress had been made, however, including the creation of the National Coalition to End Child Marriage in 2019, government guidelines for social work centres, and a 2022 statement by the National Council of Roma Minorities rejecting child marriage as a cultural practice. What other measures were in place to combat child marriage in Roma communities? How was the State addressing discrimination faced by Roma women in accessing health services and protecting them from domestic violence?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said Serbia had around 600 judges who came from ethnic minorities, out of around 2,500 judges; and around 60 prosecutors from ethnic minorities out of 780 prosecutors. A merit-based system was used to select judges and prosecutors, and judicial councils ensured the representation of national minorities in the judiciary. The Judicial Academy provided mandatory training courses for all members of the judiciary.
Future legal amendments would strictly prohibit underage marriages and introduce additional safeguards to protect minors from rape. The State party was fully committed to putting an end to child marriages. Hate speech was not classified as a separate offence in the Criminal Code, but it was an aggravating circumstance in certain cases, such as cases of incitement to racial and ethnic hatred. The Constitutional Court was sensitive to respect for procedural rights, including the right to an interpreter.
The State party had adopted a strategy and action plan on the integration of the Roma into society and had set up a coordinating body on the implementation of the strategy and action plan, which included representatives from various Government bodies.
The numbers of most ethnic minorities had decreased in the 2022 census compared to 2011; however, the numbers of Bosnians, Russians and Yugoslavs had risen. Data was disaggregated by gender, language, ethnic background, employment status, religion, and other parameters.
In 192 educational institutions, instruction was provided in one of eight minority languages. Classes for ethnic minority groups could be formed even when the number of students was low, and textbooks for minority groups were provided free of charge by the State.
Questions by Committee Experts
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked whether Serbia had quotas for recruiting ethnic minorities to the judiciary and civil service posts.
BAKARI SIDIKI DIABY, speaking on behalf of IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked why the numbers of certain minority populations had decreased. The Committee took note of the transitional justice strategy for 2021-2026 and its associated action plan. How was it being implemented, and what efforts were being made to clarify the fate of the missing persons? Cooperation at the regional level had declined, politicisation and glorification of war crimes persisted, and access to archives and official information remained restricted. Prosecutions for domestic war crimes had also slowed considerably, and high-level perpetrators were rarely prosecuted. How was the State cooperating with other States to clarify cases of missing persons? How did it guarantee access to archives and protect witnesses from intimidation? Could data be provided on the cases under investigation? What measures were in place to ensure the conviction and prosecution of war criminals?
Other Committee Experts asked questions on how the State party had addressed the Committee’s past recommendations; how health policies and strategies were designed to promote access to dedicated health services for Roma women; measures to detect and correct algorithmic biases in the provision of social aid that negatively impacted marginalised persons; and progress to address reports of discrimination against Albanians in southern Serbia, including police actions that prevented ethnic Albanians from renewing identification documents.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said there were no quotas for the appointment of ethnic minorities on the judiciary, as recommended by the Venice Commission. However, judges and prosecutors needed to have undergone training on the languages, terminology and cultural specificities of national minorities.
Some 80 per cent of the punishments issued in war crime trials were close to the maximum penalty for war crimes. War crimes were tried in relation to the chain of command. Serbia had witness protection units and the Ministry of Justice provided funds for the accommodation of witnesses. The State was working with non-governmental organizations to enhance witness protection; in the past 10 years, there had been steady enhancement in this regard.
Social work centres did not use algorithms when deciding on the provision of social aid. These decisions were made by professionals, who made field visits and gathered all relevant facts before making such decisions. The right to social protection was exercised by all citizens of Serbia. Citizens could submit complaints against the decisions of the social work centre to seek reparations.
The law on health insurance was amended in 2023 to ensure that persons who were socially endangered but were not registered for mandatory health insurance, including Roma persons and asylum seekers, could access health services. Roma health mediators had worked with the Roma community for years to support their access to health. More than 93 per cent of the Roma population now had health insurance.
From 2020 to 2025, more than 49,000 identity documents had been issued in the languages of national minorities.
Over the past few years, the number of Roma children in preschool and primary school had increased by 17 per cent. Some 86 per cent of Roma children were now in primary school. More than 2,800 high school students were currently studying Roma language in public schools. The State party had developed rulebooks and protocols on responding to incidences of discrimination and violence against ethnic minority groups in schools, and an early warning system to prevent school dropouts. It had provided training to Roma families on the importance of education.
