OPINION

This opinion was issued in the proceedings upon the complaint filed by D. M, on behalf of her minor son D.M, against S. M, director of PU “V.” in Ž. and educator K. P., for discrimination on the basis of an assumed personal property – a medical condition. The complaint stated that the child D. М. had been enrolled in kindergarten “L.” within the Preschool institution “V.” and in that period had not yet started to speak. It was further specified that at the parents’ meeting the director stated that there was “no place for children with disabilities in her kindergarten” and that she also stated that the boy D. М. was a child with developmental disabilities. It was further stated that the director and the educator had neglected the child, excluded him from the activities of the kindergarten group, and that the child D. М. spent time in kindergarten with Z. Т. in another room separated from his peer group. In their statements, the director and the educator specified, inter alia, that the child D. М. was in a period of adaptation in the kindergarten, that he reacted emotionally very strongly and disturbed other children, which is why he was separated in moments of emotional anxiety to another room with Z.T., as kindergarten staff noticed that the child was responding well to Z. Т. and that the child, after calming down, was returned to the peer group in a period not exceeding 20 minutes. During the procedure, based on the application of the rules on redistribution of the burden of proof, as well as on the evidence presented, it was established that the director stated at the parents’ meeting and on another occasion that her institution was not meant for children with disabilities. Also, during the proceedings, it was determined that the director and the educator did not provide evidence that the separation of the child D. М. to another room with Z. Т. was a measure planned by the adaptation plan, that it was monitored, and that it was taken as a last resort, after all other measures taken to calm the child. Following the procedure, the Commissioner for Protection of Equality issued the opinion that director S. М. committed an act of direct discrimination against children with disabilities by stating that her kindergarten was not meant for children with disabilities, and that by isolating the child D. М. in another room with the administrative worker Z.Т. during his adaptive period in the kindergarten, the director S. М. and educator K. P. committed an act of discrimination against the child D. М. on the basis of an assumed personal property – a medical condition. Therefore the Commissioner for Protection of Equality recommended to S. M, director of kindergarten “L” in Ž, PU “V.” in Ž., to send, together with educator K. P, a written apology to D. M, mother of minor D.M, within 15 days of receipt of this opinion, with a recommendation that, when enrolling children in preschool institution “V.” in Z, she does not deny or hinder the enrollment of children on the basis of their health status, developmental disabilities, disability or any other personal attribute, as well as that in the future she takes care not to violate the anti-discrimination legal regulations within her regular jobs and activities, and she was advised to organize trainings and educations for employees of the Preschool institution “V.” in Ž. on the topic of discrimination in education, especially in relation to children who, because of social deprivation, developmental disabilities, disability, learning difficulties and other reasons, need additional support in education.

COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROTECTION OF EQUALITY
Brankica Janković