Country report : non-discrimination : Macedonia 2016.
Date: 2016-10-31
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers
Subjects: North Macedonia, age discrimination, anti-discriminatory measure, discrimination based on disability, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, equal treatment, ethnic discrimination, national law, religious discrimination, report, sexual discrimination, social policy

Macedonia 

2016 

Including  summaries  in 
English, French and 
German 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Directorate-General for Justice and C onsumers 
Directorate D — Equality 
Unit JUST/D1 

European Commission 
B-1049 Brussels 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN  COMMISSION 

Country report  

Non-discrimination 

Macedonia 

Biljana Kotevska  

Reporting period 1 January 2015 – 31 December 2015 

2016 

Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Europe  Direct  is a service  to help  you find  answers   
to your questions  about the European  Union. 

Freephone  number  (*): 

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 

(*) 

The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone 

boxes or hotels may charge you). 

LEGAL NOTICE 

This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the 
authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the  information 
contained therein. 

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 

PDF 

ISBN 978-92-79-47009-7  

doi:10.2838/616164 

DS-04-16-688-3A-N 

© European Union, 2016 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country  report  - Non-discrimination  – Macedonia  – 2016 

CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 5 
RÉSUMÉ ........................................................................................................ 13 
ZUSAMMENF ASSUNG  ..................................................................................... 22 
INTRODUC TION............................................................................................. 31 
GENERAL LEGAL F RAMEWORK ................................................................ 35 
1 
THE DEF INITION OF DISC RIMINATION  .................................................. 36 
2 
2.1  Grounds of unlawful discrimination explicitly covered............................... 36 

3 

4 

2.1.1  Definition  of the grounds  of unlawful  discrimination  within  the 

directives ............................................................................. 37 
2.1.2  Multiple discrimination ............................................................ 38 
Assumed and associated discrimination ...................................... 39 
2.1.3 
2.2  Direct discrimination (Article 2(2)(a))  ................................................... 39 
2.2.1 
Situation testing .................................................................... 40 
Indirect discrimination (Article 2(2)(b)) ................................................. 40 
Statistical evidence ................................................................ 41 
2.3.1 
2.4  Harassment (Article 2(3))  ................................................................... 42 
2.5 
Instructions to discriminate (Article 2(4))  .............................................. 44 
2.6  Reasonable  accommodation  duties (Article 2(2)(b)(ii)  and Article 5 Directive 

2.3 

2000/78) ......................................................................................... 45 
PERSONAL AND MATERIAL SCOPE  .......................................................... 49 
3.1  Personal scope ................................................................................. 49 

3.1.1 

3.1.2 

3.2.1 
3.2.2 

EU  and non-EU  nationals  (Recital  13  and Article 3(2)  Directive 
2000/43 and  Recital 12 and Article 3(2)  Directive 2000/78)  .......... 49 
Protection against discrimination (Recital 16  Directive 2000/43) ..... 49 
3.2  Material scope .................................................................................. 50 
Employment, self-employment and occupation............................ 50 
Conditions  for access to employment,  to self-employment  or  to 
occupation, including  selection criteria, recruitment  conditions  and 
promotion,  whatever the branch  of activity and at all  levels  of the 
professional hierarchy (Article 3(1)(a))  ...................................... 50 
Employment  and working  conditions, including  pay and dismissals 
(Article 3(1)(c)) ..................................................................... 51 
Access to all  types and to all  levels  of vocational guidance,  vocational 
training,  advanced vocational training  and retraining,  including 
practical work experience (Article 3(1)(b)) ................................. 52 

3.2.4 

3.2.3 

3.2.5  Membership  of, and  involvement  in,  an organisation  of workers  or 

3.2.6 

employers,  or any  organisation  whose members  carry on  a particular 
profession,  including  the benefits provided  for by such organisations 
(Article 3(1)(d))  .................................................................... 53 
Social protection, including  social security and healthcare (Article 
3(1)(e)  Directive 2000/43)  ...................................................... 53 
Social advantages (Article 3(1)(f)  Directive 2000/43)  ................... 54 
Education (Article 3(1)(g)  Directive 2000/43)  ............................. 55 
Access to and supply  of goods and  services which are  available  to the 
public (Article 3(1)(h)  Directive 2000/43) ................................... 58 
3.2.10  Housing (Article 3(1)(h)  Directive 2000/43) ................................ 59 
EXCEPTIONS .......................................................................................... 62 
4.1  Genuine and determining occupational requirements (Article 4)  ................ 62 
4.2  Employers  with an ethos based on  religion  or belief  (Article 4(2)  Directive 

3.2.7 
3.2.8 
3.2.9 

2000/78) ......................................................................................... 62 

4.3  Armed  forces and other specific occupations (Article 3(4)  and Recital  18 

Directive 2000/78)  ............................................................................ 64 
4.4  Nationality discrimination (Article 3(2))  ................................................. 65 
4.5  Work-related family benefits (Rec ital 22  Directive 2000/78)  ..................... 66 
4.6  Health and safety (Article 7(2) Directive 2000/78)  .................................. 66 

3 

 
 
4.7  Exceptions  related to discrimination  on the ground  of age (Article 6 Directive 

2000/78) ......................................................................................... 67 
4.7.1  Direct discrimination............................................................... 67 
4.7.2 

Special conditions  for young  people,  older  workers  and persons  with 
caring responsibilities  ............................................................. 68 
4.7.3  Minimum and  maximum age  requirements ................................. 68 
Retirement ........................................................................... 69 
4.7.4 
Redundancy .......................................................................... 70 
4.7.5 
4.8  Public  security, public  order,  criminal  offences, protection of health,  protection 
of the rights and freedoms of others (Article 2(5),  Directive 2000/78)  ........ 70 
4.9  Any other exceptions  ......................................................................... 70 
POSITIVE  ACTION  (Article  5 Directive  2000/43,  Article  7 Directive 
2000/78) .............................................................................................. 72 
REMEDIES AND ENF ORCEMENT ............................................................... 75 
6.1 
Judicial  and/or  administrative  procedures  (Article 7 Directive  2000/43,  Article 
9 Directive 2000/78)  ......................................................................... 75 

6.2  Legal  standing  and  associations (Article 7(2)  Directive  2000/43,  Article 9(2) 

Directive 2000/78)  ............................................................................ 77 
6.3  Burden of proof (Article 8 Directive 2000/43, Article 10  Directive 2000/78)  . 78 
6.4  Victimisation (Article 9  Directive 2000/43, Article 11  Directive 2000/78)  ..... 79 
6.5  Sanctions and remedies  (Article 15  Directive  2000/43,  Article 17  Directive 

2000/78) ......................................................................................... 79 

BODIES  FOR  THE  PROMOTION  OF EQUAL  TREATMENT  (Article  13 Directive 
2000/43) .............................................................................................. 81 
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ..................................................................... 86 
8.1  Dissemination  of information,  dialogue  with NGOs  and between social 

5 

6 

7 

8 

partners  .......................................................................................... 86 
8.2  Compliance (Article 14  Directive 2000/43, Article 16  Directive 2000/78)  ..... 88 
9 
COORDINATION AT NATIONAL LEVEL  ..................................................... 90 
10  CURRENT BEST PRAC TICES .................................................................... 91 
11  SENSITIVE OR CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES ................................................. 92 
11.1  Potential breaches of the directives (if any) ........................................... 92 
11.2  Other issues of concern ...................................................................... 94 
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN 2015............................................................ 97 
12.1  Legislative amendments  ..................................................................... 97 
12.2  Case law  ......................................................................................... 97 
ANNEX 1: TABLE OF  KEY NATIONAL ANTI- DISC RIMINATION LEGISLATION ..... 99 
ANNEX 2: TABLE OF  INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS  .................................... 101 

12 

4 

 
 
 
EXECUTIVE  SUMMARY   

1. Introduction 

Macedonia  (FYR),1  a  South-East European  land-locked  multi-ethnic  country,  declared  its 
independence  in  1991,  following  Yugoslavia’s  dissolution.  It  has  been  a  candidate  for 
European  Union  membership  since 2005,  and  has held  a conditional  invitation  to join  the 
North-Atlantic Treaty Organization  since 2008.  Although  these processes are considered  a 
foreign  affairs priority  for the country, both are stalled. Until  2014,  the name  dispute stood 
as the main  reason  for not opening  negotiations for membership  with the EU.  However,  in 
both  2014  and  2015,  the European  Commission  country  progress  report s2  raised  serious 
concerns about fundamental  rule  of law issues (for example,  partisation  of institutions and 
society, independence  of judiciary  and  freedom  of the media).  Official  domestic  priorities 
lowering 
still 
unemployment  rates5 and the fight against  poverty.6 

include  the  implementation3  of  the  Ohrid  Framework  Agreement ,4  

The end of 2014 and beginning  of 2015 saw massive  protests by university and high-school 
students, honoraria  workers,  independent  trade unions,  workers  fired  in the transition  and 
transformation  processes, etc. In February  2015,  the wire-tapping  affair  revealed  an even 
more  serious  domestic  situation.  The  largest  opposition  party  started  to publicly  release 
what are allegedly  recordings  from  the illicit  interception of communications  of more  than 
20,000  people  that are  alleged  to have been  carried  out by  the state Counterintelligenc e 
Agency.7  The  content  of  the  published  recordings  removed  doubt s  about  the  already 
existing  claims  of a state capture8 and extreme  concentration of power in  the ruling  party, 
including  the complete exercise of party control, over not only the judiciary,  but all  aspects 
of society. The Ombudsperson  opened  two cases in  relation  to the wire-tapping  affair,  as 
gross  and  large-scale  violations  of the right  to private  and  family  life  were  observed.  The 
Ombudsperson  expressed  outrage about the lack of response from  the Counterintelligenc e 
Agency  to its  requests  for  additional  information  in  the context of  gathering  informat ion 
pursuant  to  the aforementioned  cases. The Ombudsperson  has  reported  this  obstacle to 
the Parliament,  but no  assistance or  feedback from  the Parliament  has  been noted.9  

It needs  to be highlighted  that what seems  to be the voice of the President of the equality 
body, Dushko  Minovski,  also featured in  the publicly  broadcasted conversations ; he can be 
heard  to  be  a  person  working  for  the  ruling  party  on  the  ground  during  the  election 
campaign,  and even to be (ab)using  his  position  in the Ministry  of Labour  and Social Policy  
by instructing people  that have been awarded  social assistance how to vote. In addition  to 

1   The constitutional name of the country is ‘Republic of Macedonia’. However, pending  settlement with Greece 
on the name dispute, under a UN Resolution A/RES/47/225, the country was admitted as a member of the 
UN under the temporary reference ‘the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’, which is the term used by 
the European Commission, thus also used for the purposes of this report. 

2   European Commission (2015), The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Progress Report 

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2015/20151110_report_the_former_yugoslav_republi
c_of_macedonia.pdf. All hyperlinks accessed: 27.05.2016. 

3   Although it is not OFA itself that is being implemented, but constitutional, legal provisions and strategic 

documents that resulted from its signing, the expression ‘implementation of OFA’ is used here to avoid long 
explication pretexts. 

4   Signed in view of ending the 2001 armed conflict, OFA aims to advance the position of minority ethnic 

communities not in majority, and to preserve and reflect the multi-ethnic character of the country in public 
life, including through actions to promote non-discrimination and equitable representation. 

5   According to the State Statistical Office, the unemployment rate in the last quarter of 2015 was 24.6 % of 

the active population, while 42.7 % are employed. 

6   The Laeken indicator of poverty for 2014 (last available statistic) is 22.1 %. 
7   Balkan Insight, (2015), ‘Macedonia PM Accused of Large-Scale Wire-Tapping’ (09.02.2015), Balkan Insight 
Website, http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/eavesdropping-bombshell-explodes-in-macedonia. 

8   The concept of ‘state capture’ is mentioned here in terms of the understanding by Transparency 

International, that is: 'a situation where powerful individuals, institutions, companies or groups within or 
outside a country use corruption to shape a nation’s policies, legal environment and economy to benefit 
their own private interests’. 

