Migrants in the Attic: The Case of Migrants with Disabilities and Resettlement Services in Serbia
Abstract
:1. Overview
2. Introduction
2.1. Contemporary Disability Rights Discourse
2.2. The Migrant Crisis in the Balkan Region
2.3. Disability Rights in Serbia: Under the EU Spotlight
2.4. Socio-Legal Context of Migrants with Disabilities in Serbia: Migrant Rights in Theory
Member States shall provide, under the same eligibility conditions as nationals of the Member State that has granted protection, adequate healthcare, including treatment of mental disorders when needed, to beneficiaries of international protection who have special needs, such as […] disabled people, [and people who have experienced psychological, physical or sexual violence].
“[a]rriving migrants (including irregular migrants and asylum-seekers) shall be treated with full respect for their human dignity. They shall be provided with necessary social and medical assistance, including emergency treatment. Accommodation facilities (e.g., reception or detention centres), food and living conditions provided to migrants must meet basic standards of decency” .(Council of Europe 2011, Article II(a)(3))
2.5. Research Question
3. Methods
3.1. Case Study Methodology
3.2. Key Informant Interviews
3.3. Analysis
4. Key Findings
4.1. Awareness of Needs of Migrants with Disabilities
Whenever we go there [reception centre] someone is like can we talk to you about anything, I can’t provide any psychosocial services, but okay let’s speak […] the last time I went there, um when people were actually crying when they saw us, they couldn’t believe, that’s what I told you, finally someone came here.(Interview participant #6, 28 August 2017)
[…] Per week, we have the same number of arrivals that Greece and Italy have per day. So in that regard it’s very, I mean it’s far easier… You can count individual everyone that arrives, but the cases that we take up are quite serious because people have been longer here. The main concern currently of refugees is their mental health… They have enough accommodations, the asylum procedure is adjusted to this number of people, the transportation, every other, but their mental health is decreasing rapidly and there is a rise in violence and self harm; so we have fewer people but their problems are getting deeper.14(Interview participant #5, 23 August 2017)
4.2. Invisibility of Disability among Funders
Additionally those two girls as I’ve been told are having some mental illness. Then some people said they were forced to do it, others said that they want to because they need money. … I don’t know what I could have done… or the other thing I could do is to report them to the police which would have been the right thing to do from the legal point of view but from the human perspective they would end up in jail, and that’s it. So you have that kind of situation, and I tried to find some psychosocial support to go there and do something, nope. As far as I know, no one went. And it’s really tough you know, because I couldn’t speak to anyone about that.(Interview participant #6, 28 August 2017)
I think it is still not recognized particularly by government entities how important it is […] they think there are other [emphasized] priorities and of course there are a lot of priorities, but some organizations are just not able to do their job properly because the need of their type of support is not recognized, and when it comes to psychosocial support, that is just ignorant.(Interview participant #10, 1 September 2017)
4.3. Lagging Service Adaptation to Evolving Needs
As the situation changed, the government opened more centres, the services changed, the types of services and the character changed, many of the centres now, almost all of the centres have a medical unit within them, in order to respond to the emergency cases, right […] so when services are provided, when doctors the medical centre have a case and if the doctors cannot, the situation is more grave, they refer them to the local health care centre and some specialized care if required… so refugees and migrants and asylum seekers, those in the centres have access to full health care.(Interview participant #9, 31 August 2017)
Again, our country doesn’t really have a solution for them [the Nigerian migrants], they don’t want to stay here but they are somehow forced to stay here, legally, they can’t resettle at this moment, and the health system doesn’t have appropriate support at this moment. […] trying to help them move forward if they are in the end in a situation if they have to stay here, provide them with a job as well […] to work online, something like that.16(Interview participant #10, 1 September 2017)
5. Discussion
5.1. Descending from the Attic: Bridging the Gap in Funding and Services for Migrants with Disabilities
5.1.1. Economic Integration of Migrants with Disabilities and “Hot-Potato” Funding
5.1.2. Critical Disability Theory and Humanitarian Silos
5.1.3. Moving Forward and Recommendations
6. Conclusions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ackerly, Brooke. 2011. Human Rights Enjoyment in Theory and Activism. Human Rights Review 12: 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aljazeera. 2016. News Release. Hungary Leaves Refugees Stuck on Serbian Border. July 7. Available online: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/07/hungary-border-controls-leave-refugees-stuck-border-160707131922016.html (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Basser, Lee Ann. 2001. Human Dignity. In Critical Perspectives on Human Rights and Disability Law. Edited by Marcia H. Rioux, Lee Ann Basser and Melinda Jones. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, pp. 17–18. [Google Scholar]
- Betts, Alexander, and Paul Collier. 2017. Chapter 5 Rethinking Havens: Reaching Everyone. In Refuge: Transforming a Broken Refugee System. London: Penguin UK, p. 288. [Google Scholar]