Allegations of discrimination against Albanian minorities were untenable. They related to actions by authorities to “passivise” [delist] addresses where persons were not living. Authorities confirmed that addresses were uninhabited before taking any action. There were higher “passivisation” rates in highly populated areas than in those with large Albanian populations.
Questions by Committee Experts
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, called for examples of court cases that had invoked the Convention. Did the State party envisage a system of reversal of the burden of proof so it could be placed on perpetrators in cases of racial discrimination? Amendments to the prohibition of discrimination act included important changes, such as the explicit definition of segregation as a form of discrimination. However, segregation in education was not clearly regulated in the current education legislation. What measures did the State party envisage to improve the effectiveness of the act? Why did it not suspend alleged discriminatory acts when remedy for discrimination was sought?
Over the reporting period, the Council of the Online Media Monitoring Authority examined three cases relating to hate speech against national minorities. What were the ethnic origins of victims and what sanctions were imposed on perpetrators? During 2025, there had been an increase in hate speech, mainly directed against members of the Roma community. In one television programme, insulting, racist and unfounded remarks were made about the Roma community. What measures had been taken by the State party to prevent and punish hate speech in public spaces and by public authorities? What prevented Serbia from establishing racist hate speech as a separate criminal offence?
In 2018, 217 cases of violent behaviour at sports events or public gatherings were reported; 98 persons were prosecuted and 96 were convicted. What was the nature of these offences, which groups were targeted, and what reparations were granted to the victims? What measures had been implemented under the action plan for the prevention of violence and disturbances at sports events and what results had been achieved?
Over the reporting period, final convictions were handed down for seven cases of crimes motivated by hate. Hatred based on the victim's nationality or ethnicity was considered to be the motive for crimes committed against nine persons. Could more details on these cases be provided? In 2018, guidelines for the criminal prosecution of hate crimes were developed and published for prosecutors, and in 2018 and 2019, the Judicial Academy provided training on hate crimes to 214 prosecutors. What training was provided for judges? Could judges compensate victims of hate crimes and racial discrimination?
Despite the implementation of the law on free legal aid in 2019, many victims continued to face difficulties in obtaining adequate legal support, including in criminal proceedings. What conditions needed to be met to benefit from legal aid? Did this legal aid cover the assignment of a lawyer and the costs of proceedings? Which body examined applications for legal aid and decided whether or not to grant it? How did the State party support access to complaints mechanisms for victims of racial discrimination or racist hate crimes and the resolution of their cases? How were persons made aware of their right to legal aid? What measures were in place to promote more frequent use of audio-visual testimony and psychological assistance for victims of racial discrimination?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Parliament adopted a law on amendments to the anti-discrimination act in 2021, but certain elements of this law had been criticised, and the State had started work in March 2026 on revising this law. It was expected that the revised law would be drafted by the end of the year. The anti-discrimination strategy covered the period to 2030 and included actions to increase protections for vulnerable groups, including the Roma. The Constitution prohibited discrimination based on racial background, religion, complexion, language and other grounds. Segregation and hate speech were considered as forms of discrimination.
Serbia’s Equality Commissioner was an independent regulatory body mandated to fight against discrimination. The Equality Commissioner was required to report on discriminatory acts to Government bodies. Persons targeted by discrimination could submit complaints to the Commissioner, and non-governmental organizations could submit complaints on individuals’ behalf. There were plans to amend the anti-discrimination act to allow the Commissioner to instigate investigations into acts of hate speech ex officio.
The Government was strongly committed to strengthening freedom of expression and freedom of the media. It had recently adopted a strategy and action plan for the development of the information system, and in June 2025, the State’s media laws were revised to improve governance, transparency and accountability in the media sector. The Ministry of Information and Telecommunication was working to fight hate speech and discrimination in the media. The law on public information prohibited discrimination, hate and violence against individuals or groups in the media. Courts were authorised to prohibit the distribution of discriminatory media content. Fines were imposed when media companies did not comply with hate speech provisions. The law on electronic media established obligations for video-sharing platforms to prevent the distribution of discriminatory content.
Questions by Committee Experts
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said that the State party had submitted a follow-up report in 2018, within the deadline, in response to the Committee’s previous concluding observations. However, it had not provided requested information on the enforcement of article 54(a) of the Criminal Code and on sanctions imposed on perpetrators of hate crimes and reparations of victims. How did the council that monitored the implementation of treaty body recommendations work?
