|
(*) Throughout this document, the
reference to Kosovo shall be understood in full compliance with
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) and without
prejudice to the status of Kosovo
I am pleased to share my preliminary
observations at the end of the 12-day official visit I carried out
in my capacity as UN Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural
rights in Serbia and Kosovo.
I am an independent expert appointed by
and reporting to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The Council has mandated me to identify best practices, but also
possible obstacles in the promotion and protection of cultural
rights, and to conduct country visits to this effect.
I was eager to visit Serbia and Kosovo
in order to address in a comprehensive way and using a human rights
approach cultural heritage issues that are of interest to all. This
is why this end of mission statement contains observations and
recommendations that are addressed to both Belgrade and Pristina on
issues of common concern, in particular when it comes to the fate of
the cultural heritage of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Kosovo. My
statement also contains additional observations relating to other
cultural rights issues in Serbia and in Kosovo, which I believe
deserve greater attention. At a later stage, I will submit a full
report to the Human Rights Council. My recommendations should be
viewed as a whole, rather than taking any particular recommendation
out of the context of the entire package.
I wish to thank the authorities in
Belgrade and Pristina for the level of access to relevant officials
and agencies that I was granted, and for the full access to places
and sites I wished to visit without any impediment. The only limit I
faced in this regard was time, and this statement should be
understood as the reflection of a 12-day visit.
During my visit, I sought to discuss
issues with all stakeholders from many diverse backgrounds and
identities so as to hear their narratives and understand their
perspective. I would like to thank all the persons and institutions
I met for their time, warm hospitality, and the wealth of
information they shared with me. I have conducted this visit in a
spirit of co-operation and constructive dialogue, to offer my
perspective and to stress how important it is to understand the
current debates surrounding cultural heritage from the perspective
of human rights, including cultural rights.
Cultural heritage – General issues
Cultural rights protect the rights for
each person, individually and with others, as well as groups of
people, to develop and express their humanity, their world view and
the meanings they give to their existence and their development
through, inter alia, values, beliefs, convictions, languages,
knowledge and the arts, institutions and ways of life.
Cultural rights also protect access to
and enjoyment of cultural heritage. The right of access to and
enjoyment of cultural heritage includes the right of individuals and
collectivities to, inter alia, know, understand, enter, visit, make
use of, maintain, exchange elements of and develop cultural
heritage, as well as to benefit from the cultural heritage and the
creation of others. It also includes the right to participate in the
identification, interpretation and development of cultural heritage,
as well as in the design and implementation of preservation and
safeguard policies and programmes. This right is guaranteed by
international human rights law, including the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights.
Let me stress here that varying degrees
of access and enjoyment may be recognized, taking into consideration
the diverse interests of individuals and groups according to their
relationship with specific cultural heritages. I believe that this
specific point is of great importance to the situation in Serbia and
Kosovo.
Cultural heritage is significant in the
present, both as a message from the past and as a pathway to the
future. Viewed from a human rights perspective, it is important not
only in itself, but also in relation to its human dimension, in
particular its significance for individuals and groups and their
identity and development processes. It is critical to emphasize the
connections between culture more broadly and cultural heritage, and
to recognize cultural heritage as living and in an organic
relationship with human beings.
I encourage everyone to understand
cultural heritage in a holistic way, including the contributions and
perspectives of all groups. Everyone, including Serb, Albanian,
Roma, Orthodox, Muslim and Jewish people and all minorities, as well
as secular people, women, LGBT people, persons with disabilities and
people of mixed identities make significant contributions to
cultural heritage and the existence of a vivid cultural life. This
must be recognized. As important as they are, cultural heritage is
not composed only of monasteries and mosques; it also includes
artistic, historic and and other cultural sites.
There should be no monolithic view of
what constitutes or can constitute cultural heritage, and cultural
heritage should never be used to construct discourses or policies
aimed at the exclusion of others. Cultural heritage is
“multilayered”.
