Language Research

A former constituent republic of the Socialistic Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, independence from Yugoslavia on June 25, 1991.

Eastern Slavonia, which was held by ethnic Serbs during the conflict, was returned to Croatian control by the UN Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia on January 15, 1998. Croatia and Italy made progress toward resolving a bilateral issue dating from World War II over property and ethnic minority rights. Significant progress has been made with Slovenia toward resolving a maritime border dispute involving direct access to the sea in the Adriatic. Serbia and Montenegro are disputing Croatia's claim to the Prevlaka Peninsula in southern Croatia because it commands the entrance to Boka Kotorska in Montenegro. Prevlaka is currently under observation by the UN military observer mission in Prevlaka (UNMOP).

Updated (August 2002)

Croatia is emerging from a decade in which it experienced a bitter war as the former Yugoslavia broke up, and several years of authoritarian nationalism under the president Franjo Tudjman. Before the war, Serbs in Croatia were widely dispersed and established in all the Croatian municipalities. While it is likely that people from mixed Serbo-Croatian marriages would fear to declare themselves as Serbs, the real reason for the decrease in a number of Serbs is that some 300,000 ethnic Serbs have fled the country since the beginning of the war and there is no sign they will be encouraged to return to their homes.

The multinational character of Croatia was evident already during the 16th and 17th Centuries with the settlement of Vlachs and Serbs. In the following two centuries Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Slovenians, Ruthenians and Italians coming from different parts of the Austrian Empire settled in Croatia.

According to Stanko Zuljic from Zagreb University (CRO), a significant characteristic, which differentiates ethnic minorities in Croatia from minorities in other European countries, is the fact that in Croatia ethnic minorities are for the most part colonized and to a lesser degree border minorities. The only border minorities are Hungarians and to a degree Italians.

Source: Eurolang, www.eurolang.net, Trieste July 26, 2002, by Vida Valencic

Top of page

Updated (May 2005)

Croatia was one of six republics that comprised the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (hereafter SFRY), a multi-ethnic federation with multiple national identities. The basis for Croatian independence derives from the 1974 Constitution of the SFRY, which listed Croatia as one of the six constituent republics (the others were Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Serbia). The first democratic elections held in 1990, replaced the communist establishment by a nationalist bloc led by the Croatian Democratic Union (hereafter HDZ), who called for Croatian sovereignty.

Croatia eventually declared independence on June 25, 1991. The Parliament’s decision to abrogate the state-legal ties with the SFRY was formally confirmed on October 8, 1991. However, the establishment of an electoral democracy was not accompanied by sufficient mechanisms to ensure the satisfactory protection of human rights for all ethnic groups living in the country. The Serbs that used to have the status of a constitutive nation in the SFRY were granted the status of a national minority in newly independent Croatia. The majority of public servants having the ethnic Serb origin were forced to leave their posts in the early 1990s. A few of them found employment in the private sector so the under-representation is most obvious in the judiciary, police force, medical practice and national education.

An armed conflict resulting in the displacement of ethnic groups subsequently broke out and one third of the country's territory was occupied by the local Serbs and the Yugoslav People’s Army. This conflict occurred because of historical distrust between ethnic groups accompanied by unequal economic distribution alongside a liberalization movement for political pluralism promoted by new ethno-nationalist political elites. Needless to say, the uprising of the Serb minority resulted in anti-Serbian sentiments among the public. Hate speech and collective pejorative generalizations that depreciated certain minorities were regularly used against the non-Croat population, particularly against the Serbs and the Muslims, against whom Croatia fought in the 1990s.

The response of Croatian authorities to almost four years of occupation came in the spring and summer of 1995 when, according to the estimates, approximately 300,000 Serbs left Croatia. The lack of official efforts to stop this migration, as well as the fact that tens of thousands of Serbian homes were looted and burnt by Croatian soldiers, put the burden of responsibility on the Croatian state. It was accused of ethnic cleansing of its Serb population in the Krajina Region. The Government argued that the Serbs had left Croatia after being organized by their leaders and before Croatian troops got control of the liberated territory.

