Vezi raport EN

130. Access to public educational institutions. Refusal. Ethnic origin. Roma. The Community Development Agency „Împreună” notifies the fact that two young Roma, students of the Social Assistance Faculty were expelled from the Headquarters of the Academy of Economic Studies. The two young men wanted to post to the Faculty notice board posters advertising a training program on a voluntary basis for Roma students within some non-governmental organizations. The young men were stopped by the security guard, who did not allow their access inside the institution. Through decision no. 89 of 10.03.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by warning. (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 3, art. 18). 131. Press article. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. Romani Criss complained about the publishing of the article „The influx of Romanian beggars in the West, an issue of morality of public notaries”. The Committee set down that the content of the article introduces an association between the image of the Roma community and immoral and illegal activities, which could generate a hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the whole Roma community. Through decision no. 93 of 01.04.2004, the Committee decided that the notified deeds are discrimination according to the provisions of art. 2 par. 3 and art. 19 of Government Ordinance 137/2000 and it decided to sanction the defendant by warning. (art. 2 par. 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000). 132. Access to labour. Ads. Ethnic origin. Roma/Age. Multiple differentiation. Romani CRISS complained about the online publishing by S.C. Adrasim S of some employment ads on a specialized site. Two employment announcements were published: "I employ auto-mechanic with experience, age 30-40 years (Roma excluded)” and „manufacturers, dressmakers, Roma excluded”. Through decision no. 97 of 17.05.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are direct discrimination and it decided to sanction the employer company by fine amounting to 2000 lei and the company owner of the specialized site by fine amounting to 400 lei. (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 3, art. 7 par. 1 and 2 of G.O. 137/2000). 133. Statements. National origin. Hungarians. Personal dignity. M.V. complained about him being attacked in the public by B.S.during work hours. The defendant used insulting phrases referring to the Hungarian ethnic origin of the petitioner and forbade him to speak in front of him until he learns the Romanian language. Through decision no. 125 of 19.04.2005, the Committee found that the notified deeds were confirmed by the petitioner's work colleagues, as through references to nationality his personal dignity was injured, according to art. 2 par. 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000. The Committee ascertained the discrimination deeds and it decided to sanction the defendant by warning. (art. 2 par. 1 and 3, art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented). 134. Statements. Chanting. Sports manifestations. National/ethnic origin. Personal dignity. K.A. notified NCCD regarding the chanting of supporters of the hockey team Steaua Bucuresti during the match fought with S.C. Miercurea Ciuc. The chanting refer to the message „Hungarians out, out of the country!". Through decision no. 135 of 02.06.2005, the RO - Piaţa Valter Mărăcineanu 1-3, sector 1, Bucureşti, Tel / fax 021-312.65.78/79/85 37 „building trust in human rights” www.cncd.org.ro  „protecţie efectivă a drepturilor omului” Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination, as such messages could generate a hostile, offensive and humiliating environment for the members of the Hungarian community. It was decided to sanction the defendant by fine amounting to 500 lei (art. 2 par. 1, art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/20000, subsequently amended and supplemented). 135. Statements. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. Several non-governmental organizations complained and the Steering Committee of NCCD was self-notified regarding the statements of Mr. A.S. published in the newspaper „Gardianul”. Within the interview, the defendant states, among others: „It is true that I am in a war with the Gypsies in Craiova because they have no additional right”, „I don't live in the same house with the Gypsies” and about Mr. V.N. he indicates that he is a „despicable, loathsome Gypsy”, namely „jerks and tramps". The Committee set down that the language used generates a hostile, degrading and offensive environment against the Roma ”ethnic group”. Through decision no. 136 of 14.06.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by fine amounting to 1500 lei (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented). 136. Statements. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. Ms. R.M. complains about the fact that some of her neighbours express insulting words towards her specifically referring to her ethnic affiliation and that of her children. (Roma ethnic group). Through decision no. 144 of 11.05.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by warning. (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000). 137. Press article. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. Romani Criss complained about the content of the article entitled "Failed Gypsy putsch" regarding the behaviour of Roma ethnic origin persons. The article states that: „meeting the tanned minority left heavy traces on the premises of the Town Hall, worthy of a modern chemical-bacteriological attack. The chemical componency was given by the smell of a hundred or so Roma which forced the local administration officials to work with the windows open until the end of the program. The bacteriological attack was caused by the huge number of fleas and lice remained after the session in the Town Hall room”. The Committee set down that through the references associated with the Roma origin persons their dignity was offended based on ethnical origin. Through decision no. 154 of 11.05.