OPINION

The opinion was issued on the occasion of two complaints, submitted by A. A. and V. V., against B.B., due to alleged discrimination of A. A. based on political and religious beliefs and sexual orientation. The complaints state, among other things, that B. B., in a series of her posts on the Internet and social networks, called the complainant “homosexual, atheist and leftist”, mentioning such determinants in the context of allegations seeking to disparage his views on the work of the Association of Fine Artists of Serbia (AFAS),  as well as that she addressed him in an Instagram comment as “originale” which in a malicious way alludes to his national origin, interpreting it in a “distorted” and comic manner, in the spirit in which the TV series of the same name was produced. In the statement of B. B. it is stated, inter alia, that there is no basis for A. to be insulted regarding his personal characteristics that are part of his identity, because they are not presented in a derisive context, but are part of his actual orientations and ideological affiliation, that no type of epithet, derogatory context or ridicule of his personal traits is mentioned anywhere. It is further stated that there is no basis to treat the comment on the Instagram profile she administers, which refers to A.’s national affiliation, as offensive, since the comment was not addressed to him, nor was it related to some shows he cites, because she is not familiar with the content of the mentioned series. During the procedure, it was determined that in the text “First resignations in AFAS”, among other things, it was written: “She first cited the inappropriate comment from the then Vice President of the AFAS, A. A., that he does not want the President of AFAS to be a person named after one of the Serbian queens! It apereas that, A.A., an atheist, leftist and homosexual, thought that it was distasteful for the identity of the national association of artists to be symbolically marked by the name of the medieval Serbian Empress, Milica?” Further on, during the procedure the Commissioner determined that the terms used to indicate the complainant’s political and religious beliefs (leftist and atheist) are not offensive, but can be understood in the context of criticism of his statement, which is why these allegations in the text do not constitute harassing and degrading treatment aimed at or violating A.’s dignity based on his personal characteristics (religious and political beliefs). It was further determined that emphasizing the complainant’s sexual orientation in the text is completely irrelevant in relation to the topic of the text and that, although the term homosexual is not offensive, pointing to an actual or presumed personal trait – sexual orientation, is used in this case to disqualify the complainant. The Commissioner gave the opinion that by pointing out the sexual orientation in the text in which she criticizes the work of the Board of Directors of AFAS and the statement of A. A., B. B. violated the provisions of Article 12 in conjunction with Article 21 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination and recommended B. B. to send a written apology to A.A. on this occasion, as well as to refrain from acts and statements that discriminate against persons on the basis of any personal characteristics in the future.

COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROTECTION OF EQUALITY

Brankica Janković