(Special Rapporteur... -see below - vidi dolje *)

-----------------------------------------

REPORT - Kopija engleskog teksta, a ispod toga je PRIJEVOD   

----------------------------------------------------------------------------  

http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/alldocs.aspx?doc_id=18060 

United Nations                          A/HRC/16/42/Add.2

General Assembly    Distr.: General  /  30 December 2010  /  Original: English

--------------------------

Human Rights Council

Sixteenth session

Agenda item 3

Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,

political, economic, social and cultural rights,

including the right to development

        Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a

        component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and

        on the right to non-discrimination in this context, Raquel

        Rolnik

          Addendum

        Mission to Croatia* **

(......)

III. Security of tenure for holders of occupancy/tenancy rights

(......)

D. Occupants of nominally owned and confiscated property

26. As part of the privatization of the housing sector initiative in 1991, occupancy right holders were given the possibility to transform their occupancy rights into full ownership by purchasing their flats on very favourable terms. However, occupants of nominally owned privatized apartments (flats with nominal owners) were denied the right to purchase their homes at favourable rates, although their tenancy rights had not been abrogated.

Occupancy rights were abolished in 1996 and OTR holders who could not purchase their apartments, had their properties transformed into protected leases, or lost their OTRs.

27. In 1996, the Croatian Parliament adopted the Law on Lease of Apartments (Official Gazette No. 91/96), which deprived occupants of nominally-owned privatized apartments of their right to occupy such apartments in perpetuity. Nominal owners who wanted to reoccupy their apartments were allowed to do so, but were obliged to provide alternative accommodation to the occupant. The Law on Lease of Apartments in practice abolished tenancy rights to apartments in nominally private ownership. With the abrogation of these rights, the relationship between the nominal owner and the occupant became one between a lessor and a protected lessee, degrading former OTR holders to the status of a protected tenant with fewer rights and protections. Since 1998, nominal owners have no longer been required to provide suitable alternative accommodation, further weakening security of tenure of protected lessees.

28. As already indicated, occupants of nominally owned privatized apartments could not purchase their flats on favourable conditions, thus being effectively discriminated against.

In addition, their right to resolve their household problems by exchanging their flats with other OTR holders in practice could not be realized. Accordingly, they were forced to remain in the same apartment regardless of the family situation, such as children growing up and needing a new home to live, or couples needing a bigger apartment when enlarging their family. Moreover, it has been brought to the Special Rapporteur’s attention that to allow a new member of the family to live in the leased apartment, occupants are required to seek permission from the nominal owner. Unlike other OTR holders, protected tenants are also not allowed to perform any business activity in their flats or to own a vacant house anywhere in the territory of Croatia.

29. The Law on Lease of Apartments further affects the security of tenure of tenants since the nominal owner has the right to demand the eviction of a tenant. A protected tenant pays a State-controlled rent prescribed by law. However, rents for occupants of nominally owned apartments increased 60 per cent in 2005.   Former tenants are now threatened with evictions, which are taking place with increasing regularity.¹³

30. Another complex situation is that of occupants of confiscated apartments. According to article 22 of the Law on Denationalization, private apartments that had been nationalized in the former Yugoslavia may not be returned to the original owners if OTR holders are living in them, however, the original owners were entitled to compensation. During the privatization process, occupants of nationalized apartments were given the possibility to purchase the property under the same favourable conditions offered to occupants of social or state-owned apartments. A different situation was that of occupants of confiscated apartments. Since confiscation, which mostly took place during the Second World War, was the result of individual decisions and not of a law formalizing the transfer of property, occupants of confiscated flats were not allowed to purchase their flats. While during the socialist regime no differences were made with regards to the origin of the apartment to be allocated to each tenant and all occupants had equal rights to their flats, those differences played a significant role in the rights afforded to each category of occupant during the privatization process, and impacted on the access to housing of each group. (......)

_____________

13   International Alliance of Inhabitants, “Croatia: Restoring tenant’s rights to security of housing tenure”, available at: www.habitants.org.

(......)

VIII. Conclusions and recommendations

80. The Special Rapporteur also encourages the Government to define and unify tenure arrangements applicable to those with similar housing rights from the outset, including the possibility to purchase under favourable conditions the houses in which they reside.

-------------------------------- 

PRIJEVOD

Izvješće Posebne izvjestiteljice o odgovarajućem stanovanju kao

komponenti prava na odgovarajući životni standard, i  na pravo na

nediskriminaciju u tom kontekstu, Raquel Rolnik

III. Sigurnost stanovanja (posjedovanja stana) za nositelje stanarskog prava

(......)

D. Stanari u nominalnom vlasništvu i konfisciranoj imovini

26. U sklopu inicijative o privatizaciji stambenog sektora u 1991, nositelji stanarskog prava su dobili mogućnost da transformiraju svoje stanarsko pravo u potpuno vlasništvo otkupom svojih stanova pod vrlo povoljnim uvjetima. Međutim, stanarima privatiziranih stanova u nominalnom vlasništvu (stanovi sa nominalnim vlasnicima) bilo je uskraćeno pravo na kupnju svojih domova po povoljnim cijenama, iako njihova stanarska prava nisu ukinuta.

