Disappeared Newborns in Former Yugoslavia: ECtHR Rulings, Serbia’s Reforms, and Croatia’s Obligations
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Vocal.Media
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10
Between the 1960s and 1990s, thousands of parents in Serbia and Croatia were told their newborns had died, often without proof. The ECtHR ruled in Zorica Jovanović v. Serbia (2013) and Petrović v. Croatia (2025) that states violated family rights. Allegations include falsified identities, missing records, and illicit payments. Serbia has enacted reforms; Croatia must follow suit.
The Timeline
From the 1960s through the 1990s in the former Yugoslavia (especially Serbia and Croatia), many parents were told their newborns had died. Bodies were rarely shown. Records were inconsistent. Important to emphasize, the missing babies were taken from across the entire territory of former Yugoslavia.
In central Belgrade, there was one headquarters of the East German secret service, Stasi. These were involved in population control and demographic operations. This secret service cooperated with the KGB, some police, some hospitals,and some Serbian intelligence services, to orchestrate the transfer of children to EU nations and the US.
Authoritative monitors estimate as many as 250,000 newborn disappearances over approximately seven decades. Exact tallies remain uncertain pending further investigation. In 2013, in Zorica Jovanović v. Serbia, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found violation of Article 8 (right to family life). There was a failure to provide credible information on a newborn’s fate. Serbia was instructed to create a mechanism for all similar parents.
In 2020, Serbia enacted the Law on Establishing Facts on the Status of Newborn Children Suspected of Having Disappeared from Maternity Hospitals, to operationalize case-by-case fact-finding and compensation for damages. By mid-2021, the Belgrade Higher Court had received 694 applications. One had been resolved, and about 99 were pending at that time.
In 2025, in Petrović and Others v. Croatia, the ECtHR again found a violation of Article 8. An independent national mechanism was required to establish each child’s fate and award compensation.
The Patterns and Further Findings
Some documented patterns have emerged. These “paper deaths” came with the parents being told about the death. No body or burial proof was shown. There were registry contradictions. Records from funeral firms indicate that no remains were delivered. Therefore, documented patterns represent contradictions, knowledge gaps, and a lack of evidence.
Additional reported elements involve identity laundering, including for adoption. In one case, officials listed a mother who did not exist. This was processed into a rapid relinquishment. The reported workflow was about a week.
Alleged illegal payments have also been noted. Fees of up to around US$10,000 (in 1998 equivalencies) were reported in one case. In addition, 29 adoption files went missing between 1976 and 1981 from a social-work center in Aleksinac. Therefore, data can involve finances, missing partial registries, or falsification of identity.
Science as Partial Solution
Some positives have emerged from these stories, including a September 2021 DNA-confirmed reunion in Serbia, which demonstrates the feasibility of genetic tracing in helping to facilitate reunification and other rights-based efforts (see the 2013 and 2025 court cases, as well as the 2020 law mentioned above).
Serbia has the Missing Children hotline, operated by ASTRA and linked to the Missing Children Europe network. Several crucial items will require follow-through from this long history of crimes to rights-based action.
What Happens Next for Justice
Serbia has a mechanism in law. There are monitoring bodies. There are academics. These should continue to be assessed. They should be implemented to evaluate their efficacy. Croatia should establish an independent mechanism capable of issuing subpoenas to obtain credible answers and compensation, thereby meeting the ECtHR’s Article 46 obligations and ensuring their execution.
Former Serbian Orthodox Church deacon Bojan Jovanović has been a whistleblower on clerical abuse and authored Ispovest – Kako smo ubili Boga (2021). The public launch and interviews have documented regional media coverage.
Jovanović notes the missing babies are a combined failure of trafficking crimes and institutional shortcomings. He continues to advocate for justice in these cases.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 