KOSOVA ACTION FOR CIVIC INITIATIVES (KACI)

Problems of ownership and property rights in Kosova

Analyses and Recommendations

Prishtine, August 1999

CURRENT ISSUES REGARDING PROPERTY AND OWNERSHIP:

Analysis and recommendation - by Gani Tigani and Ylber Hysa

The subject treated here is the issue of dealing with the effects of laws applied by the organs of the Yugoslav federation and the Republic of Serbia (RS) relating to public property (i.e. that of state organs and enterprises).

We should recall that according to Article 10 of the Constitution of the Autonomous Socialist Province of Kosova (ASPK), adopted on 27 February 1974, productive assets and other assets of collective labor, the products and revenues of collective labor, assets used to fulfill collective and social needs, natural resources, and assets used by the public, had the status of public property. According to Paragraph 2 of Article 11, the rights, obligations and responsibility related to the management and disposal of public assets are regulated by the constitution and by law. The Assembly of the ASPK, authorized by the constitution, had adopted laws that regulated property rights in the period from 1974 until the dissolution of the Assembly.

On the other hand, property was a subject of numerous federal laws, since the Federation was exclusively authorized to set the basic principles of property rights.

Some federal laws that dealt with public property are the following: the Law on Joint Labor, the Law on Enterprises, the Law on the Principles of the Transfer of Ownership of Public Capital in the FRY, and others.

The entire system of property rights, as a legal category, was disrupted after the dissolution of the ASPIK and the Autonomous Socialist Province of Vojvodina. The disruptions have intensified over time because new republican laws relegated all regulatory authority to the Republic of Serbia. Article 56 of the constitution adopted by the Assembly of the Republic of Serbia on 28 September 1990 (The Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, nr. 1/90), guarantees state, private, joint, and other forms of property. Article 60 of this constitution states that natural resources, assets for general public use, assets that are of public interest, and land used for the building of infrastructure, are state, Or public, property.

The Law on the Assets Owned by the Republic of Serbia is worthy of special attention (OGR.V, nr. 53/95). Article I of this law defines what is considered the property of the Republic of Serbia, which are called "state-owned assets." These assets include ( I ) natural resources (land, mountains, water, water flows, underground resources and other natural resources), assets used by the general public (public roads, parks, urban squares and streets and other publicly used assets) as well as other assets determined by law to be of public interest, and which are declared by law to be owned by the state: (2) assets that, in accordance with the law, have been or are acquired by state organs and organizations, organs and organizations of autonomous territorial units, local self-government, and public services (public enterprises and institutions) and other organizations founded by the Republic or territorial units; (3) buildings and objects created or obtained through the use of state owned assets; (4) assets created or obtained and/or revenues generated through the use of assets or capital owned by the state or by public enterprises; (5) assets that are determined, in accordance with the law, to have no owner; (6) other assets that, in accordance with the law, are state-owned. This law with few descriptive details includes in a very general fashion everything that could be considered state-owned property and places all of it under the authority of the state. The ASPK, of course, has been completely excluded in this case. The law also regulates in detail all that relates to the use and disposition of state property.

Separate laws adopted on the basis of the 1990 constitution have regulated all aspects of the transformation and disposition of property in Kosova.

The Assembly of the Republic of Serbia ensured the implementation of new laws through the establishment of emergency administration measures in enterprises in Kosova. In this manner, the entire property of Kosova became the property of the Republic of Serbia. This included property owned by Kosovar enterprises, which were then annexed by Serbian enterprises.

A common element of all of the changes was that Albanians were completely excluded from any and all decisions regarding the ownership transformations applied after 1989. As such, all transformations contain an element of forceful imposition and exclude the entitled owners of property in Kosova (i.e. the Assembly of the ASPK and enterprises based in Kosova).

To deal with the consequences of the forceful transformation of the ownership system in the aspects discussed above raises many questions and problems. Nevertheless, the principle that forceful changes are not legally valid must serve as a starting point, as must the principle of restoring legal conditions to their prior state, of course taking into consideration that there will arise a series of situations where restoration to prior states is simply impossible.

The principle of restoration, as a legal norm, is also incorporated in the positive laws of the Yugoslav Federation.

The process of transformation of ownership that had excluded the Province as ail owner now raises the question of re-legitimizing the owner and the rights that the owner is entitled to.

Article I of the Law on the Principles of the Transfer of Ownership of Public Capital states that the purpose of this law is to set the basis upon which ownership of public capital by enterprises, cooperatives, and other forms organizations that have relied on the use of public capital, can be transferred to another owner. The Province, as a part of the federation, should have undergone the transformation of ownership just as other units of the federation did, since constitutionally, it was entitled to determine property rights. However, the process of transformation of ownership conducted by the Republic of Serbia through a series of laws ignored the Province altogether. Since 1989, and especially after 1990, when Serbia adopted its new constitution, the following laws were passed: the Law on the Conditions and Procedures for the Transformation of Public Property into Other Forms of Ownership (OGR,@, nr. 48/91, 75/91, 48/94 and 5 1/94) and the Law on the Republican Agency for the Evaluation of Public Capital (OGRS, nr. 45/91, 58/91 and 71/94). Subsequent legislation also excluded the Province as the titular owner of property

Hence, the Province had no input in the evaluation of public assets or in the determination of parameters for accounting and assessing the value of public property. Similarly, rules of the evaluation of public assets (applied during the years 1991 - 1994), which were set during the process of (transforming ownership from public to other forms, and the value of shares, were determined solely by the Republic of Serbia. In addition, the Decree on the Methods of Determining the Capital (OGRS, nr. 43/97), was authored and implemented exclusively by the organs of the Republic of Serbia.

The current situation, in our view, raises many questions on who is the entitled owner of property, who should dispose of what property and how the property should be managed. The problems have also been complicated by the number of persons and organizations, including phantom enterprises and various international companies, which claim property of public assets, former or current.

In order to bring an end to the confusion in the initial period and institute better management of property, it is necessary to identify all former enterprises and their property at the time of the dissolution of the Province. This can be made possible by the data available at the Commercial Court, the Land and Real Estate Registry Service, and the information available in the archives of enterprises.

Transformation of ownership is a process that must also include Albanian employees. Their exclusion would mean unauthorized confiscation of property without compensating the labor they performed until the dissolution of the Province.

A return to the legal conditions of 1989 is necessary because any Solution not Incorporating this step would mean accepting and condoning the illegal acts performed by Serbia and institutionalizing the legal chaos created as a result of the forceful changes. They would contribute to further impoverishing an already poor Kosova. In addition, one must also take into consideration the fact that none of the existing Kosovar enterprises had retained their independence. Initially, all enterprises were governed by emergency administrations appointed by the Assembly of the Republic of Serbia. Later, managers were appointed by central administrations of Serbian enterprises, under which Kosovar enterprises were made part of and subordinated to.

Serbian republican authorities also agreed to numerous concessions, while using all benefits for their own purposes.

