Regarding the media announcement of the Military Trade Union, which expresses dissatisfaction with the opinion that the Ministry of Defense did not violate the provisions of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination and the announced lawsuit against the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality, we emphasize:

The Commissioner makes decision on the basis of facts that were established, by applying the rules on the burden of proof, in this and every other case. The allegations of the Military Trade Union of Serbia that the Commissioner misapplied the rules on the redistribution of the burden of proof when issuing an opinion are unfounded. Making an opinion on whether the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination has been violated is a legal duty and authority of the Commissioner for the Protection of Equality. To sue the Commissioner for an opinion is the same as to sue a judge for a judgment and is subject to the same rules.

Each party in the procedure must be aware that the Commissioner does not act in accordance with the expectations of the complainants but in accordance with the legally prescribed jurisdiction, and one cannot speak of partiality, as stated by the Military Union, because the opinion that did not meet their expectations. Each case is unique, so in the other procedure against the Ministry of Defense two weeks ago, an opinion was issued where we found a violation of rights by this Ministry. There are numerous cases from the Commissioner’s practice where discrimination has been established by various ministries, ministers personally and other public officials.

Needless to say, numerous opinions have just been passed in case of violation of the rights of numerous trade union organizations and trade union members, and the Commissioner has repeatedly initiated a procedure of constitutionality and legality before the Constitutional Court in order to protect trade union rights.

The Commissioner will continue to act exclusively in accordance with the law, which means that opinions will be based exclusively on established facts and evidence, with the application of rules on the burden of proof and respect for procedure, regardless of whether it will cause dissatisfaction of a party.