The Scars of the Erasure_web

Erasure_4a 10.1.11 20:29 Page 104104 THE SCARS OF THE ERASUREarchival documents is often false. For example, the record of an erased womanwhose mother was a Croatian and father a Slovenian states that from 26 February1992 her permanent address was “Croatia,” although she never lived anywhereoutside Slovenia. Begeš’s example is also illustrative:I also asked [the administrative office] to issue a certificate stating since when myfather had lived in Slovenia. They rejected me three times and then finally issuedthe paper. It says that my father lived in Slovenia from 1958 to 1992, when hewas “moved” to [the name of a municipality in Bosnia-Herzegovina] where hesupposedly lived until 2004, when he was again registered at the same address[...] where he stayed all this time. The UE [administrative office] therefore issueda document with false information relating to the period of erasure, from 1992to 2004. (Begeš, 89)Taking into account the administrative and judicial procedures to whicherased people resorted to regulate their status, the question that arises iswhether the kind of conduct described above represented a violation of theirhuman rights, for example, the right to a fair trial defined in Article 6 of the ECHR.A thorough analysis of this right shows that Article 6 refers only to civil proceedingsand criminal procedures but not also to administrative procedures or a court actionfollowing an administrative procedure. Article 6 (1) states that “[i]n the determinationof his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge againsthim, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time byan independent and impartial tribunal established by law.” Therefore, since theissues related to alien status are not covered by this article, the rights of erasedpeople in these procedures are not protected by the ECHR, and consequently, nobreach of international law occurred. However, this does not mean that there wasno breach of their rights viewed from the perspective of constitutional law. Theright to a fair trial could therefore be considered for analysis only in connectionwith other court procedures in criminal or civil law involving erased people.3.9 The right to an effective remedyContrary to the right to a fair trial, which is not directly relevant to our analysis,the right to an effective legal remedy is of particular importance. It covers allprocedures, including administrative procedures relating to the regulation of alienor citizen status. Article 8 of the UDHR states that “everyone has the right to aneffective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamentalrights granted him by the constitution or by law.” Similarly, Article 13 ofthe ECHR states that “[e]veryone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in thisConvention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authoritynotwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in anofficial capacity.” While many victims of the erasure indeed did not seek legalremedies and, consequently, can no longer pursue them because of time limita-