With regard to the tensions regarding
cultural heritage arising between Serbia and Kosovo, I wish to make
the following general points, before proceeding to separate,
detailed consideration below.
It was no surprise to me to find out
that narratives and perspectives were quite dissimilar depending on
where I was and with whom I was speaking. I am concerned about the
human rights impact of the perception gap regarding the meaning and
importance of different aspects of cultural heritage.
In Serbia and in Kosovo, I was
particularly sorry to hear or read disparaging discourses disputing
the importance of the cultural heritage of the Serbian Orthodox
Church in Kosovo, or intentionally omitting mention of the specific
relationship of the Serbian Orthodox Church with certain sites.
Conversely, I regret discourses minimizing the importance or even
the existence of the cultural heritage of Kosovo Albanians. Both
discourses are damaging to human rights and equally offensive.
Fortunately, I had the opportunity to meet people in civil society
from diverse backgrounds who are eager to combat such perspectives
and organize joint events with people of mixed backgrounds to visit
each other’s sites of cultural significance. Such activities were
often curtailed due to lack of funding, and need all possible
support, from Serbia, from Kosovo, and from the international
community.
There is also a clear need for mutual
acknowledgment of the harm that has been done in the past by
attacking heritage related to various groups, and the suffering this
has caused. Lasting peace and reconciliation require no less. I
refer to the many reports of widespread attacks against and
destructions of mosques, historic centers and cultural sites such as
archives committed by Serbian security forces and paramilitaries in
1999 in Kosovo, as well as against churches committed by the Kosovo
Liberation Army. I also refer to the intentional destruction of, in
particular, 35 listed Orthodox monuments and churches between 17 and
19 March 2004, followed by a number of attacks and incidents against
Serbian orthodox cultural heritage since then. I likewise regret
retaliatory attacks during the events of March 2004, including one
on the workshop of well-known Kosovo Albanian sculptor Agim
Čavdarbaša in Pristina, as well as those against two mosques in Niš
and Belgrade (which I visited). I heard in the voices of victims and
eyewitnesses to such acts, and to those in groups particularly
affected by them, the same shock and pain and loss about which I
have the greatest concern. I greatly appreciate those from all
backgrounds with whom I met – whether in Mitrovica/Mitrovicë north
or south for example - who echo such universalist views as “Culture
can never be divided”. I condemn unreservedly all of these
destructions of cultural heritage and insist on all necessary steps
being taken to prevent any repetition and to hold perpetrators
accountable, in accordance with international norms.
I regret the high level of
politicization of cultural heritage issues. This reduces cultural
heritage to a tool, undermines the protection of cultural heritage
and heightens the risks to it, produces monolithic discourses not
appropriate in diverse societies, and impedes implementation of a
wide range of human and cultural rights for all. Serbia and Kosovo
must depoliticize the issue of cultural heritage and de-link
cultural heritage matters from nationalistic agendas. Cultural
heritage is not a weapon: it is an issue concerning universal human
rights. In any political campaign, and in the response to any such
campaign, cultural heritage must not become a political football.
This is absolutely essential.
Visit to Serbia
In Serbia, I visited Belgrade, Novi Sad,
Novi Pazar and Niš. I had the opportunity to hold meetings with a
number of Government officials, at the national and municipal
levels, including those in the areas of culture, cultural heritage
and education. I had the pleasure to meet with the Minister of
Culture and Media as well as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and I
discussed issues with the Office of Human and Minority Rights and
the Office of Kosovo and Metohija. Furthermore, I held discussions
with a number of ombudspersons and several national councils for
minorities. I met artists, academics, representatives of civil
society, religious leaders from the Serbian Orthodox, Muslim and
Jewish communities, human rights defenders, including women’s human
rights defenders, peace activists, artists and cultural heritage
experts and defenders.