That the purpose of the changes applied to Kosovar public property was its illegal acquisition is illustrated by the fact that this process continued during the war as well. For example, the Commercial Court in Leskovac, Serbia, by decision Nr. 113/99, made Marketing - Export Prishtina Holding part of Pamucni Kombinat Yumco, based in Vranje, while the Commercial Court in Prishtina, on 16 June 1999, de-registered Marketing - Export Prishtina Holding.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The problematic situation involving the property issues, created as a consequence of the Serb authorities adopting anti-constitutional laws in 1989, created a pathological situation in the aspect of property in Kosova. As a consequence some 47 discriminating laws were adopted in Kosova, which further complicated the issue of property and burdened the economical situation of Kosova.

Such a complicated situation has two distinguished issues. The first being the issue of "social property" (which was brought under State supervision in an unlawful and anti-Constitutional manner by the Serb authorities after the autonomy status was revoked) and the second being the aspect of civil property.

The aspect of ex-social property is the one that needs immediate addressing in order to surpass the situation created. This not only because it is the main part of Kosova's economy (200 companies ranging from energetics to food production), but also because without settling this issue there call be no progress in the economic transition, to the privatization of this property. Kosova has in the last ten years lagged behind these processes which are now full in Central and Eastern Europe.

The aspect of civil property, once complicated by the Serb authorities after forced measures (Martial Law) were imposed, is now burdened after the installation of the international civil administration, due to the judicial and governing vacuum, thus endangering ethnic Serb and Roma property from arbitrary snatching.

Considering these issues, the group of experts KACI suggests these measures be undertaken in order to get through the situation:

Taking into consideration the current difficult situation, economical and social, as a consequence of the negative current in the Kosova economy in the last tell years, the air strikes and the situation created after the settling of the international civil administration in Kosova we suggest:

• Based on the principle of Restitution, to resettle an expertise which Would determine the carriers, registered owners of objects-factories of former social property, according to the laws of the 1974 Constitution as the only Constitutional precedent.

• The rightful owners should be determined according to the registers and documents in the Economic Court of Kosova.

• This means that all laws adopted after 1989, after the forced measures were introduced by the Serb authorities in Kosova, should be suspended.

• Ali UNMIK Commission, comprised of local experts should be formed in order to determine the rightful owners of the social property

• Involving this there should be though given to the formation of a Privatization Agency, Supervised by UNMIK. In this aspect, restitution, based on the 1974 Constitution should

apply only in restoring property o the rightful owners, while their future economic activity should be settled according to a contemporary law, new Kosovar legislation brought under the UNMIK Umbrella.

• In order to settle disputes on civil property a Court should be formed within the UNMIK, where parties call file complaints on property problems and transactions undertaken in the last ten years. In helping these disputes be solved, in the capacity of advising, the formation of an Office for Property-Issues is suggested. Kosova NGOs would aid the Office. It should be serving to the community and also help UNMIK and its organs with suggestions and advice.

• All disputes in economical companies of "social property" will be ruled by UNMIK precisely organs under it supervision until their final solution.

******************************************

I.

Public Property in Kosova according to its Peculiarity -

The origin of the notion "public property"- by Kurtesh Salilu

Although the phenomena of public self-government and public property of the ex-Yugoslavia has been of interest in scientific circles around the world, which call be seen from the numerous Congresses, round table discussions and meetings of experts held in various western countries and the even in the opening of special courses in some universities, after the dissolution of SFRY the issues have re-emerged especially in relation to public property. This can be seen especially in the activities of the Succession Commission as well as now in the work of the International community representatives in Kosova.

A particular problem is posed by the interchange of public property with state property which evidently complicate the situation, especially in Kosova's case, although ill Judicial theory regards disputes of this kind with reference to the territory of ex-Yugoslavia, and especially Kosova, as perfectly clear. This is especially concealed by Serbia, which has used different anti-constitutional means to pave the way for transferring public property and consigning it without any obstructions to Serbian property. For that reason, if international bodies are to make decisions concerning Kosova, such Serb measures should not be taken into consideration as a basis for the repositioning and installing of new relations, but the judicial-constitutional state before Serbia's unconstitutional measures dating back ill 1989, measures which resulted With the unconstitutional revocation of Kosova's autonomy and its political vassal as ail equal member of the federate, unseen in any federal country in the world and which is not known ill either theory or practice of federalism (a case of one federal unit repealing another federal unit, recognized and guaranteed by the federal constitution, and turn it into its Own Colony).

Just like in other former socialist Countries, Yugoslavia was also a case of public property initiating the formation of state property, mainly via nationalizing private property. In the first development phase in ex-Yugoslavia (1946-1950), which is called the phase of administrative government In economy, state property as "socialist property" was completely centralized and in state hands. Even though it was a country organized according to federal principles, the majority of economic (state) enterprises were run by federal state organs. Even though economic enterprises possessed judicial Subjects, they in fact did not possess the Subjective right to Such property because it was the exclusive state property. According to discretional evaluations, state administrative organs, with the elementary means they were entitled to, have the right to take assets 1rorn one enterprise and give it to another enterprise. This was all based on the administrative-operational planning system. Such means of governing in economy, based on such (state-owned) property, was a great contribution to strengthening (lie state, especially its administrative apparatus, which was in accordance to the dogmatic perception of the "proletariat state" and its introduction to all living aspects.

Based on file same (Marxist) theoretic foundation of a state and its role basement of a state and its role, but having the mind (lie weaknesses and experiences of the Soviet, particularly from its totalitarian aspect, Yugoslavia, in theory and practice, had a different approach to the issue of the dissolution of a state. Instead of Stalin's dogmatic approach, based on which a state is disintegrated after it is Incorporated and introduced in all life spheres and after it achieves maximal strength, the Yugoslav political leadership saw the dissolution process in its gradual weakening, in abandoning its undertaking in different spheres, especially economy. To achieve this, (in 1950) labor self- governance in economic state enterprise was applied (the fundamental Law on economic state enterprise administration by working staff), as means of indirect workers' participation (through workers' council) in enterprise administration. In accordance with tills course, (social) self- governance was applied from 1952 in all social spheres (education, science, culture, health, etc.), as well as in social-political communities (municipalities, districts, autonomies, republics and federates) from the year 1953, with the application of the production chamber to represent economists. The constitution of 1963 brought about further economic and judicial changes of social property (transformed from state property) and social self-governance. According to it, possession is the only condition to run and control social assets and gain personal income. The labor organization has certain rights regarding social property which it governs and for it carries outs its obligations with the social assets it controls. Those rights cannot be revoked or restricted except in the case where general interests, determined by law, are at stake and only through legal procedure. The labor organization, as such, is reminiscent of private economic enterprises in democratic countries, with the exception of the governing authority (instead of the owner, it is the workers that govern).

Constitutional amendments based on the 1971 SFRY Constitution, especially "workers' amendments", were resourceful and filled up the gaps of the system of direct social self-governance. The fundamental offspring of labor organization and economizing social property organizations is the fundamental organization of collective labor, in which workers, based on then- working rights, fix their reciprocal working relations directly and equally, govern work and wide reproduction assets, and decide on their income and other issues that have to do with their social-economic position (Amendment XXI, Article 2, paragraph 1).

