no. 07-00-00216/2022-02 date: 5.1.2023.

OPINION

AA filed a complaint with the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality, against BB, due to discrimination based on birth and age, on behalf of his minor son VV, who was born in 2005 and who enrolled in the first grade of the GG high school, in the 2020/2021 school year. In the complaint, it was stated that BB decided to pay scholarships to students who attend GG secondary school as an additional motivation for attending this school, but that these scholarships were not rewarded only for the 2020/2021 school year. In its statement, BB contested the allegations in the complaint related to discrimination based on birth and stated, first of all, that there is no obligation of the local self-government unit to announce the competition, that the competition is announced for the calendar year in accordance with the capabilities and budget of the municipality, and that none of the competitions announced by the local self-government unit states for which generation it is being announced, but rather for which school year, from September of one year to June of the following year. In the statement, it was also clarified that in order to announce the competition, a legal act, i.e., a decision is needed, which was not passed by the authorities of the local self-government unit for the school year 2020/2021 year, as well as that in 2020 the global Covid pandemic began, which is why business was conducted in extremely difficult conditions, and children attended classes online. During the procedure, the Commissioner performed an analysis of the relevant legal regulations, namely the Law on Student Scholarships, the Law on the Basics of the Education and Training System, the Law on Local Self-Government Units, and it was determined that none of those regulations established an obligation for the local self-government unit to award scholarships to students, but it is rather left as a possibility, that is, the right of the local self-government unit to allocate certain funds for those purposes. Furthermore, the Commissioner took into account the allegations from the statement that the right to a scholarship is exercised by anyone who is enrolled in GG in a specific school year, and by inspecting the competition for awarding scholarships to students who enroll in the first year of GG, found out that the scholarship is awarded for the 2021/2022 school year, for the period September 1, 2021 – June 30, 2022. Based on the above, it can be concluded that the competition is announced for enrollment in a specific school year, that is, the right to a scholarship is exercised by a student who enrolled in the first year of this high school in a specific school year, regardless of the student’s year of birth, that is, age. The Law on the Basics of the Education and Training System, as well as the Law on Secondary Education and Training, stipulates that the right to enroll in secondary school is granted to persons who have completed primary education, as well as persons who have already completed secondary school, for the purpose of retraining, additional training, specialist, or artisan education. Considering the above, it can be concluded that enrollment in secondary school is not related to age. In accordance with the cited regulations, enrollment in secondary school is possible even after already completed secondary school, for the purpose of retraining or additional training, which also indicates that enrollment itself is not related to age, but to previously acquired education. Therefore, it can be concluded that the actions of BB, which is reflected in the fact that the complainant’s son VV, born in 2005 and enrolled in the first grade of secondary school GG in the 2020/2021 school year, did not receive a scholarship for enrollment in this high school, is not in a cause-and-effect relationship with the personal characteristics mentioned in the complaint, but rather with the school year in which he enrolled in high school. Bearing in mind the above, the Commissioner concludes that BB’s actions cannot be brought into a cause-and-effect relationship with the personal characteristics of the complainant’s son mentioned in the complaint. Therefore, the Commissioner issued an opinion that BB, by failing to provide a scholarship to the son of the complainant VV, who enrolled in the first grade of GG in the 2020/2021 school year, did not violate the provisions of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination. However, taking into account all the circumstances of the case as well as the vision and mission of the development of education contained in the Strategy for the Development of Education and Training in the Republic of Serbia until 2030, which refers to the provision of quality education to achieve the full potential of the population, especially each child and young person in the Republic of Serbia, as well as the goal of providing high-quality education that serves the development of society as a whole^[1], and the goal of granting the scholarship – ensuring the continuation of DD’s education, and the stay of young people in this municipality, the Commissioner, in accordance with Article 33, Paragraph 1, Item 9 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination, sends a recommendation of measures to BB, to consider the possibility of enabling the realization of the right to scholarships to children who have enrolled in GG in the 2020/2021 school year, in accordance with the available budget funds.

^[1]  content available at: https://www.mpn.gov.rs/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/1-SROVRS-2030_MASTER_0402_V1.pdf

COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROTECTION OF EQUALITY

Brankica Janković