I was pleased to receive the assurances
by the Minister of Culture and Media that a draft strategy on
culture, which will refer to human rights including cultural rights
and express a commitment to the protection of cultural heritage of
all people living in Serbia, will soon be submitted for public
debate. I encourage the widest consultations with civil society
organisations and professionals in the field of culture and the arts
for elaborating such a strategy. I also hope that adequate funding
will accompany it.
In Serbia, there remain serious
challenges to cultural rights in many areas, which must be urgently
addressed. These include the ability to discuss, produce and access
cultural content related to the past atrocities of the 1990s, as
well as freedom of artistic expression and creativity, and the
rights of human rights defenders. Many of these difficulties are
reportedly related to the impact of resurgent nationalism.
I am pleased to see advances as well.
For example, LGBT rights activists in Serbia told me that the
climate for their work has improved. I was pleased to learn that
after several years of being banned or met with hostile
counterdemonstrators, the Belgrade Pride march has been permitted
since 2014 and this year did not face counter protests. I salute the
organizers of this event for their efforts to promote human rights.
I note that while it is important to provide security for this event
it is also important not to over securitize it so as not to create a
barrier between the marchers and the public.
I am deeply concerned at reports of
ongoing pressure on the exercise of freedom of artistic expression
and creativity, with one artist suggesting that “in 25 years, we
never faced censorship like now.” For example, the independent DAH
theatre which has long been associated with critics of past
atrocities and has engaged in street performances about war crimes,
told me that after years of investing in a particular location, they
were now unable to remain in that space, which is in a city-owned
building. It was reported to me that Dušan Petričić, a noted
political cartoonist was fired from the newspaper Politika, and then
re-hired after protests, after drawing cartoons critical of the
Prime Minister. Some artists and civil society organizations also
reported on at least one case of the directors of a cultural
institution fired for having opened his or her spaces for
alternative cultural programmes, and stressed that the independent
art scene is being negatively impacted by patterns of funding.
An ongoing concern has to do with
pressure on human rights defenders, including those defending
cultural rights. I am worried about the impact of a recent
exhibition, entitled “Uncensored Lies”, which reportedly took place
in at least one public institution, and targeted people who had been
critical of the government or, for example, had asked questions
about the genocide in Srebrenica. The exhibit sometimes displayed
the names and photographs of human rights defenders. I am pleased to
note however that civil society and independent voices were raised
to counter the potentially negative impact of the exhibition, and
hope that such events will not be repeated.
Of deep concern to me is also the
pattern of attacks against events held by the renowned peace and
women's human rights organization Women in Black when they carry out
activities seeking to commemorate atrocities committed during the
1990s and World War Two. These efforts are critical to create a
dialogue about events of the past, which is key to improving the
climate for the enjoyment of cultural rights for all without
discrimination and cultural heritage. Additionally, I am concerned
that reportedly the authorities have not undertaken sufficient
measures to combat these attacks and I call on them to do so. I am
also sorry to hear about an incident in 2016 in which stones were
thrown through the windows of the Human Rights House in Belgrade.
There needs to be a full investigation into this incident, and
measures must be taken to prevent any further such acts. Some human
rights defenders, peace activists and persons who had opposed
atrocities in the 1990s indicated that they had been branded as
“traitors”, who were seen as somehow excluded from Serb and Orthodox
identities.
Some, including many of Serb ethnicity,
expressed concerns about the human rights impact of the role of the
Serbian Orthodox Church when it was seen to impose itself as a
“cultural authority.” Others expressed concern about the close
relationship between the Church and the State, including for example
reported cases of observance of Serbian Orthodox celebrations at
municipalities and in schools.