The 1974 Constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the constitution of republics and autonomies and the law on collective labor (of 1976), deal with social property and collective labor based on the principles of the appropriate Constitutional amendments.

Despite certain convictions concerning the judicial nature of social property. based on its proprietorship concept, according to which social property is a belonging-judicial category to which certain authorities (state, society and other authorities) have the right to, the 1974 constitutions sanctioned the non-proprietorship concept of social property. According to the Constitution, "no one call gain the right to possess social assets that represent the working condition for fundamental organizations and other collective work organizations or the material foundation for self-governed communities of interest and social-political communities to function" (SFRY Constitution, Article 12, Paragraph 2 - Kosovar Constitution, Article 10, Paragraph 2). That means that Constitutional principles before Kosova's autonomy was revoked, did not allow the transformation of social property by any state authority, or other authority. It was the foundation of the entire social- economic constellation of the SFRY, as well as Kosova, as part of the federate. According to the constitution "the social-economic organization .... is based on free work together with the production means of social property and on the self-governance of production workers and in the distribution of social products among fundamental organizations and other collective work organizations and in social reproduction in general", (SFRY Constitution, Article 10 - Kosovar Constitution, Article 8). According to the constitution, all production assets (except for land and assets to which, farmers and craftsmen, are entitled to), all other assets for social labor, the products of collective labor and earnings gained through collective labor, assets for fulfilling collective and general social needs, natural riches and wealth for general use, are social property (SFRY Constitution, Article 12, Paragraph I - Kosovar Constitution Article 10, Paragraph 1).

The constitution sequesters all assets of general interest. Even so, their proprietorship character remains intact (some can be social property and others even private property), with the exception that their rational use is ensured in accordance with society's interests. According to the constitution, "land, woods, waters, water sources, the sea and seaside, mineral riches and other natural riches, riches for general use as well as real-estate and other assets of extensive importance, enjoy special protection and call be used in the conditions and ways determined by Law" (SFRY Constitution, Article 85 - Kosovar Constitution, Article 85). To ensure this, corresponding bills were drafted ill republics and in Kosova's autonomy. Their laws, which were conform with the principles of the self-government system, regulated the ways in which organizations of the social property of these assets were governed, as well as the judicial regulation of these assets.

The social meaning and character of social property are clearly defined with the constitution, based on which "the production assets of social property, as the mutual and inalienable foundation of social property, serve to fulfill the personal and collective needs and interests of working people ... Working people that work with those assets govern directly with the production assets of social property". In this context, a person's positions in social reproduction have special significance, while the constitution presents this issue as a central issue for achieving self-governance and for its further development. According to the constitution (the federal one and Kosova's constitution), an employee can decide directly and equally, in accordance with the principle of responsibility and solidarity, on all reproduction issues, and use the results of his work, determining on the salaries which belong, in their entirety, to the fundamental organization of collective labor. The constitution, furthermore, sanctions the possibility of the free and joining of labor and reproduction assets, and the principle of increasing capital, aimed at incorporation. This means that reproduction is not supervised by the state or other authority, but workers in collective labor, and before all, the fundamental organization of collective labor. Seen this way, it is impossible to tell the necessity of the territorial aspect of social property, but one call tell the significance of the central position of workers that join work with social property assets. The fundamental form of joining work, according to the constitution, was the fundamental organization of collective work (OTHPB). Workers in OTHPB, based on their work with production assets of social property, directly and equally regulate reciprocal working relations, govern work and social reproduction assets, decide on income and other Issued that have to do with their social-economic position. So every republic and autonomy, as parts of the federate, is held responsible for ensuring their own development and the development of the entirety, ensuring the development of each one, the fundamental organization is ensured special legal status. It is a legal entity, which governs work and results independently, and carries the burden of extensive reproduction independently and has an independent account, etc. It, as a technical-technological entirety, acts within one republic or autonomy. It call combine in more extensive forms of collective labor, such as labor organizations, complex organizations of collective labor, etc. aimed at advancing work and achieving mutual interests. This represents all attempts to ensure the possibility of economic integration as a contemporary necessity. It, however, regulates its relations with the fundamental organizations it Joins by itself, with self-governing agreements. To prevent assets from flowing from one federal unit to another, unification has been carried out without the responsibility to become solidary.

The fundamental organization is established from other collective labor organizations, and in certain spheres, by social-political communities as well. It was obliged to return the assets for its establishment, if it was established by the entities of other republics and autonomies, in the way and within the time frame set forth in all agreement. OTHPB responded with its own assets. It collapsed, like private economic enterprises in democratic countries, without jeopardizing other fundamental organizations with which it was united.

Assets for establishing the OTHPB in Kosova, were taken from the Federal Fund for the development of economically undeveloped republics and Kosova, as a credit. Yugoslavia, as a mailer of fact, had a Federal Investment Fund until 1968 as means of getting over differences in the economic development level. Assets for this fund were ensured in an administrative way and they were distributed to republics that were not developed enough without repay. Because of its unequal position, Kosova did not take assets directly from the fund, but Serbia took them in its name.

Serbia, led by nationalist anti-Albanian motives, used such assets for the development of its own regions outside Kosova. Thus, nearly no economically significant building was built with such assets in Kosova. This made Kosova, which was undeveloped anyway, lose its development tempo, something that had its repercussions in the future as well. Whilst Kosova's economic development level in 1946 was 50 percent of Yugoslavia's average, this percentage fell to 30 percent before SFRY disintegrated. Following the constitutional changes of 1968, which brought back Kosova's position ill the federation and after the Investment Fund was terminated and the Fund for the Development of economically undeveloped republics and Kosova was established, Kosova was directly represented in this fund as well as all other federal organs. This fund was established and functioned on a new basis. Its assets were allocated based on credit, with adequate conditions, and not as assets without repay. Economic organizations from all republics and autonomies, including Kosova, ensured the Fund's assets (in the beginning 2 percent high). The Fund had its own bodies with representatives from all federal units. Assets were allocated according to the percentage determined by the development level, based on development plans and requests by undeveloped republics and Kosova. These assets were kept in these units' commercial banks and were used for certain purposes, based on the decision of the Fund's Convention.

Besides some international credits (for building thermo-centrals and Ferronikel), this Fund was the main source of assets used by the OTHPB, when the, were established or for the increase of their material basis. A condition for the use of the fund's assets was participation in the economic Subjects of Kosova, or Kosova with certain percentage.

This, just like OTHPB's position, shows that social property was tied to a certain republic or autonomy, no matter the generalized wording in the constitution. This leads us to the conclusion that social property in Kosova's territory is closely related to the workers that combined work with these assets in these organizations, respectively with Kosova's workers and Kosova. This argument should serve as a basis for making decisions regarding those organizations and economic entities that are social property, as well as the return of Albanian employees sacked from their working places from 1990-on in Kosova.

