Vezi raport EN

After examining the state of facts the Steering board notes that by separating the two shifts

• - morning program for the two bilingual Spanish studies XI classes and afternoon program

for the one non-bilingual - the defendant prioritizes the students who attended gymnasium within the high school and offers them the possibility to attend morning classes while stu- dents coming from other schools were restricted the right to equal opportunity education by the differentiated treatment of afternoon program.

The Steering board Resolution no. 440/22.06.2016 noted that favouring the students who attended gymnasium within the high school by offering them the possibility to attend morning classes as compared to the students coming from other schools, in the sense of restricting equal opportunity education access by applying the different treatment of afternoon classes is a fact of discrimination pursuant to the provisions of Art. 2 par. 1, corroborated to Art. 10, letter h of the Government Ordinance no. 137/2000 as republished, and recommended the defendant to draft a schedule to take into account the same program for all groups/classes of the same year of study, or to enforce a rotational schedule so that all students of the same year be offered the possibility to attend both morning and afternoon classes.

18. Restriction of equal access to education The Romanian National Council for Combating Discrimination opened an investigation by itself on granting additional free of admission seats for children of teachers or employees of the defendant college for the 5th grade admission in 2016. The Romanian National Council for Combating Discrimination Steering board notes that the defendant favours the children of teachers or employees of the college, as specified in the provisions of point 10 of the ad- mission procedure for the 5th grade class of 2016. The Steering board notes that the burden of proof has not been reversed for the present case.

The Steering board Resolution no. 349/04.05.2016 (unanimously voted by all members at- tending the meeting) notes the existence of a differentiated and discriminatory treatment pursuant to the provisions of Art. 2 par. 1 corroborated to Art. 10 letter h) and Art. 11 par. 1 of the GO 137/2000 on the prevention and punishment of all facts of discrimination, as re- published (unanimously voted), and disposed that the defendant be fined with a warning and together with the obligation of publishing a summary of the present decision in the media.

19. The right to equal opportunity access to social services The complainant notifies the Romanian National Council for Combating Discrimination on the existence of a different financing quantum on social services for the disabled within the public system as compared to the private one. The complainant association offers integrated services for children, youth and adults and benefits from a smaller state financing than public institutions offering the same set of services.

After analysing the situation, the Steering board notes that differentiated state financing of private social services represents a fact of discrimination. Disabled people resorting to the public system are in comparable situation with those resorting to the private one, because they have the right to benefit from the minimum standard social services established by the Government of Romania. The Steering board notes that the state externalizes the provision

Examples of the Council Steering board’s case law                                                     55