I visited Staro Sajmište, an old expo
fair site which was used as a concentration camp for women and
children during WWII in the center of Belgrade. After the war,
Sajmište was populated by Roma, some of them descendants of the camp
inmates, and refugees from the 1990s wars also settled there. The
location had its protected status revoked in 1992, which enabled
companies to open business and successfully obstruct its
preservation and commemoration. A number of civil society
organizations have campaigned for the site to be protected and used
as a memorial to all victims, Jews and Romas, imprisoned Partisans,
Serbs from the Independent State of Croatia as well as prisoners of
war who stayed in the camp, many of whom also died. While the
municipality of Belgrade established a Commission for Sajmište in
2011, I am seriously concerned that to date no decision has been
taken to memorialize the site in an adequate manner. I am also
concerned at reports that the German Pavillon is under threat of
destruction by the municipality for the construction of a road, and
that the Topovske Supe camp used for men is planned for destruction
in 2017 to build a shopping mall. I also find particularly offensive
that at the site of mass executions of men, in Jakuba, Pančevo, the
memorial built in 1981 is in very bad condition and used by a local
hunting association for target practice and wildlife hunting. I
strongly recommend to the Government of Serbia and the Municipality
of Belgrade to ensure the adequate memoraliziation of these sites,
in consultation with the concerned communities.
I was pleased to visit the statue
honoring the Romani singer Saban Bajramovic in Niš, which has been
erected as the result of a civil society initative. I was sorry to
learn that this statue has been vandalized in the past, including
with swastikas and ethnic slurs, but I pleased to hear that measures
had been taken to ensure no attacks on it since. Further measures
should be taken to create more monuments commemorating the heritage
of the Roma, and other marginalized people, to consult the people
concerned when doing so, and to make sure that such sites are
treated with respect and used to promote tolerance and inclusion,
rather than as what one civil society voice called “an alibi.”
Roma civil society stressed to me the
need for the creation of Roma cultural institutions to combat what
they felt to be considerable anti-Roma sentiment, expressed, in
particular, in the media, and by those they termed “neo-nazis,” and
as a means to improve the overall human rights condition of Roma.
They noted the lack of representation of Roma on the administrative
board of Radio-TV Serbia and the perceived lack of inclusion of Roma
in e.g. local archives, all of which need to be addressed. I was
glad to learn that the Deputy head of the Office of Human and
Minority Rights is Roma.
Surely, more needs to be done in the
field of education to ensure teaching about the cultural heritage of
all. In particular, the history teaching curriculum should depart
from the tradition of learning chronologically ordered historical
facts by heart. It is necessary to introduce a new curriculum which
would present a thematically based study of history, thus enabling a
more thorough teaching about historical phenomena, including lessons
on cultural heritage and its meaning. In addition, history teaching
should be conducted from a comparative and multi-perspective
approach, in order to learn more about “the Other”, including their
view of historical events. This is especially important for
controversial events on which neighbouring people often hold
opposing opinions, which deepen mutual misunderstanding and “memory”
conflicts, and even tangible conflicts between people and states.
History should be taught as a field for discussion and different
interpretations, not as a field of rigid and single possible
“national” truths.
I was also informed about the legal
framework put in place to ensure the linguistic rights of
minorities. The Law on National Councils of National Minorities,
enacted in 2009, grants national councils on minorities wide ranging
competences in the fields of culture, education, information
dissemination and official use of language and alphabet. However,
many interlocutors stressed the need to decrease the current
segregation of children belonging to some minorities in the
education system, and more widely in society, when they are taught
exclusively in their mother tongue and when members of the majority
are not taught the relevant minority languages. I encourage the
Government of Serbia, in consultation with the concerned minorities,
to enlarge access to bilingual education so as to enable children
belonging to minorities to participate in the wider society while
still enjoying fully their linguistic rights.