Organizations with special interest, like the PTT (post office) and Railway network, are organized and work according to the same principles like other economic organizations. They were established by the Kosova Assembly (legally), and were consolidated with certain syndicates -- for technical-technological reasons -- on federal level. Regarding Elektrokosova, it was established by the Kosova Assembly and was it, just like other economic organizations, was organized on self-governance basis. The property of the first two organizations, as well as Elektrokosova, is social property. These organizations, therefore, cannot be identified with state or public organizations or even public corporations in England.

Social activities (education, science, Culture, health and social security etc.) as well, were organized and functioned according to the same principles. The only difference lies in the fact that the assets needed for their work were ensured through workers contributions, assets which were divided through their delegates in self-governed communities of interest, as well as in the fact that they were established by the Kosova Assembly, which delegated its own representatives in c certain percentage in their governing bodies. Besides them, Kosova established other organizations and institutions of' special interest, such as commercial banks, Eximkos, and social security organizations lolls, etc., which were organized according to the Law, based on the principles similar to those of collective labor and social property assets. The situation was nearly identical with certain media with special interests, like "Rilindja" RTP (Radio television Prishtine), etc.

The issue of the social property transformation represents a problem in itself and has thus not been elaborated. This principle was aimed at elaborating the social work character in association with the judicial constitutional position Kosova had before its autonomy was revoked, as assistance to international bodies in their attempts to reposition, renew and reconstruct Kosova based on the UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the Rambouillet Agreement.

II.

Kosova's Position in ex-Yugoslavia - Equal Federal Entity

By Fatmir Fehmiu

1. The Constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic Of Yugoslavia - I - The Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Serbia - 2 - and the Constitution of the Socialist ALItOI10111OUS Province of Kosova -3- along with all fundamental principles and their standards, present and represent, the autonomy in general, and Kosova's Autonomy in particular, as a federal-forming agreement- reaching unit, participant and decision-maker of the federation, equal with the republics.

With the basic principles of the Constitution of SRF of Yugoslavia - 4 -, the Constitution of the SR of Serbia - 5 - and the Constitution of KSA of Kosova - 6 - It was determined that autonomy supervised authorizations and realized origin and sovereign rights. They show and prove that autonomics had political rule as constitutional parts of the federation and the federal constellation in general. It seems that the Autonomy of Kosova, like the republics, was represented and participated in the entire organizational orbit of ex-SFR of Yugoslavia according to the principle of the equality of republics and autonomies. It was represented and decided equally with the republics in all federal bodies in the SFRY Parliament -7- in the SFRY leadership - 8 - in the Federal Executive Council -9- in Federal Administrative Bodies - 10 - Federal Court, in Federal Prosecution and Federal Social Self-governance Attorneyship -11 - Yugoslav Constitutional Court - 12 - in the Yugoslav People's Bank - 13 - etc. In fact, conform with the basic principles of the SFRY Constitution which determined:

a) Working people and nations and nationalities realize their sovereign rights in socialist republics and socialist autonomous provinces, in accordance with their Constitutional rights and in the Socialist Federal Republic Of Yugoslavia -- when it is determined with this Constitution for the mutual interest, and

b) Working people, nations and nationalities decide in the Federation on the principles of agreements of solidarity and complementary, equal participation of republics and autonomous provinces in Federation bodies in accordance with this Constitution, between republics and autonomous provinces, as well as on the principles of the responsibility of' republics and autonomous provinces for their development and the development of the Constitution - 14 - Kosova's Autonomy took part equally, with the republics, in exercising federal functions - 15 -.

2. Different aspect of Autonomy's essence and character in general, and Kosova's autonomy in particular, in the former SFRY constitutional system, represent elements of' the realization of' sovereignty, respectively citizenship, as reflected and expressed by the entire and original regulation of the autonomy of Kosova.

The basic state characteristics of the Autonomy of Kosova in the former SFRY Constitutional system were

I ) Kosova Assembly's right to draft (lie Constitution of' Kosova and decide on any changes to it, which represents one of the main characteristics of its statehood - 16 -

2) Kosova Assembly's right to support changes in file SFRY Constitutional and the SFRY Constitution on issues that deal with mutual interests SFRY -17-.

3) Kosova's constitutional right to organize power in its territory independently, a right shared by republics as well. This means the existence of the assembly -18-- Presidency- 19- the Provinces' Council -20- Executive Council - 21 - Provvince Administration - 22 - Constitutional Court of Kosova - 23 - Kosova Supreme Court, the Kosova Public Prosecution and the Social self-governed Attorneyship of Kosova - 24 - the Kosova People's Bank - 25 - etc.

4) Kosova Autonomy's right to independently regulate social-economic relations with its own laws, which makes Kosova equal with republics in the law-making field - 26 -

5) Kosova's right to contemplate issues in the field of foreign policy and international relations, to express its opinion regarding international contracts in cases foreseen by the SFRY Constitution, to ratify treaties between Kosova and foreign state organization bodies and with international organization bodies, in the framework of SFRY foreign policy and international treaties - 27 -

6) The right to establish collective labor organizations - 28- 7) The right to exercise the legal-constitutional function, that is, the existence of the Constitutional Court of Kosova, its character and competencies, which are completely identical with the character and competencies Of Constitutional Courts of republics - 29 -

8) The existence of complete legal autonomy, which was evident in the right that the Autonomy of Kosova had to establish the Supreme Court of Kosova, to organize Public prosecution and Social self-governed Attorneyship of Kosova - 30 -

9) The right to amnesty criminal acts as determined by the Law of Kosova - 3 1 - etc.

[3. The SFRY Constitution, the KSAK Constitution and even the SRS Constitution, define the state characteristic of autonomy in general, and Kosova in particular, with its right to decide on the borders of its territory in a sovereign way. - 32 - Ill fact, the Constitution of Kosova underlines that "the territory of the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosova cannot be changed without the preference of the provincial Assembly". - 33 -]

It must be noted that the SFRY Criminal Code titled "the Meaning of Legal Terms" explains the meaning of the notion of SFRY territory and the territory of republics and autonomy. As a matter of fact, according to the SFRY Criminal Code "the territory of the republic, respectively province, means the ground territory, the seaside and waters within its borders as well as the air-space over it". - 34 -All Constitutions of republics and autonomies that formed the former SFRY had special principles according to which their territory could not be changed without the liking of their assemblies. - 35 - It is the Constitutions of republics and autonomies, including the KSAK Constitution, that determined the competencies and procedures to decide on changes of territory borders.

Thus, each unconstitutional act, be it forceful or otherwise, to change the borders of republics and autonomies, was sanctioned as a criminal act. The SFRY Criminal Code says that "He who carries out the action aimed at changing the borders between republics and autonomous provinces, by force or other unconstitutional means, is to be sentenced to a prison term not shorter than one year". - 36 - The determination of principles regarding territory and the change of borders, was a natural and logical course to be pursued in the SFRY Constitution as well as the Constitutions of republics and autonomies, therefore even Kosova, as means to completely define the constitutional sovereignty of republics and autonomies, even Kosova, as a constitutional part of the SFRY, which have been associated according to the principle of the free will and their mutual interests.

The hereby presented Constitutional concept of sovereignty, decision-making, participation and responsibility of republics and autonomies of the SFRY, was conform with the democratic meaning and rational sovereignty character, especially associated in labor, respectively, the association of' citizens and working people and national groups according to collective interests.

