Romania / National Council for Combatting Discrimination / casefile no.567/2019 decision 281/2020
Country
Romania
Title
Year
Decision/ruling/judgment date
Incident(s) concerned/related
Related Bias motivation
Groups affected
Court/Body type
Court/Body
Key facts of the case
The case is filed by the plaintiff, a Romanian citizen and member of the Local Town Council in Măgura village, who claims that the defendant, also a member of the Local Council, called him “alien” (“venetic”) countless times and asked him, during the Local Council meeting, if he came with a gun on him. Thus, the petitioner shows that the defendant refers directly to his origin and frequently and unjustifiably infringes his right to dignity.
Main reasoning/argumentation
In its decision, the CNCD Steering Board noted that protecting the dignity of persons with disabilities, of national minorities or of other vulnerable groups is a legitimate aim in a democratic society.
In the light of the parties' submissions and the annexed documents, the Board noted that the defendant made statements which undermined the plaintiff's right to dignity.
The decision also mentions that the plaintiff was placed in degrading situations during meetings of the Local Council, in the presence of his colleagues, by being called an “alien” and by being asked, in public, if he was carrying a gun (because he is Muslim).In CNCD’s view, this implies an association with terrorism.
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
While the initial complaint on this case was submitted on grounds of ethnic origin, ex-officio CNCD identified and referred to an additional ground of discrimination - that of religion. This is based on that fact that the plaintiff is not only part of a national minority, but also a Muslim and, on this account, is indirectly associated with terrorism - in a public setting, during the sessions of the Local Council, in front of his colleagues.
Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case
The act was sanctioned with a fine of 1,000 lei (approx. EUR 200) applied against the defendant, for discrimination and incitment to hatred.
Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details
“Colegiul director consideră că petentul a fost pus într-o situație denigratoare (…). A-l considera și a-l numi “venetic” în prezența altor persoane reprezintă o încălcarea a demnității. Mai mult, prin întrebarea (…) referitoare la posibilitatea ca acesta să dețină o armă asupra lui (…) doar pentru că este de origine musulmană, induce, negreșit, ideea că ar fi terorist.”
“The Board finds that the plaintiff was placed in a degrading situation (…). To consider him and call him “alien” in the presence of other people represents a violation of dignity. Moreover, the question (…) regarding the possibility that he had a weapon on him (…) only because he is of Muslim origin, induces, without a doubt, the idea that he is a terrorist".