Visit to Kosovo
In Kosovo, I met with representatives of
the Kosovo authorities, including the Minister of Foreign affairs
and the First Deputy Prime Minister, as well as governmental experts
in the field of cultural heritage and the protection of monuments,
environment and spatial planning, and gender equality. I do regret
however that despite several requests, I was unable to meet the
Minister of Culture.. I discussed issues with members of the
Parliamentary Committee on Youth, Sports and Culture and municipal
authorities. I had the opportunity to discuss with representatives
of the Kosovo police and of KFOR. I also met members of the Serbian
Orthodox Church, the Muslim clergy, diverse representatives of civil
society including those representing Kosovo Albanians, Kosovo Serbs,
Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian populations, and women’s human rights
defenders. I also met with the international organizations as well
as with the UNMIK.
As noted, my approach has been to look
both at the particular connections groups have to particular aspects
of heritage, as well as the ties to the broader population. I was
pleased to have been able to visit various parts of Kosovo. I
travelled to Mitrovica/Mitrovicë, Peć/Peja, Prizren, and Pristina. I
visited many sites, including churches and monasteries, mosques,
historic centers, old bazars, as well as an artistic gallery. I saw
many hammams and many important cultural landscapes. Many of the
sites I visited had been damaged or destroyed in 1999 or 2004, such
as the Bayrakli mosque and the old bazar in Peja/Pec, the Church of
Saint Georges in Prizren or the Agim Cavdarbasha Gallery in
Pristina. But I also visited the historic center of Prizren where
many cultural heritage buildings have been destroyed, damaged or
threatened more recently by urban development projects. I noted the
particular challenges and difficulties facing cultural heritage
defenders who raise these issues, and I am concerned at reports that
some of them have been threatened, including by private actors from
the field of business.
As UN Special Rapporteur in the field of
cultural rights, I urge that further opportunities are created for
people from all backgrounds in Kosovo -including Albanians of all
religious backgrounds and of no religion, Serbs, members of the
Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian communities, people of mixed identities
and others - who are concerned about cultural heritage, including
cultural heritage experts, professionals, defenders and ordinary
people, to come together to share their concerns, their knowledge
and join their efforts to protect cultural heritage of all and of
particular groups.
I appreciate that there is a complex
legal and institutional framework for the protection of cultural
heritage in Kosovo, including the 2008 Law on cultural heritage for
which I heard praise. However, I remain concerned about the lack of
implementation of this framework, the need for coordination among
these institutions and the fact that some of them appear inactive,
nonexistent or dormant. I also noted that there were concerns raised
with me a number of times that national policy or even court
decisions were not being fully implemented at the municipal level.
Above all else, the key is political will, which must be clearly
expressed and actively employed, and must be more than
window-dressing for political purposes.
As mentioned earlier, one thing that has
impressed me throughout my visit is the absolute need for mutual
recognition of the cultural heritage of all, and of its importance
and meaning for various people and communities. The past
destructions of cultural heritage are an integral part of other
atrocities and crimes committed against people and of the suffering
that these destruction have inflicted. Accountability for these
violations of international law remains essential. I note with
appreciation the letter of the President of Kosovo, sent during my
visit, calling for prosecutions in these areas, and I will watch
closely for the full, impartial and inclusive implementation of this
important initiative.
One of the first important points of my
preliminary recommendations is to increase education programmes on
the cultural heritage of all (in the curriculum itself, and not only
through extra-curricular activities that also are important), and to
ensure history teaching in a multi-perspective manner. While I
encountered many excellent and committed professionals, I also
learned of the need for capacity building in related fields, and
noted with concern the lack of a university program in archaeology.
Cultural heritage of special
significance to the Serbian Orthodox Church and Serb people
During my visit to Kosovo, I visited
several sites of specific significance to the Serbian Orthodox
Church and the Serb people. I visited the Sokolica Monastery near
Mitrovicë/Mitrovica, the Peć/Peja Patriarchate, the Dečani Monastery
and Church, as well as the Gračanica Monastery and Church. It is
important to hear and understand the perspective of the Serbian
Orthodox Church, which wishes to abide by its great responsibility
to preserve these monuments. These sites are living monuments, they
have been built to be so, and they cannot be well preserved without
the constant presence of the monks or nuns. They have traditionally
been gathering places, and I was able to observe the importance for
Serbian people of the ability to visit sites, to take part in
rituals that are closely connected to these sites and their attached
iconostasis, and to socialize and maintain a sense of belonging.
