{"id":6308,"date":"2026-11-13T09:42:16","date_gmt":"2026-11-13T08:42:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/?p=6308"},"modified":"2026-11-13T09:42:17","modified_gmt":"2026-11-13T08:42:17","slug":"2025-annual-report-respect-protection-and-fulfilment-of-the-human-rights-of-persons-in-need-of-international-protection-in-the-republic-of-serbia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/2025-annual-report-respect-protection-and-fulfilment-of-the-human-rights-of-persons-in-need-of-international-protection-in-the-republic-of-serbia\/","title":{"rendered":"2025 Annual Report: Respect, Protection and Fulfilment of the Human Rights of Persons in Need of International Protection in the Republic of Serbia"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Key messages<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Almost 17 years after Serbia established its asylum system, the system continues to face significant challenges in efficiency and effectiveness, in all its segments \u2013 from access to the territory and the asylum procedure to the integration of persons granted asylum.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The practice of informal, collective and often violent denials of access to Serbian territory (pushbacks) continued in 2025, especially in relation to foreign nationals arriving from North Macedonia and Bulgaria.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Of the 86 Asylum Office decisions on the merits, only 7 were positive, a recognition rate of 8%, and the first-instance procedure lasted on average around 13.4 months, or 408 days.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Neither the Asylum Commission nor the Administrative Court rendered a single positive decision recognising the right to asylum in 2025, and their practice continues to lack corrective influence on the Asylum Office.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Since 2008, a total of 250 persons have been granted asylum, of whom at most 30% remained in Serbia, and 45 refugees had been granted permanent residence by the end of 2025.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">About the publication<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Centre for Research and Social Development IDEAS, as partner to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Serbia, and through its Asylum and Migration Programme, has been providing legal support to refugees and asylum-seekers in the Republic of Serbia since 2019, and since 2015 has advocated for the improvement of the overall legal framework, practices and policies relating to persons on the move. Activities carried out in 2025 were conducted within the project Improvement of protection and access to rights for asylum-seekers and refugees in Serbia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The report Respect, Protection and Fulfilment of the Human Rights of Persons in Need of International Protection in the Republic of Serbia includes a review and analysis of the legal framework, policies and practices of competent authorities and their impact on the enjoyment of human rights by refugees, asylum-seekers, and certain vulnerable migrant categories whose personal circumstances at least temporarily prevent their safe return to their country of origin. The report is divided into ten chapters that thematically address the steps persons in need of international protection must go through in order to fulfil their right to international protection within the Serbian asylum system, and concludes with recommendations for improving the legal framework and practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The overarching conclusion of the Report is that the Serbian asylum system continues to face significant challenges in efficiency and effectiveness, notwithstanding the progress achieved in certain areas. The positive practices and decisions observed in 2025, primarily rendered by the Asylum Office, appear to reflect the high-quality work of individual professionals in competent state authorities, international organizations and civil society, rather than a system-wide feature. The system remains unpredictable, inconsistent and inefficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Main findings<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Legal framework<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The legal framework governing the human rights of persons in need of international protection in the Republic of Serbia is largely in line with international human rights law, international refugee law and the EU acquis. However, certain amendments to the Law on Asylum and Temporary Protection (LATP) and accompanying bylaws, as well as to the Law on Foreigners in relation to provisions which could affect refugees and asylum-seekers, are still required. The most important are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>persons who might be in need of international protection and whose entry to Serbia at airports is assessed or refused should be recognised as persons deprived of their liberty, with accompanying safeguards related to the principle of non-refoulement and the right to liberty and security;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>recognition of persons registered in line with Article 35 of the LATP who have not lodged an asylum application as beneficiaries of minimum material reception conditions in asylum and reception centres;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>abolition of the deadline of 15+8 days for lodging an asylum application after registration;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>harmonisation of the provisions on guardianship in the Family Law with the provisions of the LATP governing the accommodation of unaccompanied and separated children;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>introduction of biometric ID cards for asylum-seekers and persons granted asylum;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>amendment of the Law on Health Insurance to define clearly the right to health insurance of asylum-seekers, persons granted the right to asylum and persons granted temporary protection.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Access to territory and the asylum procedure<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The practice of informal, collective and often violent denials of access to Serbian territory (pushbacks) continued in 2025, especially in relation to foreign nationals arriving from North Macedonia and Bulgaria. This is corroborated by the official statistics of the Ministry of Interior, which reported 10,802 \u2018preventions of illegal entry\u2019, and by reports of national and international civil society organisations. The European Court of Human Rights rendered a landmark judgment in O.H. and Others v. Serbia, finding multiple violations of the ECHR, including the prohibition of collective expulsions, as well as Article 3 and Article 5 of the Convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The contentious practice of refusal of entry at Serbian airports continued, including the arbitrary detention of persons who could be in need of international protection and who are frequently denied access to the asylum procedure after they are refused entry. A total of 1,771 refusal of entry decisions were issued in 2025. In the judgment H.G.D. v. Serbia, the ECtHR outlined the lack of a legal framework governing the status of foreign nationals in the transit zone who are refused entry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A handful of cases of denial of registration in line with Article 35 of the LATP were recorded, and a total of 626 registration certificates were issued. Still, it remains unclear what the practice of police departments across Serbia is in relation to foreign nationals who were served with return decisions or penalised in misdemeanour proceedings for irregular entry or stay. There were no major issues in relation to lodging asylum applications: a total of 132 applications were lodged, mainly by nationals of the Russian Federation (29), Palestine (10), Pakistan (9), Burundi (8), Syria (8) and Cuba (7).