Matevž Krivic je pisal veleposlanikom o zavajajočem in lažnem sporočilu evroposlanca Mihe Brejca kolegom v evropskem parlamentu glede izbrisanih.

Miha Brejc je 29. novembra evropskim poslancem podal informacijo z naslovom: “Persons who did not regulate their status after Slovenia’s independence”. Predstavil jo je kot “uradno stališče slovenske vlade do vprašanja tako imenovanih izbrisanih “.

Zaradi poročanja o Brejčevem sporočilu je Matevž Krivic Delu in Večeru poslal »popravka in odgovora«, ki pojasnjujeta, kje in zakaj Brejc v imenu vlade zavaja in laže.

—————————————————————————————

“Pravica do leta 2008?”

Pod gornjim naslovom je Delo 30. novembra poročalo tudi o sporočilu evroposlanca Brejca kolegom v evropskem parlamentu, da “dramatizacija zadev s tako imenovanimi izbrisanimi temelji večinoma na pomanjkljivih informacijah”. Njegove nasprotne “informacije” (v imenu vlade!) pa so bile tako globoko neresnične in zavajajoče, da v imenu Društva izbrisanih zahtevam objavo tega popravka oziroma odgovora:

4. Krona vseh teh (in še drugih, v Delu neomenjenih) manipulacij in zavajanj pa je to, da sta Brejc in vlada v tej (dez)informaciji evropskemu parlamentu popolnoma zamolčala ključno odločbo ustavnega sodišča iz leta 1999! Očitno zato, da sta potem lahko pomen druge odločbe iz leta 2003 prikazala skrajno manipulativno, saj ta odločba v resnici zahteva takojšnjo izvršitev odločbe iz leta 1999 – Brejc in vlada pa sta prvo odločbo popolnoma zamolčala, resnično vsebino druge pa prav tako!

Matevž Krivic,
pravni zastopnik Društva izbrisanih

“Izbrisani so tudi državljani EU”

Pod gornjim naslovom je Večer 30. novembra poročal tudi o sporočilu evroposlanca Brejca kolegom v evropskem parlamentu o problemu izbrisanih – v resnici ne le v imenu slovenskih poslancev skupine EEP-ED, ampak kar v imenu slovenske vlade. Te njegove “informacije” pa so bile tako globoko neresnične in zavajajoče, da v imenu Društva izbrisanih zahtevam objavo tega popravka oziroma odgovora:

3. Krona vseh teh (in še drugih, v Večeru neomenjenih) manipulacij in zavajanj pa je to, da sta Brejc in vlada v tej (dez)informaciji evropskemu parlamentu popolnoma zamolčala ključno odločbo ustavnega sodišča iz leta 1999! Očitno zato, da sta potem lahko pomen druge odločbe iz leta 2003 prikazala skrajno manipulativno, saj ta odločba v resnici zahteva takojšnjo izvršitev odločbe iz leta 1999 – Brejc in vlada pa sta prvo odločbo popolnoma zamolčala, resnično vsebino druge pa prav tako!

Matevž Krivic,
pravni zastopnik Društva izbrisanih

——————————————————————————————

»Popravka in odgovora« sta Delo in Večer objavila. O Krivičevem pismu veleposlanikom pa je poročal samo Dnevnik. A še to na zelo nenavaden način. Tako da ni povedal ničesar in ob tem še zamenja Brejca za Rupla.

Krivičvo pismo zato objavljam v celoti, čeprav v angleščini. A razkrite laži in zavajanja evropskega poslanca Mihe Brejca večini najbrž ne bo težko razumeti.

Prijetno branje.

Jani Sever

Association of the Erased in Slovenia

INFORMATION TO FOREIGN EMBASSIES
(I apologize for several old addresses I have in my address-book)

In attachement (”iz.850-Brejc”), I am sending to you a brief comment on really incredible misleadings and untruths in the paper which you have received in these days by Foreign Minister Mr. Rupel.

On 29 November, the same information was sent to all MEP’s in Brussels by Slovenian MEP Mr. Brejc – the information was intitled “Persons who did not regulate their status after Slovenia’s independence” and was presented as “the position of the Slovenian Government regarding the issue of the so-called erased”. As the next day Slovenian newspapers Delo and Večer published a short report about this information of Mr. Brejc to the MEP’s, I used the right to reply and the following day (1st December) both newspaper had published this reply (here enclosed as attachements “D347-Brejc” and “V174-Brejc”).

I am emphasizing the fact that neither Mr. Brejc nor the Government replied nothing – they remained silent, as usual in all these years: first, they spread untruths and even common lies – but on all our reactions (when we succeed to publish them at all) they remain silent. But this time, they not only remained silent – Minister Rupel had sent to you the same misleading paper which was already publicly revealed as untruthful!

With such methods and attitudes, our Government is presenting itself as a credible one for presiding the EU in 2008?? I am sending this letter also to the Government, to the President of the Republic, to the Constitutional court, to the Ombudsman and to the media.