Other Committee Experts asked follow-up questions on why the majority of Roma persons who went to university were women, considering they were affected by early marriages; follow-up to the decisions issued by the Equality Commission; mechanisms to punish persons who wrote hateful graffiti targeting minorities; and efforts to address the low vaccination rate in the Roma community.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that in 2023, the High Court of Belgrade issued a judgement in a procedure against the city that protected the Roma minority from eviction. Victims of hate crimes and juveniles were recognised in State legislation as being extremely vulnerable. The Judicial Academy had organised several training sessions in recent years on anti-discrimination legislation and had developed learning modules and guidelines on granting reparations in discrimination cases. Domestic laws prevented the State party from collecting data on the ethnicity of victims of discrimination.
The State had a strategy for 2025 to 2035 on the development of sports and an action plan for its implementation, which included measures to prevent violence at sporting events. The Criminal Code included an offence of violent behaviour at sports events, which envisaged action based on ethnic and racial hatred. Around 400 complaints of such violence had been filed since 2020 and the State had registered more than 1,800 at-risk persons. It was working with Interpol on a project to ensure security at high-risk sporting events such as major football matches.
The Ministry of Interior had recruited 611 persons from national minorities in dedicated posts. The vaccination rate for the Roma community was 94 per cent, which was comparable to the 98 per cent rate for the general population.
The council for follow-up on United Nations human rights mechanisms was established in 2014; it had 28 member organizations. The council was preparing reports on the implementation of the recommendations of these mechanisms and working with government entities, including local governments, to promote their implementation.
Questions by Committee Experts
BAKARI SIDIKI DIABY, speaking on behalf of IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said several measures had been taken to improve the situation of refugees and asylum seekers in Serbia. In 2023, amendments to the employment of foreigners act improved access to the labour market for refugees and asylum seekers, and amendments to the law on foreigners allowed permanent residency after three years to recognised asylum holders and paved the way for future citizenship applications. Since February 2024, refugee travel document regulations allowed foreign nationals who had been granted asylum or, in exceptional cases, subsidiary protection to apply for travel documents. In March 2022, Serbia activated temporary protection for Ukrainian citizens and their families, as well as stateless persons and those receiving protection in Ukraine, including some foreign residents unable to return to their country of origin.
The law on asylum and temporary protection and the aliens act provided for the deprivation of liberty of asylum seekers and migrants in “reception centres for foreigners”, which were in practice closed detention centres. Detained asylum-seekers and migrants did not have access to legal aid or interpretation services. Reports also pointed to inadequate detention conditions for migrants, a lack of access to food and health services, and ill-treatment by guards. What measures were being taken to review the legal framework to ensure that it was in line with international standards and that detention was carried out as a last resort? What measures were being taken to improve conditions in reception centres? Could information be provided on investigations and sanctions for ill-treatment and abuse faced by detained asylum seekers and migrants? Some non-nationals were reportedly held in abandoned houses and police stations in northern Serbia, as well as a warehouse in Belgrade. Could the delegation provide information on the use of informal detention?
The European Court of Human Rights had reviewed the deportation of a group of Afghan asylum seekers – including several minors – from Serbia to Bulgaria in February 2017. Serbian police deported the applicants at night, in freezing temperatures and without individual assessment of their situation. The Court ruled that this constituted inhuman treatment, and that Serbia had violated the principle of non-refoulement. Between 2022 and 2024, 19,505 people, including 416 stateless people, were reportedly refused entry to Serbia, mainly due to a “vague purpose of stay” and the lack of travel documents or visas, and 789 people were deported. Reports also indicated that pushbacks reached 37,403 in 2023 and 14,179 in 2024. Would the State prohibit collective expulsions? What sanctions were imposed on security forces for collective expulsions and pushbacks?
Several asylum seekers had reportedly died due to denial of access to medical care, lack of health insurance, and inadequate medical services in asylum centres. What was the legislative framework regarding access to health care for asylum seekers and migrants? What investigations were carried out after the deaths of migrants and asylum seekers in the asylum centres? Between 2020 and 2024, 1,054 asylum claims were submitted, with only 89 approvals. Recognition rates had fallen sharply, from 18 per cent in 2020 to three per cent in 2024. Was the asylum procedure available for migrants at airports, crossing posts and police stations? What were the reasons for the low approval rates of asylum applications?
