Temperatura del aire y temperatura operativa

The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY)¹⁰² was a federal state composed of six republics and two autonomous provinces.¹⁰³ Stemming from this structure was the regulation of citizenship, which was two-tiered: each citizen held both the federal and the republican citizenship. The predominant citizenship-acquisition principle at the federal level, which was followed by all the republics as well, was jus sanguinis,¹⁰⁴ although other manners of acquiring citizenship were also possible (i.e. by naturalization, in accordance with international agreements or by birth on the territory if the child’s parents or their citizenship could not be identified or if they were stateless). All Yugoslav citizens were considered equal before the law in their rights and duties, regardless of their national, racial, religious, gender, language or any other difference.¹⁰⁵ The same applied to their republican citizenship as well.

Two phases can be distinguished in the relationship between the federal and the republican citizenship: until 1974 the federal citizenship was “the primary” one, meaning that only Yugoslav citizens could hold citizenship of one of the republics and, consequently, that the loss of federal citizenship also meant the loss of the republican one. After the adoption of a new constitution in 1974, which began a process of decentralization, republican citizenship took precedence: Art. 249/2 of the Constitution stated that each citizen of a republic is also a citizen of the SFRY and that citizens of one republic have the same rights and duties on the territory of any other republic as its own citizens. It should be noted that each republic had to adopt its own internal laws regulating citizenship which had to be harmonized with the federal law. In practice these laws differed between each other only in less important issues.

This shift of primacy from the federal to the republican citizenship was mostly theoretical as it had little or no practical effect. In both phases, all Yugoslav citizens, regardless of their republican citizenship, held equal rights and duties and were able to move freely, work and

102 The name SFRY was introduced in 1963. Until 1918 the territory was part of the Austro-Hungarian empire.

After World War I, the country became known as the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. In 1929 it was renamed as the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. In 1945, after World War II it was first named Democratic Federal Yugoslavia and soon thereafter renamed as Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia.

103 The republics were: Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia, whereas the two provinces, Vojvodina and Kosovo, were initially part of Serbia.

104 Ius sanguinis can be defined as principle according to which “a person’s nationality is determined on the basis of the nationality of his or her parents – or one (particular) parent – at the time of the person’s birth” (Bauböck et at. 2006: 121).

105 Cfr. Article 33 of the 1963 Constitution and Article 154 of the 1974 Constitution.

100

reside in any republic they wished. Yugoslav citizens frequently exercised this right and moved often, especially for work-related motives. In this way, a considerable number of individuals resided outside of the republic of their origin. In Slovenia, for instance, the number of non-Slovene residents at the time of its secession in 1991 was approximately 200.000, which made for roughly 10% of the entire population. Moreover, changing the republican citizenship was fairly easy: although conditions differed slightly from republic to republic, the essential requisite was that the applicant, being of full age, was able to prove residence in the specific republic at the time of filling the application. It has been noted that due to the unproblematic nature of the republican citizenship and the full equality enjoyed by all citizens, “many (perhaps most) SFRY citizens did not devote much attention to this feature of their citizenship; many may not even have known which republic’s citizenship they held”

(Kogovšek Šalamon 2016: 40).

Seeing how federal citizenship guaranteed all the same civil rights, regardless of their republican citizenship, one's day-to-day legal relations were significantly more influenced by her (permanent) residency status. Yugoslav citizens were able to register their permanent (or temporary) residency in any of the republics, granted that it was the republic where they effectively lived. Permanent residence was in SFRY, and still is its successor countries, including Slovenia, a fundamental legal status in that it gave access to a series of socio-economic rights, including the right to health care, a host of social benefits, the right to work and to study etc.; additionally, in certain cases it even gave access to the right to vote (and still does).¹⁰⁶ Hence, for any Yugoslav citizen, his or her residency status was, within the country itself, the most important legal status, determining the greater part of his or her public rights and duties.

The keeping of citizenship and residence records is a special chapter in the Erasure story. A detailed and a comprehensive presentation of regulation of this area would require much more space and it is not my intention here to go into detail on the matter. I shall only point to matters that I find particularly relevant for a general understanding of the Erasure.