These sites have been offered special
protection in particular by KFOR, which must be thanked for its
presence and efforts. I was informed that, except in the case of the
Dečani Monastery, which remains under the military protection of
KFOR, other sites now have been transferred to the Police of Kosovo.
Reports from a variety of source acknowledged the dedication and
increased capacity of the Kosovo police for the protection of sites,
in particular thanks to its specialized unit for the protection of
cultural heritage, which is multi-ethnic in its composition. Thanks
to actions taken at various levels, the number of security incidents
involving cultural heritage in Kosovo seems to be on the decline,
and there is no need for heavy escorts to accompany Serbs wishing to
visit orthodox sites as there had been before. The level of violence
has been reduced. I acknowledge these achievements.
However, I was concerned to hear of
ongoing threats received in some instances, and graffiti of a
serious nature, and vigilance is critical to avoid any repetition of
such incidents. I heard ongoing concerns from Serbian Orthodox monks
and nuns that in some instances they still are uncertain about
security and are longing to feel welcome and accepted. This involves
increased actions as well in the field of education and awareness
raising and measures to build trust. Whenever there are any
incidents involving this heritage, or threats, they must continue to
be condemned publicly and widely by inter alia officials, diverse
religious and cultural leaders to assure the relevant groups of
their safety and to indicate the utter unacceptability of such
conduct. There are also some allegations that these statistics do
not entirely reflect the reality.
I understand that sites of specific
significance for the Serbian Orthodox Church and Serb people in
Kosovo are also important for many other people, including Kosovo
Albanians who sometimes have accessed monasteries or churches to
pray or visit.
From a human rights perspective,
protecting and ensuring full respect for a special relationship
between the Serbian Orthodox Church with these sites does not mean
that others should not have any access. I am also convinced that
many within the Serbian Orthodox Church as well as members of other
religious or non religious communities are eager to ensure a more
open and free access to these sites. Of course, a good balance has
to be reached between the need to offer access and to ensure
security. Security must be guaranteed in light of past acts of
wanton destruction. However, over-securitization bears other risks
of exclusion and alienation. Both concerns must equally be borne in
mind.
There is a clear need to build trust
between the Serbian Orthodox Church and the authorities of Kosovo
and to have good institutional channels and mechanisms to ensure
dialogue. In this regard, I regret that the Implementation
Monitoring Council, as planned under Annex V of the Ahtisaari Plan,
after successful beginnings, seems to be in a deadlock since 2015. I
encourage the Serbian Orthodox Church and the Kosovo authorities to
take steps to show their good will in making this mechanism work
again.
I also hope that a solution, based on
mutual respect and respect for international standards on cultural
heritage, will be achieved for the Church of Christ the Savior in
Pristina, which I know to be a controversial topic in Kosovo, and
about which I know there are diverse narratives, but one which
remains at its heart a human rights question. Pending resolution, it
is important that the dignity of the site be respected and ensured.
I was pleased to meet in Belgrade with
representatives of the more than 200,000 internally displaced
persons (IDPs) from Kosovo, who stressed the importance of visiting
cultural sites, including churches and cemeteries, on return visits
to Kosovo.
Reports of cultural heritage
destruction, which they saw as an attempt to wipe out their history,
came as especially heavy blows to this population. They were
particularly distressed by reports of vandalism at Serb cemeteries
in Kosovo that were said to be especially upsetting to elderly IDPs
during return visits. IDPs sometimes feel unwelcome on such visits
and their perception is that they cannot access some areas. I
recommend that every effort be made to guard and restore the dignity
of the cemeteries of all, and that particular care be taken to
protect the cemeteries of displaced populations that are not in a
position to maintain ongoing upkeep. Return visits are vital for the
cultural rights of IDPs, and funding is needed to ensure that this
can continue.