Roma communities were at increased risk of statelessness due to the lack of identity or legal identity documents. The civil registry act, passed in December 2025, with implementation scheduled for 2028, required registrars to begin birth registration procedures as soon as the birth was known. However, the law did not stipulate that a child needed to be registered, regardless of whether their parents had personal documents. What measures were envisaged to guarantee universal birth registration? What was the procedure for determining statelessness?
Serbia was primarily a country of origin for trafficking in human beings, but it also served as a transit and destination country. Children, especially Roma girls and those from rural areas, were particularly vulnerable to trafficking, sexual exploitation, forced begging and child labour. Victims were often under-identified and, when identified, may not receive timely or comprehensive support or adequate legal aid. When would the State party adopt the law to prevent trafficking and protect victims envisioned in the programme to combat trafficking in persons 2024–2029? Had it assessed the implementation of the national strategy for the realisation of the rights of victims and witnesses of criminal offences, and was it developing a new strategy in this area?
In 2024–2025, the Centre for the Protection of Victims of Trafficking received 426 reports and officially identified 152 victims, including 44 foreigners. Children accounted for 49 per cent of victims in 2024, with the majority being girls. Sexual and labour exploitation accounted for 75 per cent of cases. There was under-reporting of labour trafficking and sentences for traffickers remained lenient. What was the process of identifying victims of trafficking? How would the State improve access to justice, health care, legal aid and support for victims, especially women and children?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said since February 2024, asylum seekers had been allowed to file applications for travel documents for refugees. Foreign citizens with asylum status were guaranteed access to fundamental human rights. Travel documents for refugees were issued with five years’ validity. Serbia strictly adhered to the principle of non-refoulement. The State was on the migratory route to Western Europe and was working to regulate these migrations in collaboration with the European Union Asylum Agency. Persons who wished to seek asylum needed to file asylum applications within 72 hours of their entry in Serbia. In 2025, 133 persons filed asylum applications, most of whom were from Afghanistan.
There were no informal or secret detention units in Serbia. The border police did not have any detention units, but operated reception centres for migrants and asylum seekers, which held around 300 persons in total. The State party had devised a plan for strengthening access to health care for foreigners in reception centres, and a plan of police activities for protecting migrants and asylum seekers from torture and abuse. In 2025, 24,800 persons were detained in Serbia, and 2,100 of these persons were foreigners. These persons were detained for breaching Serbian laws.
The 2019 law on legal aid stipulated that asylum seekers and victims of trafficking could access free legal aid and legal representation. If legal procedures were not carried out in a language that these persons could understand, an interpreter was provided. A rulebook was introduced in 2024 on the protection of victims and witnesses; this was now implemented by all courts across Serbia. The State had developed a national strategy for the protection of victims and witnesses.
There were cases in which migrants had been abducted and housed in informal camps in border areas by criminal groups. Police were involved in investigations into such crimes. Migrants could file complaints of violations by police officers, which were investigated by internal and external oversight bodies. Frontex and other States’ oversight bodies monitored the activities of Serbian border police. There were only around 600 foreigners received by reception centres in 2023, of whom only 34 were taken to the airport to be returned and only seven were taken to the border. Investigations had been carried out into three deaths in reception centres, with no wrongdoing by officials found.
Progress had been made in the implementation of the universal birth registration system introduced in 2020.
Various stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations and Roma representatives, had been involved in developing the law on trafficking in persons. Serbia had adopted a plan for fighting trafficking in persons 2024-2029. In 2024, 95 per cent of the activities envisioned under this plan were implemented.
Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked for information on sanctions imposed on police who violated the rights of migrants at the border.
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked about the support granted to victims of trafficking, including by the courts.
Other Committee Experts asked questions on the statelessness determination procedure; protection granted to displaced persons from nations other than Ukraine; rules prohibiting police from carrying out identification checks based on persons’ appearance and the number of complaints filed related to racial profiling; checks in place to ensure that all detained persons could access formal asylum procedures; whether there was follow-up to deportations to North Macedonia; and the conditions of asylum reception centres.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the State party had provided training for officials on identifying victims of trafficking in persons. The centre for protection of victims of trafficking had been in operation since 2022; it provided victims with comprehensive health care, psychosocial support, and access to education. Serbia planned to expand the capacity of shelters for child and male victims. The centre had developed a rulebook on the identification of victims and ensured timely provision of information to victims on available support services. More than 80 per cent of trafficking victims were given the status of “extremely vulnerable” witnesses in court cases, which gave them access to lawyers paid for by the State. Rules were in place to prevent secondary victimisation of these persons.