4. The mutual interests were, thus, the capital notion of the SFRY constitutional right, respectively, the constitutional right of republics and autonomies as constitutional parts of' it. They were the pillars and their foundation was made up of mutual interests articulated through the free will and participation of all subjects that the Federation consisted of; republics and autonomies. All particular interests were articulated through the constitutions of each republic and autonomy while their mutual interests were articulated through the Constitution of the SRF of Yugoslavia

It should be noted, however, that specific mutual interests of Kosova, Serbia and Vojvodina, analogue with resolutions determined by the SFRY Constitution, are defined by certain principles of the Constitution of the SR of Serbia. - 37 -

The SFRY Constitution, which materialized joint interests, was drafted with the agreement and liking of the assemblies of all federal units - republics and autonomies - 38 - whereas the principles of the SRS Constitution that had to do with specific joint interests of Serbia, Kosova and Vojvodina, were adopted with the liking of their assemblies. - 39 - Mutual interests, as a special category and basis for constitutional relations and their achievement, indicate the equality of federal -forming unit and their direct participation in drafting the SFRY Constitution, and the SRS Constitution, with the right to veto as well. Mutual interests were therefore the foundation of the roles of republics and autonomies, at the same time being their legitimacy ill setting SFRY relations. The incorporation of republics and autonomies in the body of self-governed cooperative federalism resulted with the creation of a new and original form of sui generis and social-economic and social-politic relations of the SFRY, which equalizes autonomies, including Kosova, with republics. These, as constitutional and stately units, determined, with their own conditions and in a sovereign way, the social-economic regulation as well, including the issue of property.- 40 -

5. In accordance with the principle of sovereignty that "working people and citizens, nations and nationalities of Kosova realize their sovereign rights in the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosova", - 41 - the Constitution of Kosova determined the social-economic constellation of its own territory, just like republics determined theirs'. Thus the Kosova Constitution concludes that "the

social-economic constellation of the KSAK, in the framework of the unique social-economic constellation of the SFRY, is based on free work together with social property production assets, and the self-governance of workers ill production, and the distribution of social products to fundamental organizations for collective labor and social reproduction in general".- 42 - As a matter of fact, the production assets and other collective labor assets, collective labor products and the income gained through collective labor, assets for fulfilling Mutual and general social needs, natural resources and riches for general use are social property in the territory of Kosova. Therefore no one call will the right to possess production assets that are a condition for the work of fundamental organizations and other collective labor organizations or a material basis for the functioning of self- governed communities of interest or other self-governed organizations and Communities and social- political communities. For that reason, social assets cannot be used to personalize the work of others, not even to create conditions for personalizing. - 43 -

The rights, obligations and responsibilities for using and directing social assets, are regulated by the Constitution and laws, fit accordance with the destination of these assets. - 44 - The rights and duties of' the autonomies of Kosova, for the working people and citizens, nations and nationalities in its own territory, to realize then sovereign rights, include the right over working assets and work results and directing assets and their work results For creating conditions for the Successful economic and social development and improving the educational, Cultural, scientific and health standards, as well as other social and personal standards. - 45 - They also include the adjustment of the financial system of social-political Communities, and the levy system, - 46 - the determination of general principles and conditions regarding the organization and collective labor organization work that exercise activities with special social interest, - 47 - establishing the system for the protection of agriculture and woods, use of agricultural and wooded land, natural resources and waters, land weigh and cadastral and registering social property rights, traffic and relations, construction and use and Categorization of roads and traffic safety, - 18 - establishing collective labor organizations, - 49.

It is logical to conclude from the legal constitutional data taken from the principles of the constitution and other judicial acts of Kosova that , the social property in the frames and within the territory of Kosova was a segment of the sovereign rights of the working people and citizens, nations and nationalities of Kosova, meaning the property of Kosova and in no way the property of any other subject outside Kosova, not even the former SFRY, or the SRS. It cannot even be the property of so-called federal republic of Yugoslavia, or the present Republic of Serbia, which were created in an illegitimate and illegal way because their constitutional bodies adopted unconstitutional acts with which they violated the sovereignty of the people of Kosova, guaranteed by the former SFRY Constitution, discriminating and barring the people and making a classic colony of Kosova.

1. Official gazette of SRY nr. 9/1974 2. Official Gazette of SRS nr. 8/1974

3. Constitution of SFRY, basic principles 1, al. 2 and 3 4. Official gazette of ASPK, 1974

5. Constitution of SR of Serbia, Basic principles 1, al. 3 and 8

6. Constitution of SAP of Kosova, Basic principles 1, al. 3 and 4 7. Constitution of SFRY, a. 282-332 8. Same constitution, 3 13-321 9. Same constitution, 346-362

10. Same constitution, 363-368 11. Same constitution, 369-374 12. Same constitution, 275-396 13. Same Constitution, 260-263

14. Same constitution, Basic principles 1, al. 2 and 3 15. Same constitution, 244 etc.

16. Constitution of SAP of Kosova, a.301. p. 1 17. Same constitution, a. 30 1. p. 1 18. Same constitution, a. 300-338 19. Same constitution, a. 339-347 20. Same Constitution, a. 348

21. Same constitution, a. 349-361 22. Same constitution, a. 362-37 1 23. Same constitution, a. 372-389 24. Same constitution, a. 390-393 25. Same constitution, a. 292

26. Same Constitution, a. 301 p. 3 27. Same Constitution, a. 301 p. 6

28. Same Constitution, a. 301 p. 10

29. Compare: Const. Of SFRY, Art 375-396: Ustav SR BiH, article 387-407: Ustav SR C.G. it. 409-428: Ustav SR IIRV. a. 412-433, Ustav na SR Makedoni.1a, it. 419-437: Ustav SR Slovenija article 408-428: Ustav SR Serbije, article 401-426, Kushtetuta e KSAK, article 372-393: Ustav SAP Vojvodine, article 395-414

30. Const. of SAP of Kosova, a. 390-414 3 1. Same constitution, a. 301. p. 13

32. Compare: Constitution of SFRY, it. 5: Constitution of SAP of' Kosova art 3 and Constitution of Serbia, 1. 3, al. 2

33. Constitution of Kosova, a. 3, a. 2

34. (Criminal Code of SFRY, "Official Gazette of SFRY" nr. 44/1976, a 113, p.2 )

35. Compare Constitution Bill, a. 5 of Constitution of' SRC, a. 1: Constitution of SR of Montenegro: a 3: Constitution of SR of Macedonia, a1. 5,8,3 18: Constitution of SR of Serbia a 3 and 392: Constitution of SAP Vojvodina a. 6 and 36, Constitution of SAP of Kosova, a.3.