Respectfully,

Matevz Krivic,
legal representative of the Association of the Erased,
former judge of the Constitutional court

PERSONS WHO DID NOT REGULATE THEIR STATUS AFTER SLOVENIA’S INDEPENDENCE

1. Before Slovenia’s independence (1991) the inhabitants of Yugoslavia (with the exception of foreigners), according to federal legislation, held both the citizenship of the federal republic, and, at the same time, the citizenship of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). Since the declaration of Slovenia’s independence the status of the residents who had moved from other federal republics to Slovenia – usually to find employment – has changed. The Republic of Slovenia had to establish a body of citizens of the newly created state. With the aim of facilitating the transformation towards a new system and enabling the majority of citizens of other successor states to the SFRY to regulate their status in time, the then municipal bodies for internal affairs (at present: administrative units) were inviting such residents to regulate their status and acquire identity documents of their countries of origin.
MISLEADING: they were invited to do so only several months AFTER the illegal erasure!

2. Among other laws the 1991 independence legislation contained the Citizenship Act (ZDRS) and the Aliens Act (ZTuj) that were establishing the body of citizens of the new state. Article 40 of the Citizenship Act allowed for obtaining citizenship of the Republic of Slovenia under rather favourable naturalization conditions. In fact, the only requirement was for a person to have had registered permanent residence address in Slovenia on 23 December 1990. Altogether 171,120 persons obtained the citizenship of the Republic of Slovenia in this way, whereby they retained their former citizenship.

3. Persons who did not request Slovene citizenship had the possibility to obtain a residence permit in the Republic of Slovenia according to the provisions of the Aliens Act. A great majority of citizens of other successor states to the former Yugoslavia who had decided not to acquire Slovene citizenship but to remain living in Slovenia, did so.
MISLEADING: This possibility (on the basis of the Aliens Act) was very difficult to realize – only the special Act from July 1999 (ZUSDDD) offered a real possibility to the “erased”, used in 1999 by cca 7.000 of them (till now about 12.500) – but not with retroactive effect as requested by the Const. court!

However, as of 26 February 1992 those citizens of the former Yugoslav republics who have obtained neither Slovene citizenship nor a residence permit according to the Aliens Act were considered as aliens without legal status (and hence without residence permit on the territory of the Republic of Slovenia).
MISLEADING: Yes, they were considered so – but the Const. court declared this ILLEGAL already in 1999, and the Government is not ashamed to repeat this untruth even now, in 2006!

On the same date permanent residence address registration and personal documents issued in the former Yugoslavia became invalid for all citizens of successor states to the SFRY. These citizens were not “erased” by any authority of the Republic of Slovenia. The designation “erased persons” was a fabrication of a political and media campaign, and was used for those persons who in the given timeframe, despite frequent formal invitations by the competent authorities, have not responded to these invitations or have decided neither for Slovene citizenship nor for a regulation of their status according to the Aliens Act.
This “fabrication” was accepted as correct by the Const. court itself!

4. The State became aware of the delicate and problematic situation of this group of people. It has been established, on the basis of the permanent residence register, that 18,305 citizens of the states successors to the SFRY had not regulated their status. As a result, in 1999 the Act Regulating the Legal Status of Citizens of Former Yugoslavia Living in the Republic of Slovenia (ZUSDDD) was adopted, thus making it possible for permanent residence permits in Slovenia to be acquired under revised, more favourable conditions as compared to those defined for the period after 26 February 1992 by the Aliens Act. Indeed, the only condition for a person to obtain a residence permit according to the said act was that he/she de facto had resided in the Republic of Slovenia since 23 December 1990 or 25 June 1991. By 31 October 2006, 13,301 applications for the issuing of a permanent residence permit were filed according to the ZUSDDD Act. In 12,174 cases permanent residence permits were issued, in 1,346 cases the procedure was stopped because of the failure of the interested party to cooperate, and 534 applications were refused.
MISLEADING AND LIE: ZUSDDD was a result of the FIRST decision of the Const. court, here completely ignored!

5. In 2002, the Act Amending the Citizenship of the Republic of Slovenia Act was adopted, allowing (Article 19, transitory provision) easier acquisition of Slovene citizenship to all foreigners who had permanent residence address in the Republic of Slovenia on 23 December 1990 and had lived in Slovenia without interruption since that date. According to Article 19 of the Act Amending the Citizenship Act the deadline for applications was 29 November 2003; 2,959 applications were filed.

6. In its decision No. U-I-246/02-28 of 3 April 2003 the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia dealt with several provisions of the ZUSDDD Act (Act Regulating the Legal Status of Citizens of Former Yugoslavia Living in the Republic of Slovenia). On the basis of the aforementioned decision a new constitutional law was drafted in order to eliminate the established nonconformities and complement the legislation with regard to the issuing of permanent residence permits for the citizens of states successors to the former Yugoslavia:

a) who had registered permanent residence address in Slovenia on 23 December 1990, i.e. the day of the plebiscite on the independence and autonomy of the Republic of Slovenia;
b) have since that date de facto lived in Slovenia – under the condition that they have already applied for a permanent residence permit according to the Aliens Act, but that their application was refused.
A TRIPLE LIE OR DECEIT:
a) This CC-decision is only the consequence of the first decision from 1999, here completely ignored!
b) In this decision, the CC is requesting (ordering) the elimination of constitutional nonconformities in ZUSDDD (=ordinary law!) and not through a “new constit. law” with clear intention to avoid or by-pass the ruling of the CC!
c) In this decision, the CC is requesting (ordering) the issuing of those permits:
ca) to ALL the erased who lived really here – without any further conditions,
cb) and also to those who were forced to leave Slovenia because of the illegal erasure (or even expelled)