A rulebook had also been developed for schools on the identification of trafficking victims, and training modules and a mobile application had been developed for teachers and parents on identifying victims. Migrant children were fully included in the Serbian education system; a special curriculum for migrant children had been developed and grants were provided to support migrant children’s extracurricular activities. The State party distributed laptops to all migrant high school students.
The law on birth registration made the State responsible for registering all births and the State party planned to pass a bylaw on the registration of the births of children to mothers who did not have identification papers.
Serbia was aligning its asylum legislation with relevant European Union directives. Instructions had been developed for police on actions to take when migrants expressed a desire to seek asylum. No minor migrants were separated from their families in reception centres. There were three open reception centres for asylum seekers and three for migrants in Serbia. Since 2022, more than 5,000 decisions had been reached on temporary protection for asylum seekers, influenced by the conflict in Ukraine. Displaced persons from Ukraine were entitled to the same rights as citizens regarding work in Serbia.
The internal oversight body for the police followed a specific methodology for investigating complaints against police officers. In 2020, 1,000 complaints of excessive use of force were filed against the police, of which 67 were found to be well-founded. Dedicated prosecutors investigated all cases.
The legal framework included safeguards to prevent refoulement and judges were required to consider risks in destination countries before ordering deportations. Police officers participated in training sessions with international bodies on the prevention of refoulement.
Questions by Committee Experts
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, cited reports of checks and abuse by law enforcement at border areas. What measures had been taken to prevent and punish racial profiling by law enforcement officers, particularly in the context of law enforcement, judicial investigations, and their contact with road users in border areas? What were the responsibilities of community policing and what did specialised training for community police involve?
The independence of the Public Prosecutor's Office was guaranteed by the Constitution and the Public Prosecutor's Office act, which prohibited interference by the executive and legislative branches in the work of the Public Prosecutor's Office. How could the Public Prosecutor be independent of the legislative power when they needed to account for their actions before the Parliament? Did the Public Prosecutor benefit from immunity or a privilege of jurisdiction? What was the election process for the members and president of the Supreme Court?
Amendments were made to the discrimination act in May 2021 that strengthened the role of the Equality Commissioner. How had the Commissioner’s role been strengthened in preventing and punishing racial discrimination and racist hate speech and crime? How did the Commissioner collaborate with the Ombudsman and the judiciary in the fight against racial discrimination? How could a victim of racial discrimination submit a petition to the National Assembly? What were the criteria for choosing the members of the council for the monitoring of the implementation of United Nations recommendations in the field of human rights. Were they appointed on a permanent basis?
Since September 2016, several measures had been implemented to strengthen law enforcement, better punish hate speech and hate crimes, and improve the handling of cases. What results had been achieved through these measures? A strategy for the prevention of and protection against discrimination and an associated action plan had been applicable until 2018, and a new strategy was adopted in February 2022. What results had the former strategy achieved?
What training was provided to public servants by the National Academy of Public Administration with regard to racial discrimination, the Convention and the mechanisms for its implementation? How many public servants had been trained? The Judicial Academy provided training for judges, prosecutors and other judicial personnel, including on human rights. What training modules were offered and how many judicial personnel were trained, including on the application of the Convention?
The State had adopted the strategy for the prevention and protection of combatting discrimination for the period 2022-2030. How did the strategy help to prevent racial discrimination and raise awareness among the general public and public authorities on the importance of diversity and tolerance? What measures had been taken to introduce human rights, non-discrimination and equality into school and university curricula and teacher training programmes?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said all judges and chief justices were appointed by the High Judicial Council, an independent State authority composed of six high-level judges elected by their peers. Every judge and public prosecutor could not be held accountable for actions taken in the performance of their duty, unless they violated the law. The High Judicial Council decided on the immunity of judges. Judges on the Supreme Court were elected for a period of five years, while the Chief Public Prosecutor was elected for a six-year period.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office was an independent public authority which was mandated to protect public interest as envisaged by law, including international treaties and the Constitution. Prosecutors’ Offices were bound only by court decisions and were not unduly influenced by political decisions.