36. Criminal Code of SFRY, "Official Gazette of SFRY", article 116, al 2.

37. Constitution of Serbia article 300.

38. Decision on announcing the SFRY Constitution, "Official Gazette of SFRY", nr. 9/1974 39. Constitution of SR of Serbia, a. 417-430, "Official Gazette of SRS", nr. 8/1974

40. Compare: Constitution of BiH a. 10-94; Constitution of Montenegro a. 10-103; Constitution of SR of Croatia a. 10-121; Constitution of SR of Macedonia 12-108; Constitution of SR of Slovenia a. 12-112; Constitution of SR of Serbia a. 9-102; Constitution of SAP of Kosova a. 8-102; Constitution of SAP of V0j'vodina a. 8-100

4 1. Constitution of SAP of Kosova, a. 2, a 1. 1 42. Same constitution, a. 8

43. Same constitution, a. 10

44. Same constitution, a. 11, al. 3 45. same constitution, a. 280

46. Same constitution, a. 283, p. 2 47. Same constitution, a. 283, p. 3 48. Same constitution, a. 283, p. 6

49. Same constitution, a. 3 0 1, p. 10

III.

THE INVALIDITY OF SERBIAN JUDICIAL ORDER IN KOSOVA DURING THE PERIOD OF 1989-1999

By Riza Smaka

The Kosova crisis, in form and contents, dates back to 1989 -- when Serbia revoked Kosova's enhanced political autonomy of 1968, by unconstitutional and violent rneans -- and was closed in June of 1999, when international administration was established in Kosova following the spectacular and unbelievably effective NATO air strikes against Serbia.

During that time period, Serbia, conform with the nationalist state policy, installed a state (para)military, radical and extremist authority in Kosova and constructed judicial order in that function. The judicial order that Serbia set up in Kosova during that time frame was constitutionally insufficient and consisted of judicial norms antithetic to the international Judicial norms and principles. For that reason, such judicial order is legally inexistent. The above-mentioned judicial orders conform with the traditional Judicial order of "QUOD YNITIO VITOSUM EST NON POTEST TRACTU TEMPORIS CONVALESCERE". cannot be convalidated as certain experts and experts of international bodies in Kosova endeavor to, because it was founded on a decayed and problematic basis of violence and political fraud (Vis Cleam, Precario). On the contrary, conform with the principle of constitutional continuance, the judicial order that was in power until 23 March 1989 -- when it was revoked by unconstitutional and violent means -- Should have been applied.

The Constitution of Kosova and all general judicial acts based on it, loses Judicial and political value when it is revoked in all unconventional way, against the pre-determined procedure for invalidating or modifying that certain Judicial act. Especially when the Kosovar judicial order is legitimate and legal, it cannot be invalidated through political and state violence, but call, on the contrary, only remain as it was, with legal value and power.

The critical analysis of certain Serbian Judicial acts adopted between 1989-1999 shows that their destination lies in discriminating Albanians on national basis and favoring Serbs in Kosova with its hegemonist intention. Some of Serbia's judicial acts during 1989 - 1999 period approved with the aim of serbisation and de-Albanization of Kosova.

Yugoslav state politics, respectively Serb politics, in most of the cases until 1981 was refined and hidden with different Postulates. After the Albanian Student movements in 1981, openly and through the judicial acts Yugoslavia manifested restrictions against Albanians in Ex-Yugoslavia, as whole and Albanians in Kosova in particular, favoring the Serbs. Concretely with the program "Housing the Professional Staff", published in official state letter, February 16 1990, Serbs were openly favored to come back to Kosova. At this time Serbs had privileges as salaries, apartments, and other means. Return and employment of Serbs was stimulated wide state privileges, with good working and housing conditions, as (lie Albanians whose employment was smaller than the population balance were ignored. This Program, Charted for the needs of the Serbs that would return to Kosova for employment chest aimed at changing the ethnic structure in favor of the Serbs in a way that 2000 apartments with the surface of 115,273 square meteres would be reserved for them as well as 711 construction sites. This Program also determined a number of privileges in order to court the Serbs to come to Kosova, more colonize Kosova so that the ethnic balance would artificially shifted in favor of the Serbs. Thus, an official State Program was aimed at bringing to life a discriminatory anti-Albanian Policy. Such a Program is in collision to the international judicial and political standards, and as such is invalid and nil.

Of such character is also "The Program for the realization of Peace, Freedom, Equality and Democracy as well as Prosperity in the SAP Kosova", approved by the Serbian Parliament, on March 22, 1990 and was printed ill the Serbian official newspaper on March 30 1990. The title no doubt has a human and rightful tone, but the reader can notice the political background of the Program. It's content and message as fully anti-Albanian with the aim of ethnic discrimination. Part If of the Program says: "...the serbs were traditionally repressed, in the darkness of injustice caused by the Albanians". The number of the Serbs that have left Kosova for economic reasons and low living standard was arbitrarily Multiplied ill the document and was branded as migration caused by the Albanians.

The Program guaranteed the Serbs a privileged status in all aspects of social life, political and economical "since till that time they were exposed to Albanian terror and repression", although, according to the statistics, the situation was in the Albanians disfavor. Aiming to take away Kosova's autonomy in the economical sphere also, Article 2, paragraph b of the Program.... obliged economical enterprises which were at that time independent to integrate into the system of holding companies based in Belgrade. Instead of encouraging economical enterprises to evolve, the Program centralized Kosova's economic organizations, their control and exploitation from Belgrade in the electrical economy, PTT etc. The Program also authorized the Serb authorities, in collision to the Serb and even ex-SFRY judiciary, that in cases Judged appropriate they call annul decisions and rulings of the State authorities III Kosova. By this Program, again in collision to the Constitution Of the Republic of Serbia.

The general judicial acts of the Kosova Assembly and Executive Council, according to that decision, Article 3, "were proclaimed Invalid". It was with Article 5 of that Law that all former officials of the Kosova Assembly and the Executive Council ceased to carry Out their functions. III practice, discharging was carried Out generally, but the final dismissal was meant for Albanian officials only, whilst Serb ones were re-elected, re-appointed and re-assigned, as most of them were promoted to higher-ranking positions. With this illegitimate and violent act, SRS officials were authorized to adopt and carry Out decisions directly (which Is essentially I legislation branch) regarding acts for organizing and systemizing work, and decisions on establishing and repealing employment relations, as well as dismissing certain employees from their working place, or to be more specific, Albanian employees, etc. These authorizations, which in judicial theory and practice, in the systems of dividing state rule, are exercised by three ruling branches, were given to only one of them, to the SRS administration, to be more precise. The Socialist Republic of Serbia, on the other hand, with ideological anti-Albanian commitment, carried this out in a way that it extended the same ingerence without any control or responsibility, so, within e short time period, it practically colonialist the legitimate judicial order of Kosova, as well as the Federation of' former Yugoslavia, which was obligatory 11or Serbia as well its other federal units, dismissing Albanian state employees and public officials from their working places and posts.

Even though according to the Serbian judicial order, disputes regarding working relations, and judicial-employment issues, Should be solved urgently and without court levis, those disputes were left unsolved for years and even decades, conform with the daily anti-Albanian political directives. Given the cases that were solved in general, were decided upon and sanctioned arbitrarily, without legal grounds, but with government policy support and the backing of non-governmental lobbies and the radical and militant lobbies.