Other Cultural Rights Issues
As Special Rapporteur, I also explored a
range of other issues related to the right to take part in cultural
life, without discrimination, including on the basis of group
affiliation, as guaranteed in the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural rights. I heard repeated concerns that
culture is not prioritized and that budgets for culture require much
greater funds.
There are many excellent ideas and
initiatives in vibrant Kosovo civil society that could be carried
out, but the lack of budget remains the main obstacle for many of
these. This means more adequate allocations by national and
municipal authorities are necessary, as well as greater
international funding.
I heard particular concerns about the
impact of privatizations – and the way in which they had been
conducted - on public space and cultural sites. I heard in
Mitrovica/Mitrovicë concerns that there was no cinema, except for
one space in the cultural centre, which is only sporadically used as
such. However, I was very pleased to hear that civil society
campaigning in Prizren had been successful in saving the Lumbardhi
Cinema, and I salute the relevant authorities for responding to this
demand and will be watching closely to see how the site develops.
I also heard some concerns that there
were not adequate consultations with the population about cultural
projects, such as the refurbishment of the Mitrovica/Mitrovicë
Bridge ,which is in an area especially important for joint cultural
programming.
However, I must acknowledge that others
insisted that such consultations were conducted but that people did
not take part, to which the response was that this is because there
is not widespread public confidence that their input will be heeded.
I hope authorities will continue to engage in any consultations, and
to do so in an inclusive and meaningful way.
I heard concerns from displaced persons
originally from Kosovo about their sense that there is a lack of
adequate educational opportunities in the Serbian language, which
sometimes resulted in youth having to use military transport to
travel to school and to do so over long distances. This in turn
sometimes reportedly led to families to have to move to allow for
the schooling of their children. The equal enjoyment of cultural
rights is also a critical component of enabling sustainable return.
Diverse stakeholders, including
religious leaders, officials and women’s human rights defenders also
shared their concerns of the impact of radicalization and religious
fundamentalism. Women’s human rights defenders noted their concern
about reports of pressure on women in some cases to change their
mode of dressing and adopt veiling, and that in some cases
individuals refused to shake the hand of a person from another
religion due to such factors. Many said that a preventive approach
and education were both key to tackling this problem and protecting
the traditionally more tolerant approach to religion here. This is
not only a security issue but a question of human rights, and
cultural rights, and one which should be addressed as such, and in
accordance with international standards.
I was very pleased to hear of the
adoption of the law on gender equality, and the quotas for women’s
participation in public institutions. However, I note that some
women’s human rights advocates reported that much more needed to be
done to implement the law on gender equality so that it would not
merely amount to “lipstick” as they said rather colorfully. I would
encourage that this implementation be fully carried out with regard
to women’s cultural rights, including their right to access and
enjoy cultural heritage. Indeed, I was pleased by the large number
of highly qualified women cultural heritage experts with whom I was
glad to be able to meet, including from the Ministry of Culture,
Sports and Youth, as well as the Prizren Council on Cultural
heritage, museum professionals, and the civil society sector.
Likewise, I was glad to learn of the
strategy on the rights of persons with disabilities. However, I hope
that in addition to its full implementation, that greater attention
will be given to their access to culture and cultural heritage. I
noted that the Mitrovica/Mitrovicë cultural center, which I visited,
does not have an elevator so that the very meeting room where I
conducted CSO consultations would not have been accessible to
participants in wheelchairs.
I intend to raise many other issues in
the final report, including intangible cultural heritage, other
forms of discrimination, including issues arising with regard to the
Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian population and the relevant strategy,
challenges arising from urban development, and the difficulties
faced by cultural heritage defenders.
I stand ready to assist in any way
possible in the implementation of these recommendations.
|
