OPINION

The opinion was issued in the proceedings regarding the complaint of A. M. from N. against G. L. entrepreneur of a hairdressing and beauty salon D. N. The complaint stated that A. M. was in the salon with M. M. when the latter was kicked out of the salon with the words “Get out now, your folks robbed us, we have bad experiences” and that thus it was made known that they do not want to provide service to Roma in the salon. In the statement, it was specified that at the beginning of August 2018, two women entered the salon and demanded a facial treatment service, as well as that they reacted very violently and rudely after being explained that the salon could not provide this service because it did not have a qualified worker to perform the facial treatment service. In addition to the statement, no evidence was submitted to support the allegations of the statement. During the proceedings, it was established that the allegations from the complaint and the statements of the witness match each other, and that M. M. was addressed in words by which she was kicked out of the salon because she is a Romani woman. This behavior represents an act of direct discrimination against A. M. based on her nationality because she could have been put in a disadvantageous position in relation to salon customers who are not Roma, that is, she could have been refused salon services. At the same time, this kind of treatment created a humiliating and offensive environment for A. M., which is prohibited by the provisions of Article 12 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination. Applying the rules on the burden of proof prescribed in Article 45 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination and taking into account statistical data on the great social distance of citizens towards Roma men and women, as well as their position in society, the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality concluded that G. L. did not submit evidence to dispute the allegations of the complaint, that is, she did not submit evidence that her actions were not related to the nationality of A. M. The Commissioner for the Protection of Equality issued the opinion that G. L., entrepreneur of hair and beauty salon D. in N., committed an act of direct discrimination prohibited by Article 6 and in connection with Arts. 12 and 17 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination and recommended that G. L, through the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality, send a written apology to A. M, within 15 days from the day of receiving the opinion with the recommendation, as well as to take care in the future not to violate the legal regulations on the prohibition of discrimination by her statements and actions.

COMMISSIONER FOR THE PROTECTION OF EQUALITY

Brankica Janković