9. April 2024

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Versorgung im Asylverfahren 

Zugang zu medizinischer Behandlung für kranke Asylwerber·innen            

Situation an der Grenze         

Situation nach der Rückkehr von nach dem Dublin-Verfahren überstellten Personen            

Stand der Implementierung des unabhängigen Überwachungsmechanismus         

Rückkehrentscheidung und Abschiebung nach Bosnien-Herzegowina für Asylwerber·innen ohne inhaltliche Prüfung und mögliche Rechtsschutzmöglichkeiten mit aufschiebender Wirkung        

Die folgenden Ausschnitte aus ausgewählten Quellen enthalten Informationen zu oben genannter Fragestellung (Zugriff auf alle Quellen am 9. April 2024):

Bitte beachten Sie, dass die in dieser Anfragebeantwortung enthaltenen Übersetzungen von Titeln aus dem Kroatischen unter Verwendung von technischen Übersetzungshilfen erstellt wurden. Es besteht daher ein erhöhtes Risiko, dass diese Arbeitsübersetzungen Ungenauigkeiten enthalten.

Versorgung im Asylverfahren (Unterbringungskapazitäten, Unterbringung vulnerabler Personen)

·      SRC – Swiss Refugee Council: Situation of asylum seekers and beneficiaries of protection with mental health problems in Croatia, Dezember 2021
https://www.fluechtlingshilfe.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationen/Dublinlaenderberichte/211220_Croatia_final.pdf

“There are two reception centers for asylum seeking persons in Croatia where applicants have the right to be hosted until the final decision on their asylum application. One in the city of Zagreb (informally called ‘Hotel Porin’) with a capacity of 600 persons and the other one around 80 km outside of Zagreb (Kutina) with a capacity of 100 persons. Both centers are managed directly by the Ministry of Interior. At the time of writing this report, neither of them was overcrowded. The Croatian Red Cross assessed that living conditions improved thanks to renovation in the ‘Hotel Porin’ back in 2020.

The centre in Kutina is aimed at the accommodation of vulnerable persons. The LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] enumerates as vulnerable persons the following groups: persons without legal capacity, children, unaccompanied children, elderly and infirm persons, seriously ill persons, disabled persons, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, persons with mental disorders and victims of trafficking, as well as victims of torture, rape or other forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, such as victims of female genital mutilation. However, up until now the Ministry of Interior does not have a special unit dealing with vulnerable groups, and rather accommodates their needs in the general reception system. Although the reception center in Kutina is formally appointed as an accommodation option for persons with vulnerabilities, the reality is different, according to the Rehabilitation Centre for Stress and Trauma (RCT) and the Center for Peace Studies (CMS). The only peculiarity is that the center in Kutina is smaller in terms of capacity than the one in Zagreb. Families seem to be the only group actually placed in Kutina on the grounds of their vulnerability.

Persons with a final negative asylum decision have no right to accommodation. They are issued a decision compelling them to leave the territory of Croatia within 30 days; during that time, they are on their own. If apprehended after that, they are usually placed in detention centers, where basic healthcare services are available, but no mental health care (except in emergency situations).“ (SRC, Dezember 2021, S. 9-10)

„3.3 Accommodation of persons in need of psychological treatment

There is no difference regarding the accommodation for persons in need of psychological treatment and other asylum seekers. In very acute and serious situations if a person is in need of an inpatient treatment he or she will be hospitalized in the public healthcare system. As asylum seekers have very limited access to healthcare in general, this is in practice only the case in life threatening circumstances.

4 Identification

Article 15 of the LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] introduced special procedural and reception guarantees for vulnerable applicants. Yet, Croatian authorities do not provide systematic assessment and identification of persons in vulnerable situations, because, at the moment, there is no further detailed guidance available in the law, nor an early identification mechanism in the form of internal guidance. Thus, according to the AIDA [Asylum Information Database] report, there are no adequate reception conditions and guarantees for persons with less visible vulnerabilities. For example, there is no appropriate mechanism for the identification of torture victims in place and, consequently, applicants for international protection who are victims of torture are not always provided with the necessary treatment and access to appropriate medical and psychological rehabilitation and care. RCT [Rehabilitation Centre for Stress and Trauma] reported that specific needs and rights of victims of torture are completely ignored within the health and social care system. According to RCT, many victims of trafficking remain unidentified and unrecognized.“ (SRC, Dezember 2021, S. 12)

·      HPC – Croatian Law Centre: Country Report: Croatia; 2022 Update, Juni 2023
https://asylumineurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/AIDA-HR-2022-Update.pdf

„The Ministry of the Interior, or more precisely its’ Service for reception and accommodation of applicants for international protection, is responsible for the reception of applicants of international protection and runs two Reception Centres for applicants of International protection, which are situated in Zagreb and Kutina. The total reception capacity of these two centres is 740 places.

In 2022, within the project ‘Renovation of the Reception Centre for Applicants for International Protection in Kutina’, the Kutina Reception Centre was renovated. The aim of the project was to improve reception and accommodation conditions, and one of the results was that accommodation capacity of Kutina center has been increased from 100 to 140.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 82)

„E. Special reception needs of vulnerable groups […]

The LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] enumerates as vulnerable persons: persons without legal capacity, children, unaccompanied children, elderly and infirm persons, seriously ill persons, disabled persons, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, persons with mental disorders and victims of trafficking, as well as victims of torture, rape or other forms of psychological, physical and sexual violence, such as victims of female genital mutilation. The LITP provides special procedural and reception guarantees (see section on Special Procedural Guarantees).

However, up until now the Ministry of Interior does not have a special unit dealing with vulnerable groups, but accommodates their needs in the general reception system.

When accommodating applicants in the Reception Centre, gender, age, position of vulnerable groups, applicants with special reception needs and family unity shall be particularly taken into account. Those with special reception needs may be placed in an appropriate institution or can be accredited to accommodation in accordance with regulations on social welfare, if accommodation appropriate for their needs cannot be provided in the Reception Centre.

The Ordinance on the Realisation of Material Reception Conditions prescribes that reception conditions should be adapted to the needs of applicants, psychosocial support should be provided, and special care should be given to applicants with special reception needs. The process of identifying those with special reception needs should be conducted by professionals who provide psychosocial support in the Reception Centre, and if necessary, the competent Centre for Social Welfare can participate in the assessment. The Centre for Social Welfare involved in the procedure of identifying applicants with special reception needs shall notify the Reception Centre of all measures and actions taken.

Applicants with special health care needs shall be provided a special diet, based on the recommendations of the physician.

There is no monitoring mechanism in place with regards to measures for addressing special needs of applicants accommodated in the centres. However, social workers of the Ministry of Interior and the Croatian Red Cross are available daily in the Reception Centres and can provide support. In practice, during their regular work and communication with applicants as well as during individual and group support, Croatian Red Cross employees can observe the needs of vulnerable groups and, where there is a need, can accordingly propose changes in the reception of particular applicants to the Head of Reception Centre (for example, a person may need to be accommodated in a single room, or with other persons, or may need to be relocated to the Reception Centre in Kutina, which is specifically designed for vulnerable applicants).

The Ministry of Interior, depending on the needs of the applicant, cooperates with other competent bodies in relation to reception guarantees, for example with Centres for Social Welfare which are, when appropriate, included in the procedure for assessing special needs. In the case when adequate accommodation cannot be provided for those persons in the Reception Centre for Applicants for International Protection, a person would be accommodated in another appropriate institution or can be granted accommodation according to the social welfare regulations. Also, when needed, special dietary requirements will be provided based on the recommendation of the competent physician. Applicants accommodated in the Reception Centre are provided with three meals a day and pregnant women, babies and children under the age of 16 are provided with an afternoon snack. Upon recommendation of the doctor, separate accommodation would be provided to those with special reception needs. If needed, they would be provided with appropriate health care related to their specific health condition.

In regard to persons with special needs who were accommodated outside Reception centres, in 2022 there were two adult applicants for international protection who were provided accommodation in special social welfare institutions due to their health condition.

In 2020, the NGO Rehabilitation Centre for Stress and Trauma (RCT) informed FRA [European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights] that they noted difficulties in ensuring the standards laid down in the Receptions Conditions Directive, especially for vulnerable applicants. They reported that an applicant with amputated legs was placed in a facility for the elderly with mental problems, which was not adapted for people in wheelchairs. They also highlighted the lack of effective mechanisms to identify torture victims. Similar findings were reported by RCT in 2021. Centre for Peace Studies (CPS) also pointed out that there is still an inadequate system for identifying vulnerable groups within Reception Centres for Applicants of International Protection and Reception Centre for Foreigners. CPS also reported the questionable level of providing psychological support to applicants in reception centres suffering from trauma, PTSD [Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder] and similar conditions in which quality, professional, individualised psychological support is needed.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 99-100)

·      SOSF – Solidarité Sans Frontières: Ein Spirale der Gewalt, Dublin-Rückführungen nach Kroatien und die Rolle der Schweiz, 28. Juni 2023
https://www.sosf.ch/sites/default/files/2023-08/230628_Sosf_DublinKroatien_Spirale_der_Gewalt_DE_WEB.pdf

„Anfang Juni 2023 reiste eine Delegation nach Zagreb, um die Aufnahmebedingungen für Asylsuchende in Kroatien zu untersuchen. Die Delegation führte 20 Interviews mit Personen im Exil und Gespräche mit verschiedenen NGOs. Drei weitere Interviews wurden nachträglich per Telefon geführt. […]

Die Aufnahmebedingungen in den Zentren für Asylsuchende in Kroatien sind unzureichend. Die Gesamtkapazität der Aufnahmezentren reicht nicht aus, die Strukturen sind teilweise baufällig, es fehlt an Betten und (Fach-) Personal.

Die medizinische Versorgung von Asylsuchenden in Kroatien ist unzureichend: Es gibt nicht genügend erfahrenes medizinisches Fachpersonal (Ärzt:innen, Psychiater:innen, Pflegepersonal) und es fehlt an Material und Medikamenten. Medizinische Untersuchungen bei der Aufnahme in den Zentren werden nicht mehr durchgeführt. Die Bedürfnisse von besonders vulnerablen Geflüchteten werden oft weder erkannt noch respektiert. Diese Situation wird noch verschlimmert, weil Krankenakten aus der Schweiz nicht nach Kroatien weitergeleitet werden oder dort nicht rechtzeitig eintreffen.“ (SOSF, 28. Juni 2023, Zusammenfassung)

„5. Lebensbedingungen in kroatischen Aufnahmezentren

In Kroatien gibt es zwei Aufnahmezentren für Asylsuchende, die internationalen Schutz beantragen. Eines mit einer Kapazität von 600 Plätzen befindet sich in Zagreb (im ehemaligen Hotel Porin am Stadtrand) und eines in Kutina, einer Kleinstadt von 25.000 Einwohnern, zwei Stunden von Zagreb entfernt, mit einer Kapazität von 200 Plätzen. Ursprünglich war das Zentrum in Kutina als Zentrum für besonders schutzbedürftige Personen geplant. Zum Zeitpunkt unseres Besuchs gab es jedoch keinen Unterschied mehr zwischen Kutina und Porin. In beiden Zentren befanden sich ebensoviele besonders verletzliche wie nicht besonders verletzliche Personen im Asylverfahren.“ (SOSF, 28. Juni 2023, S. 10)

·      AAN – Afghanistan Analysts Network: Keep on Moving on the Balkan Route: No quarter for Afghan asylum seekers in Croatia and Serbia, 26. September 2023
https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/en/reports/migration/keep-on-moving-on-the-balkan-route-no-quarter-for-afghan-asylum-seekers-in-croatia-and-serbia/

“The main reception centre in Croatia is in the former Hotel Porin, on the southern outskirts of Zagreb. The centre opened in 2011 with a capacity of 600. Although meant for single men, it currently hosts a mixed population which includes several families. The authorities might have considered its location, away from the city centre, to be convenient. It has proved uncomfortable for those living there. There is a foul-smelling major waste disposal nearby, a huge and largely abandoned freight train exchange station and untended expanses of grass. The area swarmed with ravenous mosquitoes even more than the average Zagreb suburbs in the wet and stormy summer of 2023.