For one, it is important to note that all population registers in Yugoslavia (from 1945 until 1991) were kept only at the level of the republics. Municipalities were obligated to keep records on their (permanent) residents and citizenship was recorded in the place where the

106 See more in Ragazzi & Štiks 2010: 3.

101

individual had her permanent residence.¹⁰⁷ After 1963, however, republican citizenship was no longer consistently recorded. “Beginning in that year”, notes Kogovšek Šalamon, “the population registers contained records on all SFRY citizens, regardless of the republic in which they had citizenship” (2016: 45).¹⁰⁸ Soon thereafter population registers began to be abandoned. While in 1976 separate citizenship records were abolished and information on citizenship was entered into the birth registers, in 1982 population registers were abandoned altogether (see more in Kogovšek Šalamon 2006: 45, including note 69).

In order to better understand the complexities of the legal regulation in this area as well as the consequent confusion it created among the affected individuals – constituting in this way a relevant element of the Erasure –, I should add that in addition to the two statuses – citizenship and (permanent) residency – the SFRY introduced in 1976 the “unique personal identification number” (EMŠO).¹⁰⁹ The EMŠO allowed for unique identification of each individual and it was used for the maintenance of population databases, the integration of data in various such databases and for the purposes of other official bodies authorized to use the EMŠO. A federal law defined the structure of the number and the obligation to enter it into certain documents, while the republics were in charge of all other aspects of its implementation. In Slovenia, all permanent residents obtained the EMŠO, including those permanent residents who did not held Slovenian republican citizenship. This fact proved to be one of the biggest problems in the time of the Erasure since “many erased individuals erroneously thought that their ‘Slovenian’ personal identification number was proof that they were not obliged to apply for Slovenian citizenship, thinking that they would not have received the Slovenian personal identification number unless they held Slovenian republic citizenship” (Kogovšek Šalamon 2016: 42).¹¹⁰

107 In SR Slovenia, until 1965 only data on Slovenian citizens was entered in the registers. That meant that if an individual was born in Slovenia before 1965 to parents who resided in Slovenia but were not Slovenian citizens (either both or the one after whom the child obtained her citizenship), the information on the citizenship of this child was not entered into the Slovenian population register. See Kogovšek Šalamon 2016: 45.

108 I.e. of all citizens, regardless of their republican citizenship, with permanent residence in Slovenia. However, it should be noted that due to the relative unimportance of the republican citizenship individuals moving to other republics often did not change their republican citizenships nor did they register the changes of their residence.

See Ragazzi & Štiks 2010: 5.

109 See the Law on the Introduction of the Unique Master Citizen Number, Official Gazette of SFRY, n. 58/1976.

110 As Kogovšek Šalamon also notes, from this it can be seen that the government did not provide sufficient information to the population regarding the differences between the population register, the EMŠO number and the role of the republic citizenship. This, she also notes, had especially serious consequences for the lower working class immigrants in Slovenia from other Yugoslav republics – who represented the majority of those later erased.

102

In summary, three points relevant for understanding the Erasure should be emphasized in relation to the just discussed matters. First, while individuals in SFRY held a dual citizenship, the republican citizenship had almost no practical value. The practically most relevant legal status was rather permanent residence. Individuals were often unaware of their republican citizenship and the data entered into population records was frequently incorrect or outdated.

All this proved particularly important at the moment of the break-up of Yugoslavia when, with federal citizenship ceasing to exist, the republican citizenship became the main criterion for determining one’s citizenship of one of the newly formed states. Secondly, citizenship and residency records were kept at the level of the republics. However, due to constant changes in the legislation, their maintenance was highly irregular and thus the data they contained became unreliable. This fact proved critical when Erased individuals attempted to provide proof of their citizenship and residency but were unable to do so. Finally, due to a mix of political and legal circumstances (promotion of Yugoslavianism, freedom of movement and equal rights regardless of republican origins), as well as of a widespread disinterest, there was both a lack of information as well as misunderstanding regarding the functions of the various statuses (federal and republic citizenship, permanent residence, unique identification number), including lack of knowledge about one’s own precise legal situation.

All these facts proved to be crucial for the events that followed. Since the secession of Slovenia from SFRY and the transition from one legal system to another is highly relevant for understanding the Erasure, the next step is to look at the most important documents adopted by the Slovenian authorities at that time.