No. 07-00-166/2017-02 Date: 4 September 2017
The present opinion was issued following a complaint procedure initiated upon a complaint lodged by L.J., a lawyer from V., hired by G.V. and R.T. – legal representatives of L.T. who is a minor, against ’’Ž.Z.’’ primary school in M. In its complaint, the complainant stated that L.T. was a first grade student and a child with hyperkinetic disorder. In addition, the complainant stated that the School Principal D.M. had ordered primary school teacher M.S. to ‘’throw out” L.T. from extended classes in that school citing the fact that the Cross-sector Commission had not approved him attending extended classes in that particular school. In their respective declarations responding to allegations made in the complaint, the School Principal and the teacher stated that they had acted in accordance with the Opinion issued by the Cross-sector Commission which had not envisaged any additional support such as extended classes, noting that they had compared the mentioned Opinion with an Opinion issued by the Cross-sector Commission which had included such support for another student. In the course of the complaint procedure it has been ascertained that ’’Ž.Z.’’ primary school in M. had prevented L. T. from attending extended school classes on 20 April 2017. With reference to this, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality indicated that according to regulations governing attendance of extended school classes, this activity represents a type of pedagogical and educational activity and it does not constitute additional support to a student which makes it mandatory for schools to ensure that all children, in keeping with the needs expressed by parents and their own capacities, attend extended school classes, irrespective of child’s personal characteristics. Ergo, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality issued an opinion stating that by preventing student L.T. from attending extended school classes on 20 April 2017, ’’Ž.Z.’’ primary school in M. had violated provisions of Articles 6 and 19 of the Law on the Prohibition of Discrimination. For this reason, a recommendation was issued to ’’Ž.Z.’’ primary school in M. to take all necessary actions and measures which would ensure that all ’’Ž.Z.’’ primary school in M. staff members are trained in anti-discrimination, in particular with respect to education of children with developmental impairments and to refrain in the future from violating anti-discrimination regulations while performing their regular work and activities i.e. to refrain from making unjust differences or subjecting to unequal treatment or failing to act (exclusion, limitation or giving preference) with respect to a person or group of persons, based on his/her or their personal characteristics.
COMMISSIONER FOR THE
PROTECTION OF EQUALITY