18.02.2026.

Protection of Migrants Workers' Rights - Comments by the Centre for Peace Studies on the Final Proposal of the Act on Amendments to the Aliens Act (2026)

Over the past year, the Centre for Peace Studies has provided free legal aid to nearly 400 people and undertaken more than 800 legal actions on their behalf. Most individuals who approached us sought assistance due to issues regulated by the Aliens Act—whether migrant workers, applicants for international protection, or persons who already hold some form of protection in Croatia.

Through our daily work with people, we have identified a number of systemic problems that create legal uncertainty and disproportionate sanctions. We highlighted these issues by participating in the public consultation on the Amendments to the Aliens Act, which is currently in parliamentary procedure.

1. Lack of Transparency in Proceedings

Imagine being subject to proceedings before the Ministry of the Interior, where the outcome determines whether you may remain in the country where you live and work.

Migrant workers often find themselves in situations where a decision by the Ministry of the Interior determines whether they can stay in the country where they live and work—yet they do not receive timely and clear information about the status of their application. Instead, such information is provided to their employers.

Despite legislative amendments extending the permitted period of unemployment, migrant workers remain highly dependent on their employers. In practice, this means that if an employer fails to submit an application for a permit or does not provide the necessary documentation, the worker bears the consequences. Often, the only way for a worker to check the status of the procedure is to visit a police station in person, which in many cases happens too late to regulate their status in time.

We have witnessed cases in which workers worked for months believing their employers had submitted applications for their work permits, only to later discover that no application had been submitted or that it had been rejected without their knowledge. The result is a fall into irregular status, which under the current law can no longer be regularized retroactively, forcing individuals to leave Croatia.

It is crucial to ensure that persons of migrant background whose applications for issuance or renewal of residence and work permits are pending have independent, quick, and effective access to information about the status of their applications through the e-Citizens system.

2. Punishing Workers by Revoking Their Right to Residence and Work, and Preventing Re-Regulation Due to Circumstances Beyond Their Control

A second level of the problem lies in the fact that, under the current Act, there are numerous grounds on which workers’ right to residence and work can be revoked—without the possibility of re-regulating their stay—due to circumstances caused by the employer.

For example, if an employer fails to pay taxes or ends up on a so-called “blacklist,” the worker bears the consequences. Their stay may be declared unlawful, they may receive an order to leave the country, and ultimately face deportation. In this way, workers are punished for omissions, misdemeanors, and even criminal offenses committed by their employers.

We therefore believe that the Act must allow for the re-regulation of residence for persons whose permits have expired or become invalid due to circumstances beyond their fault and/or control.

3. Disproportionate Sanctions for Failure to Meet Certain Obligations

We welcome the legislator’s intention to place greater emphasis on learning the Croatian language, as this is a genuine need of migrant workers. However, failure to pass a language exam must not be sanctioned by the loss of a residence and work permit.

Experience with organizing language and cultural courses to date has shown that competent authorities have struggled to ensure timely and accessible programs even for smaller numbers of participants. In circumstances where tens of thousands of people arrive from countries with different linguistic and writing systems, mastering the language within one year—while working full time—represents an extremely significant challenge. Introducing such a strict sanction without adequate infrastructure and program availability would lead to further insecurity.

We propose that language learning remains voluntary, or at least that the obligation be implemented through a supportive and phased approach, with warnings and realistic deadlines, rather than through automatic withdrawal of residence rights. Integration is not achieved through the threat of losing status, but through accessible support and realistic expectations.

4. Allowing Asylum Seekers Living and Working in Croatia to Transition to Migrant Worker Status – In Line with the Slovenian Model

Given that in recent years Croatia has regularized and opened pathways for a larger number of migrant workers to come to the country, we propose continuing this direction toward a more inclusive society by creating additional possibilities for regulating residence for persons whose applications for international protection have been rejected or who have withdrawn their applications.

Applicants for international protection may begin working after three months of residence, which means that an increasing number of people whose administrative status has not yet been finally resolved are currently working in Croatia. Many have worked here for years, paid contributions, and established genuine ties with the local community. Given the small number of approved asylum applications, there is a high likelihood that some of these individuals will be required to leave the country despite already having employment here. Slovenia has already recognized this issue and incorporated such a model into its legislation. We therefore propose introducing a similar model adapted to the Croatian legal framework.

For those who began employment in Croatia during the process of seeking international protection and have thereby established active connections with Croatian society and culture, we propose opening the possibility of regulating their residence in Croatia so that they may continue contributing to society through their work, as an alternative to return or deportation to their country of origin.

5. Enabling Displaced Persons from Ukraine to Transition Easily from Temporary Protection (Expiring in March 2027) to Permanent Residence

Persons who fled the war in Ukraine and have lived and worked in Croatia for almost four years are, under this proposed Act, placed in an absurd situation: if temporary protection ceases, they would be treated as though they had just arrived in the country and would have to regulate their residence again from the beginning.

We therefore propose that all persons under temporary protection be allowed to obtain permanent residence upon the expiry of temporary protection.

6. Lengthy Procedures for Granting Temporary, Permanent, or Long-Term Residence

A serious issue is the excessive duration of procedures for granting temporary as well as permanent or long-term residence. Temporary residence decisions often take more than a year, while permanent or long-term residence decisions can take more than two years.

In practice, this means that persons who have resided continuously in Croatia for more than five years—thereby meeting the requirement to apply for long-term residence—must wait an additional two years to actually obtain that status. Such practice creates prolonged insecurity for people who have built their lives here.