Denmark / The Board of Equal Treatment / KEN nr 9375 af 21/04/2023
Country
Denmark
Year
2023
Decision/ruling/judgment date
Friday, April 21, 2023
Incident(s) concerned/related
Discrimination
Related Bias motivation
Religion
Groups affected
Muslims
Court/Body type
High regulatory authority
Court/Body
The Board of Equal Treatment (Ligebehandlingsnævnet)
Key facts of the case
In 2019, the complainant was employed in the department of the accused ministry.As a volunteer in the staff association, the complainant helped to organize social events under the auspices of the association. The staff association's events received financial support from the ministry as an employer. In the early summer of 2019, the complainant wanted to organize an event under the auspices of the staff association on the occasion of the end of Ramadan. On the same day, the complainant was called in for an interview with manager A, who was head of department in the ministry. The complainant has stated that during the conversation, manager A said that the complainant was not allowed to hold the event through the staff association. According to the complainant, manager A also stated that the ministry was a Danish workplace with Danish and not Muslim traditions, and that the ministry did not want to risk a case on the front page in the middle of an election period, as it could harm the minister. The complainant has stated that during the conversation, manager A said that the complainant was not allowed to hold the event through the staff association. According to the complainant, manager A also stated that the ministry was a Danish workplace with Danish and not Muslim traditions, and that the ministry did not want to risk a case on the front page in the middle of an election period, as it could harm the minister. Manager A stated a few days later that the complainant was allowed to borrow a room for the event, which was still to be held outside the staff association. The complainant could mention the event on the intranet, but the words “Eid” or “Ramadan” could not appear.
Main reasoning/argumentation
The Board finds that the complainant has not demonstrated facts that give reason to assume that she has been subjected to discrimination, including harassment, on the grounds of her religion or ethnic origin. It was important in the Board's reasoning that after the initial conversation with manager A, the complainant was allowed to hold an event in light of the end of Ramadan at the ministery's premises, and she was also allowed to invite colleagues to the event on the intranet.
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
A key issue was whether the staff association was allowed to hold religious events. According to the statutes of the former staff association, the purpose of the association was to promote the interests of its members with emphasis on creating a good atmosphere in the workplace. This purpose was to be achieved by coordinating and planning meetings, festive events, lectures, sports, excursions, etc. Happenings with religious undertones were not prohibited but at the same time not welcomed by the board. The complainant pointed out that the annual Christmas dinner was held in the auspices of the staff association to which several of the board members stated a Christmas dinner at a Danish workplace is not comparable to this. The majority of all Danish workplaces hold an annual Christmas lunch, and this is not associated with religion.
Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case
The complaint was not upheld.
Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details
"Det lægges efter det oplyste til grund, at det var den generelle opfattelse i ministeriets personaleforening, at arrangementer skulle ramme bredt blandt medarbejderne, og at der ikke skulle afholdes blandt andet politisk eller religiøst betonede arrangementer."
"According to the information provided, it is assumed that it was the general view of the ministry's staff association that events should have a broad impact among the employees and that political or religious events, among others, should not be held.”
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.