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination and it decided sanctioning by warning (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000). 138. Statements. Chanting. Sports manifestations. National/ethnic origin. Personal dignity. NCCD was self-notified regarding the chanting of the supporters of the hockey team S.C. Miercurea Ciuc during the match fought with Steaua Bucuresti. The chanting refer to the message " stinking Romanians"., "Out, gypsies out of the country!”. Through decision no. 182 of 22.07.2005 the Committee ascertained that the deeds constitute discrimination, as such messages could offend the dignity of some communities of persons. It was decided to sanction the club with fine amounting to 500 lei. (art. 2 par. 3, art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented). 139. Access to employment. Competition conditions. Hungarian language. Residence. The Committee was self- notified regarding the ad published in the local press for a competition of mechanics-tractor-driver, house painter, mechanic and doorman. Among the conditions for enrollment in the competition was imposed the knowledge of the Hungarian language and for the position of doorman the condition of permanent residence in the town. The Committee set down that under the law regarding local public administration, the knowledge of the national minorities' maternal language by employees may be required for positions which suppose relations with the public. For other positions, such a condition is not necessary. The residence condition is prohibitive and could restrict the labour right. In this context, the restriction of participation in the contest of persons who do not know the Hungarian language is clear and the existence of two restrictions is an aggravating circumstance, under art. 2 par. 4 of G.O. no. 137/2000. Through decision no. 183 of 22.07.2005, the Committee ascertained that the stated deeds are direct discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by fine amounting to 500 lei. (art. 2 par. 1 and art. 7 par. 2 of G.O. no. 137/2000 subsequently amended and supplemented). 140. Access to goods and services. Prohibition. Ethnic origin. Roma. Pro Europa League complained about the prohibition of access of Roma origin persons inside the shop Rich Life by posting the following ad at the entry: „Entry of Roma prohibited”. Through decision no. 207 of 11.07.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are direct discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by fine amounting to 1500 lei (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 3, art. 18 of G.O. no. 137/2000, republished). 141. Access to goods and services. Real estate ads. Ethnic origin. Roma. Romani Criss complained about the on-line RO - Piaţa Valter Mărăcineanu 1-3, sector 1, Bucureşti, Tel / fax 021-312.65.78/79/85 38 „building trust in human rights” www.cncd.org.ro  „protecţie efectivă a drepturilor omului” publishing of real estate ads containing references to the ethnic structure of the area (expressions „zone without Gypsies”, „village without Gypsies”). The Committee set down that by using the expressions in question there is an association between the Roma minority and the idea of disturbing the public order or that of increased risk. Through decision no. 220 of 30.08.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination and it decided to sanction the authors of the ads by fine amounting to 400 RON (art. 2 par. 3, art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented). 142. Labour relationships. Appointment to public office. National origin. Romanians. Mr. G.C. complained against the mayor regarding the pressures made on the general director and inspector of the school against his appointment as deputy of the school. The petitioner claims that there was pressure regarding the revision of the decision in order to appoint a person of Hungarian nationality on the position of deputy director of the school and not a Romanian nationality person. The Committee set down that apparently neutral reasons were stated in the case regarding the suppressing of the position, however the effect generated put at disadvantage persons in comparable situations, namely the Romanian community. Through decision no. 222 of 07.04.2005 , the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are indirect discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by warning. (art. 2 par. 2 and par. 3, art. 6 lett. d of G.O. no. 137/2000). 143. Press article. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. The National Museum of Agriculture complained about the publishing of the article „What the bald misses, a pearl cap” which contains generic references to ethnic minorities. Among others it is stated that: „It is not enough that Gypsies are everywhere around us and because of them doors are closed before us (…)” , „as if the Gypsy has ever known what is agriculture or what it is made up of”, „Well, if the Gypsy teaches us agriculture”, etc. The Committee set down that through the statements charged the dignity of Roma citizens is offended, generating a hostile and offensive environment against them. Through decision no. 238 of 31.08.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by fine amounting to 1000 lei (art. 2 par. 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000 subsequently amended and supplemented). 