With the "LAW ON REPUBLICAN BODY PROCEDURES IN EXTRAORDINARY CONDITIONS" exemplified in a part of the SRS -read: Kosova-standardized the proceeding and hierarchy subordination of ruling bodies and organizations in Kosova to the SRS ones. In Kosova's case they were only called as such for political display, but were essentially invoked lacking constitutional and legal authorizations in favor of ruling Serbian bodies and organizations.

This is set forth in Article 3 of that law, mainly through the advocacy or delegation of state bodies' competencies, depending on the nature and character of certain Issues.

The "LAW ON EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS IN EXTRAORDINARY CONDITIONS" of September 27 1990, gave unlimited authorization to its officials (SRS ones in Kosova), to employ Serbs in Albanian posts and dismiss Albanians from their working places. Legal resolutions, determined by that Law are precedents that remain unknown in the judicial-employment theory and practice, entirely conform with the centralist concept, with the absolute ingerence of those officials and ignorance to procedural norm s sanctioned before, but otherwise not modified with that Law!

By putting tills Law to practice, hundreds of thousands of Albanians were dismissed from their work, and Serbs were brought to replace then even though they usually lacked qualification, they did serve the intention of colonizing Kosova.

As said before, Serb chauvinists dominated in the leading state Yugoslav structures. They in turn imposed the adoption of the "YUGOSLAV PROGRAM OF MEASURES AND ACTIVITIES FOR PREVENTING SERBS FROM MIGRATING FROM KOSOVA AND FOR THEIR RETURN TO KOSOVA" published in the Official Gazette of Yugoslavia, nr. 8/09.08.1990. As to what extent was the Program nationalistic and anti-Albanian, one could tell 'List by looking at paragraph 7 which is explicit in its saying that Serbs and other non-Albanian people should be prevented through all means and measures possible, from migrating from Kosova. Regarding Albanians, the above-mentioned Program was aimed implicitly at driving them from their land in favor of the Southern Slavs, the Serbs. The Program consisted of various privileges for the return of Serbs, to the Albanian-inhabited land that they abandoned mostly for economical reasons, Including preferable employment, unbelievably high wages, construction credits, and giving them construction land to build houses and commercial buildings, etc.

As opposed to international legal-civilian norms and fundamental principles regarding the free management of private property (lus Utendi, ius Fruendi, lus Abutendi) as well as it was directly opposed to Albanian interests, the SRS Parliament adopted the "LAW FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR DISTRIBUTING REAL-ESTATES" in 1991. As opposed to the principle of' applying general territorial Judicial acts, this Law was practically adopted by Serbia, which considered Kosova to be its integral part, but had to be carried out exclusively in its Own territory and was aimed at Albanians only. Conform with tills, tills Law incriminated the judicial circulation of property between Albanians, on one hand, and Serbs and Montenegrins and other people, on the other. Even though neither the Law on Housing Relations, nor the above-mentioned Law, voiced the obligation to get prior Support from the republican administration for the privatization of housing compounds, this Solution was applied in the administrative practice of the Serb state rule regarding Albanians, even though it wits considered illegal according to the Serbian judicial order. It is clear that Serbs did not require special approval for taking over the possessions and privatizing the social property from their legitimate owners, and even If requested formally, it was granted immediately, even though Albanians were turned down by silence and year-long prolongations.

The "LAW ON SOCIAL CAPITAL", published in the SFRY Official Gazette, nr-. 84/89 and 46/90, and the "LAW ON THE CONDITIONS AND PROCEDURE TO TRANSFORM SOCIAL PROPFRTY TO OTHER FORMS OF PROPERTY", published in the SRS Official Gazette, nr. 48/5. VIII. 1991, which determine the conditions and methods of privatizing social property in the material aspect, were ethnically discriminating for Albanians.

Albanians were also discriminated by over 150,000 of them being dismissed from their working places, thus deprived from their rights sanctioned with the above-mentioned laws participated in the privatization of social property which they participated in creating. Only the currently employed were entitle to those privileges, meaning only Serbs and Montenegrins, whilst the circa 150,000 Albanians dismissed from their working places were deprived of such rights, deprived of social security.

The violent revocation of Kosova's autonomy in judicial aspects as well, was sanctioned by the "LAW ON PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS" of the SRS, nr. 43/91, with the KSAK Public Prosecution de-institutionalized according to Article 3 of that law, being that it sanctioned the Public Prosecution of Serbia only. The Court system had a similar fate with the Supreme Court of Kosova being annulled in favor of the Supreme Court of Serbia. Such a resolution is set forth with Article 8 of the "LAW ON COURTS", publicized in the SRS Official Gazette, nr. 46/91. This law in fact erased the sole existence of the Supreme Court of Kosova, in favor of the Supreme Court of Serbia. Kosovar authors, in a study they did on the ethnic discrimination of Albanians in Kosova for the Fund for the Development of the Republic of Serbia, came to the conclusion that it was an accelerator for the further colonialization of Kosova. The virtual stimulation of the colonialization of Kosova with Serbs, which enjoyed judicial backing from the constitutional federal order and international judicial norms, was carried out by anti-Albanian state policy and certain mechanisms and instruments devised by that very Fund as well as principles mentioned before.

Kosova, in the time period when the SFRY existed, with oscillations depending on state will, had the status of autonomy, at times more enhanced, and otherwise more reduced, but nonetheless was a social-political community, equal to other republics and Vojvodina from 1968 until it was disintegrated. Natural resources, along with riches for public use, then belonged to Kosova. Serbia, however, took over all its natural resources and riches after revoking its status of autonomy in 1989. According to the "LAW ON ASSETS POSSESSED BY THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA", published in the SRS Official Gazette, nr. 53/95, all riches and assets of Kosova were proclaimed to be state riches and assets of Serbia!?!

In this context, Kosova was also severely damaged by the "LAW ON CONCESSIONS", published in the SRS Official Gazette, nr. 20/97. This Law specifies that all profits from concessions for the riches and assets of Kosova, belong to Serbia!

It also specifies that all assets from concessions, including the Kosovar ones, belong to Serbia as state property after the contract deadline is over or after the concession is made. Besides the above- mentioned laws and Acts, Serbia adopted many other anti-Albanian Serb state policy judicial acts. The most characteristic of these acts are those of' very low legal level, which are noted for the insufficient constitutional rounds to refer to Albanians in such a sophisticated manner.

IV.

DISCRIMINATION AT WORK AND PROFESSION

By Adil Fetahu

According to official statistics, there were 236,399 people were employed in the social-state sector in Kosova in 1989. 164,323 of them were Albanian, 58,206 were Serb and Montenegrin and 13,870 were of other nationality. Whereas, according to the Union of Independent Trade Unions of Kosova registry, more than 130,000 Albanian employees were dismissed from their working places until 1995, whilst over 50,000 Serbs and Montenegrins, from Kosova, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, Albania and Rumania, were employed.

In the corpus of fundamental human rights and freedoms, the right to employment (and profession) part takes as an elementary right. This has been determined by the norms and principles of many international judicial acts, as well as the constitutions and national laws of certain countries in particular. The Universal Declaration on Human Rights, Article 23 paragraph I says that "Everyone enjoys the right to work, the free choice of- work, righteous and pleasing working conditions and protection from unemployment". -"The Universal Declaration on Human Rights", was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1948.