The camp is closed to all but government personnel and the Red Cross. Médecins Sans Frontières used to have access but has recently suspended its operations there. However, Afghan migrants are regularly to be found moving around the old hotel’s fenced precincts, squatting in the greenery that surrounds it, exchanging information or walking back from the city after a failed departure. At lunchtime, in particular, many Afghans who have not been able to secure accommodation in the complex try to obtain some food from their acquaintances inside. […]

The Porin hotel was fully booked during the days AAN [Afghanistan Analysts Network] was in Zagreb. Afghans hanging around the hotel said that some newcomers had been made to sleep in the hallways and others could simply not be accommodated inside and slept rough in abandoned wagons in the nearby railway area. When the author visited in late July, the rough sleeping was especially grim, as Zagreb was hit by a quite unprecedented hurricane. […]

Besides Porin, there exists a reception centre for vulnerable cases in Kutina, some seventy kilometres southeast of the capital, which has been recently renovated and can host up to 140 people; and two transit centres in Trilj and Tovarnik, close respectively to the borders with Bosnia and Serbia, where migrants caught crossing the border can be detained until moved elsewhere or readmitted to the neighbouring countries. Minors, among them many Afghans, are reportedly often hosted in structures meant for problematic minors, despite the objections raised against this practice by the NGO community in Croatia.“ (AAN, 26. September 2023)

·      BVMN – Border Violence Monitoring Network: Illegal Pushbacks and Border Violence Report, August 2023
https://borderviolence.eu/app/uploads/BVMN-Monthly-Report-August-2023-1-2.pdf-2.pdf

„Following this increase, the government has recently initiated a project to establish a reception centre within an abandoned military barracks located in the Dugi dol area situated in the municipality of Krnjak. This reception centre is designed to accommodate up to 1,500 individuals and involves the construction of 50 containers for temporary housing. Local newspapers report that it is an open-type centre intended to provide registration services for people on the move from third countries expressing an intention to seek asylum or international protection. […]

Meanwhile, it is very unclear what will happen to people after they register in this new planned centre, and what the criteria will be for accommodating them in a different facility. At the beginning of September, hundreds of people arrived at Porin, the Asylum Centre in Zagreb, with a registration paper from the authorities stating that they could request accommodation there, only to find out there were no more spaces in the facilities. Thus, according to local media, 500 people ended up sleeping on the streets and parks around the centre.“ (BVMN, August 2023, S. 7)

Laut der kroatischen Nachrichtenwebseite Radio Mrežnica ist das oben beschriebene Aufnahmezentrum in Dugi Dol mit Dezember 2023 in Betrieb:

·      Radio Mrežnica: Das Flüchtlingslager in Dugi Dol war betriebsbereit, seine Kapazitäten waren jedoch bei weitem nicht ausgeschöpft [Kroatisch], 19. Dezember 2023
https://radio-mreznica.hr/migrantski-kamp-u-dugom-dolu-proradio-ali-ni-priblizno-mu-kapaciteti-nisu-iskoristeni/

Zugang zu medizinischer Behandlung für kranke, vor allem psychisch kranke Asylwerber·innen (Therapieplätze, Kosten)

Die rechtlichen Bestimmungen bezüglich der Gesundheitsuntersuchungen von Asylwerber·innen finden Sie hier:

·      Gesetz über die Gesundheitsuntersuchungen von Asylbewerber·innen, anerkannten Flüchtlingen, Ausländer·innen unter vorübergehendem Schutz und Ausländer·innen unter subsidiärem Schutz [Kroatisch], NN 39/2008, 4. April 2008
https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2008_04_39_1346.html

·      CARE – Common Approach for Refugees and other Migrants’ Health: Croatian health system navigation guide for international protection applicants, asylees and persons under the subsidiary protection, 2016
http://careformigrants.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/booklet-Croatia-English.pdf

„International and temporary protection applicants (including asylum seekers)

· are obliged to undergo a medical screening

· Health care includes emergency medical assistance and necessary treatment of illnesses and serious mental disorders.

· Have right to emergency medical care and emergency transportation as well as the right to emergency dental assistance.

· Necessary treatment includes: maintenance of vital functions, stopping or preventing major bleeding; prevention of sudden health deterioration that could result in permanent damage to certain organs or vital functions; shock treatment; treatment of chronic diseases and conditions, neglecting of which would immediately or later cause a disability, other permanent damage or death; treating fever and preventing the spread of infection that could lead to sepsis; treatment or prevention of poisoning; treatment of bone fractures or sprains and other damage which requires medical intervention; medicines from the official list of drugs which are prescribed for the treatment of abovementioned conditions.

· The right to health care of women – women in labour and those who just gave birth should be provided medical care, nursing care, midwives, medicines, bandages and other necessary treatment.

· Applicants, who need special reception and/or procedural guarantees, especially victims of torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, shall be provided with the appropriate health care related to their specific condition or the consequences of those offences.

· If material conditions are reduced or withdrawn, asylum seekers are still given access to health care.

· The healthcare costs are covered by the Ministry of Health.“ (CARE, 2016, S. 14-16)

„Mental health services

Some of the reception centres have psychologists who are working for NGOs (Rehabilitation Centre for Stress and Trauma, Society for psychological assistance, MdM [Médecins du Monde], etc) providing psychological support and services to persons accommodated in the reception centres.“ (CARE, 2016, S. 37)

·      SRC – Swiss Refugee Council: Situation of asylum seekers and beneficiaries of protection with mental health problems in Croatia, Dezember 2021
https://www.fluechtlingshilfe.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationen/Dublinlaenderberichte/211220_Croatia_final.pdf

„5 Treatment

5.1 Dublin returnees

In general, asylum applicants are entitled to health care. But they have very limited access to mainstream healthcare due to restrictive regulation: namely under the LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] they are granted only ‘emergency medical assistance, and necessary treatment of illnesses and serious mental disorders’. Psychiatric and psychological treatment for asylum seekers is covered therefore only in case of emergency medical care and essential treatment of diseases and serious mental disorders. This is mostly the case when a person needs to be hospitalized. Apart from this, there are no clear criteria in determining a case of emergency.

To ensure these provisions in the LITP are met, the Croatian Ministry of Health together with the European Union’s Asylum, Migration Integration Fund AMIF are funding a medical project implemented by Médicins du Monde (MdM). The agreement runs until the end of 2022.

According to the information received from MdM, their team consists of a medical doctor, a nurse and four interpreters for both Arabic and Farsi. Two MdM’s psychologists conduct a mental health initial assessment and individual psychological counselling sessions every working day for six hours in Zagreb and when necessary in Kutina. An external associated psychiatrist visits the Reception Centre in Zagreb three times a month. During each visit, she is able to conduct about five consultations. Based on the prescriptions from the psychiatrist, necessary medication is administered through MdM and/or the GP [General Practitioner] from the local outpatient clinic. Psychological support is also provided through the CRC (Croatian Red Cross), they conduct for example group activities. As both organizations are subcontracted by the Ministry of Interior through the national AMIF program, it needs to be stressed that these services are project based and therefore of uncertain sustainability.

Other organizations emphasized the lack of appropriate and continuous psychological and psychiatric assistance for asylum seekers and Dublin returnees, as many asylum seekers do not fall into the category of emergencies but are in need of continuous psychological treatment. They need to rely on the assistance by NGOs that are funded through projects and therefore dependent on the continuation of those funds.

In reception centers, Dublin returnees are in general subjected to initial health examination and screening, during which basic screening of mental health difficulties are assessed. This is conducted through MdM. According to their information, the outcome of this assessment may be shared with the Ministry of Interior, if the patient agrees with it. This is the case especially if special needs regarding the accommodation become apparent.

Applicants who need special reception and/or procedural guarantees, especially victims of torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, should in theory be provided with the appropriate health care related to their specific condition or the consequences resulting from the mentioned acts. In practice, this type of specialized health care has been lacking for years, and is mainly covered by NGOs.

According to the information of MdM, the psychological treatment in the reception centers cannot be in-depth until persons get protection status. This is because, from a therapeutic point of view, it might be counterproductive to start a long and complex process without being able to ensure the necessary support and follow-up.

Residents of reception centers are also free to seek help in other NGOs who are providing psychological support.

In 2020, an Ordinance on health care standards for applicants for international protection and foreigners under temporary protection entered into force regulating, amongst other, initial and supplementary medical examinations and the scope of health care for applicants of international protection. Several organizations reported that it is not yet clear if the provisions of this Ordinance are actually applied. The lack of identification mechanisms is therefore insufficient, and was confirmed by all interview partners.

Conclusion

The public health system is deficient in providing psychological care to asylum seekers with mental problems. NGOs can partially remedy the problem, but they have to rely on intermittent funding for technical resources and personnel. Thus, the planning of a long-term support system is often not possible and, as a consequence, patients can only rarely benefit from stable treatments.

Persons with a final negative decision have no right to healthcare services, with exception to emergencies.“ (SRC, Dezember 2021, S. 13-14)

„5.3 Translation for psychological treatment

Translation is one of the main barriers and problems in regard to psychological treatment. It is sometimes provided by NGOs, depending on their capacities. As previously mentioned, in 2020 the MdM-team consisted of a medical doctor, a nurse and interpreters for Arabic and Farsi. In some cases, when asked by MdM, the Ministry of Interior supports with their translators, who oftentimes are the same that sat through the asylum interview. This does not enforce the trust of the asylum seeker and may lead to them not sharing all information needed in the two very different settings of the psychological treatment and the asylum interview.

RCT [Rehabilitation Centre for Stress and Trauma] employs two Arabic translators, a male and a female. If other languages are needed, they work with sub-contractors. According to their information, they had to turn people down in the past as there were no translators to be found or there was no funding available to hire them.

In cases where psychological assistance was provided through NGO projects, translators were provided and paid through projects. Insecure funding for this purpose is a serious obstacle, as it leads to high turnover of experienced and qualified interpreters working in the setting of psychological counselling, which is often irreplaceable.

In 2021, the Ministry of Interior decided to grant a contract to a faith-based organization for support in integration (Centre for Intercultural Dialogue), which includes engagement of cultural mediators. However, the scope of persons who are eligible to use their services is limited as it is only granted to beneficiaries of international protection, and in practice RCT and asylum seekers/Dublin returnees are encountering many restrictions in using this resource.

Even for the Croatian authorities it seems to be difficult sometimes to find enough translators. In general, asylum seekers would have the right to ask for a specific gender of the interview team, but this can sometimes not be taken into account as such a person is not to be found. Also MdM stressed that there is a severe lack of female translators.“ (SRC, Dezember 2021, S. 16-17)

„5.4 Specialised services for victims of torture or trafficking

If a person is identified as victim of torture or victim of trafficking, which may not always be the case as there is a general lack of identification mechanisms (see chapter 5.1), there are specialized services provided by NGOs.

The RCT (Rehabilitation Centre for Stress and Trauma) provides holistic rehabilitation services for torture survivors. But also their resources are limited and the access depends on the identification of the persons as victims of torture in the first place.