- Beznec, Barbara, Marc Speer, and Marta Stojić Mitrovićat. 2016. The turn from humanitarianism to securitization in discourse and migration policy. In Governing the Balkan Route: Macedonia, Serbia and the European Border Regime. Edited by Barbara Beznec, Marc Speer and Marta Stojić Mitrovićat. Belgrade: Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung Southeast Europe. [Google Scholar]
- Birt, Linda, Suzanne Scott, Debbie Cavers, Christine Campbell, and Fiona Walter. 2016. Member Checking: A Tool to Enhance Trustworthiness or Merely a Nod to Validation? Qualitative Health Research 26: 1802–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 2000. OJ C 364, Art 21 (Entered into Force 1 December 2009). December 18. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. 2006. Continuation by the Republic of Serbia of membership of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro in the Council of Europe: Declaration by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Paper presented at 967th Meeting (Item 2.3a); Available online: https://rm.coe.int/168071dd21 (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. 2019. Guidelines on Human Rights Protection in the Context of Accelerated Asylum Procedures. Paper presented at 2009 1062nd Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, July 1; Available online: https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016806aff8b (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Corbin, Juliet, and Anselm Strauss. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Tehcniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
- Council of Europe. 2011. Council of Europe Standards and Guidelines in the Field of Human Rights Protection of Irregular Migrants. Committee of Ministers, art II(a)(3). Available online: https://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/frc2011/docs/CoE-standards-hr-protection-irreg-migrants.pdf (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Creswell, John W. 2013. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches. Newbury Park: Sage Publications, p. 448. [Google Scholar]
- Crock, Mary E., Laura Smith-Khan, Ron McCallum, and Ben Saul. 2017. The Legal Protection of Refugees with Disabilities: Forgotten and Invisible? Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, p. 336. [Google Scholar]
- Deshpande, Neha A., and Nawal M. Nour. 2013. Sex trafficking of women and girls. Review in Obstetrics & Gynecology 6: 22. [Google Scholar]
- EC. 2011. Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted, OJ, L 337. December 13. [Google Scholar]
- EC. 2016a. Report on the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, with special regard to the Concluding Observations of the UN CRPD Committee, 9 June, [2016] A8-0203. [Google Scholar]
- EC. 2016b. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: 2016 Communication on EU Enlargement Policy, OJ, C 715/F1. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016DC0715 (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- EC. 2016c. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Proposal for a New European Consensus on Development Our World, Our Dignity, Our Future, [2016] COM, 0740. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52016DC0740 (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- EC. 2016d. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Next Steps for a Sustainable European Future, [2016] COM, 0739. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52016DC0739&from=EN (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- EC. 2016e. Sustainable Development in the European Union: A Statistical Glance from the Viewpoint of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016). Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-statistical-books/-/KS-02-16-996 (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- EC. 2017. Implementation of the European Disability Strategy: European Parliament Resolution of 30 November 2017 on Implemenation of the European Disability Strategy, 30 November 2017, Texts Adopted [2017] P8_TA-PROV(2017)0474. November 30. [Google Scholar]
- ECHR. 1950. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 4 November 1950. 213 UNTS 221, art 14 (entered into force 3 September 1953, accession by Serbia 3 March 2004) [ECHR]. November 4. [Google Scholar]
- European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]. 2009. European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR], Strasbourg. Slawomier Musial v. Poland, January 20. [Google Scholar]
- European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]. 2011. European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR], Strasbourg. M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece, January 21. [Google Scholar]
- European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. 2017. Thematic Focus: Migrants with Disabilities. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. Available online: https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-august-2016-monthly-migration-disability-focus_en.pdf (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Gagnon, Yves-Chantal. 2010. The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook. Québec: Presses de l’Université du Québec. [Google Scholar]
- Gogou, Kondylia. 2017. The EU-Turkey deal: Europe’s year of shame. Amnesty International. March 20. Available online: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/the-eu-turkey-deal-europes-year-of-shame/ (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Greenbaum, Jordan, and James E. Crawford-Jakubiak. 2015. Child sex trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation: Health care needs of victims. Pediatrics 135: 566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Handicap International. 2014. Hidden Victims: Radical Change Needed for Older, Disabled and Injured Syrian Refugees. Handicap International. April 9. Available online: https://www.helpage.org/newsroom/press-room/press-releases/hidden-victims-radical-change-needed-for-older-disabled-and-injured-syrian-refugees/ (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Harnacke, Caroline. 2013. Disability and Capability: Exploring the Usefulness of Martha Nussbaum’s Capabilities Approach for the UN Disability Rights Convention. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 41: 768. [Google Scholar]
