The Czech Public Defender of Rights is addressing complaint filed by a major humanitarian NGO which could be discriminated against on the grounds of the racial or ethnic origin.

Under the Czech law this NGO has status of legal entity. It offers a wide range of activities. It also provides a social inclusion services to Roma and third country nationals. For this purpose, it enters into private law relations with other entities (mostly providers of goods and services).

In summer 2015 the NGO was preparing a summer camp for children and their parents. Camp site Operator (hereinafter “Operator”) confirmed reservation by phone. One day before the departure Operator sent the following SMS to one employee of NGO: “Good morning, your reservation has not been confirmed and thus it has been cancelled. Thank you for your understanding.” The employee of NGO called Operator but did not make the record of the phone call. The Operator informed her that he did not wish them to come. He said: “You sure want to come with some refugees or what.” He asked whether the participants had permanent residence in the Czech Republic etc. The NGO said that the participants were born in the Czech Republic and that it was organized group. Operator replied that having tents in the camp site would not pay off and that he would have high water consumption as well. The camp site web reads that facilities include tent area, lavatory and shower room and that hot water is provided free of charge.

The NGO alleges in its complaint that this occurs on regular basis. It maintains that some providers of services refuse this organization on the very grounds of its reputation, this means due to its activities focused on specific (vulnerable) groups. While clients of the organization don´t want to take any action against discrimination, the organization itself would like to defend against such less favorable treatment.

When accessing goods and services the Czech Antidiscrimination Act protects only natural person on the grounds of the racial or ethnic origin. Legal persons are not protected against discrimination. Actio popularis is not recognized in the Czech legal system.

Recital 16 of Race Directive (2000/43/EC) Member States should also provide, where appropriate and in accordance with their national traditions and practice, protection for legal persons where they suffer discrimination on grounds of the racial or ethnic origin of their members.

The Public Defender of Rights (Czech Equality Body) would like to open discussion concerning the gaps in the applicable legislation and help NGOs supporting vulnerable groups. She would like to obtain an overview of different national legislations and legal opinion and experience of Equinet members.

For this reason I would like to kindly ask you to provide an answer to following questions:
 In the instant case, under your national law could that amount to discrimination on grounds of the racial or ethnic origin? If so, could you possibly quote relevant legal regulations (English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Polish, Croatian, Hungarian and Slovak).
 If you replied positively to the first question, who could possibly become the victim of discrimination? Clients of organization (natural persons) or the NGO itself (legal person)? Could you possibly provide brief reasoning of your answer including reference to the applicable legal regulation (for the language version see above).
 If you national legislation admits protection of legal persons against discrimination on grounds of the racial or ethnic origin, what claims may the legal person raise?
 Hay your equality body or domestic court dealt with any similar case? If so, could you provide more details and the outcome including internet link?
 Would you like to add any other views or suggestions to this particular case?

Dear colleagues, I would like to kindly ask you to send your replies to obrovska@ochrance.cz by 16th September 2016 (putting Tamas.Kadar@equineteurope.org in the copy).

We will circulate the outcome of the case to the members of the Equinet WG in the course of Autumn 2016.

test for the Forum

Dear Equinet members,

The Public Defender of Rights (the Czech equality body) is currently dealing with the case of the Nursing College that prohibits wearing of any headdress in special classrooms for physics, chemistry and biology. The ban is imposed by the internal school regulation. The declared reasons for the ban is safety and protection of students and others (without exception). Would you consider such a case to constitute indirect discrimination? Could it be discriminatory against Muslim students wearing a headscarf – ‘hidjab’?

We would be grateful for any information concerning similar cases that you may have encountered. Could you provide us with domestic (or European) case-law in this regard?

In case you have never handled any similar case, we would be grateful for sharing your opinion. The key questions are:
  Is there a legitimate aim?
  If yes, are the means of achieving the aim appropriate and necessary?

Please send the information to Eva Nehudkova, eva.nehudkova@ochrance.cz, by the end of June, 2016.