The CRC (Croatian Red Cross) is designated as a key stakeholder for providing care services to victims of trafficking, with other NGOs specialized in this field. There are four mobile teams covering the territory of Croatia, with defined geographical area of responsibility, and services are provided in these locations. There are standardized protocols for the identification, processing and care for victims of trafficking. These safeguards formally in place do not work very well in practice.

Although the protocols seem to work in terms of processing and care, the gaps in the identification phase are still quite relevant. This is problematic because, without identification, there is no accessing the following (and better working) stages. The GRETA [Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings] report of 2020, while acknowledging some improvements in the situation, still notes with concern that not all complaints about possible human trafficking offences are taken seriously by the police and urges the Croatian authorities to ensure that human trafficking offences are promptly investigated, leading to effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions.

If persons are in need of inpatient treatment because of their serious mental health state, this does not imply a psychological treatment but rather that the person will be given tranquilizers to calm them down. They will not be provided with further treatment after the situation seems not to be an emergency anymore. After hospitalization, persons will be sent back to where they were brought in from.“ (SRC, Dezember 2021, S. 17-18)

„6 Conclusions

Access to psychological treatment in Croatia is difficult in practice, even for Croatian nationals. For persons not speaking the language, the chances of stable long term treatment are minimal. The gaps in health insurance and the lack of translation and treatment of mentally ill persons leave the mental health difficulties of many persons unaddressed and untreated.

Translators are missing in all sectors connected with asylum and immigration in Croatia, in health care, but also in education and social care. There is a general lack of specific languages but also of female translators. This general shortage of translators leads as a consequence to an overburdening of those existing, as well as to the risk that the individual interpreter may have to play several different roles, thus undermining his or her impartiality as well as the trust of the asylum seeker in the system.

The lack of meaningful and thorough treatment could interfere with the integration process. The effects of trauma and chronic stress on the mental health of refugees is underestimated and unacknowledged.

All support and treatment for persons with psychological problems are conducted by NGOs. The state funds some of their activities, but does not provide any support itself. This is cause for instability, as these NGOs and the continuity of their work depends on the funds provided.“ (SRC, Dezember 2021, S. 19)

·      HPC – Croatian Law Centre: Country Report: Croatia; 2022 Update, Juni 2023
https://asylumineurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/AIDA-HR-2022-Update.pdf

„In 2022, in addition to psychological support, psychotherapy and art therapy activities, the Rehabilitation Centre for Stress and Trauma (RCT) also carried out activities focused on social mentoring, preparation for the labor market and employment, contacts with employers, support in terms of accompaniment and translation when exercising rights in the social welfare system, socio-cultural orientation workshops and creative workshops, and provided support to asylum seekers at the risk of homelessness. RCT reported that their request to continue with providing activities in the Reception Centre for Applicants of International Protection, was rejected.

The Centre for children, youth and family Modus provided psychosocial counselling.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 90)

„Applicants are entitled to health care. However, the LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] prescribes that health care includes emergency care and necessary treatment of illnesses and serious mental disorders. In 2020, an Ordinance on health care standards for applicants for international protection and foreigners under temporary protection entered into force regulating, amongst other, initial and supplementary medical examinations and the scope of health care for applicants of international protection. Additionally, the Ordinance lists the different vulnerable groups entitled to health care as follows: persons deprived of legal capacity, children, unaccompanied children, elderly and infirm persons, seriously ill persons, persons with disabilities, pregnant women, single parents with a minor children, people with mental disabilities and victims of human trafficking, victims of torture, rape or other psychological, physical and sexual violence, such as victims of female genital mutilation. These categories of persons have a right to psychosocial support and assistance in appropriate institutions. A pregnant woman or a parturient woman who requires monitoring of pregnancy and childbirth is entitled to health care to the same extent as insured person from compulsory health insurance. Children up to the age of 18 are guaranteed the entire right to health care in accordance with the legislation governing the right to health care from compulsory health insurance.

Medical assistance is available in the Reception Centres for Applicants for International Protection in Zagreb and Kutina. While no information is available for the period from 2019 until the end of 2022. At the beginning of 2019, the Ministry of Interior reported that health care is also provided by the health care institutions in Zagreb and Kutina designated by the Ministry of Health. In the Health Centre, a competent ambulance (family medicine) has been designated for the provision of health care from the primary health care level for chronic and life-threatening illnesses. A specialist ambulance for vulnerable groups has been appointed by the Ministry of Health and Local Health Centres. This includes: paediatric ambulance, gynaecological ambulance, school medicine ambulance, neuropsychiatric ambulance at the Hospital of Kutina, ambulance for addiction treatment; dental ambulances and Psychiatric Hospital in Zagreb.

In addition, applicants are referred to local hospitals i.e. in Sisak for those accommodated in Kutina, and the Hospital of Zagreb. The competent pharmacies, one in Zagreb and one in Kutina, have also been determined.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 94-95)

„2. Mental health

Psychological counselling and support was provided by MdM [Doctors of the World] during 2021.

Two MdM’s psychologists conducted initial psychological assessments and individual psychological counselling sessions every working day for 6 hours, as well as emergency interventions when needed. Cooperation with an external associate – psychiatrist continued in 2022 who was visiting the Reception Centre in Zagreb three times a month. An increase in the number of reported cases of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) (as well as the number of applicants) compared to the previous year was noted in 2022. A total of 66 cases were reported. MdM’s psychologists offered adequate psychological help and support and, if necessary, included them in adequate psychological and/or psychiatric treatment. During 2022, 665 individual psychological consultations were carried out by two psychologists, and 96 specialist psychiatric examinations were conducted by one psychiatrist.

In addition, three info-prevention posters/leaflets concerning mental health, protection of reproductive health and violence-prevention were distributed: ‘How I feel matter’, ‘Everyone has the right to birth control’ and ‘There is no room for violence in the family’, as well as a brochure on mental health. Additional info-prevention workshops for women and girls on the topics of mental health and psychosocial support were also conducted on average once a week in the course of 2022.

Additional issues related to trauma and mental health of applicants for international protection are further described in Screening of vulnerability.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 98)

·      SOSF – Solidarité Sans Frontières: Ein Spirale der Gewalt, Dublin-Rückführungen nach Kroatien und die Rolle der Schweiz, 28. Juni 2023
https://www.sosf.ch/sites/default/files/2023-08/230628_Sosf_DublinKroatien_Spirale_der_Gewalt_DE_WEB.pdf

„5.1 Fehlender Zugang zur medizinischen Versorgung

Seit 2003 beauftragte das Innenministerium das Kroatische Rote Kreuz mit der Betreuung der Schutzsuchenden (d.h. Unterbringung, Beschäftigungsprogramme, Transport und Begleitung zu externen medizinischen Einrichtungen) in Porin und Kutina. Daneben waren bis zum 22. Mai 2023 Médecins du Monde Belgique im Zentrum präsent. Diese NGO ist seit 2016 in Kroatien im Bereich der medizinischen Versorgung mit verschiedenen Projekten für Flüchtlinge tätig, die aus dem AMIF [Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund]-Fonds finanziert werden. Obwohl der letzte Vertrag mit MdM [Doctors of the World] Ende Dezember 2022 auslief, gab es bislang keine neue Ausschreibung für diese wichtige Aufgabe. MdM führte die Versorgung mit eigenen finanziellen Mitteln weiter, doch am 22. Mai sah sich die Organisation gezwungen, ihre Dienste aufgrund fehlender Mittel einzustellen. Seitdem ist ein einziger Arzt jeweils zwischen 13 und 15 Uhr im Zentrum von Porin anwesend und trägt die medizinische Verantwortung für die anwesenden rund 600 Personen, wobei deren Zahl täglich sehr stark wechselt (gemäss einigen Quellen besteht eine tägliche Fluktuation von bis zu 200 Personen). Nach erhaltenen Informationen soll diese Person kurz vor dem Burnout stehen. Die erzwungene Einstellung der Aktivitäten von MdM hatte verheerende Auswirkungen auf viele extrem traumatisierte Menschen, deren psychiatrische Behandlung von einem Tag auf den anderen unterbrochen wurde. Wir stellten fest, dass die medizinische Betreuung von Personen, die von der Schweiz nach Kroatien zurückgeschickt werden, abrupt unterbrochen und verkompliziert wird. Ihre psychiatrische Betreuung ist in keiner Weise gewährleistet. Laut MdM wurden bestehende Krankenakten oft nicht an sie übermittelt und bereits während der Anwesenheit von MdM wurde die medizinische Einreisekontrolle nicht mehr durchgeführt, weil kein ausreichendes Personal zur Verfügung stand. Dies ist insofern schwerwiegend, als die meisten aus der Schweiz zurückgeführten Personen aus einer medizinischen Behandlung herausgerissen wurden. Zudem wurden ihnen die in der Schweiz verschriebenen Medikamente nicht mehr verabreicht. Es liegt auf der Hand, dass es diesen Personen zum Teil sehr schlecht geht. Eine Asylsuchende, die Opfer wiederholter Vergewaltigungen war, ihre Reise nicht fortsetzte und mit ihrem wenige Monate alten Baby in Porin blieb, berichtete uns von ihrer Verzweiflung darüber, dass ihre psychiatrische Versorgung nach dem Weggang von MdM eingestellt worden war. Dasselbe galt für eine andere Person, die wir trafen. Keine einzige der aus der Schweiz zurückgeschickten Personen, die sich in laufender psychiatrischer Behandlung befanden, konnten ihre Behandlung in Kroatien fortsetzen. Wenden sich die Asylsuchenden an den Arzt des Zentrums, würde ihnen dieser entweder Schmerzmittel oder Antibiotika verabreichen. Diese Feststellung wird von zahlreichen Zeugenaussagen gestützt. Zudem wurden beispielsweise in der Schweiz angefertigte Röntgenaufnahmen in Kroatien nicht berücksichtigt und es wurden neue Röntgenaufnahmen gemacht. Eine wirkliche Nachsorge fand bislang jedoch nicht statt. Die Versorgung läuft extrem langsam an oder bleibt gänzlich aus, weil sie nicht als dringend betrachtet wird, und alle Behandlungen, die in der Schweiz gemacht wurden, könnten verloren gehen, weil keine Krankenakte vorliegt oder diese nicht berücksichtigt wird.“ (SOSF, 28. Juni 2023, S. 10-11)

„Die medizinische Versorgung der Kinder erfolgt in Kutina und Porin zur Zufriedenheit der Eltern sowohl in Bezug auf Impfungen als auch auf Verletzungen und Krankheiten. Über den Zugang zu kinderpsychiatrischer Versorgung konnten wir keine ausreichenden Daten sammeln. Alle Organisationen und Körperschaften, mit denen wir Gespräche führten, waren äusserst besorgt über den Weggang von MdM [Doctors oft he World] aus dem Zentrum. Eine Mitarbeiterin der Ombudsfrau sagte uns, dass die schutzbedürftigen Personen durch den Weggang noch schutzbedürftiger geworden seien. In Kutina beschränkte sich die medizinische Betreuung durch MdM auf einen gelegentlichen Besuch. Eine vom Innenministerium beauftragte Krankenschwester ist unter der Woche anwesend. Sie wird vom Büro gerufen, wenn Asylsuchende um medizinische Betreuung bitten. Der Arzt käme selten und die Krankenschwester würde häufig die vom Arzt nach einem Telefongespräch vorgeschlagenen Medikamente aushändigen.“ (SOSF, 28. Juni 2023, S. 13)

Situation an der Grenze (Pushbacks)

·      ECCHR – European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights: Croatia’s Pushback Policy: A System of Unlawful, Covert, and Perpetuated Expulsions, Februar 2023
https://www.ecchr.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/ECCHR_Croatia_factsheet__February_2023.pdf