- Harpur. 2012. Embracing the New Disability Rights Paradigm: The Importance of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Disability & Society 27: 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Hathaway, James C. 1990. A Reconsideration of the Underlying Premise of Refugee Law. Harvard International Law Journal 31: 161. [Google Scholar]
- Hathaway, James C. 1991. Reconceiving Refugee Law as Human Rights Protection. Journal of Refugee Studies 4: 113–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Human Rights Watch. 2017. Serbia/Kosovo: Events of 2016. Human Rights Watch. Available online: https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/serbia/kosovo (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Ktistakis, Yannis. 2016. Protecting Migrants under the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Social Charter, 2nd ed. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Mackelprang, Romel W., and Richard O. Salsgiver. 2016. Contemporary International Approaches to Disability in Disability: A Diversity Model Approach in Human Service Practice, 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Mental Disability Rights Initiative-Serbia [MDRI-S]. 2011. Mental Disability Rights Initiative of Serbia (MDRI-S): Partial Report on Implementation of Recommendations as Accepted by Serbia at the Human Rights Council, (Paper delivered to Universal Periodic Review (UPR) 29 August 2011). Available online: https://www.upr-info.org/followup/assessments/session15/serbia/MDRI-serbia.pdf (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Meyers, Stephen. 2016. NGO-Ization and Human Rights Law: The CRPD’s Civil Society Mandate. Laws 5: 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Morris, Eleanor G., and Manonh L. Souhmahoro. 2017. Free Movement for All? Restrictive Practices, Human Rights Violations and European Governance. In The Challenges of European Governance in the Age of Economic Stagnation, Immigration, and Refugees. Edited by Henry F. Carey. Lanham: Lexington Books. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. 2017. International Migration Outlook 2017. Paris: OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Office of the High Commissioner. 2017. Addressing Disabilities in Large-Scale Movements of Refugees and Migrants Joint Statement by the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (CMW), and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). United Nations Human Rights. April 12. Available online: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/CMW/JointStatementCMW-CRPDFINAL.pdf (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Peers, Steve, Elspeth Guild, Diego Acosta Arcarazo, Kees Groenendijk, Violeta Moreno-Lax, and Jonathan Tomkineds. 2015. EU Immigration and Asylum Law Volume 3: EU Asylum Law, 2nd ed. Boston: Hotei Publishing. [Google Scholar]
- Peterson, Vandana. 2014. Understanding Disability under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Its Impact on International Refugee and Asylum Law. Georgia Jounral of International and Comparative Law 42: 687–742. [Google Scholar]
- Pothier, Dianne, and Richard Devlin, eds. 2006. Critical Disability Theory: Essays in Philosophy, Politics, Policy, and Law. Vancouver: UBC Press. [Google Scholar]
- Speer, Marc. 2017. Die Geschichte des Formalisierten Korridors: Erosion und Restrukturierung des Europäischen Grenzregimes auf dem Balkan Bordermontoring. München: Bordermonitoring.eu. [Google Scholar]
- Squire, Nick. 2017. A Year on from EU-Turkey Deal, Refugees and Migrants in Limbo Commit Suicide and Suffer from Trauma. The Telegraph. March 14. Available online: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/year-eu-turkey-deal-refugees-migrants-limbo-commit-suicide-suffer/ (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
- Thomas, David R. 2006. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation 27: 237–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 2007. 13 December. OJ C 326 at Art. 67. (entered into force 26 October 2012) [TFEU]. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:326:FULL:EN:PDF (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- UN. 1966. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN General Assembly, 19 December, 999 UNTS 171 arts 2.1 and 26 (entered into force 23 March 1976, accession by Serbia 12 March 2001) [ICCPR]. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations [UN]. 2008. Convention for the Rights of Peoples with Disabilities, 13 December 2006, UNTS 2515 (entered into force 3 May 2008, ratification by Serbia 31 July 2009) [CRPD]. [Google Scholar]
- UNCRPD. 2016. UNCRPD, Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Concluding Observations on the Initial Report of Serbia, UN Doc GE.16-08243. [Google Scholar]
- UNDP. 2017. UNDP, Sustainable Development Goal Analysis Mission for Western Balkans One-Day Mission to the Republic of Serbia: Understanding Linkages and Opportunities for Sustainable Development Linked to SDGs and EU Accession, 21 June 2017 [Meeting] UN House Belgrade, Republic of Serbia. [Google Scholar]
- UNHCR. 2017a. Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2016. Geneva: UNHCR. [Google Scholar]
- UNHCR. 2017b. UNHCR Serbia Update 6–8 March 2017. Available online: https://data2.unhcr.org/fr/documents/download/54240 (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- UNHCR. 2017c. Snapshot Serbia. Available online: https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/60331 (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- UNHCR. 2020. Figures at a Glance. Available online: https://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html (accessed on 7 February 2021).