9   Annual Report of the Ombudsperson for 2015, Ombudsperson of the Republic of Macedonia (2016). 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
this,  what  seems  to be  the  voice  of  the then  Minister  of  Interior  Gordana  Jankulovska1 0 
was featured  in  a conversation  that clearly  shows the pressure  the Roma  community  has 
been under  to go out on election day and vote as instructed.1 1 Following  the release  of this 
recording,  Roma  organisations  protested  against 
the  Government,  demanding 
Jankulovska’s  resignation,1 2   after which she published  what was intended  to be an apology 
to  the  Roma  community.  However,  the  letter  was  a  mere  rehearsal  of  all  actions 
undertaken  in  the country to improve  the position  of Roma,  rather  than an  apology.1 3 

The country’s population  is a little over two million. 1 4   Ethnic affiliation  is important,  as sets 
of rights and positive action measures  are tied to the numerical  representation  of an ethnic 
community  in  the total population.  The ethnic composition1 5   is  64  %  ethnic Macedonians, 
25 %  ethnic Albanians,  4 % ethnic Turks, 3 %  ethnic Roma,  2 %  ethnic Serbs, 1 %  ethnic 
Bosniaks,  0.5 %  ethnic Vlachs and  1 %  ‘others’  (a term  used in  the Constitution). 

Patchwork  legal  and  institutional  reforms  created a  framework  that raises  legal  certainty 
issues. Very frequent changes to laws, disregard  for the public policy participation principle  
and  underfunding  of  the  two  national  human  rights  institutions  (with  responsibility  for 
equality  and  non-discrimination),  are  just some  of the  most  pressing  issues.  These have 
an  impact  on  the country’s  legal  and  institutional  framework,  and  on  the implementat ion 
of and  practices related  to upholding  the principle  of equality  and  non-discrimination. 

Although  the Government  often presents  the country as one  open to differences, bec ause 
of  the  actions it  has  undertaken  to advance  minority  rights,1 6  this  is  not  the  case. Hate 
speech seems  to be omnipresent  and is widely tolerated. Homophobic  statements and hate 
speech directed towards homosexuals  are still  very present. Moreover,  t here were several 
violent  attacks on  an  LGBT  support  centre  founded  by  a  local  civil  society organisation 
(CSO).  The  attacks have  still  not  been  thoroughly  investigated,  and  almost  no  charges 
were raised,  so protests by CSOs,  which began in  2014,  continued in  2015. 

Many  Government  and  donor-supported  activities, including  those  supported  by  the  EU, 
have been  undertaken  as part of the efforts to overcome  the challenges  to the realisation 
of the  basic human  rights  of Roma.  However,  as a  2013  study  on  the implementation  of 
the  Decade  of  Roma  Inclusion1 7   shows,  the  results  in  terms  of  the  achievement  of  the 
goals,  (then) only two years  away from  the end of the decade were devastating. The only 
area where  we can speak of inclusion  would  be in  relation  to political  pa rticipation.1 8  

In relation  to the cooperation between Government  and CSOs,  as in  the previous  years, in 
theory,  all  NGOs  can participate in  public  consultations  and  cooperate with and  even get 
financial  support  from  the Government.  In  practice, however,  the NGOs  with meaningf ul 
participation  in  public  policy  processes are  those with  the  least critical approach  towards 
Government  actions. This is in line  with the overall  approach of the Government  – to silence 

10   Gordana Jankulovska resigned 12 May 2015. 
11   A1On online media portal, ‘SDSM: Jankulovska says “By the ears, Gipsy by Gipsy, we’ll drag them”’ (СДСМ: 

Јанкулоска вели – З а уши, циган по циган ќе вадиме) http://a1on.mk/wordpress/archives/465799. 
Please note that in the national context “Gipsy” (“Циган”) is a derogatory word for Roma. 

12   24 Vesti - National TV Broadcaster, ‘Roma request resignation from the Minister Jankulovska’ [Ромите 

бараат оставка од министерката Јанкуловска], http://24vesti.mk/romite-baraat-ostavka-od-minsiterkata-
jankulovska. 

13   This letter is no longer available online. 
14   Although not supported by official numbers, estimates show that 250 000 to 500 000 people have left the 

country in the past few years, to work abroad. 

15   All numbers presented here are rounded percentages from the 2002 census. A new census was scheduled 
for 2011, but it was annulled due to lack of clarity in the implementation of the methodology. All statistics 
by the State Statistical Office can be found at: www.stat.gov.mk/. 

16   There were inter-ethnic violence cases in 2011 and in 2012. 
17   The Decade of Roma Inclusion was a regional Government initiative for improving the situation of Roma in 

health, housing, education and employment which ended in 2015. 

18   There is a Roma minister in the Government, a Roma municipality (Shuto Orizari), Roma MPs, etc. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
all  critical voices in the country.1 9  Government  organised  NGOs  (or ‘GONGOs ’)  still  operate 
to provide  public  support  for  Government  actions when  and  as  needed.  The activities of 
GONGOs  also  include  ‘initiating’  and holding  counter-protests to the protests organised  by 
NGOs. 

2. Main  legislation 

The ‘Constitution  of the  Republic  of  Macedonia’,2 0  a  written  constitution, is  the  country’s 
highest  legal  act. It accepts international  law  as part of domestic  law,  and  as higher  than 
the  laws  and  bylaws.  The  Constitution  provides  for  protection  against  discrimination.  It 
upholds  the equality of citizens before the Constitution and before law, stating that citizens 
of the Republic  of Macedonia  are equal  in  their freedoms  and rights,  regardless  of gender, 
race, colour, national  and social origin,  political and religious  conviction, property and social 
status. It provides a protection mechanism  for all who find their human  rights and freedoms 
breached,  in  front  of  the  Constitutional  Court.  Upholding  the  monism  principle  on 
application  of  international  law  (the  signed  and  ratified  international  documents),  the 
Constitution  provides  for  the  domestic  use  of  these  documents,  thus  also  for  those 
providing  for protection against discrimination  and/or  upholding  the principle  of equality. 

Until  2010, anti-discrimination  provisions  were scattered in various  laws. In April  2010, the 
Anti-discrimination  Law  (ADL)2 1   - the  first  comprehensive  equality  law  - was  adopted as 
part of the EU  acquis approximation  process. The ADL  does not comply  with the directives 
regarding  minimum  protected grounds,  definitions  and  forms  of discrimination,  effective, 
proportionate  and dissuasive  sanctions, use of statistical data, and  dialogue  with the NGO 
sector. The  equality  body  established  by  the  act  –  the  Commission  for  Protection against  
Discrimination  (CPAD)  — cannot be said to meet the requirements  of Directive  2000/43. 

The ADL  protects the following  grounds:  colour, gender, belonging  to a marginalised  group, 
ethnic  affiliation,  language,  citizenship,  social  origin,  education,  political  affiliation, 
personal  or  social  status,  family  or  marital  status,  property  ownership,  and  health 
condition.  It  does  not  explicitly  protect  the  minimum  list  of  grounds  prescribed  by  the 
directives, as it includes a limited  scope of belief, and excludes sexual orientation; however, 
there  is  an  open-ended  clause  (‘any  other  ground  established  by  law  or  a  ratified 
international  treaty’, Article 3),  and contains grounds  not covered by the directives. 

The 2013  ex-post evaluation  of the implementation  of the ADL,  conducted by the Ministry 
of  Labour  and  Social  Policy  (MLSP)  with  the  support  from  the  OSCE  Mission  to  Skopje , 
showed  that  the  aims  of  the  law2 2   were  only  partly  reached,  which,  according  to  the 
evaluation  report,  is  justified  given  the  amount  of  state-budget funds  allocated  for  the 
implementation  of the ADL.  Although  noting  numerous  points where  implementation  could 
be  improved,  the  report  explicitly  spelled  out  only  three recommendations  for  legislative 
the  ADL  to  allow  for  the 
changes  for  improving 
establishment  of administrative  support  for  the CPAD;  explicit  prescription  of the ‘shift  of 
burden  of proof’  for  the CPAD;  and  enhancing  the CPAD  accountability mechanisms.  

the  implementation:  amending 

In  2014  and 2015,  the OSCE  Mission  to Skopje  supported  an all-encompassing  analysis  of 
the harmonisation  of the national  legislation  on equality  and non-discrimination  externally 

19   The report by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of thought and opinion, Freedom House annual reports, 

C ivil Society Organisation Sustainability Index, and Nations in Transit have all marked the decline in overall 
freedom and democracy in the country. 

20   The text of the C onstitution of the Republic of Macedonia is accessible in English at: Constitution of the 

Republic of Macedonia (Устав на Република Македонија) http://www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-
republic-of-macedonia.nspx. 

21   Law on prevention and protection against discrimination (Закон за спречување и заштита од 

д искриминација) Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No.50/10, 44/2014, 150/2015, Const.Ct. 
Decision: У.бр.82/2010 (15.09.2010). 

22   As the Anti-discrimination Law does not contain a provision on its aims, by analysing other documents, the 
ex-post evaluation team identified the aims to be prevention of and protection against discrimination.  

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
(compared  to  international  standards),  and  internally  (inside  the  domestic  laws  and 
bylaws). The result of the analysis  identifies points for harmonisation  with EU law and CJEU 
practice, as well  as with other  international  equality  and non-discrimination  standards.2 3  

3. Main  principles  and definitions 

The Anti-discrimination  Law (ADL)  contains definitions  of direct and indirect discriminat ion , 
harassment,  instructions to discriminate  and victimisation.  Compared  to the directives, the 
definition  of  direct  discrimination  is  unnecessarily  complex,  whereas  the  definition  of 
indirect discrimination  is fully replicated. The law contains an article on harassment  and on 
sexual  harassment,  as  well  as  a  separate  article  on  discrimination  against  people  with 
disability.  Multiple  discrimination  is  included  as a grave form  of discrimination,  as are also  
repeated  and  extended  discrimination.  The  law  also  has  a  provision  on  inciting  and 
encouraging  discrimination.  There is  no provision  on discrimination  by association. 

The law  defines  a list of exceptions  and exemptions.  These are connected with the nature 
of  particular  occupational  activities  and/or  special  care  for  some  groups  of  people  (the 
elderly,  youth,  pregnant  women,  people  with  disabilities,  and  parents).  Reasonable 
accommodation  is included  primarily  in the Law on Employment  of People  with Disabilities. 
However,  the list of exceptions is not very precise in  the personal  and  material  scope. This 
leaves room  for readings  of the law that could narrow  protection against discrimination. 

Before  the adoption of the ADL,  various  laws incorporated  definitions  of discrimination.  As 
the ADL  does not establish a unification  of provisions  amongst  various  laws in its transitory 
and  final  provisions,  one  can expect that  the  institutions  that  are  supposed  to  implement 
the  law  could  face doubts  about  which  legislation  and/or  provision  to apply  to  a  certain 
case, and which provisions  should  have precedence. Lex specialis derogat legi generali  and 
lex  posterior  derogat legi  priori  are  by  tradition  part  of judicial  work,  but  judges  tend  to 
rely  on  existing  provisions  rather  than  general  legal  principles,  even  in  cases  where 
seemingly  contradictory provisions  exist,  as general  legal  principles  are  used  primarily  in 
case of legal  loopholes  (as prescribed  under  the Law on  Courts). 

The National  Strategy on Equality  and Non-discrimination  on grounds  of ethnicity, gender, 
age and  disability  (the first comprehensive  equality  public  policy)  was implemented  in  the 
years  2012-2015,  with  operational  plans  for  its  implementation  adopted  annually.  In 
December  2015  the Ministry  of Labour  and  Social  Policy held  the first  public  consultation 
on the new strategy, entitled  ‘Strategy on  Equality  and Non-discrimination  2016-2020’.2 4  

4. Material  scope 

The Anti-discrimination  Law (ADL)  is  applicable  to both the private  and  public  sector and 
applies  to all  fields.  The  law  notes  that specific attention  should  be  paid  to the  fields  of 
employment  and  working  relations;  membership  of  and  involvement  in  trade  unions, 
political  parties,  NGOs,  foundations,  and  other membership  organisations;  social security, 
including  social  protection,  pensions  and  disability  insurance;  health  insurance  and 
healthcare;  education;  access to  goods  and  services;  and  housing.  Thus,  it  goes  beyond 
the  directives.  Other  laws  also  include  discrimination  provisions,  defining  the  material 
scope.  All  of  them  relate  to  both  the  public  and  private  sector,  apart  from  the  Law  on 
Ombudsperson,  which provides  protection against discrimination  only in the public  sphere.  

Chapter  III  -  Exceptions  from  Discrimination  (ADL),  prescribes  the  following  three 
exceptions and  exemptions: 

23   Kotevska, Biljana, Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation 

(forthcoming – 2016; OSCE and CPAD). 

24   At the time of writing this report, the strategy had not yet been adopted. In addition, according to publicly 
available information, no analysis of the implementation of the previous strategy has been published.  