„Since news of pushbacks from Croatia first circulated in 2016, several years’ worth of reporting and documentation by national and international human rights institutions, media, and humanitarian organizations corroborate a clear pattern of pushbacks of migrants from Croatia. The following analysis demonstrates that such pushbacks are, in fact, the result of an intentionally crafted and maintained state policy. First, the existence of a Croatian state policy is made evident by the clear and consistent tactics employed by Croatian authorities engaged in such pushbacks, as laid out in Section I. Second, the existence of this policy has been repeatedly documented and supported by several diverse forms and sources of evidence, discussed in Section II. Third and finally, such pushbacks are designed to be concealed and obscured such that authorities can obstruct efforts at accountability and perpetuate the practice with impunity, as argued in Section III.“ (ECCHR, Februar 2023, S. 1)

„The violence experienced during these pushbacks reflects the utilization of ill-treatment as a deterrence tactic targeting people on the move. In June 2020, the UN Special Rapporteurs on the human rights of migrants and on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment documented ‘the use of electric shocks, forced river crossings and stripping of clothes despite adverse weather conditions, forced stress positions, gender insensitive body searches’ in addition to the above-mentioned spray-painting of crosses on migrants’ heads.“ (ECCHR, Februar 2023, S. 2)

„Croatia’s pushbacks do not spare children and unaccompanied children, despite—as mandated by EU law—obligations to respect a child’s best interests in its domestic legal framework. Croatia’s Law on Foreigners obliges it to identify minors and initiate an age assessment in cases of doubt as to one’s age, also mandating that decisions concerning their stay can only take place following a hearing. Yet during its 2020 visit to Croatia, the CPT [Council of Europe anti-torture Committee] received ‘numerous allegations from children’ impacted by pushbacks, and the Croatian Ombudsperson for Children has acknowledged the pushbacks of several hundred children, including through violence, from Croatia in 2021. Several organizations have documented Croatian officers’ refusal to record minors as such, instead telling them they cannot claim asylum in Croatia and even beating those who attempted to show papers proving their age. Testimonies collected from pushbacks during which children were present reflect the same patterns descriptive of pushbacks as a whole: the indiscriminate use of violence against children in groups with adults, such as kicking, pushing, and beatings, as well as abusive or intimidating behavior like the firing of or threatening with guns; theft of money; destruction and/or burning of personal belongings; forced undressing including the removal of jackets and jumpers; and reckless driving. Like adults, children have been arbitrarily detained in cramped conditions without food and water prior to their expulsions.“ (ECCHR, Februar 2023, S. 2-3)

„Over the years, a wide range of information from various sources has provided consistent, overwhelming, and indisputable evidence of Croatia’s pushback policy. Local and international media has consistently reported on pushbacks from Croatia since 2016, with first international reports by BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation] in January of that year. This coverage was followed by Deutsche Welle, Reuters, Al Jazeera, The Guardian, and Der Spiegel. Several international and humanitarian groups with direct access to victims of such pushbacks have also published their own reporting on Croatian pushbacks, including UNHCR [United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees], the International Organization for Migration, Human Rights Watch (‘HRW’), and Amnesty International (‘AI’). Finally, Croatian pushbacks have been confirmed by the fact-finding of European and international institutions, including the UN SRs [United Nations Special Rapporteurs] on the human rights of migrants and on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency (‘FRA’), the CoE’s [Council of Europe] Secretary-General on Migration and Refugees and its CPT [European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment], and the Bosnia and Herzegovina (‘BiH’) and Croatian ombudspersons. Several diverse types of evidence have brought the details of such pushbacks to light. These include medical records of those providing medical support to migrants pushed back from Croatia, including Médecins Sans Frontières (‘MSF’), the Danish Refugee Council (‘DRC’), and local doctors who have treated victims themselves. Video footage captured by investigative journalists and border monitoring groups such as The Guardian, the Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN), Swiss media SRF [Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen], German media Der Spiegel, and ARD [Arbeitsgemeinschaft der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten der Bundesrepublik Deutschland] has depicted white vans driving toward the Bosnian border, groups of individuals violently forced across by officers in black, and, for instance, officers in Croatian uniforms striking individuals brought to the borderline with an apparently homemade whip. The Croatian state policy has also been confirmed by testimonies from Croatian officers and officials, including those who had been ordered to carry out such operations; a whistle-blower who revealed the existence of a secret police unit specialized in pushbacks; and the former Interior Minister, who divulged that the practice was systematic and could not take place without at least tacit government support. Officials from neighboring states BiH [Bosnien und Herzegowina] and Serbia have also condemned Croatian pushbacks after gathering evidence of and witnessing Croatian pushback into their countries themselves. Finally, judgments of international and national courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Swiss Federal Administrative Court, the Tribunal of Genoa, and a Rome tribunal for personal rights and immigration have confirmed the existence of Croatian pushbacks.“ (ECCHR, Februar 2023, S. 3-5)

·      BVMN – Border Violence Monitoring Network: Illegal Pushbacks and Border Violence Report, März 2023
https://borderviolence.eu/app/uploads/Monthly-Report-March-2023.pdf

„At the end of March, the Croatian police started a practice of mass deportations of people on the move to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Following reports collected by field teams on the situation and the later confirmation by the authorities of Una-Sana Canton of this practice, BVMN calls on the Croatian Ministry of Interior to give an immediate clarification and provide all the rights guaranteed by law to all people on the move in the country. According to the testimonies of people affected by the expulsions, they were intercepted across the whole territory of Croatia and escorted to police stations in unmarked vehicles. People, including women and children, were then detained in ‘prison-like basements’, denied food and water and forced to sleep on the floor. They were also issued a decision of deportation to Bosnia and Herzegovina and forced to sign documents for which translations were not provided. According to several reports, these documents stated that they are not allowed to enter Croatia for one year, the alternative, some were told, was 18 months detention. Moreover, people described that they were given bills with the costs they were expected to pay for accommodation, food and transportation for those days. They were not given the right to apply for asylum nor to appeal against the process of expulsion. After signing the documents, they were transferred to other detention facilities. Some people were held there for several days, in some cases even weeks, before the Croatian police handed them over ‘en masse’ to the Bosnian authorities through a formal process of readmission. Following the readmission to Bosnia and Herzegovina, the agents of Bosnia’s Service for Foreigner’s Affairs and the international organisation IOM [International Organisation für Migration] transferred the men to the Transit Center Lipa and the families to the Reception Center Borići in Bihać.“ (BVMN, März 2023, S. 7)

·      AI – Amnesty International: Amnesty International Report 2022/23; Zur weltweiten Lage der Menschenrechte; Kroatien 2022, 28. März 2023
https://www.ecoi.net/de/dokument/2094461.html

„Die Zahl der Menschen, die versuchten, durch das Nachbarland Bosnien und Herzegowina nach Kroatien zu gelangen, stieg 2022 im Vergleich zum Vorjahr an. Hilfsorganisationen dokumentierten weiterhin Pushbacks und Kollektivabschiebungen durch die kroatischen Behörden. […]

Im Juli 2022 kam der EU-finanzierte Unabhängige Überwachungsmechanismus für die Außengrenzen in Kroatien zu dem Schluss, dass bei Einsätzen an der Grenze keine erheblichen Unregelmäßigkeiten aufgetreten seien. Allerdings habe die Grenzpolizei potenzielle Asylsuchende, die in mutmaßlich verminten Grenzregionen aufgegriffen wurden, rechtswidrig nach Bosnien und Herzegowina abgeschoben. Zivilgesellschaftliche Gruppen und Menschenrechtsorganisationen kritisierten erneut, dass es dem Überwachungsmechanismus an Unabhängigkeit, einem robusten Mandat und ungehindertem Zugang zur Grenzregion mangele.“ (AI, 28. März 2023)

·      ECCHR – European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights: Stellungnahme vom 27.4.2023 an das VG München im Verfahren M 10 K 22.50479, 27. April 2023
https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local/2094265/ECCHR_Auskunft_VG_Muenchen_230427.pdf

„2. Welche Rechtsschutzmöglichkeiten gegen polizeiliche Übergriffe gibt es für betroffene Geflüchtete und falls ja, können diese in der Praxis ggf. auch zeitnah, effektiv realisiert werden?

Wirksame Rechtsschutzmöglichkeit nach erlittener Polizeigewalt im Rahmen von Pushbacks wäre eine rasche, gründliche und unabhängige strafrechtliche Ermittlung und anschließende Strafverfolgung der Beschuldigten. Derartige Strafverfahren gegen tatverdächtige Polizist*innen existieren aufgrund struktureller Mängel im kroatischen Justizsystem jedoch nicht. Das kroatische Center for Peace Studies (CMS) beobachtet die Problematik von Pushbacks und Gewaltvorfällen durch die Polizei seit Jahren und berichtet wiederholt von ineffizienten Untersuchungen sowie langwierigen und ergebnislosen Verfahren, was die Straflosigkeit der Täter zur Folge hat. Trotz zahlreicher konkreter Hinweise auf Folter und Gewalt und mindestens 18 Strafanzeigen wegen illegaler Pushbacks und/oder Gewalt gegen Schutzsuchende, wurde in keinem Fall Anklage durch die kroatischen Strafverfolgungsbehörden erhoben.

Auch das Europäische Komitee zur Verhütung von Folter und unmenschlicher oder erniedrigender Behandlung oder Strafe (CPT) führt in seinem Bericht 2021 aus, dass es keine wirksamen Mechanismen zur Identifizierung der Täter von mutmaßlichen Misshandlungen gibt. Außerdem existiert immer noch keine unabhängige Polizeistelle, die wirksame Untersuchungen von Fällen mutmaßlicher Misshandlungen durch Strafverfolgungsbeamte und der Duldung von Misshandlungen durch leitende Beamte durchführen könnte. Ferner zeigt der Bericht tiefgreifende Mängel hinsichtlich der Gründlichkeit und Unabhängigkeit von Untersuchungen, die durchgeführt wurden, auf.‘ […]

Auch das Europäische Netzwerk nationaler Menschenrechtsinstitutionen (European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNRI)) betont, die Effektivität derartiger Mechanismen hänge unter anderem von der Integrität innerhalb der Befehlskette und einer Führung ab, die Willens ist, Fehlverhalten aufzuklären. Andernfalls stelle dies die Unabhängigkeit und Effektivität der Ermittlungen in Frage. Als Negativ-Beispiel werden die Ermittlungen durch das Kroatische ICS [Internal Control Service] genannt.