The Croatian Danube Region (Eastern Slavonia), also occupied by Serb rebels, was peacefully reintegrated in 1998, based on the internationally brokered Erdut Agreement of November 1995, which established the obligation of the Croatian government to guarantee all persons the right to return freely to their place of residence in this Region and to live there safely. In addition, the Agreement obliged the state to restore to these returning persons any property that had been taken from them unlawfully, or that they had been forced to abandon, and to provide a just compensation for the property that could not be restored.

In spite of the country's silent political isolation, a broad popular consensus on the necessity of European integration existed throughout 1990s, when minority rights were formally set in a very extensive legislative package. Nevertheless, a comprehensive human rights legislative framework was set up largely in response to the pressure from the international community. Namely, the country’s legislation and human rights practices were scrutinized by various international bodies (the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (hereinafter OSCE) Mission to Croatia, the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, the Council of Europe, the Venice Commission).

The issue of minority protection was first laid out in the Constitutional Law on Human Rights and Freedoms and the Rights of National and Ethnic Communities or Minorities in the Republic of Croatia (hereinafter Constitutional Law). The acceptance of this law was a prerequisite for international recognition of Croatia as an independent state in January 1992. In accordance with the Constitutional Law, large minority groups (theoretically those that make up more than 8 percent of the population based on the 1981 Census) were guaranteed proportional representation in the national parliament and were promised considerable autonomy at the local level. Members of ethnic and national minorities who made up less than 8 percent of the total Croatian population had the right to have at least five representatives in parliament.

The Constitutional Law foresaw a territorial autonomy in the Serb-populated regions of Glina and Knin. The Serb minority was offered legislative guarantee for an establishment of two special autonomous districts (kotar) with a special self-administrating status.

In late September 1995, following the liberating military operations, Parliament "temporarily" suspended those provisions of the Constitutional Law related to the Serb minority, whilst its general and representational provisions related to smaller minority communities remained in force. On May 11, 2000, Parliament amended the Constitutional Law, re-introducing some suspended provisions applying to the Serb minority; however, annulling the vast majority of those related to Serb minority self-governments.

CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT, CHANGE OF POLICY

The 2000 parliamentary elections and the fact that Stjepan Mesic became the President of the Republic in February 2000 marked the end of international isolation and also introduced different policies towards the country’s ethnic minorities.

The new government agreed that actual respect for minority rights serves as a test of the degree to which democratization has occurred. A left-centrist coalition under the Prime Minister, Ivica Racan, declared in its activity program the aim to remove all obstacles that prevent full civil integration of the members of national minorities into society. Very soon upon coming to power the new government passed two important pieces of legislation: the Law on the Use of Minority Languages and Scripts and the Law on Education in Minority Languages.

Although the Racan's government declared that the country would accept the return of ethnic-Serb refugees who were driven out of their homes in 1995, a large influx of returning Serbs has not taken place. The reason is seen in insufficient support for the government’s policies at the local level. First, the left-centrist coalition government was not united at the lower levels of governance and second, many municipality and city governments were controlled by right-wing parties. The absence of political consensus significantly weakened political determination to pursue the policies of ethnic reconciliation, and constantly endangered the stability of the coalition.

The 2003 elections constituted a move from formal guarantees of representation to implementation of arrangements ensuring effective participation of minorities in the political life of the state. Not only did the number of parliamentary minority representatives increase from five to eight, but they also played a crucial role in setting up the new country’s government. Namely, winning only a relative majority, the HDZ needed to gain support from minority representatives in order to obtain the new government’s mandate. Therefore, the HDZ sealed agreements with representatives of national minorities and offered them several positions in the administration, thus demonstrating that interethnic tensions were vanishing at the highest level, and that the country was moving towards democratic consolidation.

When the HDZ regained power in November 2003, many feared that nationalistic oppression could return. However, the new Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister used any given opportunity to persuade that their government would pursue policies of ethnic reconciliation.

