THEMATIC REPORT 2017 REDRESS AND REPARATIONS perpetrator would only be convicted of one of the lesser criminal offences covered by the Criminal Procedure Code. In addition, compensation awards can take as long as two years to be paid to the victim due to the failure of the state to allocate sufficient funds from its budget. Serbia: Statutes of limitation bar torture victims from accessing historical redress The law criminalising torture in Serbia places a limitation period of 10 years on the time within which a criminal case against the perpetrator can be brought. This in practice has barred all torture victims from the Balkans war from seeking redress or reparations for the torture suffered through the criminal law procedures. The only alternative avenue available to torture victims is to file a civil law claim for compensation for the damages suffered due to their unlawful deprivation of liberty during the war. However, this legal avenue is also subject to a statute of limitations - a claim can only be filed either within five years from the event or three years from the day of the claimant’s knowledge of the damage caused to them and the perpetrator.43 Therefore many torture victims who were forcibly mobilised during the past war are also barred from filing a compensation claim under the civil law as they are unable to meet the five year statutory limitation period. Figure 10. The Outcome of Compensation Claims filed by Torture Victims in Serbia Despite this serious obstacle to accessing reparations, some torture victims have managed to claim compensation by arguing that the three year limitation period - which runs from the time the claimant knows of the damage - should in fact run from the date when a medical or psychological doctor diagnoses the victim as suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), thereby proving the damage caused. This potentially allows torture victims to access this avenue for compensation, even where the diagnosis takes place years after the torture occurred. The torture victims that IAN treats that chose to seek reparations for the torture they suffered all filed a claim for compensation for damages using this line of argumentation. Eighty-three (83) of IAN’s clients filed a compensation claim using the Law of Obligations for torture they suffered perpetrated by Serbian authorities but in Croatian territory (which was under the jurisdiction of Serbian authorities during the war). Of these, under a quarter (18 clients) received compensation on the basis that the evidence that they have PTSD as a result of the torture was page 42 18 32 22% 38% 4% 3 36% 30 Compensation awarded (PTSD proven) No compensation award (with PTSD) No compensation award (without PTSD) Claim withdrawn