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
- 

- 

- 

Affirmative  measures  (Art icle  13):  Actions  undertaken  by  natural  or  legal  persons 
that will  not be considered as discrimination  if they are established  as justified  in the 
past, in  the present,  or  in  the future  and  may  be undertaken  until  complet e  factual 
equality  is achieved and factual inequalities  are eliminated  or reduced. 
Unequal  treatment that will  not be considered as discrimination  (Article 14):  different 
treatment  of non-citizens; genuine  occupational requirement;  different  treatment of 
persons  on  the  basis  of  religion,  belief,  sex  or  other  characteristics in  relation  to 
education and training  for the aims  of the occupation related to the relevant religion; 
actions  of  members  and  bodies  of  churches  and  religious  communities,  citizens’ 
organisations,  political  parties,  unions  and  other  organisations  conducted  in 
accordance with  their  doctrine, convictions or  beliefs  and/or  the aims  determined  in 
their  statutes, programmes  and/or  regulations;  regulation  of marriage;  exercise  of 
the  constitutionally  guaranteed  principle  of  freedom  of  speech,  public  appearance, 
opinion  and public  information;  and  establishment  of a minimum  and maximum  age 
in relation  to entering a profession/granting  privileges/retirement  provided  that there 
is a legitimate  aim. 
Protective mechanisms  for  specific categories of  persons  (Article  15):  protection of 
pregnant  women  and  mothers;  children  without  parents,  juveniles,  single  parents 
and  people  with  disability;  equal  participation  of  women  and  men;  employment  
encouragement;  training  and  education  for  persons  with  disabilities;  anticipation  of 
minimum  and  maximum  ages  for  access to certain levels  of training  and  education, 
provided  that it is objectively justified  for the achievement  of the legitimate  aim,  and 
the extent of this differentiation  does not exceed the one necessary in  relation  to the 
nature of the training  or education, or  the conditions in  which they are  delivered  and 
the  extent  of  this  differentiation  does  not  exceed  the  level  necessary  for  the 
achievement  of  the aim;  special  measures  beneficial  to persons  or  groups  who  are 
placed in  an  unfavourable  position  as a  result  of any  of the discriminatory  grounds, 
for  the  purpose  of  equalising  their  opportunities,  as  long  as  those  measures  are 
necessary;  measures  for  the  protection  of  the  specifics  and  identity  of  persons 
belonging  to  ethnic,  religious  or  linguistic  minorities  and  their  right  to cherish  and 
develop  their  own identity individually  or  in  a community  with other group  members 
and measures  stimulating  conditions for promotion  of that identity; and  measures  in 
the field  of education and  training  to ensure  the participation  of ethnic minorities,  as 
those measures  are necessary. 

In  the field  of employment,  aside from  the Anti-discrimination  Law, there is also  a Law on 
Labour  Relations,2 5   which  prohibits  discrimination 
in  line  with  the  standards  of  the 
directives. These laws apply  both to the public  and  private sector. 

5. Enforcing  the law 

According  to  the  Constitution,  citizens  are  entitled  to  bring  a  case for  the  protection  of 
fundamental  rights  and  freedoms  to the ordinary  courts in  a prompt  procedure.  However, 
in  practice, although  invocations  of  the  procedures  have  been  made,  the  Constitutional 
Court  has been  very reluctant to act upon  cases in  relation  to discrimination  i.e.  cases on 
citizens’ rights  and  freedoms  in  general. 

The laws that are  currently  in  force are  not clear when  it comes  to addressing  complaint s 
of  discrimination.  Various  laws  provide  various  types  of  proceedings  in  similar  cases. 
Proceedings  vary from  inspectoral  control, misdemeanour  procedure,  litigation  procedure, 
administrative  procedure,  to  criminal  procedure.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  (ADL) 

25   Law on Labour Relations (З акон за работните односи), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia Nos. 
62/2005, 106/2008, 161/2008, 114/2009, 130/2009, 149/2009, 50/2010, 52/2010, 124/2010, 47/2011, 
11/2012, 39/2012, 13/2013, 25/2013, 170/2013, 187/2013, 113/2014; Constitutional Court Decisions: U. 
no. 139/2005, U. no. 161/2005, U. no. 134/2005, U. no. 187/2005, U. no. 111/2006, U. no. 188/2006, U. 
no. 170/2006, U. no. 200/2008, U. no. 20/2009, U. no. 176/2009, U. no. 263/2009, U. no. 62/2013. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
envisages  several  options  for  procedural  protection. These  are:  administrative,  litigation 
and misdemeanour  procedures.  

Administrative  procedure  before the CPAD  is free of charge. This body may  give its opinion 
and recommendation.  The procedure can last up to 90 days. If the recommendation  is not 
acted upon,  the CPAD  can initiate  a proc edure  with  a  competent  body  (the law  does  not 
specify  this  further).  The  CPAD  received  70  cases in  2015,  which  is  a  third  less  than  in 
2014.  According  to its annual  report,  the CPAD  finds  that the drop-in  reporting  is  related 
to its low technical capacities. However,  this cannot explain  why fewer people  complained 
to the  CPAD  in  2015  than  in  2014.  A  more  plausible  explanation  behind  the  drop  in  the 
number  of cases could be a decline in trust in this institution, which might  have arisen  from 
the wire-tapping  affair, due to reasons  explained  in  section 1. 

Litigation  procedure  can also  be raised  in  ordinary  courts, based  on  the provisions  of the 
ADL.  The law  does  not  resolve  the  priority  of  the procedures,  in  a  case of  simultaneous 
procedures, but it states that if a procedure  is raised  in a court, no procedure  can be raised 
before  the CPAD.  However,  it  does not say  what one  does  if  a  procedure  is  raised  before  
the CPAD,  and  after that (but before  the procedure  ends  in  the CPAD)  another  procedure 
is  started before  a  court. Furthermore,  the  relations  between  procedures  in  front  of  the 
Ombudsperson  and  the  CPAD  are  not  regulated  by  law,  but  are  governed  by  a 
memorandum  of understanding  between the two institutions. 

Under  the ADL,  the outcome  of the procedure  depends  on the procedure  that one chooses 
to  pursue.  The  administrative  procedure  provides  a  recommendation  for  rectifying  the 
violation (i.e. the discrimination)  within 30 days, litigation would lead to an award of regular 
compensation,  and the misdemeanour  procedure  can lead  to fines in  the range  of EUR  70 
to  1  000  (in  national  currency).  Financial  and  other  sanctions  for  discrimination  are 
provided  in  the Criminal  Code. These provisions  have not been  applied  thus far.  

Another procedure for the protection of rights, including  the right to equality and protection 
against  discrimination  is  a  procedure  that can be  initiated  in  front  of the Ombudsperson. 
This is limited  to the public sphere only. The Ombudsperson  is vested with the responsibilit y 
to provide  protection of the principles  of non-discrimination  and  equitable  representation. 
In  2015,  the percentage of discrimination  cases remained  low:  53  cases were directed  to 
the  Ombudsperson  (representing  1.2  %  of  the  total  number  of  cases  received  by  the 
Ombudsperson).  As in  previous  years, the majority  of discrimination  cases are in  the field 
of employment  and on the ground  of ethnicity. The fact that the number  of cases reported 
to  the  Ombudsperson  did  not  experience  a  fall  as  striking  as  that  of  the  CPAD  further 
supports  the  suggestion  of  a  possible  loss  of  trust  in  the  CPAD  as  a  result  of  the  wire-
tapping  affair (see section 1 above). 

Neither  under  the  ADL,  nor  under  previous  laws  have  situation  testing  and  statistical 
evidence been prescribed  as admissible  evidence and tools in  procedures  in discriminat ion 
cases.  They  have  not  been  used  in  practice.  Statistical  evidence  is  not  mentioned  in 
domestic  legislation.  In  fact, statistics are only  mentioned  in  the context of the duties  of 
the equality  body  (i.e. collecting statistics). 

The ADL  prescribes  shifting  of the burden  of proof, as do several  other  laws. However,  its 
definition  is  not  in  line  with  the  directives,  as  the  law  asks  that  the  potential  victim  of 
discrimination  provides  facts and proofs  to justify their claim.  This places an unreasonably 
large  portion  of the burden  on  the potential  victim.  Shift of  the burden  of proof  does  not 
apply  for  criminal  offences related  to breach  of  equal  treatment.  The  CPAD  has  thus  far 
applied  the shift of burden  of proof in  accordance with national  legislation. 

NGOs  support  complaints  of victims  and  bring  cases of discrimination  to public  attention. 
However,  the media  and  public  do  not show  a constructive approach  to  such cases or  to 
covering  discrimination,  but tend towards a sensationalist  attitude. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6. Equality  bodies 

The Anti-Discrimination  Law (ADL)  provided  for the establishment  of the first equality body 
in  the  country  –  the CPAD.  Its  members  were  elected in  December  2010  and  it  started 
functioning  in  2011.  The CPAD  works  on  cases of  discrimination  as  covered  by  the ADL. 
The grounds  covered  are:  sex,  race, colour  of  skin,  gender,  belonging  to  a marginal ised 
group,  ethnicity, language,  citizenship,  social origin,  religion  or religious  belief, other sorts 
of  belief,  education,  political  affiliation,  personal  or  social  status,  mental  or  physical 
disability,  age, family  or marital  status, property  ownership,  health  condition, or any other 
ground  stipulated in  law  or a ratified  international  treaty.  

The CPAD  received  70  cases in  2015  (a striking  fall  of one third  compared  to 2014,  when 
it  received  106  cases,  and  the  first  fall  in  the  number  of  cases  since  the  body  was 
established).  The cases in  2015  were  brought  on  the following  discrimination  grounds:  9 
on ethnicity, 8  on personal  or social  status, 8 on  mental  or physical  disability,  8 on  age, 8 
on  health status, 5  on political  affiliation,  4  on family  or  marital  status, 4 on  social origin, 
3  on  language,  3  on  education,  2  on  sex,  2  on  race,  2  on  citizenship,  2  on  re ligion  or 
religious  belief,  2  on other  beliefs,  2 on  property  status, 1  on colour  of skin,  1 on gender, 
1  on  belonging  to a  marginalised  group,  17  cases where  no  ground  was claimed,  and  14 
under  ‘any  other  ground’.  In  filed  cases, the  alleged  discrimination  was  in  the following 
fields:  30  in  employment  and  labour  relations,  4  in  access to goods  and  services,  14  in 
social  security, 4  in  judiciary  and  administration,  3  in  public  information  and  media,  3  in 
education,  science  and  sports,  4  in  housing,  13  in  which  no  field  was  claimed  by  the 
applicant,  and  3  in  other  fields  as  provided  for  under  the law.  As  in  previous  years,  the 
body  did  not produce  statistics on how  many  of these cases were  proc essed  and/or  were 
closed in 2015.2 6  

The  CPAD  has  the  following  mandate:  giving  advice  and  recommendations  on  cases of 
discrimination;  providing  information  and  initiating  procedures  at  relevant  state bodies; 
initiating  changes  to  legislation; 
reporting,  and  providing  education  and  training; 
cooperation  with  local  government,  NGOs,  other  equality  bodies  and  international 
organisations;  collecting statistical data, establishing  databases and carrying  out research.  

There  was  no  equality  body  before  ADL’s  adoption.  Some  competences  concerning 
discrimination  fall within the mandate  of the Ombudsperson's  office. The relations  between 
the Ombudsperson  and the CPAD  are not regulated  in the ADL  (their relationship  operates 
partly under  a memorandum  of understanding).  According to the Ombudsperson’s  general 
mandate,  it can accept individual  claims,  investigate, give recommendations  and opinions, 
initiate  procedures,  and  monitor  and  research  specific issues,  focusing  protection  on  the 
grounds  mentioned  in the Constitution and  covering  violations  made  by public  bodies. 

7. Key issues 

The key  issues of concern in  the national  context include: 

- 

- 

- 

- 

lack  of  inclusion  of  sexual  orientation  as  an  explicitly  protected  ground  in  the 
comprehensive  anti-discrimination  law; 
lack of internal  harmonisation  of national  legislation  with the Anti-discrimination  Law 
and with international  standards; 
low  resources  for  both  national  human  rights  institutions  with an  equality  and  non-
discrimination  mandate,  preventing  them  from  fully  exercising  their  competences; 
impunity  of hate crime  and hate speech, especially with regards  to sexual  orientation;  

26   C ommission for Protection Against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација) (2016), 2015 

Annual Report of the Commission for Protection Against Discrimination http://www.akademik.mk/wp-
content/uploads/2016/04/diskriminacija.pdf. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
- 

- 

grave  rule  of  law  issues,  including  lack  of  independence  of  the  judiciary  and 
partisation  of the state institutions,  resulting  in a loss of trust in  the institutions; 
lack  of  independence  of  the equality  body  which,  under  its present  positioning  and 
operation,  cannot be seen to be in  line  with the directives. 