The Second state report on the implementation of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention, submitted by Croatia in February 2004, stated that minority rights, especially those in the legislative and cultural sphere, have been greatly improved. Nevertheless, the report also recognized existing impediments that limited national minorities to exercise their rights fully, particularly in the areas of employment and the reconstruction of devastated property in post-conflict areas.

The bilateral agreement on the protection of national minorities signed with Serbia and Montenegro in November 2004 additionally contributed to the stabilization of good neighborly relations and enhanced the stability of the region. In 1990s, Croatia signed similar bilateral minority protection agreements with Italy and Hungary.

In April 2004, the European Commission issued an Opinion on Croatia's application for membership of the European Union The Opinion found that minorities and issues of their concern were increasingly, albeit not yet adequately, covered both in the electronic media and in the press. National minorities were perceived and presented as separate entities and not as an integral part of the society. Furthermore, the Commission urged implementation of the legislative provisions that oblige public radio and TV stations to broadcast programs in minority languages at the national and local levels.

ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR MINORITY PROTECTION

The Constitutional Law on the Rights of National Minorities in the Republic of Croatia was finally adopted on December 13, 2002, coming into being in response to pressure from the international community. It sets a domestic legal framework for minority rights in Croatia, and is based on the internationally established minority protection standards. An apparent advantage of this law is that it serves all minorities, unlike the previous one, which primarily addressed the largest minority group, the Serbs.

The Law contains a number of provisions that guarantee the full respect of the principles of non-discrimination outlined in various international agreements; protection against any activities which could endanger the existence of any minority; the right to protect their identity, culture and religion; public and private use of national minority’s language and script; and the right to education and equal participation. In addition, it also guarantees certain rights and freedoms to the members of national minorities, depending on their numerical representation in the Republic of Croatia or in a particular area¹.

According to the 2001 Census, the number of almost all national minorities living in the country has dropped. Ethnic Croats represented approximately 90 percent of the total population in comparison to 78 percent ten years ago, while national minorities made up 7.5 percent of the total population. This drop was particularly sharp in case of the Serb ethnic group, since its percentage decreased from 13 percent to 4.5 percent.

The Constitutional Law, as a framework law, regulates only fundamental rights, while technical issues such as the exercise of political rights guaranteed to minorities are regulated by amended electoral legislation.

The Electoral Law provides for proportional representation in Parliament and assures three seats for the Serbian minority, one seat for Italian and one for the Hungarian minority. The other minorities are divided into two groups of which each is entitled to elect one representative. Minority representatives are elected in a special constituency, while the rest of the population votes in ten electoral constituencies.

Both at the state and local level minorities have the right to have their representatives in elected bodies as well as in judicial and administrative bodies of municipalities and cities.

The specificity of the Constitutional Law on Minorities is that it established the possibility of minority self-government in local self-government units. National minority councils serve as advisory bodies to local and regional governments that are obliged to consult them when passing a legislative act, which might affect the rights of minorities. In order to ensure proper functioning of the councils, the state has to provide adequate funding. All Croatian citizens, who, according to the 2001 Census declared themselves to be members of the sixteen national minorities, are entitled to elect minority councils' representatives at the local and regional levels. The provisions of the Law on Local Elections were applied in the first elections to national minority councils, which took place in May 2003 (additional elections were held in February 2004). In both cases, turnout of minority member voters was rather low. The reason for this was probably the fact that councils were a new institution so minority members were improperly acquainted with their mandate.

Source: EURAC Research, http://www.eurac.edu/index, Publications, Online Papers, European Diversity and Autonomy Papers, EDAP 6/2004, "Wind of Change: The Croatian Government's Turn towards a Policy of Ethnic Reconciliation", Antonija Petricušic, http://www.eurac.edu/documents/edap/2004_edap06.pdf

1. The units of a local self-government can use officially two or more languages and scripts, taking into account the size of a national minority or community.

Top of page