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Asylum procedure<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In 2025, the Asylum Office issued 170 decisions regarding 226 asylum applicants. The largest share of decisions discontinued the procedure \u2013 83 decisions (48%) regarding 100 asylum applicants. Of the 86 decisions on the merits, 79 were refusals issued regarding 118 asylum-seekers, while only 7 decisions were positive. The rejection rate in 2025 was 92%, while the recognition rate was 8%. Applicants from the Russian Federation and T\u00fcrkiye do not stand a chance of obtaining international protection in Serbia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The average length of the first-instance asylum procedure for first-time applicants whose claims were assessed on the merits remained excessive, at around 13.4 months, or 408 days. Problems regarding inadequate credibility assessment, country of origin information research and its selective citation in decisions on rejection, the quality of reasoning of negative decisions and the arbitrary application of national security grounds have remained unchanged and represent the main reason why the Serbian asylum procedure can only be assessed as ineffective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Asylum Commission issued 68 decisions concerning 94 persons and upheld only two appeals, which were referred back to the Asylum Office. The Administrative Court issued 21 decisions regarding 27 individuals and did not uphold a single complaint. The professional and logistical capacities of the Asylum Commission and the Administrative Court remained unchanged.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Inclusion and integration<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Asylum-seekers are still not recognised as a category entitled to institutional support in accessing socio-economic rights, language courses and other types of support which would allow their effective inclusion. Since 2008, a total of 250 persons have been granted asylum, of whom at most 30% remained in Serbia, which indicates that the integration of persons granted asylum remains inadequate, although positive steps were observed in 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Asylum-seekers and persons granted asylum who have not been granted permanent residence are still not entitled to biometric ID cards, which continues to create numerous challenges in everyday life and in access to basic services and rights. A total of 45 refugees had been granted permanent residence by 31 December 2025. From 1 February to 31 December 2024, a total of 49 travel documents were issued, and a further 9 during 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Asylum-seekers gain access to the labour market only six months after lodging an asylum application, a period that should be shortened. Problems related to access to healthcare can be overcome through amendments to the Law on Health Insurance and uniform written instructions from the Republic Fund for Health Insurance to all its branches. Social allowances continue to be granted restrictively, and the right to financial social assistance is not provided for persons residing in collective centres. Financial assistance for housing remains insufficient, while the conditions set by the Commissariat for Refugees and Migration remain excessive and strict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Asylum-seekers are guaranteed the right to primary and secondary education, while persons granted asylum are also entitled to preschool and higher education. Enrolment procedures remain complex, and financial and language barriers continue to be serious issues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Asylum and reception centres<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">During 2025, a total of 7 asylum and reception centres were operational, while the Asylum Centre in Krnja\u010da was permanently closed in June 2025. The total capacity in the first half of the year was 3,716 beds, and following the closure of the Krnja\u010da Asylum Centre, the capacity of the six remaining centres was 2,886 beds. A particularly impractical decision of the Commissariat for Refugees and Migration was to keep the Sjenica Asylum Centre operational, although the Obrenovac Asylum Centre accommodated fewer than 100 asylum-seekers throughout 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Temporary protection<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In 2025, in relation to persons forcibly displaced from Ukraine, a total of 387 persons were registered, temporary protection was granted for the first time to 394 persons, and 859 decisions on extension were issued.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What the report covers<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Chapter I: Overview of the Legal Framework Governing the Asylum System in the Republic of Serbia<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter II: Right of Access to the Territory and the Asylum Procedure<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter III: First-Instance Asylum Procedure \u2013 Practice of the Asylum Office<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter IV: Second-Instance Asylum Procedure \u2013 Legal Framework and Practice of the Asylum Commission<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter V: Practice of the Administrative Court<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter VI: Inclusion and Integration of Asylum-Seekers and Persons Granted the Right to Asylum<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter VII: Asylum and Reception Centres<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter VIII: Situation of Particularly Vulnerable Groups of Asylum-Seekers<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter IX: Temporary Protection for Persons Forcibly Displaced from Ukraine<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Chapter X: Recommendations<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Annex 1: Review of decisions by the Asylum Office for the period 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2025<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Annex 2: Review of the Asylum Commission&#8217;s practice in 2025<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Annex 3: Administrative Court practice in 2025<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Support<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Research and publication of this report were supported by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Representation in Serbia. UNHCR is neither responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed herein are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect the views of UNHCR, the United Nations, or its Member States.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Key messages About the publication The Centre for Research and Social Development IDEAS, as partner to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Serbia, and through its Asylum and Migration Programme, has been providing legal support to refugees and asylum-seekers in the Republic of Serbia since 2019, and since 2015 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":6313,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[142],"tags":[],"grupa":[136],"intervencija":[138],"program":[139],"vrsta-sadrzaja":[147],"class_list":["post-6308","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-publications","grupa-izbeglice-i-trazioci-azila","intervencija-zagovaranje","program-asylum-and-migration","vrsta-sadrzaja-izvestaj"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6308","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6308"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6308\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6315,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6308\/revisions\/6315"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6313"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6308"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6308"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6308"},{"taxonomy":"grupa","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/grupa?post=6308"},{"taxonomy":"intervencija","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/intervencija?post=6308"},{"taxonomy":"program","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/program?post=6308"},{"taxonomy":"vrsta-sadrzaja","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ideje.rs\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/vrsta-sadrzaja?post=6308"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}