12 

 
 
 
RÉSUMÉ 

1. Introduction 

La  Macédoine  (ARYM),2 7   pays multiethnique  et enclavé  du  sud-est de  l’Europe,  a déclaré 
son  indépendance  en  1991  par  suite  de  la  dissolution  de  la  Yougoslavie.  Elle  s’est portée 
candidate  à  l’adhésion  à  l’Union  européenne  en  2005  et  a  reçu  en  2008  une  invitation 
conditionnelle  à  rejoindre  l’Organisation  du  traité  de  l’Atlantique  Nord.  Bien  qu’ils  soient 
considérés  comme  une  priorité  nationale  en  matière  d’affaires  étrangères,  ces   deux 
processus d’adhésion  sont au point mort.  Le litige  sur  le nom  a constitué jusqu’en  2014  la 
raison  principale  de la non-ouverture  de négociations en vue de l’adhésion  à l’UE.  Tant en 
2014  qu’en  2015  toutefois,  les  rapports  d’avancement  publiés  par  la  Commissi on 
européenne2 8   concernant les progrès  réalisés  par le pays sur  la voie de cette adhésion font 
part  de  vives  préoccupations  portant  sur  des  questions  d’État  de  droit  fondament al 
(politisation  des  institutions  et  de  la  société,  indépendance  du  judiciaire  et  liberté  des 
médias,  par  exemple).  Les  priorités  nationales  officielles  prévoient  toujours  la  mise  en 
œuvre2 9   de l’accord-cadre d’Ohrid,3 0   la  réduction des taux  de chômage3 1   et la lutte contre 
la pauvreté.3 2 

La  fin  de  l’année  2014  et  le  début  de  l’année  2015  ont  été  marqués  par  d’important s 
mouvements  de  protestation  de  la  part  d’étudiants  des  universités  et  hautes  écoles,  de 
travailleurs  freelance,  de  syndicats indépendants,  de  salariés  licenciés  dans  le  cadre  des 
processus  de  transition  et  de  transformation,  etc. En  février  2015,  l’affaire  des  écoutes 
téléphoniques  a  révélé  une  situation  interne  plus  préoccupante encore .  Le  principal  parti 
d’opposition  a  entamé  la  publication  d’enregistrements  censés être tirés  de  l’interception 
illégale  des communications  de  plus  de 20  000  personnes  par  l’Agence  de renseignement  
macédonienne.3 3   Le  contenu  des  enregistrements  rendus  publics  dissipent  les  doutes 
entourant les  allégations  d’ores  et déjà formulées  quant à une captation de l’État 3 4 et une 
concentration extrême  du pouvoir  dans les mains  du parti  dirigeant,  y compris  un contrôle 
total du parti non seulement  sur l’appareil  judiciaire  mais  sur  tous les aspects de la société. 
Le Médiateur a ouvert deux  procédures en rapport avec l’affaire des écoutes téléphoniques , 
étant donné  que  des cas flagrants  de violation  à grande  échelle  du droit  à la  vie privée  et 
la  vie  familiale  avaient  été  constatés. Il  s’est  dit  indigné  de  l’absence  de  réponse  de 
l’Agence de renseignement  à ses demandes  d’informations  complémentaires  dans le cadre 
du  rassemblement  d’éléments  en  rapport  avec ces deux  procédures.   Le  Médiateur  a  fait 

27   La dénomination constitutionnelle du pays est «République de Macédoine». Mais en attendant que soit réglé 
le litige en cours avec la Grèce concernant cette dénomination, la résolution A/RES/47/225 des Nations 
unies prévoit que l’État est admis comme membre des Nations unies en étant provisoirement désigné sous 
le nom d’«ancienne République yougoslave de Macédoine», qui est aussi la dénomination retenue par la 
C ommission européenne et utilisée dès lors dans le présent rapport.   

28   C ommission européenne (2015) «The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Progress Report» 

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2015/20151110_report_the_former_yugoslav_republi
c_of_macedonia.pdf. Tous les hyperliens ont été consultés le 27 mai 2016. 

29   Même si ce n’est pas l’accord-cadre d’Ohrid proprement dit qui est mis en œuvre, mais des dispositions 

constitutionnelles et légales ainsi que des documents stratégiques découlant de sa signature, l’expression 
«mise en œuvre de l’accord-cadre d’Ohrid» est utilisée ici pour éviter de longues périphrases explicatives. 

30   Signé en vue de mettre fin au conflit armé de 2001, cet accord vise à améliorer la situation des 

communautés ethniques minoritaires ainsi qu’à préserver et refléter le caractère multiethnique du pays dans 
la vie publique, y compris au moyen d’actions pour la promotion de la non-discrimination et en faveur d’une 
représentation équitable. 

31   Selon l’Office national de statistique, le taux de chômage atteignait 24,6 % de la population active au 

dernier trimestre de 2015, et le taux d’emploi 42,7 %. 

32   L’indicateur de pauvreté de Laeken était de 22,1 % en 2014 (dernière statistique disponible). 
33   Balkan Insight, (2015), «Macedonia PM Accused of Large-Scale Wire-Tapping» (Le Premier ministre 

macédonien accusé d’écoute téléphonique à grande échelle) (9 février 2015), site web de Balkan Insight, 
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/eavesdropping-bombshell-explodes-in-macedonia. 

34   Le concept de «captation de l’État» s’entend ici au sens que lui donne Transparency International, à savoir: 
«une situation où des personnes physiques, [des institutions,] des entreprises ou des groupes puissants, qui 
peuvent être ou non des ressortissants du pays, recourent à la  corruption pour peser sur les décisions 
politiques et l’environnement juridique du pays au profit de leurs propres intérêts».  

13 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
part de cette entrave au Parlement,  mais  celui-ci ne lui  a fourni  aucune assistance ni retour 
d’information.3 5 

Il  convient de souligner  que  l’on  entendrait  également  la  voix  du  Président  de l’organisme 
pour  la promotion  de l’égalité,  Dushko  Minovski,  dans les conversations rendues  publiques  
et qu’il  apparaît  dans  ces enregistrements  comme  une  personne  travaillant  sur  le  terrain 
pour  le  parti  au  pouvoir  durant  la  période  électorale,  et même  comme  (ab)usant  de  sa 
fonction au  sein  du  ministère  du  Travail  et de  la  politique  sociale  pour  donner  instruction 
aux  bénéficiaires  d’une  aide  sociale  sur  la  manière  de  voter.  On  entend  de  surcroît  une 
voix  qui  serait  celle de la  ministre  de l’Intérieur  de l’époque,  Gordana  Jankulovska,3 6   dans 
une conversation attestant clairement de la pression  exercée sur la communauté  rom  pour 
qu’elle  aille  voter  le  jour  des élections  conformément  aux  instructions  données.3 7  Suite à 
la  publication  de  cet  enregistrement,  des  organisations  roms  ont  manifesté  contre  le 
gouvernement  et réclamé  la  démission  de Jankulovska:3 8   la  ministre  a alors  publié  ce qui 
se  voulait  une  lettre  d’excuse  à  la  communauté  rom,  mais  qui  se  contentait  plutôt  de 
récapituler  l’ensemble  des  mesures  prises  par  le  pays  pour  améliorer  la  situation  des 
Roms.3 9  

La  population  du  pays  dépasse  légèrement  la  barre  des  deux  millions.4 0   L’appartenance 
ethnique  est  importante  car  une  série  de  droits  et  d’actions  positives  sont  liés  à  la 
proportion  numérique  qu’une  communauté  ethnique  représente  dans  l’ensemble  de  la 
population.  La  composition  ethnique4 1  s’établit  comme  suit:  64  %  de  Macédoniens  de 
souche,  25 %  d’Albanais  de  souche,  4 %  de  Turcs de  souche,  3 %  de  Roms  de  souche, 
2 %  de Serbes de souche, 1 %  de Bosniaques  de souche, 0,5  % de Valaques  de souche et 
1 %  «d’autres»  (terme  utilisé  par  la Constitution). 

Des  réformes  légales  et institutionnelles  disparates  ont  créé un  cadre qui  pose  problème 
en  termes  de  sécurité  juridique.  D’incessantes  modifications  législatives,  un  déni  du 
principe  de  participation  aux  politiques  publiques  et le  financement  insuffisant  des  deux 
institutions  nationales  pour  les droits  de l’homme  (compétentes en matière  d’égalité  et de 
non-discrimination)  ne sont que quelques  exemples  des problématiques  les plus  urgentes, 
qui  ont une incidence sur  le cadre légal  et institutionnel  du pays ainsi  que  sur l’application 
du principe  de l’égalité  et de la non-discrimination  et les  pratiques  y afférentes. 

Bien  que  le  gouvernement  présente  souvent  le  pays  comme  ouvert  aux  différences, 
appuyant  cette affirmation  sur  les  mesures  qu’il  a  prises  pour  promouvoir  les  droits  des 
minorités,4 2  tel  n’est  pas  le  cas. Le  discours  haineux  semble  omniprésent  et  largement 
toléré.  Les  déclarations  homophobes  et  les  discours  haineux  à  l’égard  des  homosexuels 
restent courants.  Un  centre de  soutien  aux  personnes  LGBT,  fondé  par  une  organisation 
de  la  société civile  (OSC)  locale,  a  fait  en  outre  l’objet  de  plusieurs  attaques violentes. 
Celles-ci n’ayant  toujours  donné  lieu  à aucune enquête  approfondie  et aucune accusation 

35   Rapport annuel 2015 du Médiateur, Médiateur de la République de Macédoine (2016). 
36   Gordana Jankulovska a démissionné le 12 mai 2015. 
37   Portail média A1On en ligne, «la ministre Jankulovska déclare: en les tirant par les oreilles, nous amèneront 

tous les Tsiganes, un par un, à venir voter» (СДСМ: Јанкулоска вели – З а уши, циган по циган ќе 
вад име) http://a1on.mk/wordpress/archives/465799. Il faut noter que, dans le contexte national, 
«Tsigane» («Циган») est un terme péjoratif pour désigner les Roms. 

38   C haîne de télévision nationale 24 Vesti, «Les Roms réclament la démission de la ministre Jankulovska» 
[Ромите бараат оставка од министерката Јанкуловска], http://24vesti.mk/romite-baraat-ostavka-od-
minsiterkata-jankulovska. 

39   C ette lettre n’est plus disponible en ligne. 
40   Sans être confirmées par des chiffres officiels, les estimations font état de 250 000 à 500 000 personnes 

ayant quitté le pays ces quelques dernières années pour aller travailler à l’étranger. 

41   Tous les chiffres présentés ici sont des pourcentages arrondis tirés du recensement de 2002. Un nouveau 
recensement était prévu pour 2011, mais il a été annulé en raison d’un manque de clarté au niveau de 
l’application de la méthodologie. Toutes les statistiques publiées par l’Office national de statistique peuvent 
être consultées sur son site: www.stat.gov.mk/. 

42   Des actes de violence interethnique ont eu lieu en 2011 et en 2012. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
ou  presque  n’ayant  été portée,  les  manifestations  initiées  par  des  OSC  en  2014  se  sont  
poursuivies  en 2015.   

De  nombreuses  activités soutenues  par  le  gouvernement  et des  bailleurs  de  fonds, en  ce 
compris  celles soutenues par l’UE,  ont été menées au titre des efforts déployés pour relever 
les  défis  liés  à la  concrétisation des droits  fondamentaux  des Roms.  Toutefois, une  étude 
consacrée en  2013  à  la  mise  en  œuvre  de  la  Décennie  de l’inclusion  des  Roms 4 3   fait état 
d’un  bilan  catastrophique  en termes  de réalisation  des objectifs à deux  ans seulement  de 
l’échéance fixée. Le  seul domaine  où  l’on  peut parler  d’inclusion  est sans doute celui de  la 
participation  politique.4 4  

Quant à la coopération entre le gouvernement  et les OSC, comme  les années précédentes, 
toutes  les  ONG  peuvent  –  théoriquement  –  participer  aux  consultations  publiques  et 
coopérer avec le gouvernement,  voire  même  bénéficier d’un  soutien financier  de la part de 
celui-ci. En pratique,  toutefois, ce sont les ONG  ayant l’approche  la moins  critique à l’égard 
des  actions  gouvernementales  qui  prennent   une  part  significative  aux  processus 
d’élaboration  des politiques  publiques.  Cette situation s’inscrit dans l’approche  générale  du 
gouvernement,  à savoir faire taire toute voix critique dans le pays.4 5  Des organisations  non 
gouvernementales  organisées  par  le gouvernement  («ONGOG»)  continuent de fonctionner 
pour  apporter  un  soutien  public  aux  mesures  gouvernementales  quand  et où cela s’avère 
nécessaire.  Elles  ont  également  pour  mission  d’«initier»  et  de  procéder  à  des  contre-
manifestations  en réponse  aux  protestations organisées  par des ONG.   

