Vezi raport EN

„protecţie efectivă a drepturilor omului”

156. Public statements. Association with ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. NCCD was self-notified regarding the statements of Mr. C.N. made in the press against Mr. M.V: (…) I don't think that a crow, namely M.V. can be a spokesman for our party (…)”. The defendant showed that the use of the term „crow” was unfortunate, as the idea he wanted to express is that a person who „migrates” cannot subsequently become a spokesman of the party, without harming its image”. The Committee set down that through the statements in question are implicitly made distinctions on the criterion of ethnic origin by association. The person subject to the statements in question enjoys fame in the public and political life and regarding his possible ethnic affiliation, he did not consider it was necessary to justify it, despite speculations published in the press. It is everyone's right to self-identify as belonging to an ethnic or national group and others have no prerogative to acknowledge that a person belongs to a certain ethnic group or another. On the other hand, in the public space, the use of the phrase „crow” is obviously associated with ethnic, racial affiliation or colour of certain categories of persons. In its case- law, NCCD found that the use of this phrase offends personal dignity, based on ethnic origin and constitutes discrimination. Through decision no. 251 of 07.06.2006, the Committee set down that the notified deeds are direct discrimination and

through the effect generated they offend personal dignity (art. 2 par. 1 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented).

157. Articles. Statements. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. Romani Criss complained about the content of some articles posted on the website of Noua Dreapta, considering that that they promote a behaviour which aims to offends dignity and create a degrading and offensive environment against the Roma minority. The defendants did not formulate points of view. The Committee set down that through the articles mentioned the persons belonging to the Roma community are generically classified as violent, aggressive, illiterate, offenders, etc, identifying the Roma community as a whole with Mafia clans, with prostitution, usury, drug trafficking and other illegal and anti-social activities, inciting to racial hatred. It was set down that through the expression used in the articles, personal dignity was offended, based on ethnic origin. Through decision no. 271 of 12.09.2006, the Committee set down that the notified deeds are direct discrimination and it decided to sanction Mr. T.I. by fine (1000 RON) and Mr. N.C. (1500 RON), Mr. P.V.M. by warning and it also sanctioned Noua Dreapta organization, through representative for publishing on its website articles with discriminatory content, by fine (2000 RON). (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 3, art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, subsequently amended and supplemented).

158. Access to goods and services. Real estate ads. Ethnic origin. Roma. Romani Criss complained about the publishing on the internet, on advertising websites or specialized newspapers, to the section real estate ads, rent or sale of houses of certain ads referring to ethnic origin. The ads regarding the renting or selling of spaces or houses comprised references to the condition of buildings, namely „Building without Roma” or „ peace without Roma” or renting interdictions „no Roma”. The defendant endeavoured to eliminate ethnic references. Through decision no. 306 of 14.11.2006, the Steering Committee found that the ads had a discriminatory nature based on ethnic origin and it recommended that further efforts be made to avoid the publishing of this kind of ads on the site (art. 2 par. 1 and 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, republished).

159. Statements. Ethnic origin. Roma. Personal dignity. B.A., local counsellor, representative of Roma complained about the fact that one of his colleagues, V.E. insulted him, using terms like „crow” „stupid Gypsy”, „animal”, etc. within a meeting attended by several people. The defendant denied the allegations in question, still admitting that he would have said „we are worse than the Gypsies” because of repeated quarrels. Following the investigation and the statements of persons attending the session in question, the Committee ascertained that the statements were alleged by the defendant. The terms used for based on and promoted stereotypes and prejudices about the Roma ethnic group and their use in the public space generated a hostile, degrading and offensive image of it. Through decision no. 309 of 14.11.2006, the Committee ascertained that the notified deeds are direct discrimination and it decided sanctioning by warning (art. 2 par. 1 and 3 and art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000, republished).

160.      Access to goods and services. Prohibition. Instruction to discriminate. Ethnic origin. Roma. Romani Criss
complained about Mr. B.N. being refused to be served in a bar because of his membership to the Roma group. In this regard,
it was shown that at the bar entry a notice was posted which contained the following: „pupils, minors, Roma, homeless will
not be served in this bar”. The Committee retained that in this case a restriction was imposed related to the membership of
the Roma group of one person and the notice posted at the bar entry is an instruction to forbid access to the bar and refusal
to provide services, which constitute direct discrimination. Through decision no. 317 of 28.11.2006, the Committee set
down that the notified deeds are discrimination deeds and it decided to sanction the defendant company by fine amounting
to 1000 RON (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 2, art. 10 lett. f, art. 19 of G.O. no. 137/2000 subsequently amended and supplemented).

 RO - Piaţa Valter Mărăcineanu 1-3, sector 1,
  Bucureşti, Tel / fax 021-312.65.78/79/85                      42                    „building trust in human rights”
               www.cncd.org.ro