- Voynov, Georgi, Hana Franková, Anikó Bakonyi, Marta Górczyńska, and Miha Nabergoj. 2017. Pushed Back at the Door: Denial of Access to Asylum in Eastern EU Member States. Budapest: Hungarian Helsinki Committee. [Google Scholar]
- Warren, Carol AB. 2002. Qualitative Interviewing. In Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method. Edited by Jaber F. Gubrium and James A. Holstein. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
1 | Asylum-seekers and refugees, although distinct legal terms, are often conflated. Asylum-seekers generally are applying for State protection whether through international law or local protection mechanisms from within that State. Refugees are already granted a State’s protection, having generally applied from outside that country or successfully made an asylum claim within the host country. Migrants passing through Serbia to reach a safe country would, by definition, be considered asylum-seekers and not refugees. Regardless, the same legal standards with respect to persecution apply under the Geneva Convention. For the purposes of this article ‘migrants’ refers broadly to refugees and asylum-seekers in Serbia. |
2 | With respect to specifically Syrian migrants, for each Syrian returned to Turkey, another Syrian shall be granted asylum in an EU country. See Council of the EU, Press Release, 144/16, “EU–Turkey Statement, 18 March 2016” (18 March 2016), European Council Press Releases. Available online: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkey-statement/ (accessed on 14 January 2021). |
3 | See for examples (Beznec et al. 2016, pp. 55–60). |
4 | As well, push back has similarly been reported in other Central European States. See (Voynov et al. 2017). |
5 | See for example RadioFreeEurope, News Release, “Merkel Praises Serbia’s Handling of Migrants Taking Balkan Route to EU” (15 March 2017). Available online: https://www.rferl.org/a/german-chancellor-merkel-praises-serbia-handling-migrant-crisis-balkan-route-eu/28370171.html. See also Andrew Macdowall, “Wait, the Serbs are Now the Good Guys?”, (18 September 2015). Politico. Available online: https://www.politico.eu/article/serbia-croatia-hungary-orban-migrants-schengen-crisis/ (accessed on 14 January 2021). |
6 | As per the “Copenhagen Criteria” of the European Union, acceding countries from Central and Eastern Europe must meet minimum requirements which include Membership requires that the candidate country has achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities, the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union. (EC, Presidency Conclusions Cophenhagen European Council, [1993], at 1.) |
7 | The rights of peoples with disabilities in Serbia are protected in its constitution. The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia guarantees human and minority rights with specific reference to international standards. Article 18 states, “Provisions on human and minority rights shall be interpreted to the benefit of promoting values of a democratic society, pursuant to valid international standards in human and minority rights, as well as the practice of international institutions which supervise their implementation.” Article 21 “prevents discrimination on several enumerated grounds including mental or physical disability. Measures taken to protect and better serve substantially disadvantaged groups does not constitute discrimination.” Human dignity and the inviobility of people with disabilities are enshrined in Articles 23 and 25, respectively, and derogations of the therefrom are not permitted. See Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, Republic of Serbia, 2006, Official Gazette of the RS 98/06 (Republic of Serbia). A general framework for anti-discrimination against people with disabilities is set up by the Law for Prevention of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities. See Law on the Prevention of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities, Republic of Serbia, 2006, Official Gazette of the RS 33/06. See also Republic of Serbia, Anti-Discrimination Strategy for 2013–2018, 5 October 2011, Official Gazette of the RS 1089/11 (Republic of Serbia). The protection of Serbia’s Constitutional rights however has been criticized under EU accession screening reports. See EC, Screening Report Serbia: Chapter 23 Judiciary and Fundamental Rights, [15 May 2014], MD 45/14 at 14. |
8 | In MSS v Belgium and Greece (21 January 2011 para. 223), the ECtHR applies Article 3 to further entrench the rights to adequate standards of living for migrants in view of the increasing regional migrant claims, regardless of whether migrants reside in government reception centres or detention centres, “The Court notes first of all that the States which form the external borders of the European Union are currently experiencing considerable difficulties in coping with the increasing influx of migrants and asylum seekers. […The court] is particularly aware of the difficulties involved in the reception of migrants and asylum seekers [and the disproportionate burden] when compared to some of these States. […] The absolute character of Article 3 cannot absolve a State of its obligations under that provision”. |