2. Législation  principale 

La Constitution de la  République  de Macédoine4 6   est une  c onstitution écrite qui  représente 
la  loi  suprême  du  pays. Elle  admet  le  droit  international  en  tant que  partie  intégrante  du 
droit  interne,  et comme  prévalant  sur  les  lois  et réglementations.  La  Constitution  assure 
une  protection  contre  la  discrimination.  Elle  consacre  l’égalité  des  citoyens  devant  la 
Constitution et devant la loi,  affirmant  que tous les citoyens de la République  de Macédoine 
sont égaux  dans leurs  libertés  et leurs  droits indépendamment  de leur  genre, race, couleur 
de peau,  origine  nationale  et sociale, affiliation  politique  et religieuse,  situation  sociale  et 
fortune.  Elle  prévoit,  devant  la  Cour  constitutionnelle,  un  mécanisme  de   protection  à 
l’intention  de  tous ceux  qui  estiment  que  leurs  libertés  et droits  fondamentaux  n’ont  pas 
été respectés. Proclamant  le princ ipe  du  monisme  pour  l’application  du droit  international, 
à savoir  les  actes internationaux  signés  et ratifiés,  la  Constitution  prévoit  l’usage  national 
de ces documents, y compris  donc ceux qui assurent une protection contre la discriminat ion 
et/ou consac rent le principe  de l’égalité. 

Jusqu’en  2010,  les  dispositions  antidiscrimination  étaient dispersées  entre  plusieurs  lois. 
En  avril  2010,  la  loi  antidiscrimination4 7   –  première  loi  générale  en  matière  d’égalité  – a 
été adoptée dans  le  cadre  du  processus  d’alignement  sur  l’acquis  de  l’UE.  Cette loi  n’est 
pas  conforme  aux  directives  pour  ce qui  concerne  la  liste  minimale  des  motifs  protégés; 
les  définitions  et  les  formes  de  discrimination;  les  sanctions efficaces, proportionnées  et 
dissuasives;  l’utilisation  de données  statistiques; et le  dialogue  avec le  secteur des ONG. 
L’organisme  pour  l’égalité  institué par cette loi – à savoir  la Commission  pour  la protection 

43   La Décennie de l’inclusion des Roms, initiative régionale pour l’amélioration de la situation des Roms en 

matière de santé, de logement, d’éducation et d’emploi, s’est achevée en 2015. 

44   Le pays compte un ministre rom au sein du gouvernement, une municipalité rom (Shuto Orizari), des 

députés roms, etc. 

45   Le rapport du Rapporteur spécial sur la liberté de pensée et d’opinion, les rapports annuels de la Freedom 
House, l’Indice de durabilité des organisations de la société civile, et Nations in Transit sont unanimes à 
constater le déclin de la liberté en général et de la démocratie dans le pays. 

46   Le texte de la C onstitution de la République de Macédoine (Устав на Република Македонија) peut être 
consulté en français sur: http://www.sobranie.mk/constitution-de-la-r-publique-de-mac-doine.nspx 

47   Loi sur la prévention et la protection contre la discrimination (Закон за спречување и заштита од 

д искриминација) Journal officiel de la République de Macédoine, n° 50/10, 44/2014, 150/2015. Arrêt de la 
C our constitutionnelle: У.бр.82/2010 (15 septembre 2010). 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
contre  la  discrimination  —  ne  saurait  par  ailleurs  être  considéré  comme  répondant   aux 
exigences  de la directive 2000/43. 

La loi  antidiscrimination  assure  une protection par  rapport  aux  motifs  suivants: couleur  de 
la  peau,  genre,  appartenance  à  un  groupe  marginalisé,  appartenance  ethnique,  langue, 
citoyenneté,  origine  sociale,  éducation,  affiliation  politique,  situation  personnelle  ou 
sociale,  situation  familiale  ou  état matrimonial,  fortune  et état de  santé. Elle  ne  protège 
pas explicitement  la liste minimale  des motifs  établie par les directives, étant donné qu’elle 
limite  la  portée  des  convictions  et  qu’elle  exclut  l’orientation  sexuelle.  Elle  comporte 
toutefois une  clause ouverte en  son article 3  («tout autre  motif  prévu  par  la loi  ou par  un 
traité  international  ratifié»)  ainsi  que  plusieurs  autres  motifs  non  couverts  par  les  
directives. 

L’évaluation  ex  post de  la  mise  en  œuvre  de  la  loi  antidiscrimination,  effectuée en  2013 
sous la direction  du ministère  du Travail et de la politique  sociale avec le soutien la mission 
de l’OSCE  à Skopje,  montre  que les objectifs de la loi4 8  n’ont été que partiellement  atteints 
– ce qui,  selon le rapport  d’évaluation,  s’explique  au vu du montant  que le budget national 
alloue  à  sa  mise  en  œuvre.  Tout  en  soulignant  plusieurs  points  sur  lesquels  des 
améliorations  pourraient  être  apportées,  le  rapport  ne  formule  explicitement  que  trois 
recommandations  en vue de changements  législatifs destinés à améliorer  la mise  en œuvre 
de la loi antidiscrimination:  une modification  de cette loi de façon à permettre  l’instauration 
d’un  soutien  administratif  à  la  Commission  pour  la  protection  contre  la  discriminat ion ; 
l’obligation  explicite  du «renversement  de la charge de la preuve»  pour  cette Commission; 
et le renforcement  de ses mécanismes  de responsabilisation.  

En  2014  et  2015,  la  mission  de  l’OSCE  à  Skopje  a  soutenu  une  analyse  complète  de 
l’harmonisation  de  la  législation  nationale  relative  à l’égalité  et la  non-discrimination  à la 
fois  sur  le  plan  externe  (par  rapport  aux  normes  internationales)  et  sur  le  plan  interne 
(dans  le  cadre  des  lois  et  réglementations  nationales).  L’analyse  recense  une  série  de 
points  à  harmoniser  avec  le  droit  de  l’UE  et  la  pratique  de  la  CJUE,  de  même  qu’avec 
d’autres  normes  internationales  en matière  d’égalité  et de  non-discrimination.4 9 

3. Principes  généraux  et définitions 

La  loi  antidiscrimination  contient des  définitions  de  la  discrimination  directe  et indirecte, 
du  harcèlement,  de  l’injonction  de  discriminer  et  de  la  rétorsion.  La  définition  de  la 
discrimination  directe  est  inutilement  compliquée  par  rapport  à  celle  figurant  dans  les 
indirecte  reproduit  textuellement  la 
directives,  tandis  que  celle  de  la  discrimination 
définition  des directives. La loi  contient un article relatif au harcèlement  et au harcèlement  
sexuel,  de  même  qu’un  article  distinct concernant la  discrimination  envers  les  personnes 
handicapées.  La  discrimination  multiple  est  considérée  comme  une  forme  grave  de 
discrimination,  au  même  titre  que  la  discrimination  répétée  et  étendue.  La  loi  contient 
également  une  disposition  visant  l’incitation  et  l’encouragement  à  pratiquer  une 
discrimination.  Elle  ne  contient  aucune  disposition  relative  à  la  discrimination  par 
association. 

La loi  définit  une série  d’exceptions  et de dérogations  en rapport avec la nature d’activités 
professionnelles  spécifiques  et/ou un  traitement  spécial  à l’intention  de  certains groupes 
(personnes  âgées,  jeunes,  femmes  enceintes,  personnes  handicapées  et  parents). 
L’aménagement  raisonnable  est principalement  inclus dans la loi sur l’emploi  des personnes 
handicapées.  Le  champ  d’application  personnel  et  matériel  de  la  liste  des  exceptions 

48   La loi antidiscrimination ne contenant aucune disposition relative à ses objectifs, l’équipe chargée de 

l’évaluation ex-post a considéré, sur base de l’analyse d’autres documents, qu’il s’agissait de la prévention 
de la  discrimination et de la protection contre la discrimination.  

49   Kotevska, Biljana, Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation (à 

paraître – 2016; OSCE et C ommission pour la protection contre la discrimination). 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
manque  toutefois  de  précision,  ce  qui  ouvre  la  porte  à  des  interprétations  de  la  loi 
susceptibles de restreindre  la  protection contre la discrimination. 

Avant l’adoption  de la  loi antidiscrimination,  plusieurs  lois  contenaient des définitions  de la 
discrimination.  Étant  donné  que  la  loi  antidiscrimination  ne  prévoit  –  ni  dans  ses 
dispositions  transitoires  ni  dans  ses  dispositions  finales  –  d’harmonisation  entre  les 
dispositions  pertinentes  figurant  dans  différentes  lois,  on  peut  s’attendre  à  ce  que  les 
institutions  censées  appliquer  la  loi  ne  sachent  pas  quelle  législation  et/ou  disposition 
appliquer  à un  cas d’espèce  ni  quelles  sont les  dispositions  prévalant  sur  les  autres .  Bien 
que, par tradition, les principes  résumés  dans les adages  lex specialis  derogat legi generali 
et lex  posterior derogat legi priori fassent partie de la pratique judiciaire, les juges tendent 
à  s’appuyer  sur  des  dispositions  existantes  plutôt  que  sur  des  principes  juridiques 
généraux,  même  lorsqu’ils  confrontés à des dispositions  apparemment  contradictoires, les 
principes  généraux  du droit étant surtout utilisés en cas de lacune juridique  (comme  prévu 
au titre de la loi  relative  aux  tribunaux). 

La  Stratégie nationale  pour  l’égalité  et l’interdiction  de  discrimination  fondée sur  l’origine 
ethnique,  le  genre,  l’âge  et  le  handicap  (première  politique  publique  globale  en  matière 
d’égalité),  a  été  mise  en  œuvre  durant  la  période  2012-2015  au  moyen  de  plans 
opérationnels  adoptés  chaque  année.  Le  ministère  du  Travail  et de  la  politique  sociale  a 
organisé  en  décembre  2015  la  première  consultation  publique  concernant  la  nouvelle 
stratégie intitulée  «Stratégie pour  l’égalité  et la non-discrimination  2016-2020».5 0 

4. Champ d’application  matériel 

La loi antidiscrimination  est applicable  à fois au secteur public et au secteur privé, de même 
qu’à  tous  les  domaines.  Elle  précise  qu’une  attention particulière  doit  être  accordée aux 
domaines  suivants:  l’emploi  et  les  relations  de travail;  l’affiliation  et la participation  à des 
syndicats,  des  partis  politiques,  des  ONG,  des  fondations  et  d’autres  organisations 
associatives; la sécurité sociale, y compris  la protection sociale, les pensions  et l’assurance -
invalidité;  l’assurance-santé  et les  soins  de  santé;  l’éducation;  l’accès  aux  biens  et  aux 
services;  et  le  logement.  Cette  loi  va  donc  au-delà  des  prescriptions  des  directives. 
D’autres  lois  contiennent  également  des  dispositions  en  matière  de  discrimination,  ainsi  
qu’une  définition  de  leur  champ  d’application  matériel.  Toutes s’appliquent  à  la  fois  au 
secteur public  et  au  secteur  privé,  à  l’exception  de  la  loi  sur  le  Médiateur  qui  offre  une 
protection contre la  discrimination  dans  la sphère  publique  uniquement . 