7. The newly proposed law amends Article 13 of the Constitutional Act Implementing the Basic Constitutional Charter on the Independence and Sovereignty of the Republic of Slovenia (1991), which stipulates that citizens of other republics of the former SFRY who had registered permanent residence address in the Republic of Slovenia on 23 December 1990, and had actually lived in Slovenia, held the same rights and were subject to the same obligations as the citizens of the Republic of Slovenia (except for the purchase of immovable property) up to the date when the provisions of the Aliens Act became applicable to them.

8. An analysis was carried out of information on persons for whom it had been established, on the basis of the permanent residence register, that their status had not yet been regulated. The analysis revealed that the individuals in question had moved away, had been released from Slovene citizenship or had died. This was the case of 4,205 persons who had not regulated their status and were, consequently, not in a position to register their residence address. In January 2006 the analysis was repeated and showed that the register still comprised 4,090 persons without a status; 47 individuals had acquired citizenship, 33 had regulated alien status and 9 had died. It can be inferred, on the basis of these data, that some 4,000 persons from the mentioned register are not living in the Republic of Slovenia anymore.
At the press-conference on 19 June 2002 the Ministry of Interior promised to investigate where these persons are (here or abroad) – and they never did so. Many of such persons are still leaving here. For example: in June 2004 we descovered Alija Makić living without any papers for 12 years IN LJUBLJANA – in July 2004 he died from cancer.

9. All of the above proves that the citizens of other states successors to the former SFRY had been given numerous opportunities to regulate their status in the Republic of Slovenia. Official records also show that a great majority of these persons have regulated their status and reside in the Republic of Slovenia without any problems. Another revealing fact in this respect is that, in the period from the end of 2004 to 30 October 2006, only 219 applications for a permanent residence permit according to the ZUSDDD Act were filed.

10. The approach the Republic of Slovenia opted for in solving this complex and sensitive issue, which was new for Europe in general, has been evaluated very positively by various international organisations dealing with such matters. At an international seminar in Ljubljana on 1 December 1993, the experts of the Council of Europe’s Committee on Nationality acknowledged that Slovenia’s resolution of this issue was in perfect accordance with all standards concerning the regulation of citizenship by successor states. The same was the case in 1995 in Geneva, where the UN Human Rights Committee was discussing Slovenia’s 1st report on respect for human rights and adopted it without objection; and in New York, where the Sixth Committee of the UN General Assembly verified and approved the conformity of Slovene legislation with the international standards. It needs to be pointed out that the Republic of Slovenia and all its branches of authority have been continuously amending the relevant legislation, at all times following European legal practice. The latter includes the provisions of the European Convention on Nationality, which is one of the most progressive instruments in this field. The said Convention was adopted by the Council of Europe in 1997, which is 6 years after the introduction of the relevant Slovene legislation. The principles contained in Article 6 of the Convention, referring to citizenship and successor states, had already been previously included in the relevant Slovene legislation. The latter consistently respects one of the fundamental principles of the said Article, namely the principle of free will and decision of each individual.
Naturally – the foreign observers didn’t know anything about the secret erasure – it was not written in this “splendid” Acts. On the contrary (as stated explicitly by the CC in 1999), the erasure lacked any legal basis!

11. The dramatized comments on the issue of the persons who did not regulate their status after Slovenia’s independence mostly result from insufficient information. A lot of dust was also raised by the claims and incentives of those persons who were actually regulating their status several years after elapsed deadlines or who encountered any kind of difficulties in their actions. Due to the difficulties encountered in regulating their status, some of them expected extremely high damages from the Slovene state, which resulted in bewilderment and anger of those who had regulated their status in time. The “so-called erased” currently have either Slovenian citizenship or a permanent residence permit, yet they request their status to be recognised from 1991-1992 onwards, automatically and en bloc, without a case-by-case hearing, which they strongly oppose.
The CC-decision is requesting it, not only the erased!

The Slovenian government is prepared to recognise the status only to those, who actually had resided in Slovenia all this time. Slovenia, while consistently respecting human rights, will not hide from responsibility for any faults, errors or misuse that may have occurred. Slovenia is ready to repair any possible damage that may have been caused by unlawful conduct of public officers or public authorities.
THE BIGGEST LIE: The most “unlawful conduct” was the erasure itself – and the Government is rejecting any right to compensations for it! The Government dares even to deny the erasure itself – not to speak about its illegality, clearly stated by the Const. court!!!

Commented by: Matevž Krivic,
legal representative of the Association of the Erased (DIPS),
former judge of the Constitutional court (1990-98)