144. Public administrative services. Evacuation. Ethnic origin. Roma. The petitioners complained about their evacuation from the market, from a field surface leased by the town hall, because of their ethnic affiliation. The Committee set down that as regards the termination of lease contracts, this was directed primarily against persons of Roma origin compared to other persons whose contracts were not terminated. Although apparently neutral reasons were stated, the measures touched petitioners of Roma origin. Through decision no. 250 of 14.06.2005, the Committee ascertained that the measure implemented by the defendant had discriminatory effects. It was decided to sanction the defendant by warning. (art. 2 par. 1, par. 2 and 3, art. 5 of G.O. no. 137/2000). 145. Officiation of religious services. Maternal language. Refusal. National minorities. The Association Sfântul Ştefan Pustiana complained about the fact that it notified several times the Episcopate of Iaşi regarding the officiation of services in maternal language, but they were refused. In this regard, it is shown that for the request of officiating the funeral services in the maternal language (Hungarian), this request was not fulfilled. The Committee set down that the right to religious expression of persons belonging to the national minority was restricted, which may lead to unwanted effects regarding the preservation of essential elements of identity, religion or language. The Committee ascertained that the statutes of the cult promote the principle of use of the maternal language in pastoral services, without obstacles as to the use of the maternal language, being up to the bishop of priest to decide, as appropriate. Through decision no. 278 of 27.10.2005, the Committee ascertained that by refusing to officiate religious ceremonies in the maternal language a differentiated treatment is applied and the right to the religious expression of persons belonging to national minorities is restricted. (art. 2 par. 1 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented). 146. Press article. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. The Committee was self-notified regarding the content of the article entitled „Don't discriminate Gypsies". The article contain references to the Roma ethnic group, making an association between the image of the Roma community and activities which break law and morals, such as theft, laziness, filth, association which generates a hostile, degrading, humiliating and offensive environment against a community. Through decision no. 316/23.08.2005, the Committee ascertained that the retained deeds are discrimination and it decided to sanction the perpetrator by fine amounting to 500 lei (art. 2 par. 3 and art.19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented). 147. Publishing of statistical data. Mention of ethnic origin. Roma. Crimes. Gazeta Văii Jiului and Romani CRISS RO - Piaţa Valter Mărăcineanu 1-3, sector 1, Bucureşti, Tel / fax 021-312.65.78/79/85 39 „building trust in human rights” www.cncd.org.ro  „protecţie efectivă a drepturilor omului” complained about the publishing on the site of the County Police Inspectorate H. of certain notices regarding crimes, which mention the ethnic origin of certain perpetrators as compared to others, whose ethnic origin is not mentioned. The Committee set down that by publishing unverified information and with strict reference to the ethnic affiliation of some perpetrators only, a negative image of the Roma community was generated. Through decision no. 351 of 14.11.2005, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are discrimination and it sanctioned the defendant by warning. (art. 2 par. 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000 subsequently amended and supplemented). 148. Evacuation. Displacement and location of houses near the water purifying station. Ethnic origin. Roma. A.I. complained on behalf of several Roma families regarding the fact that following evacuation from a building in a state of degradation, they were displaced immediately near the water purifying stations, in improper conditions in terms of environment and housing. The Committee set down that the right of those families to a healthy environment was interrupted, as the authorities could have found an alternative to the area where the location was settled. Through decision no. 366 of 23.08.2005, the Committee set down that the notified deeds are discrimination and it decided to sanction the defendant by fine amounting to 4000 RON (art. 2 par. 1,2 and 3, art. 17 of G.O. no. 137/2000, with amendments and additions). XI. Ascertaining solutions issued in 2006 149. Political statements. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. European Center for Roma Rights complained about the public statements made by Mr. C.V.T. during a broadcast by Radio Romania, which were printed by the newspaper Romania Mare and available on the website of the publication. Among others, were issued opinions on persons belonging to the Roma community, in comparison with the majority population: „the gypsies, thieves and rapists threaten”, „if some Romanians defended their honour and did not allow some beasts with human face to slaughter them, beasts who always robbed them and abused them, they must also leave their villages, where their parents and ancestors lived", "who defends people with fear of God from some beasts who would immediately grab a knife, an axe or a ninja-sword"? "Romanians, defend your brothers from the wounded heart of Romanian Transylvania!”. Defend them both against Gypsy attacks and raids and against the abuses of a political regime willing to leave death bodies behind hoping to be praised by some slyboots who do nothing in a Europe where, because of this extremely corrupt regime , we will not be accepted…”. The defendant claimed that his statements express a political opinion,