No. 07-00-558/2017-02 Date: 16th March 2018
This Opinion was issued in the procedure following the complaint of А. M from B. against the Preschool Institution R., on account of discrimination on the grounds of health state and age. The complaint states that her underage child A.A was discriminated against in the field of education since the child was denied participation in educational activities due to the date of birth, since the 2015 group was enrolled, and it was too early to enrol in the 2016 group. It was also stated that the child was denied enrolment due to the child’s health issues and that the PI R. does not want to assume additional obligations and responsibilities which a child with health issues may require. The statement of the PI R. says that all day-care capacities have been filled, as well as that the mother did not disclose that the child had health issues during the enrolment period and that, at that moment, all the youngest day-care groups were filled. During the procedure, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality determined that this PI has 336 children with different health issues, while in the kindergarten “L.”, where the petitioner of the complaint applied for enrolment has 33 children with different health issues. Hence, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality concluded that the PI R. has children with health issues, and it was ascertained that this institution enrols children with health issues. In relation to the claims in the complaint that by not being enrolled in the kindergarten, A.A was discriminated against on the grounds of age as well, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality points out that the petitioner herself indicated in her complaint that children younger than her son were enrolled, while the statement said there were no available capacities and that they went over the quota proscribed by the law with the current number of enrolled children. Hence, it was determined that A.A not being enrolled in the kindergarten was not connected to his personal characteristic – age. By analysing the evidence in the conducted procedure, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality determined that the fact the child A.A was not enrolled in the youngest day-care groups was not due to child’s health state or age. Thus, it can be concluded that PI R. did not discriminate against A. M’s son, A.A due to his health state and age, and has issued the opinion stating that PI R. did not breach any provisions of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination. Furthermore, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality, in accordance with Article 33 Item 9 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination recommended to the PI R. to take the necessary measures pertaining to timely planning and providing support to parents during the enrolment process for children from priority categories, and especially children with health issues and disabilities, as well as to mind the number of children in groups with kids with health issues and disabilities.
|THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROTECTION OF EQUALITY|