Table of Contents

• Two complaints and no follow up

• Dalibor Mocevic v. Croatia: Denial of justice and ethnic discrimination in
a property right case

Two complaints and no follow up

A Serb claims he is discriminated against by the Croatian authorities

By Willy Fautré, Human Rights Without Frontiers

HRWF (03.06.2019) - Complaints filed by Dalibor Mocevic, of Serbian descent, about the
suspicious death of his mother and telephone threats have remained dead letter for
many years in Croatia.

Dalibor Mocevic and his mother

The Croatian national courts acted against him solely on the basis of his nationality, he
says.

In 1993, D. Mocevic was a victim of a first serious violation of his property rights about
which a complaint has been lodged with the European Court of Human Rights. After
coming back home from a one-year travel on foreign seas (he was employed by a
merchant shipping company), he discovered that his house, jointly belonging to him and
his mother after his father’s decease, had been confiscated and handed over to a
Croatian family displaced by the war.

HRWF│Human Rights in the World Newsletter│Belgium

These cases of discrimination which took place in Zadar, the fifth largest city of the
country situated on the Adriatic Sea, are to be related to the collapse of the Yugoslav
Republic and the wars of independence by its various national populations from 1991 to
1995. During that period, Croats and Serbs fought against each other. This enmity has
not disappeared since then and this is the general context of D. Mocevic’s troubles.

A suspicious death

On 25 August 2009, Mrs Sofija Mocevic, passed away in the General Hospital (GH) of
Zadar while her son Dalibor Mocevic was away. Her common-law partner she was living
with after the death of her husband told him that she had died from a stroke. Right from
the beginning, D. Mocevic suspected that she had died in unclear circumstances and her
partner, Ante Radetic, a Croatian national, had some responsibility in her death.

When he got a copy of his mother’s medical file, he noticed a number of differences from
what he had been told by her partner.

Under the Rulebook on Conditions, Organization and Method of Outpatient Emergency

Medical Assistance (Article 25, para. 6, 7 and 9) it is prescribed that there should be
forms of the hospital emergency service in her medical file but inexplicably there were
not any. D. Mocevic vainly tried to get an answer from GH Zadar but he did not get any.

According to the version of the facts told by Mr Radetic, D. Mocevic’s mother was feeling
bad round 1.30am and her left side got paralyzed. However, according to the hospital
file, D. Mocevic found that she had only been admitted in the hospital at 3.30am, two
hours later, although her apartment was only 100 m from the hospital. When D. Mocevic
asked for a copy of the complete medical file, he only received a report from the
protocol.

In the last month before her death, Sofija Mocevic’s blood test had showed drastic
changes in her white cells that were not reflected in her medical records. Noteworthy is
the fact that, although there had not been any toxicological report, they mention there
was no sign of poisoning.

Another intriguing detail. After Sofija Mocevic’s death, the hospital gave back her
necklace, her rings and her watch to her son. This is inconsistent with the fact that she
had been transported from her bed at home to the hospital in the middle of the night and
that she always removed such items before going to bed, according to her son.

After Mrs Sofija Mocevic’s death, her common-law partner, Ante Radetic, hurried to sell
the land, the apartment and other items. He also withdrew all the funds from their joint
bank account.

All these facts further enhanced D. Mocevic’s suspicions about the real cause of his
mother’s death.

Legal action

Due to these and other circumstances indicating suspicious handlings of his mother in
hospital and unclear circumstances regarding her death, D. Mocevic sent a letter a letter
dated 20 December 2010 to the County Prosecutors Office in Zadar, requesting some
investigation about his suspicions. The complaint was registered under Nr KR-DO-
405/2010. The Prosecutor’s Office asked the hospital to make a statement on the
relevant facts and the police to carry out the necessary investigation.

HRWF│Human Rights in the World Newsletter│Belgium

In December 2010, D. Mocevic received several threats via text messages, from his
mother’s partner. These threats were communicated to the police with a copy of the list
of telephone conversations and sms messages but they did not carry out any
investigation.

In 2011, he received a threatening letter from Ante Radetic, who warned him “not to be
a hero” and asked him for a payment of 25.500 € as a “debt” which was a part of his own
mother’s inheritance, for the collection of which A. Radetic said “I will not need the
Prosecutors’ office”. This letter was sent to Mr. Močevic after he reported his suspicions
to the police.

The police interviewed D. Mocevic on 25 March 2011 and Ante Radetic on 10 May 2011.
However, they never forwarded the letter to the Prosecutors’ Office and they never took
any other action or informed D. Mocevic about the outcome of the proceedings: the filing
of a criminal report or the suspension of the proceedings.

During 2011, 2012 and 2013, D. Mocevic complained to the State Attorney (DORH) about
the excessive duration of the preliminary investigation into the death of his mother and
also threats he received on his phone. There was no reaction.