Best regards

Veronika Bazalova

We have received a complaint regarding the discriminatory effect of the Ordinance on Drivers’ Licenses related to the extensions and renewals of drivers’ licenses.
The complainant asserts that, due to her vision problems, her drivers’ license is being issued to her for a term of five years instead of the usual ten. Every time she needs to extend her license she is being issued with a new one, with a new expiry date. This is resulting in the fact that, along with the costs of a medical exam, each time she is also forced to pay for the costs of a new drivers’ license form in the amount of 150.00 kn (20.00 Eur). Since this practice is placing her in a less favorable position in relation to the persons that are being issued with drivers’ licenses for the usual ten-year term, the complainant deems she is being discriminated against on the basis of her health condition.
The competent ministry is justifying the treatment of the complainant described above citing the obligations stemming from the Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licenses. In line with the cited Directive, the driving licenses in Croatia are being issued in the form of a card the appearance of which is harmonized with the relevant provisions of the Directive. Due to the fact that driving licenses are being issued in the form of a plastic-covered card subsequent changes of the data entered or the entering of additional data are not possible and thus each change results in the issuing of a new drivers’ license and the charging of the citizens with the cost thereof.
We are interested to know how this issue is regulated in your countries, i.e. whether for each extension of a drivers’ license a new form is being issued and charged or whether the changes are being recorded electronically.
Please respond to silvija.trgovec@ombudsman.hr.
Many thanks and best regards,
Silvija Trgovec Greif,
legal adviser to the ombudsman

Dear Colleagues,

I write to ask if NEBs could let me know what the situation is in their country with the the law concerning the involvement of NEBs in election campaigns such as to parliament or for president.

I expect that law could be divided into three types:
(a) the law (statute, or court or case law as appropriate) prohibits an NEB from contributing to the debate in an election campaign
(b) the law permits it
(c) the law is silent on this question.

I also expect that if there is a law, then
 it might be contained in the law concerning the NEB or
 it might be in other laws,
and for the second of these I would expect that laws
 on elections or
 on the use of state funds
would be most likely to permit or constrain what an NEB may do. Another possibility is that laws at the state or national level or silent, but that the NEB or may have adopted its own rules, internal statute, or code of practice.

The final aspect that I am interested in concerns the following: where an NEB does engage with an election process, what aspects of the election may or does it engage with. In theory, a number of possibilites that could occur include the following (although that does not mean I believe these necessarily actually occur):
 confining any contribution to the subject of the participation of women, ethnic monrities, people with disabilites, and so on, in the election as candidates or as voters
 commenting on the need for parties and candidates to avoid discrimination, hate speech, or other attacks on ’equality groups’ such as religious or ethnic minorities
 commenting broadly on the importance of equalty policies without addressing any party and candidate manifestos, programmmes and platforms
 analysing the manifestos, programmmes and platforms of parties and candidates from an equality perspective.

Any brief information would be appreciated.

Yours sincerely,

Cathal Kelly
Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission

An Irish trade union has contacted the Equality Authority with a request for sources of information and guidance on equality audits and outsourcing work contracts.

I have drawn their attention to
 the book "Buying Social Justice" by Christopher McCrudden and
 the report "Equality of Opportunity and Sustainable Development in Public Sector Procurement" by the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland.

Do any other Equinet members have resources or information that I can forward to this union?

Please forward replies to Cathal Kelly

cfkelly@equality.ie

Dear All,

As Cyprus Ombudsman, we are in progress to prepare a report regarding the asylum procedures for Syrians. We have received an important number of complaints from Syrians about the delays of examining or reexamining their files.

I would like to know if other countries (mainly Mediterraneans) have set policies or practices for the examination of the applications from Syrians. If yes, what kind of policies? (If possible mention also the number of Syrians who applied for international protection).

Thank you.

Hi everyone,

Let me wish you a very good year!

I come to you with the next request: the National Council for Combating Discrimination (the Romanian equality body) wants to apply for the PROGRESS call below and needs a foreign partner:

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/grants/just_2013_frc_ag_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/files/call_2013_frc_ag_en.pdf.

If any of your institutions would be interested in being our partner, please let me know as soon as possible.

Thank you very much,
Madalina

Madalina Rosu
Director, Legal Directorate
National Council for Combating Discrimination (Romania)
Email: madalinaraluca.rosu@gmail.com
Tel.: 0040 722 393 711

Dear Colleagues,

Our colleagues from the Maltese equality body NCPE would like to request if any of you has any information on which country obliges the father’s company to pay for part of the maternity leave to the company where his pregnant partner works, and if there is any more information about this scheme.

Thank you and best wishes!

Dear all,

Our colleague Marie-Pierre Despret from the Belgian Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism would be interested to find out whether any of you know of e-learning tools/resources on discrimination and diversity that are good and well made.

You are encouraged to post your replies here in the forum, though should you wish to contact Marie-Pierre directly you can do so at mariepierre.despret@cntr.be or +32 (0)2 212 30 32.

Kind regards,
Cosmin