The Judicial Academy provided training for lawyers and judges on the implementation of anti-discrimination legislation and had developed a publication on case law for discrimination cases. Training addressed reparation for victims of discrimination and non-material damages. The Judicial Academy had also developed digital resources on United Nations human rights treaties. Police training included training on combatting discrimination and responding to incidences of intolerance and human rights violations. The National Academy for Public Administration provided training for civil servants, including training on reduction of inequalities, gender responsive budgeting, and protection from discrimination and hate crimes.
The Ministry of Human and Minority Rights and Social Dialogue was tasked with developing and disseminating instructions for officials and the public on how to implement the recommendations of United Nations human rights mechanisms. It organised hearings in this regard. The State party had a plan for implementing almost 500 of these recommendations.
Human rights were an integral part of the education system. The Ministry of Education had reformed the school curriculum to promote respect for inter-cultural dialogue and respect. Civic education was offered as an optional subject, and extracurricular activities were offered that promoted tolerance and respect for diversity. Since 2022, more than 700 training sessions had been provided for teachers on human rights education. There were also handbooks on the development on cultural competencies for students and parents.
Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked why a low number of young people were putting forward applications for positions on the judiciary. Civic education was an optional subject in Serbia; were there plans to make it obligatory? What was the role of community police officers in Serbia?
Ms. Esseneme welcomed the establishment of a follow-up and monitoring office on treaty body recommendations. Were the members of the office permanent and was the Government involved in their appointment? What petitions did the National Assembly receive and how could victims of discrimination submit petitions to the National Assembly? How did the Equality Commissioner address the complaints received related to discrimination?
Other Committee Experts asked questions on tools set up to combat impunity for offences committed by police officers, and whether criminal sanctions were handed down for such offences; whether wardens in open reception centres and detention centres received training on combatting discrimination; the extent to which training for judges focused on the Convention; how police were instructed on guidelines on the prevention of racial profiling; measures to monitor the health of the Roma community; whether the Equality Commissioner could open investigations ex officio; and whether the electronic database for monitoring recommendations by United Nations human rights mechanisms had been set up.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said members of the judiciary needed to go through a long period of professional development; this was why there were low numbers of young people applying for positions on the judiciary.
The council for monitoring the recommendations of United Nations human rights mechanisms had developed a publicly available electronic tool for monitoring progress in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Members of the council were each responsible for monitoring the implementation of specific treaties. This body included cabinet members and ministers and there was a fast-track procedure for the appointment of new members.
Some 25,000 police officers went through training annually on combatting discrimination. Handbooks for police officers stressed that officers needed to act in accordance with the provisions of the Convention and other international human rights treaties. Fines and penal measures were in place to prevent impunity for violations of police codes of conduct.
Currently, students needed to take either religious or civic education courses. The State party was monitoring the application of rulebooks on combatting discrimination in education and students’ cultural competencies.
In 2021, the mandate of the Equality Commissioner was expanded to monitor the prevention of torture and the rights of persons with disabilities. Over the reporting period, the Commissioner had submitted almost 4,000 recommendations to the State party, over 700 of which related to Roma persons. Public consultations were being conducted on amendments to legislation on the Equality Commissioner. Once these amendments were implemented, the Commissioner would become able to carry out investigations ex officio. Currently, the Commissioner could initiate litigation procedures if they deemed the case to be of strategic importance.
Closing Remarks
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said that the Committee would adopt concluding observations based on the dialogue, and called on the State party to submit a follow-up report on the implementation of these within one year of their adoption.
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for the courteous and constructive dialogue. The Committee and the State party were pursuing a common goal: to improve the achievement of human rights in an inclusive fashion. Ms. Esseneme thanked all persons who had contributed to the dialogue.
DEMO BERIŠA, Minister of Human and Minority Rights and Social Dialogue of Serbia and head of the delegation, thanked the Committee for the dialogue and its interest in improving human rights in Serbia. The State party had presented its efforts to protect all human rights, especially through the prohibition of discriminatory behaviour and the improvement of protective mechanisms. The dialogue had been extremely useful, and the delegation would pay due attention to the Committee’s recommendations.
GÜN KUT, Committee Chair, said the Committee appreciated that the State party had appeared before it with a very high-level and competent delegation. The issues presented in the dialogue required constant vigilance and collaboration. The Committee would work on developing concluding observations based on the dialogue, which it counted on the State party to implement.
___________
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CERD26.002E