Für eine zumindest stillschweigende Duldung der teilweise extremen polizeilichen Gewalt gegen Geflüchtete an den kroatischen Grenzen sprechen Zeugenaussagen kroatischer Offizieller und Beamt*innen; darunter drei Beamt*innen, die mit der Durchführung von Pushback-Operationen beauftragt waren.“ (ECCHR, 27. April 2023, S. 4-5)

„Weiter erschwerend hinzu kommt das zumeist verdeckte Vorgehen bei Pushbacks, so dass Tatverdächtige schwer überführt und Medienberichte insgesamt leichter ignoriert werden können. Wie das CPT [Europäisches Komitee zur Verhütung von Folter und unmenschlicher oder erniedrigender Behandlung oder Strafe] hervorgehoben hat, ist die Führung von Aufzeichnungen für die Rechenschaftspflicht der Strafverfolgungsbehörden und deren Überwachung von entscheidender Bedeutung. Demgegenüber zeigen interne Ermittlungen, sowie Aussagen des Leiters einer polizeilichen Grenzstation, dass die von den kroatischen Behörden zurückgeschobenen Personen nie registriert und die polizeilichen Operationen nicht offiziell erfasst werden. Beamt*innen, die Pushbacks durchführen, kommunizieren stattdessen weisungsgemäß nur informell über WhatsApp- und Viber-Gruppen oder private Telefone und nicht über offizielle Kanäle, wie zuletzt durch Veröffentlichungen des Spiegels und der NGO Lighthouse Reports im April 2023 noch einmal nachgewiesen wurde. Whistleblower betonen, dass Pushbacks so konzipiert sind, dass sie keine Spuren hinterlassen, bis auf die Spuren physischer Gewalt; als ob die Personen nie mit den Behörden in Kontakt gekommen wären und nie zurückgeschickt wurden. Auch die Verwendung von Sturmhauben und nicht gekennzeichneten weißen Lieferwagen für die Verbringung an die ‚Grüne Grenze‘ zu Bosnien-Herzegowina, sowie die Beschlagnahmung und Zerstörung von Mobiltelefonen hindern die Betroffenen daran, Sachverhalte zu Beweiszwecken zu dokumentieren und Tatverdächtige zu benennen. Informant*innen aus den Reihen der Einsatzkräfte erklären zudem, dass sie die Betroffenen ‚fangen müssen, bevor sie Menschenrechtsgruppen oder irgendeinen Ort erreichen, der ihnen helfen würde, Asyl zu beantragen‘, und durchgesickerte E-Mails enthüllten offizielle Anweisungen, sicherzustellen, dass während Pushback-Operationen keine Filmaufnahmen gefertigt werden oder potentielle Zeug*innen zugegen sind.“ (ECCHR, 27. April 2023, S. 6-7)

„4. Hat die Verurteilung Kroatiens durch den Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte vom 18. November 2021 (EGMR M.H u.a. / Kroatien, Nr. 15670/18 und 43115/18 mittlerweile rechtskräftig) zu Veränderungen in der Verwaltungs- bzw. disziplinarrechtlichen Praxis in Kroatien geführt bzw. ist ein Einfluss dieser Entscheidung auf die kroatische Rechtspraxis nachweisbar?

Der EGMR [Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte] legte im Fall M.H. u.a. gegen Kroatien tiefgreifende und strukturelle Mängel der Praxis an den kroatischen Außengrenzen offen: Der Gerichtshof betont, dass die Auswirkungen des Falles über die spezifische Situation der Kläger hinausgingen – diese wurden jedoch bis heute nicht ausreichend vom kroatischen Staat adressiert. Vielmehr wurden die systematischen Menschenrechtsverletzungen durch die kroatischen Polizeikräfte gegenüber Geflüchteten fortgesetzt. Wie CMS [Center for Peace Studies] und Human Rights House Zagreb (HRHZ) in Bezug auf die weiterhin ausstehende Implementierung des Urteils berichten, finden die von Kroatien durchgeführten Pushbacks gegenüber den Vorjahren noch häufiger und in brutalerer Art und Weise statt. […]

Trotz der oben ausgeführten Kritik am ‚Unabhängigen Grenzüberwachungsmechanismus‘ wurde auch nach Ergehen des EGMR-Urteils gegen Kroatien dessen tatsächliche Unabhängigkeit und Effektivität bisher nicht sichergestellt. CMS und HRHZ berichten zudem weiterhin von behördlicher Einmischung in das Mandat der Ombudsstelle, wodurch ein ungehinderter Zugang zu Dokumenten, Informationen, Einrichtungen in den Grenzgebieten und anderen Orten, an denen sich Opfer von Menschenrechtsverletzungen befinden, weiterhin nicht gewährt wird.“ (ECCHR, 27. April 2023, S. 9)

„Im Laufe des Jahres 2022 kam es kurzfristig zu einer partiellen und temporären Veränderung im Umgang der kroatischen Behörden mit Geflüchteten. So berichtete das Center for Peace Studies (CPS), dass die kroatische Polizei im Staatsgebiet aufgegriffene Geflüchtete registriert und ihnen so genannte 7-Tage-Papiere ausgestellt habe, d. h. Rückführungsbescheide, mit denen sie aufgefordert werden, den Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum wieder zu verlassen – freilich ohne Möglichkeit, einen Antrag auf internationalen Schutz zu stellen. Dessen ungeachtet hielt aber auch die Praxis der Pushbacks weiterhin an, wie die Daten von NGOs in Bosnien-Herzegowina und Serbien zeigen. So verzeichnete allein DRC [Danish Refugee Council] in Bosnien 3 196 Pushbacks, einschließlich 589 Fällen, in denen Kinder beteiligt waren, bis Ende Oktober 2022. BVMN [Border Violence Monitoring Network] berichtete, dass im Herbst 2022 Schutzsuchende wieder in teilweise stark abgekühlten Polizeitransportern für bis zu acht Stunden ohne Nahrungsmittel, Wasser oder Toiletten, festgehalten worden seien. Auch wenn im Jahr 2022 die Gesamtzahl der Pushbacks leicht zurückgegangen sei, blieben illegale und gewalttätige Methoden weiterhin Teil der behördlichen Praxis, ohne, dass effektive Ermittlungen durchgeführt würden oder unabhängige und effektive Monitoring Mechanismen eingeführt wurden.“ (ECCHR, 27. April 2023, S. 14)

·      HRW – Human Rights Watch: “Like We Were Just Animals”, Pushbacks of People Seeking Protection from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina, 3. Mai 2023
https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/05/03/we-were-just-animals/pushbacks-people-seeking-protection-croatia-bosnia-and

„Human Rights Watch researchers interviewed 105 people—all refugees, asylum seekers, and other migrants, staying in squats, encampments, or shelters, in transit, or sleeping on the streets. Interviews took place in and around Bihać and Velika Kladuša, Bosnia and Herzegovina; Rijeka, Croatia; Ljubljana, Slovenia; Oulx and Trieste, Italy; and Briançon, France. Most of these interviews were carried out in Bosnia and Herzegovina near the Croatian border during visits in November 2021, May and July 2022, and February, March, and April 2023. Twenty-one people identified themselves as unaccompanied children under the age of 18. Five were parents travelling with children under age 18, and twelve were children travelling with their parents or other family members. Most of those interviewed were from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, and Pakistan. Other countries of origin included Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Guinea, Morocco, India, Nepal, and Turkey.

Human Rights Watch also interviewed aid workers, volunteers, and activists who distribute food, provide medical or legal services, or offer information and other support to asylum seekers and migrants.

Human Rights Watch researchers conducted interviews in English, French, Spanish, or Portuguese, in some cases with the aid of interpreters for people who did not speak those languages. We explained to all interviewees the purpose and public nature of our reporting, that the interviews were voluntary and confidential, and that they would receive no personal service or benefit for speaking to us. We also obtained oral consent from each adult interviewee and oral assent from each child interviewee.“ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 12)

„Pushbacks from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina are both a longstanding phenomenon and an ongoing practice. The Danish Refugee Council recorded nearly 30,000 pushbacks from Croatia to northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina between 2020 and the end of 2022—a number that it cautions is likely a significant underestimate. Its teams in Bosnia and Herzegovina continued to record pushbacks as this report was being finalized in mid-April 2023.

Every humanitarian group operating in northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina observed that the number of people transiting through the country had fallen throughout 2022 and early 2023, and that correspondingly fewer people were pushed back from Croatia. Even so, they observed that the number of pushbacks in 2022—nearly 4,100, according to the Danish Refugee Council—was still high in absolute terms, and almost certainly severely undercounted the total number of pushbacks from Croatia.“ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 15)

„But by March 2023, groups reported that Croatian police were again carrying out pushbacks and other mass summary expulsions to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Some of these expulsions had a veneer of legality—Croatian police issued written decisions and expelled people at regular border crossings, using a ‘readmission’ agreement with Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nevertheless, as with informal pushbacks and the unenforced ‘seven-day’ orders, expulsions under the readmission agreement did not consider people’s individual protection needs, in violation of international norms. And in many instances, Croatian police made no effort to follow readmission procedures; instead, following their usual pushback practice, they simply ordered people to cross rivers or wooded or mountainous areas to enter Bosnia and Herzegovina.“ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 15-16)

„In the second half of 2022, in one such tactic, Croatian police frequently issued people summary expulsion orders giving them a seven-day deadline to leave the European Economic Area. People who received these orders told Human Rights Watch that Croatian police did not allow them to explain their circumstances or to request asylum, did not explain the process or the nature of the order, did not say if they had an opportunity to be represented or to seek review of the order, and did not provide translations of the order in the languages they understood best. In fact, nearly everybody Human Rights Watch spoke with understood the papers they received to be a seven-day permit to transit Croatia.“ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 23-24)

Informationen über die gewalttätige Behandlung von Menschen an der kroatischen Grenze und als Teil der „Pushbacks“ finden Sie im folgenden Kapitel des HRW-Berichts: ‘Violence, Humiliation, and Other Abuses During Pushbacks’ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 25-52).

„Human Rights Watch heard many such accounts of Croatian police ignoring people’s requests for asylum. For instance, 12-year-old Zarin G. told us he and his extended family, including four other children between the ages of 3 and 8, had been pushed back from Croatia early that morning even though they tried to explain that they were from Afghanistan and wanted to seek asylum. Similarly, describing his second pushback in a week in early April 2023, 15-year-old Hasan F., also from Afghanistan, said, ‘I asked for asylum. I told the police I’m underage. I repeated this: ‘I am fifteen. I am a child.’ They ignored me. They just took me to the border and told me to go.’

The people interviewed for this report repeatedly expressed dismay at the unwillingness of the Croatian border police to consider the specific circumstances that led them to leave their countries. […]

Sometimes Croatian police falsely claim that access to asylum is restricted in some way. For instance, Rozad N., 17, said he and his family have asked for asylum in Croatia more than 45 times:

We always ask for asylum. Usually they’re just like, ‘Okay, bye.’ They always have some lie. Sometimes they say the camp is full. Or there’s no car to take us there. The buses aren’t working, so they can’t accept us. It’s always some lie like that. […]

Others told Human Rights Watch that Croatian police responded to their requests for asylum with insults, including racial slurs. […]

Many of the people interviewed for this report said they made their asylum requests clearly and repeatedly to leave no doubt as to their objective. Describing a pushback in April 2022, Mustafa Q., a 33-year-old man from Pakistan, told us, ‘We had walked for seven days. We were almost to the Slovenian border when the Croatian police caught us. We asked for asylum many, many times. They just told us, ‘No asylum,’ and pushed us back to Bosnia.’ In another case, Yasser D., a 26-year-old Pakistani man, said Croatian police apprehended and pushed back the five members of his group in early 2021. ‘Everybody asked for asylum. That’s why we had crossed the border, so we kept asking for asylum when the police caught us. They didn’t acknowledge our request. Instead, they beat us and had us enter their vehicle. They hit us with their sticks, kicked us, punched us. To them, it was like we were just animals.’

We also heard numerous accounts from people who said they consistently requested asylum from Croatian police even though they had been pushed back many times.“ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 53-55)

„In the face of overwhelming evidence, Croatian authorities typically reject reports of pushbacks categorically or claim they are carried out by private individuals. Prosecutors have not acted on more than a dozen detailed criminal complaints submitted by human rights groups, ostensibly because the complaints lack sufficient evidence. Nor have prosecutors or other authorities responded to the Croatian ombudsperson’s request for an investigation into reports of police mistreatment of migrants. In one of the few instances in which officials have publicly acknowledged that members of the police force took part in pushbacks, just three officers received suspended sentences—and then only for improperly wearing their uniforms.

A border monitoring mechanism, established in 2021 with European Union funding after considerable delay, has not been independent or effective. Among other significant limitations, it is not authorized to conduct unannounced inspections to official border crossing stations and cannot investigate areas between border crossing stations, the zone known as ‘green border.’