Le chapitre III  de la  loi  antidiscrimination,  consacré aux  exceptions au principe  de la  non-
discrimination,  prévoit  les trois exceptions  et dérogations  suivantes:   

- 

- 

Les mesures  positives  (article 13):  mesures  qui, prises  par des personnes  physiques 
lorsqu’elles  sont 
ou  morales,  ne  sont  pas  considérées  comme  discriminatoires 
instaurées  sur  la  base  d’une  justification  passée,  actuelle ou  future,  et qui  peuvent 
être adoptées jusqu’à  ce qu’une  égalité  de fait soit intégralement  réalisée  et jusqu’à 
ce que les inégalités  de fait soient éliminées  ou réduites.   
(article  14): 
Le  traitement  différencié  non  considéré  comme  discriminatoire 
traitement  différencié  des  non-citoyens;  exigence  professionnelle  essentielle;   
traitement  différencié  fondé  sur  la  religion,  les  convictions,  le  sexe  ou  autres 
caractéristiques personnelles  pour ce qui  concerne l’éducation  et la formation  en vue 
de  l’exercice  d’une  profession  liée  à  une  religion  déterminée;  activités menées  par 
les  membres  et instances d’églises  ou  de  communautés  religieuses,  d’organisations 
citoyennes,  de  partis  politiques,  de  syndicats  ou  d’autres  organisations 
conformément  à  leur  doctrine  ou  leurs  convict ions  et/ou  aux  objectifs  définis  par 

50   À l’heure de rédiger le présent rapport, cette stratégie n’avait pas encore été adoptée. De surcroît, selon des 
informations accessibles au public, aucune analyse de la mise en œuvre de la stratégie précédente n’a été 
publiée.  

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
- 

leurs  statuts,  leurs  programmes  et/ou  leurs  réglementations;  réglementation  du 
mariage;  exercice  du  principe  constitutionnel  de  la  liberté  de  parole,  d’intervention 
publique,  de  pensée  et  d’information  publique;  et  fixation  d’un  âge  minimum  et 
maximum  pour  ce  qui  concerne  l’ac cès  à  une  profession/l’octroi  de  privilèges/la 
retraite pour  autant qu’il  existe un  but légitime.   
Les  mécanismes  de  protection destinés  à  des  catégories particulières  de personnes 
(article 15):  mécanisme  de  protection des femmes  enceintes et des mères;  pour  les 
enfants orphelins,  les mineurs,  les parents célibataires et les personnes  handicapées ; 
pour  la  participation  égale  des femmes  et des hommes;  pour  l’incitation  à l’emploi; 
pour  l’instruction  et la  formation  des  personnes  handicapées;  pour  l’avancement  de 
l’âge  minimum  et  de  l’âge  maximum  permettant  d’accéder  à  certains  niveaux 
d’éducation  et  de  formation  pour  autant  que  ce  traitement  différencié  soit 
objectivement  justifié  par  un  but  légitime  et  qu’il  n’aille  pas  au-delà  de  ce qui  est 
nécessaire  compte  tenu  de  la  nature  de  l’éducation  et de  la  formation  en  cause ou 
des conditions dans lesquelles  elles sont dispensées,  et qu’il  n’aille  pas au-delà de ce 
qui  est nécessaire pour  atteindre le  but  recherché; des mesures  spéciales en faveur 
de  personnes  ou  de  groupes  se  trouvant  en  situation  défavorisée  en  raison  d’un 
leur  accorder  une  égalité  de 
quelconque  motif  de  discrimination,  afin  de 
chances, pour  autant que  les mesures  en question  soient  nécessaires;  des mesures 
destinées  à  protéger  les  spécificités  et  l’identité  de  personnes  appartenant  à  des 
minorités  ethniques,  religieuses  ou  linguistiques  ainsi  que  leur  droit  de  tenir  à leur 
propre  identité  et de  la  développer  individuellement  ou  au  sein  d’une  communaut é 
avec d’autres  membres  du groupe,  et mesures  destinées à favoriser  l’instauration  de 
conditions propices  à la  promotion  de cette identité; et, le  cas échéant, des mesures 
dans le  domaine  de l’éducation  et de la  formation  en vue  de garantir  la  participation 
des minorités  ethniques. 

Il existe dans le domaine  de l’emploi,  outre la loi antidiscrimination,  une loi sur les relations 
de  travail5 1  qui  interdit  toute  discrimination  conformément  aux  normes  fixées  par  les 
directives. Les deux  lois  s’appliquent  tant au  secteur public  qu’au  secteur privé. 

5. Mise en application  de la loi 

La  Constitution  confère aux  citoyens le  droit  d’intenter  une  action devant  une  juridiction 
ordinaire  dans  le  cadre  d’une  procédure  rapide  pour  faire  valoir  leurs  libertés  et  droits 
fondamentaux.  Dans  la  pratique  toutefois, bien  que  la  procédure  ait  déjà  été invoquée  à 
plusieurs  reprises,  la  Cour  constitutionnelle  s’est  montrée  très  réticente  à  se  saisir 
d’affaires  de  discrimination,  autrement  dit  d’affaires  touchant aux  droits  et  libertés  des 
citoyens en général. 

Les  lois  en  vigueur  manquent  de  clarté pour  ce qui  est du  traitement  des  plaintes  pour 
discrimination.  Elles  prévoient  des  procédures  différentes  dans  des  cas similaires  –  ces 
procédures  pouvant aller  de la simple  inspection, procédure contraventionnelle,  procédure 
contentieuse ou procédure administrative  à une procédure  pénale. La loi  antidiscriminat ion 
envisage plusieurs  possibilités  de protection juridique,  à savoir la procédure administrative, 
la procédure  contentieuse et la  procédure  contraventionnelle.   

Une  procédure  administrative  engagée  auprès  de la  Commission  pour  la protection contre 
la  discrimination  est  gratuite.  Cette  instance  peut 
formuler  des  avis  et  des 
recommandations.  La procédure a une durée maximale  de 90  jours.  Si la recommandat ion 
n’est pas suivie  d’effet, la  Commission  en question  peut  engager  une procédure  auprès  de 
l’instance  compétente (la  loi  ne  fournissant  aucune autre  précision).  La  Commission  pour 

51   Loi sur les relations de travail (Закон за работните односи), Journal officiel de la République de Macédoine 
n° 62/2005, 106/2008, 161/2008, 114/2009, 130/2009, 149/2009, 50/2010, 52/2010, 124/2010, 47/2011, 
11/2012, 39/2012, 13/2013, 25/2013, 170/2013, 187/2013, 113/2014; arrêts de la Cour constitutionnelle : 
U. n° 139/2005, U. n° 161/2005, U. n° 134/2005, U. n° 187/2005, U. n° 111/2006, U. n° 188/2006, 
U. n°  170/2006, U. n° 200/2008, U. n° 20/2009, U. n° 176/2009, U. n° 263/2009, U. n° 62/2013. 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
la  protection contre la  discrimination  a été saisie  de  70  dossiers  en  2015,  soit un  tiers  de 
moins  qu’en  2014.  Elle  estime  dans  son  rapport  annuel  que  cette forte  diminution  du 
nombre  de cas signalés  est liée à ses faibles  capacités techniques – lesquelles  n’expliquent  
cependant pas pourquoi  moins  de personnes  ont adressé  une  plainte  à la  Commission  en 
2015 qu’en  2014. Une explication davantage plausible  de la diminution  en question pourrait  
être  une  perte  de  confiance  dans  l’institution  à  la  suite  de  l’affaire  des  écoutes 
téléphoniques,  pour  les raisons  exposées  à la  section 1. 

En  vertu  des  dispositions  de  la  loi  antidiscrimination,  une  procédure  contentieuse  peut 
aussi  être intentée devant des juridictions  ordinaires.  La loi  n’établit pas l’ordre  de priorit é 
de  procédures  simultanées  éventuelles,  mais  elle  dispose  qu’aucune  procé dure  ne  peut 
être  engagée  auprès  de  la  Commission  pour  la  protection  contre  la  discriminat ion 
lorsqu’une  action  en  justice  est  déjà  en  cours.  Elle  ne  précise  pas  en  revanche  ce qu’il 
convient  de  faire  lorsqu’une  procédure  a  été  engagée  auprès  de  ladite  Commission  et 
qu’une  autre procédure  est engagée  par  la suite (mais  avant la  fin de la procédure  devant 
la  Commission)  devant  un  tribunal.  De  même,  aucune  loi  ne  régit  les  relations  entre  les 
procédures  respectivement  engagées  auprès  du  Médiateur  et  auprès  de  la  Commissi on 
pour  la  protection  contre  la  discrimination:  ces  relations  sont  régies  par  un  protocole 
d’accord entre les deux  institutions. 

En vertu de la loi  antidiscrimination,  l’issue  de la  procédure  dépend de la  filière  choisie.  La 
procédure  administrative  prévoit  une  recommandation  invitant  à  mettre  fin  à  l’infraction 
(autrement  dit  à  la  discrimination)  dans  un  délai  de  30 jours;  la  procédure  contentieuse 
peut  donner  lieu  à  l’octroi  d’une  indemnité  régulière;  et la  procédure  contraventionnelle 
prévoit  des  amendes  allant  de  70  à  1 000  euros  (en  monnaie  nationale).  Le  code  pénal 
prévoit  des sanctions financières  et autres en  cas de discrimination,  mais  ces dispositions 
n’ont  encore jamais  été appliquées. 

Une  autre  procédure  visant  à  protéger  les  droits,  y  compris  les  droits  à  l’égalité  et  la 
protection contre la  discrimination,  peut être engagée  auprès  du  Médiateur,  mais  elle  est 
limitée  à la sphère  publique.  Le Médiateur  est chargé de défendre  les  principes  de la  non-
discrimination  et  de  la  représentation  équitable.  En  2015,  le  pourcentage  de  plaintes 
adressées  au  Médiateur  pour  cause de  discrimination  est resté  faible  puisqu’il  s’agit  de 
53  cas,  soit  1,2 %  du  nombre  total  d’affaires  dont  il  a  été  saisi.  Comme  les  années 
précédentes,  la  majorité  des  dossiers  introduits  en  2015  concernaient  le  domaine  de 
l’emploi  et le motif  de l’origine  ethnique. Le fait que le nombre  de cas signalés au Médiateur 
n’ait  pas  connu  un  recul  aussi  flagrant  qu’en  ce  qui  concerne  la  Commission  pour  la 
protection contre la discrimination  confirme  l’hypothèse  d’une  perte de confiance à l’égard 
de cette dernière  par  suite de l’affaire  des écoutes téléphoniques  (voir  la section 1). 

Ni  la loi antidiscrimination  ni les lois antérieures  ne font du test de situation et des preuves 
statistiques des éléments  probants recevables et des instruments  utilisables  dans le cadre 
d’affaires  de discrimination.  La  pratique  n’y  recourt  pas. Les  preuves  statistiques ne  sont 
pas mentionnées  dans la législation  nationale.  En  réalité, les  statistiques sont uniquement  
évoquées  dans  le  cadre des  obligations  de  l’organisme  pour  l’égalité  (à savoir  la  collecte 
de statistiques). 

La  loi  antidiscrimination  prévoit ,  tout comme  plusieurs  autres lois,  le  renversement  de la 
charge  de  la  preuve.  Sa  définition  ne respecte cependant pas  les  directives, étant  donné 
que  la loi  fait reposer  sur  la  victime  potent ielle  d’une  discrimination  l’obligation  de fournir 
des éléments  factuels et des preuves  à l’appui  de sa plainte.  Cette exigence  fait peser  sur 
la  victime  potentielle  une  part  déraisonnablement  disproportionnée  de  la  charge  de  la 
preuve.  Le renversement  de cette charge ne s’applique  pas aux  délits  pénaux  relevant du 
non-respect  de  l’égalité  de  traitement.  La  Commission  pour  la  protection  contre  la 
discrimination  a appliqué  jusqu’ici  le renversement  de la charge de la preuve conformément  
à la législation  nationale. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Des  ONG  soutiennent  les  plaintes  déposées  par  les  victimes  et portent  certaines affaires 
de  discrimination  à  l’attention  du  grand  public.  Tant  les  médias  que  le  public   n’ont  
cependant  pas  pour  autant  une  approche  constructive  de  ces  affaires,  notamment  en 
termes  de couverture, mais  tendent davantage à rechercher  un certain  sensationnalisme. 

6. Organismes  de promotion  de l’égalité  de traitement 

La  loi  antidiscrimination  a  créé  le  premier  organisme  de  promotion  de  l’égalité  de 
traitement  du  pays,  en  l’occurrence  la  Commission  pour 
la  protection  contre  la 
discrimination.  Ses  membres  ont  été  élus  en  décembre  2010  et  elle  a  commencé  de 
fonctionner  en 2011.  La  Commission  traite de dossiers  de discrimination  au sens  de la  loi 
antidiscrimination,  c’est-à-dire toute discrimination  fondée  sur  les  motifs  suivants:  sexe, 
race,  couleur  de  peau,  genre,  appartenance  à  un  groupe  marginalisé,  origine  ethnique, 
langue,  citoyenneté,  origine  sociale,  religion  ou  conviction  religieuse,  autres  types  de 
convictions,  éducation,  affiliation  politique,  situation  personnelle  ou  sociale,  handicap 
mental  ou physique,  âge, situation familiale  ou état matrimonial,  fortune, état de santé ou 
tout autre motif  stipulé  dans la  législation  ou dans  un traité international  ratifié . 