In 2009/2010, D. Mocevic also sent an inquiry to the Emergency Services of the Zadar
County Hospital who refused to provide him with his mother’s medical record for over a
year. That is when he noticed significant discrepancies regarding the time of her
admission in hospital and her complete check-up along with her blood test results.

On 28 March 2012, D. Mocevic filed a criminal complaint with the County Prosecutor’s
Office in Zadar, against the police but he was never notified about the follow up of his
complaint.

In conclusion, preliminary criminal investigation into two different issues concerning D.

Mocevic lasted for eight years without any outcome, because he is of Serbian origin and
the man against whom he lodged complaints is a Croatian, he says.

Dalibor Mocevic v. Croatia: Denial of justice and ethnic

discrimination in a property right case
Willy Fautré, director of Human Rights Without Frontiers

HRWF (26.04.2019) - In a never-ending property right dispute, Dalibor Mocevic, a

Croatian and Bosnian national of Serbian descent, has been a victim of human rights
violations in Croatia.

He and his attorney at law, Miljan Timotijevic,are of the opinion that discrimination based
on ethnic origin is in the core of all his troubles and travails of his family during the
years, caused by Croatian authorities. In the center of this case is the fact that Dalibor
Močević is a Serbian national with both Bosnian and Croatian citizenship, his late
ancestors.

D. Mocevic had a permanent residence in a flat located in Zadar, at 6 Ugljanska Str.

where he had lived since his birth in 1972 until 1994. This flat belonged to his father,
Savo Mocevic, who had received it in 1972, during the Communist period, from his
former employer, the Customs Office of Zadar. According to the relevant legislation in
force, D. Mocevic and his mother became automatically the co-owners of the flat under
the administrative/legal status of "specially protected tenancy".

HRWF│Human Rights in the World Newsletter│Belgium

On 15 September 1992, D. Mocevic's father died as a victim of the war in Bosnia in a
sanatorium where he had spent the last years of his life.

In 1993, the Ministry of Finance, the Customs Administration and the Customs Office of
Zadar brought a civil action against Dalibor's parents in the Zadar Municipal Court,
seeking the eviction of D. Mocevic and his mother from the flat. However, as a co-owner
of the flat, he was entitled to use and purchase it in accordance with the Housing Act. At
the beginning of 1993, D. Mocevic also submitted a request for the property right
transfer to his name.

In January 1993, D. Mocevic, who was employed by a merchant shipping company, left
Zadar on a ship for one year.

In February 1994, he came back to Croatia and found that the flat was occupied by a
family of refugees. His personal belongings had remained untouched. He had however no
other place to live in. His mother had in the meantime been given a 58 sqm flat by her
own employer under the status of "protective tenancy" but she was living there with a
new partner and his children.

During the proceedings, the court received a certificate from Zadar police confirming that
his registered residence had been at 6 Ugljanska Str. in Zadra since 29 September 1988.

Ten years of "ping pong game" between the Municipal Court and the County
Court in Zadar

On 9 February 1999, the Municipal Court cancelled the specially protected tenancy
rights of Dalibor's mother concerning the flat at Ugljanska Str.

On 26 April 2001, the Municipal Court deprived Dalibor of any rights on the flat but he
appealed the decision.

On 11 September 2003, the Zadar County Court quashed the first instance judgment
and remitted the case.

On 11 November 2004, the Municipal Court ruled again for the defendant state
(Croatia) but Dalibor appealed the decision.

On 27 September 2006, the Zadar County Court quashed again the first instance
judgment and remitted the case.

The "ping pong game" between the two courts continued for four more years.

On 31 August 2010, the Zadar County Court dismissed Dalibor's appeal and upheld the
first instance judgment, which hereby became final and enforceable.

Proceedings at Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court

On 25 October 2010,D. Mocevic lodged a complaint with the Constitutional Court

against the County Court's decision, alleging violations of his constitutional rights to
equality before the law and fair proceedings as well as his right to respect for his peaceful
enjoyment of his possessions. Indeed, the Government had never disputed the fact that
the flat in question was his actual place of residence.

D. Mocevic also lodged an appeal on points of law with the Supreme Court. Relying on
section 382 (1) and 382 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act, he argued that his case raised

HRWF│Human Rights in the World Newsletter│Belgium

leghal issues important for ensuring the uniform application of the law and equality of
citizens.

On 3 March 2011, the Supreme Court declared his appeal on points of law inadmissible.

At the end of 2011, D. Mocevic left Croatia due to fear for his own safety as he
repeatedly received phone threats.

As his mother had died in 2009 and he had no living relative left in Croatia, he had no
knowledge of the outcome of the proceedings of the Constitutional Court for several
years.

In November 2016, after repeated inquiries by electronic mail, he received a

notification from the Constitutional Court saying that a decision had been taken on 22
February 2012. He was orally informed that his complaint had been dismissed as
unfounded.

A complaint for denial of justice and ethnic discrimination has been lodged with the
European Court of Human Rights. As of the end of April 2019, the admissibility of the
case has not been examined yet.

HRWF│Human Rights in the World Newsletter│Belgium