As the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture concluded in a 2021 report, ‘no arrangements are currently in place to prevent police officers acting violently against migrants, [leaving them] safe in the knowledge that they will not be held to account.’“ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 58)

·      Balkan Insight: Migrants’ Mass Expulsions from Croatia Raise Legal Doubts, 5. Mai 2023
https://balkaninsight.com/2023/05/05/migrants-mass-expulsions-from-croatia-raise-legal-doubts/

„Since the end of March 2023, hundreds of migrants and refugees have been returned from Croatia back to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Differently from the illegal pushbacks that saw thousands of people being violently sent back from Croatia to Bosnia between 2018 and 2022, these recent operations are happening with cooperation between the two countries and with the open approval of European institutions.

NGOs and rights groups were the first to condemn this new phenomenon, referring to it as ‘mass expulsions’ implemented by Croatia. With information gathered by direct testimonies and documents collected from the expelled people, they have voiced concerns regarding alleged degrading treatments and human rights violations by Croatian police.

Besides such abuses, experts also say the procedure could be illegal. […]

Croatian and Bosnian authorities later explained that the mass returns were taking place on the basis of a bilateral agreement between the two states signed in 2002 and annexed again in September 2011 with a specific plan for its implementation, but never actually put into use. […]

Presenting data for the first three months of 2023, he stated that a total of 768 foreign citizens had been accepted back under the Readmission Agreement between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia. […]

Sara Kekus, from the Zagreb-based Center for Peace Studies, CMS, who has been monitoring the situation with migrants, told BIRN [Balkan Investigative Reporting Network] that they do not have specific data on readmissions, but that the number is clearly increasing.

‘According to the testimonies of our associates, organisations, volunteers, and activists who are present in BiH [Bosnien und Herzegowina], the persons returned from Croatia testified that they tried to seek asylum [there], but they were not allowed to do so, or they did not even know who to ask for asylum,’ Kekus said.

According to Kekus, people reported not having access to translators and that they were issued documents mostly in Croatian, which they signed without knowing what they were signing.

‘Complaints are that persons were kept in detention for several days and that the meals were rather meagre, one a day, bread and cheese and water,’ he said.

Among the expelled people, Kekus notes, there were not only adults but also unaccompanied children and families with small children, which is ‘especially problematic’. […]

The MUP [Croatian Ministry of Interior] also said these procedures cannot be called expulsions, but are instead returns of persons as regulated by the bilateral agreement.

Italian jurist and migration expert Gianfranco Schiavone has a different opinion. ‘This type of procedure needs to be verified carefully because the notion of readmission applies currently in light of a directive, 115 of 2008, that regulates readmissions, but only among member countries of the European Union.’

That is not the case for the two countries in question. Croatia is a European Union member since 2015, and it joined the visa-free Schengen zone at the start of 2023. Bosnia, on the other hand, has only recently been granted the status of EU candidate country.“ (Balkan Insight, 5. Mai 2023)

·      Global Detention Project: Croatia, Juni 2023
https://www.globaldetentionproject.org/countries/europe/croatia#country-updates

„Faced with increasing migration flows, Croatia has focused on the securitisation of its borders–deploying thousands of police officers and using specialised equipment such as thermos-vision devices and drones. Recently, reports have alleged that Croatian authorities have been engaged in arbitrarily detaining and torturing irregular arrivals in ad hoc facilities, before forcing them back across the border to Bosnia. The country’s official immigration detention system has also been the focus of criticism, as non-citizens are required to pay for their own detention and lack information about their rights and access to legal aid, and unaccompanied children are detained without adequate services.“ (Global Detention Project, Juni 2023)

·      HPC – Croatian Law Centre: Country Report: Croatia; 2022 Update, Juni 2023
https://asylumineurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/AIDA-HR-2022-Update.pdf

„Pushback practices persisted throughout 2022, as reported by many organisations such as the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), PRAB [Protection Rights At Borders] initiative, the Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN), Save the Children, Are You Serious? (AYS), the Centre for Peace Studies (CPS) and Welcome! Initiative’.

According to the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), 3,461 persons were pushed back from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in 2022, compared to 9,114 in 2021. UNHCR [United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees] data further indicates that 289 persons were pushed back from Croatia to Serbia in 2022, compared to 928 in 2021. […]

Are You Syrious (AYS), as a part of the Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN), reported that BVMN collects data on pushbacks. According to their data in 2022, BVMN collected 123 testimonies of expelled groups, which included at least 1,100 victims. The majority of persons (93.5%) were expelled from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Among the interviewed groups who experienced pushback, at least 53 groups (43.1%) included minors, and at least 73 groups (59.35%) declared having tried to request asylum. The most common forms of violence recorded were: beating, theft and destruction of personal belongings (money, mobile phones and portable batteries). AYS also reported that according to BVMN data, violent acts were observed against all groups of people, including towards pregnant women, children, unaccompanied children and elderly persons.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 26-27)

·      Der Standard: Kroatien: "Migrationsdruck an der Grenze hat deutlich zugenommen", 6. Juni 2023
https://www.derstandard.de/story/3000000173409/kroatien-migrationsdruck-an-der-grenze-hat-deutlich-zugenommen

„In jüngster Zeit war vor allem an der kroatisch-bosnischen Grenze eine Änderung der Politik zu bemerken. Migranten wurden nämlich vermehrt aufgrund eines bilateralen Abkommen von Kroatien aus nach Bosnien-Herzegowina zurückgebracht. Diese reguläre Rücksendung ist in rechtsstaatlicher Hinsicht ein Fortschritt, zumal die Migranten in diesem Fall auch nicht ‚zurückgeprügelt‘ werden – wie dies in den vergangenen Jahren sehr oft geschah.

Auf Anfrage des STANDARD hat das kroatische Innenministerium nun bekanntgegeben, dass Kroatien bis dato 6.186 Rückübernahmeersuchen an Bosnien-Herzegowina gesendet hat. Bosnien-Herzegowina stimmte der Aufnahme von 3.872 Personen zu. ‚Allerdings wurden bisher nur 1.074 Personen tatsächlich wieder aufgenommen‘, erklärte das kroatische Innenministerium. Der Rest der Migranten äußerte nämlich die Absicht, internationalen Schutz zu beantragen, doch die meisten dieser Personen verließen Kroatien wieder – höchstwahrscheinlich Richtung Slowenien, um dann weiterzugehen, oft nach Italien.

Abkommen lange nicht funktionsfähig

Kroatien kann nur jene Migranten zurück nach Bosnien-Herzegowina schicken, die einen Registrierungsnachweis (das sogenannte ‚Weiße Papier‘) bei sich tragen, welches bekundet, dass sie sich zuvor in Bosnien-Herzegowina aufgehalten haben. Die Rückübernahmen werden auf der Grundlage des 2011 geschlossenen bilateralen Abkommens vorgenommen.“ (Der Standard, 6. Juni 2023)

·      AAN – Afghanistan Analysts Network: Keep on Moving on the Balkan Route: No quarter for Afghan asylum seekers in Croatia and Serbia, 26. September 2023
https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/en/reports/migration/keep-on-moving-on-the-balkan-route-no-quarter-for-afghan-asylum-seekers-in-croatia-and-serbia/

„Croatian police behaviour towards Afghans likely plays another key role in keeping them on the move. The country’s borders with Bosnia and Serbia are heavily patrolled, along with transit routes in the interior; according to the Croatian Prime minister, 6,700 police guard and patrol the border. The Croatian police often engage in so-called ‘pushbacks’ – that is, the immediate and illegal expulsion of individuals who may have applied for asylum – if given the opportunity.

Migrants intercepted by the police not only close to the border, but even at greater distances from it, are routinely brought back and forced to re-enter Bosnia on foot, without a formal transfer to Bosnian authorities, and usually through deserted tracts of the border far away from their original crossing point.

CMS [Centre for Peace Studies] have estimated that around 25,000 pushbacks to Bosnia took place in the years 2019-21 (with smaller numbers to Serbia). The overall number of pushbacks may have slightly diminished in 2022 – the Danish Refugee Council counted 3,461 pushbacks to Bosnia; however, Afghan nationals constituted the main victims of this practice, with 919 such cases. In the first six months of 2023, the volume of pushbacks involving Afghans has continued unabated, with 475 recorded.” (AAN, 26. September 2023)

·      BVMN – Border Violence Monitoring Network: Illegal Pushbacks and Border Violence Reports, November 2023
https://borderviolence.eu/app/uploads/BVMN-Monthly-Report-November-2023-.pdf.pdf

„The presence and transit of people on the move through the Bosnian Northern Canton of the Una Sana saw a slight numerical increase in the final weeks of November. As far as the town of Velika Kladuša and its surrounding areas are concerned, local activists have claimed to meet groups of people on the move on a daily basis, who were pushed back to Bosnia Herzegovina by the Croatian police. The destruction of SIM cards and theft of personal phones and money at the hands of the Croatian police have been reported by people in transit, who have also stated to have experienced multiple pushbacks in a row. The pushed back groups often include women, minors and children.

More and more frequently, pushback trends registered in the area seem to reproduce the operational patterns characteristic of 2021 – 2019, in particular: frequent use of extreme physical violence, such as beating with batons, confiscation of clothes and personal belongings and their subsequent destruction through burning, and forced immersion in rivers. The use of police dogs as a means of intimidation and reckless driving by the apprehending officers have also been reported.“ (BVMN, November 2023, S. 15)

·      DRC – Danish Refugee Council: Border Monitoring Factsheet December 2023, Jänner 2024
https://pro.drc.ngo/media/ojtcfi1b/2023_12_border-monitoring-factsheet-final-overview.pdf

„Total for 2023: 3.323 persons* reporting pushbacks to BiH [Bosnien und Herzegowina].“ (DRC, Jänner 2024)

·      DRC – Danish Refugee Council: Border Monitoring Factsheet January 2024, Februar 2024
https://pro.drc.ngo/media/d5phitfd/2024_01_border-monitoring-factsheet-final.pdf

„217 persons* reporting pushbacks from Croatia to BiH [Bosnien und Herzegowina] in January 2024.“ (DRC, Februar 2024)

Situation nach der Rückkehr von nach dem Dublin-Verfahren überstellten Personen

·      SRC – Swiss Refugee Council: Situation of asylum seekers and beneficiaries of protection with mental health problems in Croatia, Dezember 2021
https://www.fluechtlingshilfe.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationen/Dublinlaenderberichte/211220_Croatia_final.pdf

„3.1 Dublin returnees

Dublin returnees are transferred to Zagreb airport. No NGO is available at the airport, even though for very serious cases, a psychologist may be made available. Normally, a Ministry of the Interior officer is assigned to collect arriving people at the airport. Provided that asylum seekers have access to the Croatian asylum procedure upon return, they are placed in an asylum center. There is no different treatment or procedure for persons with special vulnerabilities.

If Dublin returnees do not want to apply for international protection, they are considered as irregular migrants, which means that they can also be detained).“ (SRC, Dezember 2021, S. 9)

·      HPC – Croatian Law Centre: Country Report: Croatia; 2022 Update, Juni 2023
https://asylumineurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/AIDA-HR-2022-Update.pdf

„There is no special interview conducted in the Dublin procedure, since questions relevant to that procedure are part of the interview when expressing the intention to apply for international protection before the police, and also of the first interview that is conducted by the officials of the Reception Centre for Applicants for international protection upon the lodging of the application.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 50-51)

„The same rules as in the regular procedure apply for access to free legal assistance during the Dublin procedure, meaning that free legal aid includes assistance in the preparation of the lawsuit and representation before the Administrative Court, if requested by the applicant.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 52)

„2.7. The situation of Dublin returnees

Applicants who are returned from other Member States in principle do not face any obstacles in accessing the procedure for granting international protection in Croatia. However, those who had left Croatia before the end of procedure and therefore had their case suspended, have to re-apply for international procedure (if they wish) once they return to the country, and thereby re-enter their initial procedure, in line with Article 18(2) of the Dublin III Regulation. On the other hand, persons whose application was explicitly withdrawn or rejected before leaving Croatia are considered subsequent applicants upon return, contrary to the requirements of the Regulation.

