North Macedonia / Commission for Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за спречување и заштита од дискриминација) / No.08-242/1

Country

North Macedonia

Title

North Macedonia / Commission for Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за спречување и заштита од дискриминација) / No.08-242/1

View full Case

Year

2021

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Friday, July 15, 2022

Incident(s) concerned/related

Discrimination

Related Bias motivation

Religion

Groups affected

Muslims

Court/Body type

National Human Rights Body

Court/Body

Commission for Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за спречување и заштита од дискриминација)

Key facts of the case

Prnalija is a village situated in the Municipality of Radovish, inhabited by Turks of Muslim religious affiliation. The village has no access water and sewage system which would allow access to clean drinking water to each household. They rely on the main village public tap for drinking water. The lack of access was especially felt during the COVID-19 pandemic. So, the inhabitants complained to the equality body of discrimination in access to goods and services on grounds of ethnicity and religion by the Municipality and by the Public Enterprise tasked with water management in the municipality. The equality body agreed with the applicants.

Main reasoning/argumentation

The equality body found direct discrimination on grounds of ethnicity and religion by both the municipaliy and the public enterprise since they have failed to enable conditions for the realisation of the constituional right to water. The body cited the General Comment No.12 of the CESCR, the Hudorovic et al v Slovenia ECtHR case in order to state the clear standard for nondiscriminatory access to water. The body also cited a national court case where it was found that another municipality discriminated against Roma by not enabling access to water.

Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?

Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case

Albeit not discussing it openly, the equality body reaffirmed the essential nature of the right to water and the core obligation of the state to provide it. While the body took into account the fact that the municpality was not completely inert regarding this matter (as it had as part of its plans drilling for the purposes of identifying water sources), it placed an emphasis on the current situation which showed that this village had no such access, thus dissalowing for a discussion of maximum available resources and centering on the experience of the inhabitants. The body did not enter into a comparison of this village with the others.

Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case

The equality body can issue only opinions with recommendations, which are not legally binding. It can, however, monitor the implementation of these opinions and, if the discriminator does not act within the deadline assigned in the opinion, it can start a misdemeanour procedure. In this particular case, the equality body recommended that the discriminators organise a process of identification of a possible water source and engage in securing financial and administrative conditions for building a water access network. It also provided an obligation for them to secure a temporary solution, pending the permanent one.

Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details

„обезбедувањето на пристап до вода како основно човеково пшраво е наложен како обврска и треба да биде овозможен на еднаква основа за сите граѓани на Република Северна Македонија без разлика на нивното место на живеење и нивната етничка и верска припадност“ „securing access to water as a basic human right is an obligation which has to be observed on an equal footing for all citizens of the Republic of North Macedonia regardless of their place of residence and their ethnic and religious affiliation"

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.