La  Commission  pour  la  protection  contre la  discrimination  a  été saisie  de  70 dossiers  en 
2015  (un chiffre qui  représente un  recul  d’un  tiers par  rapport  à 2014  (année  au cours de 
laquelle  elle avait traité 106  dossiers)  et la première  diminution  depuis  la mise  en place de 
l’institution).  Les  dossiers  introduits  en  2015  portaient  sur  les  motifs  de  discriminat ion 
suivants: l’origine  ethnique (9), la situation personnelle  ou sociale (8), un handicap  mental 
ou physique  (8), l’âge  (8), l’état de santé (8), l’affiliation  politique  (5), la situation familiale 
ou l’état matrimonial  (4), l’origine  sociale (4), la langue  (3), l’éducation (3), le sexe (2), la 
race (2), la  citoyenneté (2), la  religion  ou la  conviction religieuse  (2), d’autres  convictions 
(2),  la  fortune  (2),  la  couleur  de  la  peau  (1),  le  genre  (1)  et l’appartenance  à  un  groupe 
marginalisé  (1);  aucun  motif  n’était  invoqué  dans  17 cas  et  14  invoquaient  une 
discrimination  en se référant à «tout autre motif».  La discrimination  présumée  concernait, 
dans les plaintes  déposées, les domaines  suivants: l’emploi  et les relations  de travail  ( 30), 
l’accès  aux  biens  et  aux  services  (4),  la  sécurité  sociale  (14),  le  système  judiciaire  et 
l’administration  (4),  l’information  publique  et les  médias  (3),  l’éducation,  les  sciences et 
les  sports  (3)  et le  logement  (4);  aucun  domaine  n’était  invoqué  par  le  plaignant  dans  
les  années 
13  cas  et  3  concernaient  d’autres  domaines  prévus  par  la  loi.  Comme 
précédentes,  la  Commission  n’a  communiqué  aucune  statistique  quant  au  nombre  de 
dossiers  traités et/ou clôturés en 2015.5 2  

La Commission  pour  la  protection contre la discrimination  a pour  mandat  de  formuler  des 
conseils  et  des  recommandations  concernant  des  cas  de  discrimination;  de  fournir  des 
informations  et d’engager  des procédures  auprès  des organismes  officiels compétents; de 
réaliser  des  rapports  et  de  prester  des  services  éducatifs  et  de  formation;  d’initier  des 
changements  législatifs;  de coopérer avec les administrations  locales, les ONG  et d’autres 
organismes  de  promotion  de  l’égalité  et  organisations  internationales  pertinentes;  de 
collecter des  données  statistiques, de  créer  des  bases  de  données  et  de  procéder  à  des 
recherches. 

Aucun organisme  national  de promotion  de l’égalité  n’était en place  avant l’adoption  de la 
loi  antidiscrimination.  Certaines  compétences en  matière  de discrimination  relèvent  de la 
mission  du bureau  du Médiateur.  Les relations  entre le Médiateur et la Commission  pour  la 
protection  contre  la  discrimination  ne  sont  pas  régies  par  la  loi  antidiscrimination  (elles 
sont partiellement  régies  par  un  protocole d’accord). En  vertu de  son  mandat  général,  le 
Médiateur  peut  être  saisi  de  plaintes 
formuler  des 
recommandations  et des avis, engager  des procédures,  et assurer  un suivi  et effectuer des 
recherches sur des questions spécifiques, en se focalisant sur la protection par rapport  aux 

individuelles, 

instruire, 

les 

52   C ommission pour la protection contre la discrimination (Комисија за заштита од д искриминација), Rapport 

annuel 2015 (2016) http://www.akademik.mk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/diskriminacija.pdf. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
motifs  cités  dans  la  Constitution  et  sur  les  infractions  commises  par  des  instances 
publiques. 

7. Points  essentiels 

Les aspects les plus  préoccupants dans  le contexte national  sont : 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

la 

interne 

insuffisante  de 

législation  nationale  avec  la 

la  non-inclusion  de  l’orientation  sexuelle  en  tant  que  motif  expressément  protégé 
dans la  loi  générale  antidiscrimination; 
l’harmonisation 
antidiscrimination  et les normes  internationales; 
le  peu  de  ressources  allouées  aux  deux  institutions  nationales  en  matière  de  droits 
de  l’homme  dont  le  mandat  couvre  l’égalité  et  la  non-discrimination,  ce  qui  les 
empêche  d’exercer  pleinement  leurs  compétences; 
l’impunité  des  crimes  de  haine  et  des  discours  haineux,  à  l’égard  de  l’orientation 
sexuelle  plus  particulièrement; 
de  sérieuses  problématiques  en  termes  d’État  de  droit,  y  compris  le  manque 
d’indépendance  de  l’appareil  judiciaire  et la  politisation  des institutions  de l’État,  qui 
entraînent  une perte de confiance des citoyens dans les institutions; 
le manque  d’indépendance  de l’organisme  pour l’égalité  qui, dans son positionnement  
et  son  fonctionnement  actuels,  ne  peut  être  considéré  comme  conforme  aux 
directives. 

loi 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG   

1. Einleitung 

Mazedonien  (ehemalige  jugoslawische  Republik) 5 3  ist  ein  multiethnisches  Binnenland  im 
Südosten  Europas  und  erklärte  sich  1991,  nach  der  Auflösung  Jugoslawiens, 
für 
unabhängig.  Seit  2005  ist das Land  Bewerber  um  eine  Mitgliedschaft in  der  Europäischen 
Union  und  im  Jahr  2008  erhielt  es  eine  bedingte  Einladung  zur  Mitgliedschaft  im 
Atlantischen  Bündnis.  Obwohl  diese  Prozesse  für  das  Land  zu  den  außenpolitischen 
Prioritäten  zählen,  ruhen  derzeit  beide.  Bis  2014  wurde  der  Namensstreit  auch  als 
Hauptgrund  dafür  genannt,  dass keine  Verhandlungen  über  eine  Mitgliedschaft  in  der  EU 
aufgenommen  wurden.  Sowohl  2014  als  2015  kamen  in  den  Fortschrittsberichten  der 
Europäischen  Kommission5 4  jedoch erhebliche  Bedenken  in Bezug  auf grundlegende  Fragen 
der  Rechtsstaatlichkeit (Parteilichkeit  von  Institutionen  und  Gesellschaft,  Unabhängigke it  
der  Justiz,  Freiheit  der  Medien  usw.)  zum  Ausdruck.  Zu  den  innenpolitischen  Prioritäten 
gehören  nach  wie  vor  die  Umsetzung5 5  des  Rahmenabkommens  von  Ohrid,5 6  die 
Verringerung  der  Arbeitslosenquote5 7   und  die Bekämpfung  der  Armut.5 8  

Ende  2014  und  Anfang  2015  gab  es massive  Proteste von  Studenten  und  Gymnasiast en, 
Freiberuflern,  unabhängigen  Gewerkschaften,  Arbeitern  und  Arbeiterinnen,  die  während 
der  Transitions-  und  Transformationsprozesse  entlassen worden  waren.  Im  Februar  2015 
offenbarte  die  Abhöraffaire  eine  noch  ernstere  innenpolitische  Situation.  Die  größte 
Oppositionspartei  begann,  Mitschnitte von  Gesprächen  von mehr  als  20  000  Menschen  zu 
veröffentlichen,  die  vom  staatlichen  Geheimdienst  offenbar  illegal  abgehört  worden 
waren.5 9   Der  Inhalt  der  veröffentlichten Mitschnitte zerstreute  die  Zweifel  an  den  bereits 
erhobenen  Vorwürfen  einer  „Staatsvereinnahmung“6 0 ,  einer  extremen  Machtkonzentration 
innerhalb  der Regierungspartei  und  einer  vollständigen  Parteikontrolle   – nicht nur über  die 
Justiz,  sondern  über  alle  Aspekte  der  Gesellschaft.  Die  Ombudsperson 
leitete  im 
Zusammenhang  mit  der  Abhöraffaire  zwei  Verfahren  ein,  da  massive  Verletzungen  des 
Rechts auf Privat- und  Familienleben  festgestellt wurden.  Die  Ombudsperson  äußerte sich 
empört  über die mangelnde  Reaktion  des Geheimdienstes  auf ihre Ersuchen um  zusätzliche 
Informationen,  die  sie  im  Rahmen  ihrer  Ermittlungen  zu den  beiden  Verfahren  sammelt e. 
Die  Ombudsperson  hat  dieses  Problem  dem  Parlament  gemeldet,  von  diesem  jedoch 
keinerlei  Unterstützung oder  Rückmeldung  erhalten. 6 1 

53   Der amtliche Name des Landes lautet „Republik Mazedonien“. Bis zur Beilegung des Namensstreits mit 

Griechenland wurde das Land im Rahmen der UN-Resolution A/RES/47/225 jedoch unter der provisorischen 
Bezeichnung „ehemalige jugoslawische Republik Mazedonien“ als Mitglied der Vereinten Nationen 
zugelassen. Diese Bezeichnung wird von der Europäischen Kommission und deshalb auch in diesem Bericht 
verwendet. 

54   Europäische Kommission (2015), The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia – Progress Report 

http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2015/20151110_report_the_former_yugoslav_republi
c_of_macedonia.pdf. Letzter Zugriff auf alle Hyperlinks: 27.05.2016. 

55   Obwohl nicht das Rahmenabkommen von Ohrid selbst umgesetzt wird, sondern verfassungsrechtliche und 
gesetzliche Bestimmungen und strategische Dokumente, die sich aus der Unterzeichnung des Abkommens 
ergeben, wird hier der Ausdruck „Umsetzung des Rahmenabkommens“ verwendet, um langwierige 
Umschreibungen zu vermeiden. 

56   Das Rahmenabkommen von Ohrid wurde Ende 2001 zur Beendigung des bewaffneten Konflikts 

unterzeichnet und hat das Ziel, die Lage ethnischer Minderheiten zu verbessern und den multiethnischen 
C harakter des Landes im öffentlichen Leben widerzuspiegeln, insbesondere durch Maßnahmen zur 
Förderung der Gleichbehandlung und gleichberechtigten Repräsentation von Minderheiten.  

57   Nach Angaben des Staatlichen Amts für Statistik belief sich die Arbeitslosenquote im letzten Quartal 2015 

auf 24,6 % der Erwerbsbevölkerung, wohingegen 42,7 % erwerbstätig sind. 
58   Der Laeken-Indikator für Armut für 2014 (letzte verfügbare Statistik) ist 22,1 %. 
59   Balkan Insight (2015), "Macedonia PM Accused of Large-Scale Wire-Tapping" (Telefonüberwachung im 

großen Maßstab: Anschuldigungen gegen mazedonischen Ministerpräsidenten) (09.02.2015), Webseite von 
Balkan Insight, http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/eavesdropping-bombshell-explodes-in-macedonia. 
60   Der Begriff „Staatsvereinnahmung“ (state capture) wird hier so verwendet, wie Transparency International 

ihn versteht: „eine Situation, in der mächtige Individuen, Institutionen, Unternehmen oder Gruppen 
innerhalb und außerhalb eines Landes Korruption einsetzen, um Politik, rechtliches Umfeld und Wirtschaft 
des Landes so zu gestalten, dass ihren eigenen Interessen begünstigt werden“. 