According to the report prepared by the Swiss Refugee Council, Dublin returnees are transferred to Zagreb airport. No NGO is available at the airport, even though for very serious cases, a psychologist may be made available. Normally, an official from the Ministry of the Interior is assigned to collect arriving people at the airport. Asylum seekers are placed in a Reception centre for applicants for international protection. There is no different treatment or procedure for persons with special vulnerabilities. In reception centres, Dublin returnees are in general subjected to initial health examination and screening, during which basic screening of mental health difficulties are assessed. This is conducted through MdM [Doctors of the World]. According to their information, the outcome of this assessment may be shared with the Ministry of Interior, if the patient agrees with it. This is the case especially if special needs regarding the accommodation become apparent.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 53)

·      SOSF – Solidarité Sans Frontières: Ein Spirale der Gewalt, Dublin-Rückführungen nach Kroatien und die Rolle der Schweiz, 28. Juni 2023
https://www.sosf.ch/sites/default/files/2023-08/230628_Sosf_DublinKroatien_Spirale_der_Gewalt_DE_WEB.pdf

„6.1 Einchecken nach der Rückkehr Dublin

Laut Zeugenaussagen gibt es bei der Ankunft am Flughafen Zagreb keine besonderen Formalitäten für die Registrierung von Personen, die auf der Grundlage der Dublin-Verordnung zurückgeführt werden. Seit April 2023 werden die Asylsuchenden direkt in eines der beiden Aufnahmezentren gebracht, die meisten mit einem geschlossenen Kleinbus der Polizei ohne Fenster. Einige alleinstehende Männer wurden aufgefordert, ein öffentliches Verkehrsmittel zu benutzen, um zum Aufnahmezentrum zu gelangen. Jeder Asylsuchende, der Kroatien während des Verfahrens verlassen hat, kann das eingeleitete Verfahren wieder aufnehmen. Keiner der von uns angehörten Abgeschobenen hatte Probleme, seinen Asylantrag im Aufnahmezentrum zu registrieren. Wie die anderen Asylsuchenden werden sie zwischen einer und drei Wochen nach ihrer Ankunft in der Aufnahmeeinrichtung zur ersten Kurzanhörung geladen. Laut dem ECRE [European Council on Refugees and Exiles]/AIDA [Asylum Information Database]-Bericht müssen Personen, die den Asylantrag vor der Abreise aus Kroatien zurückgezogen haben oder vor ihrer Abreise eine Ablehnung erhalten haben, ein Wiedererwägungsgesuch einreichen, was den Anforderungen der Dublin-Verordnung widerspricht. Unter den von uns angehörten Personen befand sich keine, die sich in einer solchen Situation befand.“ (SOSF, 28. Juni 2023, S. 17)

„In den letzten sieben Jahren gab es laut dem Center for Peace Studies (CPS) zahlreiche Fälle, in denen Menschen illegal zurückgedrängt wurden, obwohl sie in Kroatien als Asylsuchende registriert waren. Somit kann nicht garantiert werden, dass Menschen, welche durch eine Dublin-Ausschaffung nach Kroatien gelangen und dort ein Asylgesuch stellen, vor illegalen Rückführungen oder obig beschriebenen Massenabschiebungen geschützt sind. ‘Everybody with another skin color can be subjected to unlawful expulsion during their stay in Croatia’, meinte Sara Kekuš vom Center for Peace Studies zu uns. Und auch der Blick auf andere Länder zeigt, dass diese Gefahr durchaus real ist.“ (SOSF, 28. Juni 2023, S. 32)

Weitere Informationen zur Situation von nach dem Dublin-Verfahren überstellten Personen finden Sie in folgenden Abschnitten dieser Orientierungsrecherche: „Versorgung im Asylverfahren“ und „Zugang zu medizinischer Behandlung“.

Stand der Implementierung des unabhängigen Überwachungsmechanismus

·      Centar Za Mirovne Studije: The Annual Report of the (Independent) Monitoring Mechanism, as per the instructions of the Ministry of the Interior, 4. Juli 2022
https://www.cms.hr/en/azil-i-integracijske-politike/novo-godisnje-izvjesce-neovisnog-mehanizma-nadzora

„The annual report of the so-called Independent Mechanism for Monitoring (IMM) the actions of police officers of the Ministry of the Interior (MoI) in the area of illegal migration and international protection for the past year was published on Friday, July 1st, 2022, illustrating all the shortcomings of the monitoring system itself.

In the places where police conduct most requires monitoring, the (independent) monitoring mechanism does not have the ability to do unannounced spot checks without the prior notice and control of those who are supposed to be monitored. The IMM reported that ‘persons in dark uniforms’ illegally expelled migrants from the Croatian territory. It also determined that members of the police did in fact illegally expel migrants as well, but that this only happens around suspected mine-fields, and only that one time when it was captured on video and broadcast by RTL television. The other cases of violent and illegal expulsions are referred to as difficulties faced by migrants.

For quite some time now, we have been alerting the Ministry and public that the so-called Independent Monitoring Mechanism is not effective because it does not have access to precisely those places where pushbacks take place: primarily green border areas where, according to relevant reports, about 90% of pushbacks in the last 6 years have occurred.

Namely, as the Report states (although contradictory claims are made in the report), the Mechanism does not have the power to make unannounced visits to the green border areas, nor does it have access to the information system of the MoI. In other words, the (Independent!) Monitoring Mechanism supervised the actions of MoI police officers, and we quote: ‘in the presence of authorized MoI officers of the MoI and in line with their instructions.’

The Independent Monitoring Mechanism casually mentions that ‘illegal conduct of Croatian police officers towards migrants was registered (e.g. use of force) aimed at their forcible return,’ however qualifies this illegal expulsion as one of the ‘difficulties’ that migrants ‘face’, and not as potentially criminal acts and illegalities, the supervision and prevention of which was precisely the main purpose behind the creation of the Independent Monitoring Mechanism. In a similar vein, the IMM Report mentions, in passing, that numerous migrants described that ‘force had been used by persons in dark uniforms without insignia, wearing balaclavas (ski masks) and carrying batons.’ This is the same description given by victims of pushbacks over the last three years when describing individuals who tortured them, and to whom they were handed over to by Croatian police officers wearing Croatian police uniforms. The three criminal complaints filed by the Center for Peace Studies are precisely about the actions of armed officers, dressed in black and wearing balaclavas, exactly the same outfits that can be seen in the videorecording made by Lighthouse Reports investigative journalists, for which it has been proven that the individuals were police officers.

The few instances of pushbacks that the Mechanism recorded were ‘on the basis of information received from the MoI’ and from television, referring to the RTL footage of pushbacks and beatings of migrants at the Croatian border. Based on information obtained from bodies that the Mechanism supervises, the MMI established that police officers illegally expelled people in mine-suspected areas, a fact it then tries to downplay by describing these as situations in which the ‘MoI misinterprets relevant regulations.’“ (Centar Za Mirovne Studije, 4. Juli 2022)

HRW – Human Rights Watch: “Like We Were Just Animals”, Pushbacks of People Seeking Protection from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina, 3. Mai 2023
https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/05/03/we-were-just-animals/pushbacks-people-seeking-protection-croatia-bosnia-and

„A Deficient Border Monitoring Mechanism

The European Commission called for the creation of a border monitoring mechanism in 2018 when it allocated €6.8 million to Croatia ‘to help reinforce border management at the EU’s external borders, in full respect of EU rules.’ Croatia did not establish the mechanism until 2021.

Members of the mechanism were chosen by the Ministry of the Interior, which did not make a public call for nominations and did not disclose its selection criteria. The result, as the Centre for Peace Studies and other groups have noted, is that the ministry is purporting to monitor itself through a mechanism it appoints and controls.

Members of the mechanism can only visit formal places of detention, such as police stations, official border crossing points, and other detention centers. The mechanism cannot conduct field investigations along the unmonitored stretches of the border where most pushbacks take place. It lacks the ability to conduct unannounced inspections and does not have access to the Croatian Ministry of the Interior’s databases. As the Croatian ombudsperson has observed, ‘without the possibility of unannounced visits to institutions, inspections of premises and free access to all data . . . monitoring of police treatment of irregular migrants cannot be considered effective.’

Despite these significant limitations, the initial version of the monitoring mechanism’s first report, published in December 2021, noted that ‘the police are conducting illicit deterrence (pushbacks),’ among other ‘irregularities in police conduct.’ This version disappeared from the government website the following day and was replaced a week later with a new version describing pushbacks as ‘isolated cases.’

Assessing Croatia’s border monitoring mechanism and the European Commission’s oversight of the EU funding used to establish it, the EU ombudsperson found ‘significant shortcomings . . . as regards how fundamental rights compliance was monitored’ and called on the European Commission to ‘take an active role in overseeing the monitoring mechanism and demand concrete and verifiable information from the Croatian authorities on the steps taken to investigate reports of collective expulsions and mistreatment of migrants and asylum seekers.’ Similarly, a delegation of the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs found ‘little evidence as to the effectiveness of the mechanism’ up to the time of its visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina in May 2022.“ (HRW, 3. Mai 2023, S. 63-64)

·      HPC – Croatian Law Centre: Country Report: Croatia; 2022 Update, Juni 2023
https://asylumineurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/AIDA-HR-2022-Update.pdf

„An independent monitoring mechanism (IMM) for border monitoring was established in Croatia in summer 2021.

According to the PRAB [Protecting Rights at Border], the mechanism has not been effective in preventing and limiting pushback practices.

The independent monitoring mechanism was established for a one-year period with the possibility of extension, while activities were planned to be carried out at the Croatian border (border crossings / police stations / police administrations) with Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and the Republic of Serbia and in the reception centres for foreigners.

A second agreement was signed in November 2022. It will be implemented for a period of 18 months with automatic extension, through announced and unannounced visits to police stations, police administrations, the external border, including the green border, at the border crossings with Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia, as well as and in Reception Centre for Applicants of International Protection and in reception centres for foreigners.

The activities of the Independent Monitoring Mechanism include 20 visits (announced and unannounced) in order to monitor police officers' treatment of irregular migrants and applicants for international protection in the implementation of regulations governing state border surveillance and international protection, announced visits to green border and access to case files regarding complaints of alleged illegal treatment of irregular migrants and applicants for international protection. The direct activities of the Independent Monitoring Mechanism are carried out by two representatives of civil society organizations.

Within seven (7) days after the monitoring visits, monitors shall jointly compile an individual report and submit it to the Coordinating Committee. The first semi-annual report of the Independent Monitoring Mechanism for the period June - December 2021 was published at the end of 2021 and is available online.