Stanarska prava su ukinuta 1996. i nositeljima stanarskih prava koji nisu mogli kupiti svoje stanove, njihova imovina je pretvoren u zaštićeni najam odnosno izgubili su stanarska pravo.

27. Godine 1996, Hrvatski sabor je usvojio Zakon o najmu stanova ("Narodne Novine ", broj 91/96), koji lišava stanare privatiziranih stanova u nominalnom vlasništvu njihovog prava da u takvim stanovima stanuju zauvijek. Nominalnim vlasnicima koji su željeli ponovno posjedovati svoje stanove to je dopušteno, ali su bili obvezni osigurati alternativni smještaj stanaru. Zakon o najmu stanova u praksi je ukinuo stanarsko pravo na stanovima u nominalno privatnom vlasništvu. Uz ukidanje tih prava, odnos između nominalnog vlasnika i stanara je postao odnos najmodavca i zaštićenog najmoprimca, degradirajući bivše nositelje stanarskih prava na status zaštićenog stanara s manjim pravima i zaštitom. Od 1998., nominalni vlasnici više nisu dužni osigurati prikladan alternativni smještaj, čime je još više oslabljena sigurnost stanovanja zaštićenih najmoprimaca.

28. Kao što je već navedeno, stanari privatiziranih stanova u nominalnom vlasništvu nisu mogli otkupiti svoje stanove pod povoljnim uvjetima, čime se učinkovito diskriminirani.

Osim toga, njihovo pravo na rješavanje svog stambenog problema zamjenom stana s drugim nositeljima stanarskih prava u praksi se ne može ostvariti. Prema tome, oni su bili prisiljeni ostati u istom stanu bez obzira na obiteljske situacije, kao što su djeca koja rastu i trebaju novi dom za život, ili parovi koji trebaju veći stan zbog povećanja svojih obitelji. Štoviše, posebnoj izvjestiteljici je skrenuta pozornost da su stanari dužni tražiti dopuštenje od nominalnog vlasnika kako bi se omogućilo novim članovima obitelji da žive u stanu koji je u takvom najmu. Također, za razliku od drugih nositelja stanarskih prava, zaštićenim najmoprimcima nije dozvoljeno da obavljaju bilo kakve poslovne aktivnosti u svojim stanovima ili da imaju vlastitu useljivu kuću bilo gdje na teritoriju Hrvatske.

29. Zakon o najmu stanova dodatno štetno utječe na sigurnost stanovanja stanara, jer nominalni vlasnik ima pravo zahtijevati iseljenje najmoprimca. Zaštićeni stanar plaća najamninu, pod državnom kontrolom, propisanu zakonom. Međutim, najamnine za stanare u nominalnom vlasništvu povećane su za 60 posto u 2005.  Bivšim stanarima sada prijete deložacije, koje se odvijaju s povećanom pravilnošću (učestalošću).¹³

30. Druga složena situacija je za stanare u konfisciranim stanovima. Prema članku 22. Zakona o denacionalizaciji, privatni stanovi koji su bili nacionalizirani na području bivše Jugoslavije ne mogu se vratiti izvornim vlasnicima, ako nositelji stanarskih prava žive u njima, međutim, izvorni vlasnici su dobili pravo na naknadu. Tijekom procesa privatizacije, stanari nacionaliziranih stanova dobili su mogućnost da otkupe imovinu pod istim povoljnim uvjetima koji su ponuđeni stanarima u društvenim stanovima, odnosno u državnom vlasništvu. Različita je situacija stanara u konfisciranim stanovima. Budući da je konfiskacija, koja se uglavnom odvijala tijekom Drugog svjetskog rata, bila rezultat individualnih odluka, a ne zakona kojima bi se formalizirao prijenos imovine, stanarima u konfisciranim stanovima nije bilo dozvoljeno da otkupe svoje stanove. Dok se tijekom socijalističkog režima nije pravila razlika s obzirom na porijeklo stanova koji su se dodjeljivali stanarima i svi stanari su imali jednaka prava, te razlike su odigrale značajnu ulogu u pravima koja su dana svakoj kategoriji stanara tijekom procesa privatizacije, te su utjecale na pristup stanovanju za svaku grupu.

(......)

_____________

13 Međunarodni savez stanara, "Hrvatska: Vraćanje stanarskog prava na sigurnost stanovanja", dostupno na: www.habitants.org.

(......)

VIII. Zaključci i preporuke

80. Specijalna izvjestiteljica također potiče vladu da definira i unificira načine stanovanja (posjedovanja stana) primjenjive na one koji su od početka imali slična stambena prava, uključujući i mogućnost otkupa pod povoljnijim uvjetima kuća** u kojima prebivaju.***(vidi dolje!)

---------------------------

* tenure arrangements   (tenure= pravo posjeda stana)

** (kuća - odnosno/zapravo stanova, jer ta gore spomenuta stanarska prava su postojala na stanovima)

***  Drugim riječima: Specijalna izvjestiteljica potiče vladu, da na jedinstven način uredi pravo na posjed stana za sve one, koji su imali slična stambena (stanarska) prava, uključujući i mogućnost da povoljno otkupe stanove (kuće) u kojima stanuju.