9 | “3(1) No State Party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. (2) For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.” See Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), 26 June 1987, UNTS 1465 (entered into force 26 June 1987, succeeded by Serbia 24 March 2001). |
10 | They also note the EU “Asylum Procedures Directive requiring that asylees with disabilities and mental disorders, may be in need of special guarantees and […] should be provided with adequate support”. See European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, “Thematic Focus: “Migrants with Disabilities”, (August 2016), Regular Overviews. Available online: https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-august-2016-monthly-migration-disability-focus_en.pdf (accessed on 17 February 2021). |
11 | See joint statement by Committee on Migrant Workers and Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, “Migrants and Refugees with Disabilities Must Be Priority in New Global Compact on Migration—UN Experts.” United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner News and Events. Available online: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21495&LangID=E (accessed on 14 January 2021). |
12 | Key informants included representatives from international agencies and local settlement service providers in Serbia, from on-the-ground support (Medecins Sans Frontieres [http://www.msf.org/en/where-we-work/serbia], Red Cross of Serbia [https://www.redcross.org.rs/], International Aid Network [http://www.ian.org.rs/]), to longer term support and settlement services (Info Park [no website], Psychosocial Innovation Network [psychosocialinnovation.net/en/]), policy analysts and human rights monitoring organizations (UNHCR Serbia [http://www.unhcr.org/serbia.html], Belgrade Centre for Human Rights [http://www.bgcentar.org.rs/bgcentar/eng-lat/]), and legal advocates (Praxis [https://www.praxis.org.rs/], YUCOM [http://en.YUCOM.org.rs/]). |
13 | InfoPark is an organization that works with asylum-seekers often before they are received by government camps. During the interview, migrants knocked on the building’s front door and explained they had just arrived after crossing the border the previous night. |
14 | Following a member check with this participant, she cited the increasing number of incarcerations of migrants with mental health issues. Most recently, InfoPark noted 4–5 such cases in December 2017. |
15 | The Psychosocial Innovation Network (PIN) is the only organization in Serbia that specializes in providing psychological services to vulnerable populations. Its programme for migrants receives funding from the UNHCR. |
16 | In a subsequent ‘member check’ with key informants to ensure the accuracy of quotes used, PIN clarified that disability resulting from injury occurred with migrants from other countries as well, this was merely one example. |
17 | “As a result of the arrival of large numbers of people into southern Europe that accelerated two years ago this month, there are 7600 refugees in Serbia, according to the UN refugee agency (UNHCR). Most live in 18 state-run asylum centres that provide basic necessities.” See Border Monitoring “Blocked in the Balkans: The Refugees that Europe Won’t Allow In” (8 August 2017). Available online: http://serbia.bordermonitoring.eu/2017/08/08/blocked-in-the-balkans-the-refugees-that-europe-wont-allow-in/ (accessed on 14 January 2021). |
18 | Notably, the Committee expressed concern about Serbia’s lack of a general strategy “to protect and assist persons with disabilities in situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies” and encouraged a “fully accessible and comprehensive emergency strategy”. UNCRPD, Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Concluding Observations on the Initial Report of Serbia, UN Doc GE.16-08243 (UNCRPD 2016) at para. 19–20. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Badali, J.J. Migrants in the Attic: The Case of Migrants with Disabilities and Resettlement Services in Serbia. Laws 2021, 10, 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws10010010
Badali JJ. Migrants in the Attic: The Case of Migrants with Disabilities and Resettlement Services in Serbia. Laws. 2021; 10(1):10. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws10010010
Chicago/Turabian StyleBadali, Joel John. 2021. "Migrants in the Attic: The Case of Migrants with Disabilities and Resettlement Services in Serbia" Laws 10, no. 1: 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws10010010