The right to work and profession, as well as other social and economic rights and freedoms that have to do with the right to employment, are foreseen by other principles of the Universal Declaration and conventions, treaties and other international Judicial acts, and especially by the Conventions of the International Organization for Employment, in particular: - Convention nr. 2 - On Unemployment (1919) - Convention nr. 14 - on vacation (192 1)

- Convention nr-. 29 - against forceful work (1930)

- Convention nr-. 87 - on syndical freedoms and the protection of syndical rights (1948)

- Convention nr.88 - on employment services (1948)

- Convention nr-.97 - on the employment of emigrants (1949)

- Convention nr-. 98 - on collective negotiations (contracts) (1949) - Convention nr-. 100 - on Income equality (1951)

- Convention nr-. 102 - against employment and professional discrimination (1958)

The sole existence of such judicial norms does not suffice for the practical realization OF Such rights and freedoms, however, thus stable social-political circumstances, economic development and a certain level of democratic development as well as the existence of independent courts, is needed, conditions that have been lacking in Kosova.

The status of all employee brings about certain advantages. The advantages of employment advantages certain rights to which ail employee and the employee's family are entities to, like the right to work with another entity's assets (private, social, state and cooperative), wage for the work done and social security (health, pension and invalid), vacation with payment, the possibility to take credits, the possibility to be informed, professional perfectionism and professional progress, the utilization of' social standard assets, the organization of different activities, etc. In the property transformation process and the privatization of social and state capital, there are more favorable conditions for buying stocks.

In Kosova, where the employment rate is so large, discrimination at work takes new dimensions. In Yugoslavia, and in its constitutional unit of Kosova, Albanians were always discriminated in every aspect, in their field of work as well. Even in 1981, when Kosova had a higher degree of constitutional judicial autonomy, the Yugoslav policy of employment discrimination was especially persistent. Only 23 percent of the people of Kosova were active (employed) then, with the least percentage of Albanians employed when compared to other nationalities with only 19,4% Albanians, 35,6% Serbs, 37,7% Montenegrins, 21,7% Muslims and 30,4%.; "The development and territorial habitation of Albanians in Kosova and other ethnic parts of former Yugoslavia", published by the Economic Institute in Prishtina on 1997, page 92. When these figures are analyzed and the employment rate of 1988, one comes to the conclusion that every 12th Albanian was employed while every 4th Serb and every 3rd Montenegrin was also employed. These differences were even greater regarding the number of women employed with every 20th Albanian woman working, every 5th Serb woman and every 4th Montenegrin woman also working. Same document, page 34.

These figures, need no comment to illustrate the multiple discrimination Albanians suffered in the field of employment. The level of discrimination becomes even more unbearable when one contemplates the nature of work that Serbs and Montenegrins had the fortune to acquire -- mainly managing posts, well-paid, in the most profitable enterprises, banks, security organizations and budget bodies and institutions.

According to the Yugoslav official statistic data, the FRY had 1,944,937 employees in working relations in 1998, with 1,271,000 of them in Serbia, 439,000 in Vojvodina, 119,000 in Montenegro and 116,000 in Kosova. ;Data published fit Serb daily "Blic" on 23.IX. 1998.

If one considers that Kosova has three and a half times as many inhabitants as Montenegro, one call see clearly what employment rate Kosova had, especially considering the large number of Serbs and Montenegrins.

After Kosova's autonomy was revoked in 1989, various programs, laws and coercive measures were undertaken by the Serb regime regarding enterprises and institutions, wherefrom Albanians were dismissed from their working places en masse, with the leading staff and then the professional ones first to act.

According to official statistics, in the end of 1989, the social-state sector in Kosova had 236,399 employees. 164,323 of them were Albanian, 58,206 Serb and Montenegrin and 13,870 of other nationalities. Whereas, according to the Union of Independent Trade Unions of Kosova registry, more than 130,000 Albanian employees were dismissed from their working places in 1995, whilst over 50,000 Serbs and Montenegrins, from Kosova, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, Albania and Rumania, were employed.

Even though there were systematic laws and special ones for work relations (federal, republican and provincial level), the SRS Parliament adopted a (special) Law on 26 July 1990 regarding work relations Under special circumstances, "SRS Official Gazette, nr-. 33/1990; which was the flagrant opposite of the Constitution and systematic laws of Yugoslavia and Kosova.

Based on this Law, thousands of Albanians were dismissed from their working places without procedure. The fact that international judicial norms and acts were violated in the case of Albanian employees was evaluated by many international organizations, like the International Confederation of Independent Unions, in Brussels (June 1991 ), the International Labor Bureau in Geneva (1992), the UN Committee for Eliminating Racist Discrimination (August 1993), etc.

Many employees entered courtrooms in an attempt to request the protection of their employment rights, considering their dismissal to be illegal. Most of the legal battles were left unsolved for nine years due to the fact that Serb courts could but realize the regime's policy, even though the law on employment clearly specifies that employment disputes should be solved urgently. "Law on dispute procedure", SFRY Official Gazette, 47/77.

A considerable number of employees did not represent their cases at all lacking trust in Serb courts. Most of the cases have been distributed among different courts in Serbia, reaching as far as Subotica. This distribution is opposed to the legal norms on territorial Competence, but was still carried out so the employees had immense expenses and eventually give up their requests for their basic rights to be respected. Even in those rare cases of a court ruling in favor of an Albanian employees returning to work, the managers of certain enterprises or institutions refused to realize the court decisions.

The massive dismissal of Albanians from their working places had great consequences of economic and social nature for the employees and their families.

More than 274,000 children were deprived of allowances because their parents were out of work. The apartments of more than 700 dismissed employees were taken over as an even greater number of them could not obtain credits or get accommodation due to the lack of work. Those apartments were given to Serb and Montenegrin employees. In the process of the privatization of social apartments, Albanians for example, were not allowed to buy the flats they rented. Even those few Albanians to remain at work were subjected to various forms of discrimination, from being degraded to being forced to work outside their professional field.

This discrimination resulted with a large part of the working force going to work abroad. It is absurd that there should be more Albanian employees in Germany and Switzerland than in Kosova. There was not one Serb or Montenegrin of more than 18 years old, on the other hand, that was unemployed!

In the process of property, transformation to social capital, the entire capital of Kosova was transferred into the hands of Serbia, or was stolen by Serb and Montenegrin workers and managers in Kosova, whilst Albanians who created that capital themselves could not protect or profit from privatization. There are many cases in which such a process was abused.

Like when the "Mineks" factory in Ferizaj was integrated with "Bambi" in Pozharevac, the "Bambi" director had taken 531,919 shares from the "Mineks" capital, and 126 "Mineks" employees together took 42,250 shares in all!

The rights of Albanian employees on the other hand, were deprived of even their syndical rights because their independent syndicate was not recognized as a partner in negotiations and was prevented from all activities with membership.

sew