Vezi raport EN

„protecţie efectivă a drepturilor omului” exam the candidate’s age should be at least 4 years smaller than the maximum retirement age according to labour carried out and age limit and subsequently smaller than the standard retirement age. The Ministry indicated that these conditions took into account the exercise of the mandate during the period of 4 years, having the possibility to conduct and finalize projects during the mandate and not disturbing the activities of educational units. Through decision no. 153 of 18.02.2008, the Committee set down that the imposition of an age condition, initially an age 4 years smaller than the maximum retirement age and subsequently of the standard retirement age generates a differentiated treatment which is not objectively justified in order to attain a legitimate aim, through proper and necessary means. Also, it was set down that the law on the statute of educational personnel does not set out binding requirements of age and the educational personnel, under certain conditions, can be

maintained in the system over the retirement age. The Committee ascertained the existence of a different treatment based on age and it decided to issue a recommendation to ensure the application of the principle of equal opportunities through the criteria of participation in the competition in question (art. 2 par. 1, art. 2 par. 3 of G.O. no. 137/2000, republished).

58 CONSILIUL NAŢIONAL PENTRU COMBATEREA DISCRIMINĂRII

(2008) Access to a position in education. Inspector. Conditionality. Age. Ms. P.M. complained about the manner of conduct of the competition for filling the position of inspector, among others with regard to the condition laid down in relevant regulations which imposed on candidates to have an age of at least 4 years less than the standard retirement age at the date of the competition. The respondent invoked that the petitioner did not meet the requirements related to that position. Through decision no. 238 of 27.02.2008, the Committee set down that depending on the position published the respondent imposed additional criteria provided in the organisational norms for filling other positions. Also, it was set down that another candidate who had less than 4 years until the date of retirement, similar to the petitioner, was admitted. Although they were in comparable situations, the two candidates were treated in a differentiated manner, by invoking a requirement which was not relevant for the position they competed for. In the absence of objective and reasonable justifications for the treatment applied, the Committee

set down that the notified aspects constitute discrimination according to art. 2 par. 1 and 2, art. 6 of G.O. no. 137/2000. Against the respondent was decided to apply the contraventional sanction of warning and of issuing a recommendation in view of ensuring an equal treatment between persons in comparable situations (art. 2 par. 1 and 2, art. 6 of G.O. no. 137/2000, republished).

(2008) Public notice. Application for a position of local counselor. Conditionality. Age. The Popular Social Christian Union complained about the organisation by a political party of a selection competition for the position of counselor, particularly the imposition of an age requirement (maximum 45 years). The respondent showed that this criterion is justified by the avoidance of applications submitted by persons who exercised positions in the secret services of the communist . According to the party’s statute, persons who exercised such positions cannot become members. Through decision no. 386 of 08.07.2008, the Committee set down that the public notice of participation for appointments in the position of local counselor involved a distinction based on age, result in discouraging persons over 45 years from applying. The aim invoked, avoiding persons who served a totalitarian regime by limiting the rights of other people is a legitimate one. But the imposition of the maximum age requirement is not a proper measure for attaining the aim pursued, taking into account that

not all persons aged over 45 were part of the invoked category. The Committee ascertained that the deeds presented constitute direct discrimination according to art. 2 par. 1 and par. 4 and art. 15 of G.O. no. 137/2000. Also, it was decided to issue a recommendation that in the future adequate measures to the pursued aim should be adopted, as regards requirements to be met by certain candidates (art. 2 par. 1 and par. 4 and art. 15 of G.O. no. 137/2000, republished).