The first annual IMM’s report covering period June 2021 - June 2022 was published in July 2022. The report presents the activities and findings of the IMM, as well as cases of established irregularities and examples of good practices. The monitoring visits conducted in the framework of the IMM were both announced and unannounced. According to the first Agreement, 20 monitoring visits were foreseen during the 1-year period. According to annual report, out of 20 monitoring visits, 3 were announced and 17 unannounced. Direct ‘activity providers’ visited the green border on 5 occasions as part of observations of border police stations accompanied by police officers in the areas of Border police station (BPS) Donji Lapac, Police station (PS) Dvor, BPS Stara Gradiška, BPS Trilj and BPS Korenica. When sampling cases/locations of observations, the IMM was guided by the key selection criteria of the size/number and the degree of vulnerability of persons/groups of migrants, estimated urgency of the observation, assessment of the scale/severity of potential illegalities and geographically unified distribution of conducted observations in correlation with incidence and prevalence of irregular migrations in individual locations. In addition to aggregate statistical data and reports of the Ministry of Interior, the IMM also based the sampling of cases/locations of observations on daily notifications of the Ministry of Interior on persons encountered as irregular migrants (location, number of people in the group, presence of vulnerable persons in the group, origin of group members, etc.) also making sure that observations in BPSs and PSs cover the entire eastern border of the Republic of Croatia. According to the annual report, no irregularities regarding the right to seek asylum and access to the asylum procedure were registered at border police stations.

The powers of the IMM do not include unannounced visits to the green border nor gaining insight into the Information System of the Ministry of Interior, so the IMM could not observe the actions at the green border of the Republic of Croatia, except during announced visits to the green border conducted in the presence of authorized officers of the Ministry of Interior and in line with their instructions.

Based on the insight into documentation and interviews at border police stations and announced observations of the green border, apart from the cases mentioned below, cases of forcible return of irregular migrants, which would lead to collective expulsions, were not established.

By monitoring, the IMM established that the police conducts, without registering them, permissible deterrence in line with Article 13 of the Schengen Borders Code, as well as illicit deterrence in mine-suspected areas in isolated cases. The IMM further established that the Ministry of Interior misinterprets relevant regulations in situations when irregular migrants know that police officers do not conduct physical control of mine-suspected areas, take full advantage of that circumstance by crossing the state border in these dangerous/(potentially) mined locations and upon crossing and being encountered by police officers claim that they entered the Croatian territory and apply for asylum. However, the interpretation of the border police is that these persons did not in fact enter the Croatian territory, as these areas are considered not ‘under the actual control of the Republic of Croatia’. Instead they are, ‘deterred from crossing/entering’ in a way that they are returned in harmless locations, without determining whether they are indeed in need of international protection, and should as such be protected from refoulement from the moment they come under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Croatia, let alone on its territory, which is the case in the situation described.

By conducting unannounced monitoring and analysing other primary and secondary data sources relating to the video recording broadcast, the IMM established that the members of the riot police acted illicitly by returning irregular migrants from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina outside the scope of permitted national and international law, which was also confirmed by the MoI [Ministry of Interior]. Based on this case, disciplinary proceedings as well as criminal proceedings were initiated against police officers before the competent state’s attorney office.

Among the difficulties faced by irregular migrants, the annual report states that illegal acts of members of the Croatian police towards migrants (e.g. use of force) with the aim of forced return have been recorded. In describing cases of illegal use of force, irregular migrants stated that force was applied by persons in dark uniforms without markings, with ‘phantoms’ on their heads, equipped with batons. For the duration of the IMM (from June 2021 to June 2022), based on claims from various sources (requests of the Ombudswoman, Ombudswoman for Children, Office for the Prevention of Corruption and Organized Crime (USKOK), State Attorney’s Office, media, individual complaints, nongovernmental organisations etc.), thirty-five cases were initiated in the Internal Control Department of the Ministry of Interior, which monitors the actions of the border and riot police regarding possible violations of rights of refugees and migrants irregularly entering the Republic of Croatia. Fifteen of these cases were finalised and in seven of them sanctions were imposed. Three out of the said seven sanctions refer to police officers from the RTL report. They were sanctioned due to improper conduct and abuse of power.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 33-35)

·      PRAB – Protection Rights at Borders: Pushbacks at Europe’s borders: a continuously ignored crisis, Jänner 2024
https://pro.drc.ngo/media/1sgpw3ng/prab-report-september-to-december-2023-_-final.pdf

„The final reporting from Croatia’s border monitoring mechanism happened in June 2022, since then, there is no clarity on whether the mechanism is de facto operating, whether it has taken on board the recommendations shared by its advisory board after the completion of the initial one-year cycle of the mechanism or how the continuous high number of pushbacks committed by the Croatian border guards are assessed and which steps are taken to ensure justice for victims and accountability towards perpetrators of the violence […]

In Croatia, the monitoring mechanism does not have the mandate to investigate pushback cases, nor to ensure that pathways to justice are facilitated. Victims are only left with already existing mechanisms as viable legal remedies, which often have limitations, It should be noted that, for instance, the mandate of the Croatian Ombuds is often impeded with regards to border violence, not allowing her to de facto complete the role that is granted by the constitution.“ (PRAB, Jänner 2024, S. 16-17)

Es konnte folgender Bericht des unabhängigen Überwachungsmechanismus gefunden werden:

·      Independent mechanism of monitoring the actions of police officers of the Ministry of the Interior in the area of illegal migration and international protection: Annual Report June 2021 – June 2022, Juli 2022
https://www.hck.hr/UserDocsImages/dokumenti/Azil,%20migracije,%20trgovanje%20ljudima/Annual%20report%20of%20the%20Independent%20monitoring%20mechanism%20-%201%20July%202022.pdf?vel=2061078

Rückkehrentscheidung und Abschiebung nach Bosnien-Herzegowina für Asylwerber·innen ohne inhaltliche Prüfung und mögliche Rechtsschutzmöglichkeiten mit aufschiebender Wirkung

·      HPC – Croatian Law Centre: Country Report: Croatia; 2022 Update, Juni 2023
https://asylumineurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/AIDA-HR-2022-Update.pdf

„3. Admissibility procedure

3.1. General (scope, criteria, time limits)

No specific procedure is designated as ‘admissibility procedure’ in Croatia. However, it is possible for the Department for International Protection procedure to take a decision without entering into a further indepth examination of the application (i.e. an examination on the merits) when the grounds for the dismissal of the application are met.

An application will be dismissed where:

(1) The applicant has been granted international protection in another member state of the European Economic Area;

(2) The applicant has been granted international protection in a third state whose rights he or she still enjoys, including the guarantees stemming from non-refoulement, provided that he or she will be received back into that state;

(3) It is possible to apply the concept of Safe Third Country;

(4) It is possible to apply the concept of European safe third country;

(5) The responsibility of another member state of the European Economic Area is established to consider the application; or

(6) The application was lodged by a national of a member state of the European Union.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 53-54)

„According to the LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] the deadline for appealing a dismissal decision before the Administrative Court is 8 days after the delivery of the decision of the Ministry of Interior.

As for suspensive effect, the LITP provides all lawsuits with suspensive effect, except for lawsuits against dismissal decisions on ‘first country of asylum’ grounds where the applicant has refugee status in another country or when a subsequent application is dismissed.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 55)

„The LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] foresees a border procedure. Two Transit Centres for Foreigners were built and opened in 2017, one in Tovarnik at the border with Serbia and another in Trilj near the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina.

At the moment, the border procedure provided under the LITP does not take place in those two centres. According to information provided by the Ministry of Interior at the beginning of 2019, it was still not clear when the implementation of the border procedure would start. However, no information is publicly available on whether this has changed from 2019 to the end of 2022. Thus, there is currently no border procedure in Croatia according to the knowledge of the Croatian Law Centre.

According to the LITP, the border procedure would be applicable for the foreigner who expresses intention of lodging an application or make subsequent application at a border crossing point or in a transit zone of an airport, sea port or internal water port, provided that the following conditions are met:

- The applicant is provided with material reception conditions; and

- The application or subsequent application may be rejected as manifestly unfounded if the applicant does not meet the conditions for asylum or subsidiary protection and conditions are met for the accelerated procedure to be conducted, or the application or subsequent application may be dismissed as inadmissible.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 56)

„The border procedure is foreseen by the LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection], but is unknown whether it is applied in practice. By law lawsuits against decisions in the border procedure have suspensive effect, and are subject to shorter time limits: a lawsuit to the Administrative Court against a decision of the Ministry of Interior made in the border procedure must be lodged within 5 days from the day of the delivery of the decision. The Ministry shall deliver the case file no later than 8 days from the day of receipt of the decision by which the Administrative Court requests the case file. The Administrative Court shall render a judgment within 8 days from the day of receipt of the case file.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 57)

„5. Accelerated procedure

5.1. General (scope, grounds for accelerated procedures, time limits)

According to the LITP [Law on International and Temporary Protection] the Ministry shall take a decision in an accelerated procedure where:

1. The applicant has presented only facts which are irrelevant to an assessment of the merits of the application;

2. The applicant has consciously misled the Ministry by presenting false information or unreliable documents, or by not providing relevant information or by concealing documents which could have had a negative effect on the decision;

3. The applicant in bad faith has probably acted and destroyed documents that establish identity and/or nationality with the aim to provide false information about his or her identity and/or nationality;

4. The applicant has presented inconsistent, contradictory, manifestly inaccurate or unconvincing statements contrary to the verified information on the country of origin, rendering his/her application unreliable;

5. A subsequent application is admissible;

6. The applicant has already resided for a longer period of time in the Republic of Croatia and for no justifiable reason failed to express his or her intention to apply for international protection earlier;

7. The applicant expressed the intention to apply for international protection for the clear purpose of postponing or preventing the enforcement of a decision which would result in his or her expulsion from the Republic of Croatia;

8. The applicant represents a risk for the national security or public order of the Republic of Croatia;

9. It is possible to apply the concept of Safe Country of Origin; or

10. The applicant has refused to give fingerprints.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 57-58)

„The Administrative Court is the competent appeal body in the accelerated procedure, so there is no difference in the authority responsible for handling the lawsuit compared to regular procedure. However, time limits are shorter: a lawsuit may be lodged to the Administrative Court within 8 days from the delivery of the decision of the Ministry of Interior.

Moreover, lawsuits against negative decisions in the accelerated procedures do not have suspensive effect. The applicant can apply for suspensive effect, which the Court has to decide on within 8 days from the receipt. However, lawsuits against decisions in cases where the applicant has already resided for a longer period of time in the Republic of Croatia and for no justifiable reason failed to express his or her intention to apply for international protection earlier never have suspensive effect i.e. there is no possibility to request suspensive effect.“ (HPC, Juni 2023, S. 59)

·      AAN – Afghanistan Analysts Network: Keep on Moving on the Balkan Route: No quarter for Afghan asylum seekers in Croatia and Serbia, 26. September 2023
https://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/en/reports/migration/keep-on-moving-on-the-balkan-route-no-quarter-for-afghan-asylum-seekers-in-croatia-and-serbia/

“According to CMS [Centre for Peace Studies] in Zagreb, Afghans crossing into Croatia face three possible legal outcomes, if caught by the police and identified as migrants. Some migrants receive access to asylum applications and are subsequently sent to Porin or another reception centre – from where most eventually resume their trip westwards. A second possibility is that the person receives a ‘return decision’, a seven-day warrant ordering them to leave Croatia. 30,000 such decisions were issued in 2022, in particular to migrants from Burundi (who used to be able to travel to Serbia without visas) but also to many Afghans. Reportedly, this practice is continuing without a clear pattern and leaves migrants facing an uncertain fate. The return decision in fact can result in their being allowed to continue traveling, or their being held and then pushed back to Bosnia. A third option – an expulsion decision – has also become more frequent this year (more details in this analysis by Balkaninsight), especially after a ministerial summit of the western Balkan countries and the EU in Rome in April 2023. Migrants may be issued an expulsion decision, which results in Bosnia formally readmitting them. They are delivered to the Bosnian police. This is reported to have happened even after a person asked for asylum in Croatia.” (AAN, 26. September 2023)