Madam High Commissioner, Ladies, Gentlemen,

This statement is delivered on behalf of the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA).

We welcome this opportunity to share with you some of the most pressing issues raised by NGOs working with refugees, returnees, and IDPs in the Balkans.

The Regional Approach

Nine months ago, at the last HIWG meeting, we expressed our support for the regional approach of the Stability Pact. While we reiterate this support now, we must express our serious concern about the lack of progress of the Stability Pact. The Pact has the potential to ensure coordination and support for reconstruction and peacebuilding, but this is not being translated into reality. The way in which the Pact operates and the means by which participation is to be achieved continue to remain a mystery to most organisations outside of the Pact. The practical impact on the ground of the Pact remains to be seen.

Civil society organisations remain crucial partners in the reconstruction of the region. Their involvement in the Pact's Working Tables and groups can only add to the impact and durability of any work undertaken. Working Table I held a meeting with NGOs in Thessaloniki, Greece in June. Several suggestions were made by the NGOs on how Working Table I and the other Working Tables could better involve civil society. Yet, three months later, little action seems to have been taken as a result of this meeting. Meetings with NGOs are not sufficient: more meaningful involvement is needed if the Stability Pact is to achieve its goal of regional stability. To this end, we call on governments and international organisations to provide the Pact's offices with the direction, commitment, and resources needed to effectively involve civil society and attain its goal.

The exclusion of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia from the framework of the Stability Pact will hardly ensure a comprehensive regional solution. If governments are truly committed to using the Pact as a vehicle to attain regional stability, then FRY, with the largest caseload of refugees and internally displaced in Europe, must be included in the Pact.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, minority return is still taking place on a limited scale and questions over durability and security remain. Nevertheless, the level of such returns is three to four times that of the year before and the clear potential to raise those numbers exists.

At the same time, however, we are extremely concerned by the current planned and actual reductions in funding for Bosnia and Herzegovina. These cutbacks come at a time when minority return has never been higher and when those returning have often exhausted their resources after up to eight years away from their homes. Now is the best chance the international community has had to support those wishing to return and to realise some of the key aims of Dayton.

We fully endorse and support UNHCR's analysis that this potential for increased returns could be risked through a lack of funds to underpin current returns and to encourage more. We surely cannot risk losing a major opportunity to build real momentum in return and reconstruction at this critical period through donor fatigue or a lack of coordination.

There are a large number of tented camps housing minority returnees in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We are seriously concerned that the protection needs of these returnees are being under-resourced by UNHCR in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These returnees are unable to access a broad range of services, including education and healthcare. With winter rapidly approaching, these returnees, seemingly stuck in tents, are vulnerable to harassment by elements of the current local majority communities.

At the same time, there is a mini IDP and refugee crisis being created by the present eviction notices that are, quite rightly, being enforced. Refugees are being evicted to enable the return of the legal owners, but they then have nowhere to go because their own homes have still not been repaired.

While returns are taking place, those refugees and displaced who continue to live in collective centres in far from adequate conditions must not be forgotten. This group has been largely overlooked by the international community. In most cases these people have been in collective centres since the end of the war, if not longer. As the majority of them are elderly, it is difficult for them to take their chances by returning spontaneously.

Donor withdrawal from Bosnia and Herzegovina jeopardises the chance to make significant progress towards finally realising the principles on return enshrined in the Dayton Accord. In other areas not directly connected with refugee and IDP return and reconstruction, the funding gap is even wider and prospects bleaker. There remains no coherent structure to take over from the international community in supporting local NGOs in longer-term development work.

We call on donors to take into account the need for a broad application of funds tied to more sustainable long-term development and strongly support UNHCR's efforts in this regard. We surely cannot risk the massive effort undertaken by the international community and its partners at the national level over the last few years being fatally compromised by donor fatigue or inattention through this crucial period.

Croatia

A similar anxiety over promoting return and ensuring sustainability exists with regards to Croatia. Despite pledges from the new government and existing or planned legislative changes to promote return for Croatian Serb refugees, we remain deeply concerned that the implementation of this welcome policy change at the local level remains incomplete, and that returnees still face obstructions and discrimination.

