Vezi raport EN

his representative were assaulted by an employee in the parking space of Hotel Muntenia after having parked their vehicle on a parking space marked as “temporary reserved”, and thus their security and protection were threatened. As a result of this incident, during 2013, both the petitioner and his representative were summoned for police hearings as part of the criminal files that had been opened in the case. Critics on not providing access in the insti- tutions of the public administration are brought, as well as on the ways the criminal files are investigated - upon their petition (as complainants) and with them as criminal suspects. The Steering board noted that, because of the petitioner’s disability (a person in a wheelchair), he cannot exercise his right to access like any other normal person and that he has to benefit from additional measures from the part of the defendant parties in order to be able to exercise his rights. The petitioner’s access to and out of buildings belonging to Hotel Muntenia, Police Precinct 1, 3 Pitesti and Pitesti Court is restrained/impossible by the lack of access ramps,

the lack of disabled toilets, lack of especially marked parking spaces able to provide equitable access without any additional effort from the part of the petitioner in the wheelchair.

The Steering board Resolution no. 427/15.06.2016 noted that the facts charged against the defendants: Hotel Muntenia (Pitești), Police Precinct 1 and Police Precinct 3, represent facts of discrimination pursuant to the provisions of Art. 2 par. 1 corroborated with Art. 10 letter h) and Art. 15 of the Government Ordinance no. 137/2000 republished and ordered a contraventional fine of Lei 6000 each. The facts held against the defendant Pitesti Court by Argeș Tribunal represent facts of discrimination pursuant to the provisions of Art. 2 par. 1 corroborated with Art. 10 letter h) and Art. 15 of the Government Ordinance no. 137/2000 republished, the contraventional fine being enforced via an acknowledgment record on non-compliance with social care legal provisions, series: ANPIS no. 10743/25.03.2015; No elements of a fact of discrimination are found, pursuant to the provisions of Art. 2 par. 1 of the Government Ordinance no. 137/2000 republished, against the Mayor of Pitesti, Argeș Tribunal and Pitesti Appeal Court.

26. Personal dignity. Disability The petitioner claims that on September 30, 2015 around 12:20, in the courtyard of the C.B. school in Bucharest sector 3, she was physically and verbally abused by the defendant, the latter verbally insulting her and her son who was diagnosed with “global mental and language moderate retard, IQ 55, 2nd degree obesity, hyperthyroidism under substitution treatment”. It has been ascertained that statements were made in public and target the right to personal dignity, creating a hostile, degrading, humiliating atmosphere against the petitioner and her son, pursuant to the provisions of Art. 15 of the Government Ordinance no. 137/2000. The legitimacy of sanctions is given by the need to mainly protect others’ reputation and rights but one can also invoke public safety, moral preservation.

The Steering board Resolution no. 551/07.09.2016 noted that facts described in the petition represent facts of discrimination pursuant to the provisions of Art. 2 par. 1 corroborated to Art. 15 of the Government Ordinance no. 137/2000 republished and fined the defendant 1,000 lei.

27. Disability. Access to public premises The petitioner reports that the green light equipment with acoustic signals installed at the

Examples of the Council Steering board’s case law                                                      59