After two years, it can be concluded that the Croatian Program for the Return and Accommodation of Displaced Persons, Refugees, and Resettled Persons and procedures purportedly adopted to facilitate return have, in fact, had the opposite effect. The Program and various written and unwritten procedures constitute illegal barriers to the return and repatriation of former residents of the Serb minority. The adoption by the Croatian Sabor of the Amendments to the Law on Areas of Special State Concern continue the unlawful deprivation of rights of this population. The Return Program, the organised return procedures, and the Amendments, as written and applied, violate numerous domestic and international human rights guarantees for: property rights; effective access to court and fair trial; the right to effective legal remedy; freedom of movement; and the right to return to one's country.

The Croatian government persists in framing return and documentation of its own displaced citizens as immigration matters. Croatian citizens that have sought refuge abroad must prove that they are Croatian nationals. We call on the Croatian government to give practical recognition to the fact that Croatian Serb refugees are citizens of their state.

In addition, excessive administrative requirements and property laws that defeat the ability of a property owner to re-possess his/her property until the current occupants have alternative accommodation are hindrances to return.

The sustainability of return to Croatia is undermined by a lack of housing and employment opportunities. UNHCR, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the OSCE, and others at inter- and supra-governmental levels must respond swiftly and decisively to the discriminatory practices of the Croatian government. Furthermore, the international community must support Croatia in turning its statements and commitments regarding the return of refugees into action.

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

The promotion of significant return among Croatian Serb refugees currently in exile in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is clearly a key element in building stability in the region. However, this does not preclude greater efforts in supporting those Serb refugees in integrating while in exile in FRY. We strongly support UNHCR's call for the strengthening of its resources to carry out local integration work in FRY. Durable solutions must be found for the refugees and internally displaced in FRY.

In this context, we must highlight our deep concern over the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Serbia. The humanitarian needs are not decreasing. The unemployment rate has risen to 35% and the 700,000 refugees and internally displaced persons face extremely difficult circumstances. The social services network is on the verge of collapse due to the dire state of the economy and the effects of sanctions. Many essential drugs, basic foodstuffs, and energy for heating are in short supply. Even when they are available, vulnerable groups, such as refugees, elderly, disabled, children, and those in institutions, are not able to afford them. This crisis will only worsen over the coming winter months. The donor community must not link humanitarian assistance to political motivations.

Kosovo

Turning to Kosovo, we must re-emphasise our call for returns of Kosovar asylum seekers and refugees outside of Kosovo to be based on international standards with priority given to voluntary return and to conditions that ensure safety and dignity. We support both UNHCR's and UNMIK's repeated calls for return to be carried out by host governments in a planned, phased, and sensitive manner, and draw attention to the destabilising effects of large-scale forced returns on the already fragile situation in Kosovo. With a continuing gap in law and order affecting both Albanians and non-Albanians, a shattered infrastructure, and few viable shelter options remaining, further forced return is, in our judgement, both unwise and counter-productive to longer-term stability.

In this context, we call on UNHCR and other international organisations to ensure that the rights of the Roma be respected. We also, once again, forcefully reiterate our call for continued international protection in the widest sense for asylum seekers and refugees from Kosovo who remain vulnerable. NGOs have already seen disturbing cases where host governments are clearly denying continued protection to individuals in need of it. We point to the principles set out in the position papers on return to Kosovo issued by UNHCR, ECRE, and Amnesty International, which clearly define these vulnerable groups with regard to return and urge governments to use these guidelines when judging asylum applications or extensions of humanitarian protection.

Additionally, we note the need for a political settlement to the situation in Kosovo.

Applying the Lessons Learned from the Kosovo Crisis

We implore UNHCR to ensure that it takes the lessons from the Kosovo refugee crisis and applies them in the field. There is a serious concern on the part of NGOs that UNHCR has not given contingency planning the weight or attention needed in Bosnia and Herzegovina given the instability in Montenegro. The mistakes of Kosovo must not be repeated. We call on UNHCR to actively apply the lessons learned from the Kosovo evaluation and implement the recommendations beyond the emergency preparedness function in a coordinated framework in the field.

We must also express our fear that the findings of the Kosovo evaluation have been reduced to an internal enhancement of UNHCR's emergency response. The Kosovo evaluation, while rightly suggesting that UNHCR's emergency response be strengthened, also raised several other issues that went beyond UNHCR. We call on UNHCR and governments to bring in other stakeholders, including NGOs and the military, to take stock of the recommendations contained in the evaluation and to apply them to ensure that a similar situation does not arise again.

Thank you.