61   Jahresbericht der Ombudsperson für 2015, Ombudsperson der Republik Mazedonien (2016). 

22 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Hervorzuheben  ist,  dass  das,  was  die  Stimme  des  Leiters  der  Gleichstellungsbehörde 
Dushko  Minovski  zu  sein  scheint, in  den  veröffentlichten Gesprächen  ebenfalls  auftaucht; 
er  ist  zu  hören  als  jemand,  der  sich  im  Wahlkampf  vor  Ort  für  die  Regierungspart ei 
engagiert und sogar seine Position im  Ministerium  für Arbeit und Sozialpolitik  benutzt (bzw. 
missbraucht),  um  Menschen, denen  soziale  Unterstützung  gewährt wurde,  zu instruieren, 
wie  sie  wählen  sollen.  Darüber  hinaus  ist eine  Stimme  –  offensichtlich  die  der  damaligen 
Innenministerin  Gordana  Jankulovska6 2  –  in  einem  Gespräch  zu  hören,  aus  dem  deutlich 
der Druck  hervorgeht,  der auf die Roma-Gemeinde  ausgeübt wurde, damit  sie am  Wahltag 
entsprechend  den  Anweisungen  wählen  ging. 6 3   Nach  Veröffentlichung  dieser  Mitschnitte 
protestierten  Roma-Organisationen  gegen  die  Regierung  und  forderten  den  Rücktritt  von 
Jankulovska.6 4  Diese  veröffentlichte daraufhin  ein  Schreiben,  das eine  Entschuldigung  an 
die  Roma-Gemeinschaft  sein  sollte,  in  Wirklichkeit  aber  eine  bloße  Wiederholung  aller 
Maßnahmen  war,  die das Land  ergriffen  hatte, um  die  Lage der  Roma  zu verbe ssern.6 5 

Das  Land  hat  eine  Bevölkerung  von  etwas  mehr  als  zwei  Millionen. 6 6  Die  ethnische 
Zugehörigkeit 
ist  wichtig,  weil  zahlreiche  Rechte  und  Fördermaßnahmen  an  den 
zahlenmäßigen  Anteil  einer  ethnischen  Gemeinschaft  innerhalb  der  Gesamtbevölkeru ng 
geknüpft  sind.  Die  ethnische  Zusammensetzung6 7  
ist  wie  folgt:  64  %  ethnische 
Mazedonier,  25  %  ethnische  Albaner,  4  %  ethnische Türken,  3  %  ethnische  Roma,  2  % 
ethnische Serben,  1 %  ethnische Bosnier,  0,5 %  ethnische Walachen  und  1  %  „sonstige“ 
(in  der Verfassung  verwendeter Begriff). 

Zusammenhangslose  gesetzliche  und  institutionelle  Reformen  haben  einen  Rahmen 
geschaffen,  der  die  Rechtssicherheit  in  Frage  stellt.  Ständige  Gesetzesänderungen, 
Missachtung  des  Grundsatzes  der  politischen  Partizipation  und  Unterfinanzierung  der 
und 
beiden 
Antidiskriminierung  zuständig  sind)  sind  nur  einige  der dringendsten  Probleme.  Sie  haben 
Auswirkungen  auf  das  rechtliche  und  institutionelle  System  des  Landes  sowie  auf  die 
Verwirklichung  des  Grundsatzes  der  Gleichheit  und  Nichtdiskriminierung  und  die 
Maßnahmen  zu  dessen Einhaltung. 

nationalen  Menschenrechtsstellen 

Gleichbehandlung 

(die 

für 

Obwohl  die  Regierung  ihre  Maßnahmen  zum  Schutz  der  Rechte  von  Minderheiten 6 8  als 
Beweis  für  die  kulturelle  Offenheit  des  Landes  anführt,  kann  davon  keine  Rede  sein. 
Hassreden  sind  omnipräsent  und  werden  allgemein  akzeptiert.  Homophobe  Äußerungen 
und  Hassreden  gegen  Homosexuelle  sind  nach wie vor  sehr häufig.  Zudem  wurde  ein  von 
einer  örtlichen  zivilgesellschaftlichen  Organisation  (ZGO)  gegründetes  Zentrum  für  LGBT-
Personen  bereits mehrmals  angegriffen.  Diese  Angriffe  wurden  noch immer  nicht gründlic h 
untersucht und  es hat so gut wie keine  Anklagen  gegeben,  weshalb die  von verschiedenen 
ZGO  2014  initiierten  Proteste auch 2015  anhielten. 

Im  Rahmen  der  Bemühungen,  die  Schwierigkeiten  bei  der  Verwirklichung  der 
grundlegenden  Menschenrechte  der  Roma  zu  überwinden,  wurden  zahlreiche  staatliche 
und  geberunterstützte Maßnahmen,  darunter  auch von der  EU unterstützte, durchgeführt . 

62   Gordana Jankulovska trat am 12. Mai 2015 zurück. 
63   Online-Medienportal A1On , „SDSM: Jankulovska sagt, ‘An den Ohren werden wir die Zigeuner, einen nach 

dem anderen, hinschleppen’“ (СДСМ: Јанкулоска вели – За уши, циган по циган ќе вадиме) 
http://a1on.mk/wordpress/archives/465799. Dabei ist zu beachten, dass „Циган“ (Zigeuner) im nationalen 
Kontext eine abfällige Bezeichnung für Roma ist. 

64   Nationaler Fernsehsender 24 Vesti, „Roma fordern Rücktritt von Ministerin Jankulovska“ (Ромите бараат 
оставка од министерката Јанкуловска), http://24vesti.mk/romite-baraat-ostavka-od-minsiterkata-
jankulovska. 

65   Der Brief ist online nicht mehr abrufbar. 
66   Obwohl keine offiziellen Zahlen vorliegen, gehen Schätzungen davon aus, dass in den letzten Jahren 
zwischen 250 000 und 500 000 Menschen das Land verlassen haben, um im Ausland zu arbeiten. 
67   Alle Zahlen sind gerundete Prozentangaben aus der Volkszählung von 2002. Für 2011 war eine neue 
Volkszählung geplant; aufgrund von Unklarheiten bei der methodischen Umsetzung wurde sie jedoch 
abgesagt. Alle Statistiken des Staatlichen Amts für Statistik sind zu finden unter: www.stat.gov.mk/. 

68   2011 und 2012 kam es zu Gewaltausbrüchen zwischen verschiedenen Ethnien. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Eine  Untersuchung  von  2013  zur  Umsetzung  der  „Roma-Dekade“6 9   zieht,  was  die 
Erreichung  der gesteckten Ziele betrifft, (damals)  nur zwei Jahre vor dem  Ende der Dekade 
jedoch  eine  verheerende  Bilanz.  Der  einzige  Bereich,  in  dem  von  Einbeziehung  der  Roma 
gesprochen  werden  kann,  ist wohl der  der  politischen  Partizipation.7 0  

Was die Zusammenarbeit  zwischen Regierung  und ZGOs betrifft, so können  – theoretisch – 
alle  NROs,  wie  schon in  früheren  Jahren,  an  öffentliche  Anhörungen  teilnehmen,  mit  der 
Regierung  zusammenarbeiten  und  von  dieser  sogar  finanzielle  Unterstützung  erhalten.  In 
der  Praxis  sind  es  jedoch  die  NROs,  die  der  Politik  der  Regierung  am  wenigsten  kritisc h 
gegenüberstehen,  die  an  den  politischen  Entscheidungsprozessen  in  erheblichem  Maße 
beteiligt  sind.  Dies  entspricht  dem  generellen  Ansatz  der  Regierung  –  alle  kritischen 
Stimmen  im  Land  zum  Schweigen  zu  bringen. 7 1  Nach  wie  vor  sind  von  der  Regierung 
organisierte  NROs  aktiv,  um  staatliche  Maßnahmen 
im  Bedarfsfall  öffentlich  zu 
unterstützen. Unter anderem  „initiieren“  diese von der  Regierung  organisierten  NROs  auch 
Gegenproteste  gegen  die Demonstrationen  echter NROs. 

2. Wichtigste  Gesetze 

Die  Verfassung  der  Republik  Mazedonien7 2  ist eine  geschriebene  Verfassung  und  oberstes 
Gesetz  des Landes.  Sie  akzeptiert  das internationale  Recht als  Bestandteil  des nationalen  
Rechts und  räumt  ihm  Vorrang  vor  den  Gesetzen  und  Verordnungen  ein.   Die  Verfassung 
schützt vor Diskriminierung.  Mit der Bestimmung,  dass die Bürger  der Republik  Mazedonien 
die gleichen Freiheiten  und Rechte besitzen, ungeachtet von Geschlecht, Rasse,  Hautfarbe, 
nationaler  oder  sozialer  Herkunft,  politischer  und  religiöser  Überzeugung,  Eigentum  und 
sozialem  Status, betont sie die Gleichheit  der Bürger  vor der Verfassung und den Gesetzen. 
Jeder, der sich in seinen Menschenrechten und  Grundfreiheiten  verletzt fühlt, hat durch die 
Verfassung  die  Möglichkeit,  vor  dem  Verfassungsgericht  zu  klagen.  In  Übereinstimmu ng 
mit  einem  monistischen  Rechtsverständnis  hat internationales  Recht (die  unterzeichneten 
und 
im  nationalen 
Rechtssystem und bietet damit  auch Schutz vor Diskriminierung  bzw. Verstößen gegen den 
Gleichbehandlungsgrundsatz. 

internationalen  Abkommen) 

direkte  Anwendung 

ratifizierten 

Bis  2010  waren  die  Antidiskriminierungsvorschriften  über  mehrere  Gesetze  verteilt.  Im 
Rahmen  des Prozesses der Annäherung  an den Besitzstand der Union  wurde  im  April  2010 
das  Antidiskriminierungsgesetz7 3   (ADG)  –  das  erste  umfassende  Gleichstellungsgesetz  – 
beschlossen.  Das  Gesetz  erfüllt  in  folgenden  Punkten  nicht  die  Anordnungen  der 
Richtlinien:  mindestens  zu  schützende  Diskriminierungsgründe,  Definitionen  und  Formen 
von  Diskriminierung,  wirksame,  verhältnismäßige  und  abschreckende  Sanktionen, 
Verwendung  statistischer Daten  und  Dialog  mit  NROs.  Die  durch  das Gesetz  eingerichtete 
Gleichbehandlungsstelle  –  die  Kommission  zum  Sc hutz  vor  Diskriminierung  (KSchD)  – 
erfüllt  ebenfalls  nicht die Anforderungen  der Richtlinie  2000/43. 

Das  ADG  schützt  die 
folgenden  Diskriminierungsgründe:  Hautfarbe,  Geschlecht, 
Zugehörigkeit  zu  einer  marginalisierten  Gruppe,  ethnische  Zugehörigkeit,  Spra che, 
Staatsbürgerschaft, soziale  Herkunft,  Bildung,  politische  Zugehörigkeit,  persönlicher  und 

69   Die „Roma-Dekade“ war eine regionale Initiative der Regierung, mit der die Situation der Roma-Bevölkerung 
in den Bereichen Gesundheit, Wohnraum, Bildung und Beschäftigung verbessert werden sollte und die 2015 
endete. 

70   Es gibt einen Roma-Minister in der Regierung, eine Roma-Gemeinde (Shuto Orizari), Roma-Abgeordnete 

usw. 

71   Der Bericht des Sonderberichterstatters für Gedanken- und Meinungsfreiheit, die Jahresberichte von 

Freedom House, der Nachhaltigkeitsindex der Organisation der Zivilgesellschaft und Nations in Transit 
haben allesamt den generellen Verfall der Freiheit und Demokratie im Land bescheinigt. 

72   Der Text der Verfassung der Republik Mazedonien (Устав на Република Македонија) ist abrufbar (in 

englischer Sprache) unter: http://www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-macedonia.nspx. 

73   Gesetz zur Verhinderung von und zum Schutz vor Diskriminierung (Закон за спречување и заштита од 
д искриминација), Amtsblatt der Republik Mazedonien Nr. 50/10, 44/2014, 150/2015. Beschluss des 
Verfassungsgerichts: У.бр.82/2010 (15.09.2010). 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
sozialer  Status,  Familienstand,  Eigentum  und  Gesundheitszustand.  Da  es  Glaube  nur 
eingeschränkt  und sexuelle  Ausrichtung  überhaupt  nicht erwähnt, schützt das Ges etz nicht 
ausdrücklich  alle  in  den  Richtlinien  vorgegebenen  Diskriminierungsgründe.  Allerdings 
enthält es eine  offene Formulierung  („alle  sonstigen  durch ein  Gesetz oder  ein  ratifiziertes 
internationales  Abkommen  geschützten Gründe“,  Art. 3 ADG)  und enthält Gründe,  die  von 
den Richtlinien  nicht erfasst werden. 

Die  2013  unter Leitung  des Ministeriums  für  Arbeit und  Sozialpolitik  mit  Unterstützung  der 
OSZE-Mission  in  Skopje  durchgeführte  Ex-post-Evaluation  zeigte,  dass  die  Ziele  des 
Gesetzes7 4 nur  zum  Teil erreicht  wurden  – was, laut Evaluationsbericht,  angesichts der im 
Regierungshaushalt  für die Umsetzung  des Gesetzes veranschlagten Mittel nachvollziehbar 
war.  Obwohl  der  Bericht  zahlreiche  Punkte  aufzählt,  in  denen  die  Umsetzung  verbessert  
werden  könnte,  werden  in  ihm  nur  drei  Empfehlungen  für  entsprechende Änderungen  des 
Gesetzes  ausdrücklich  genannt:  Änderung  des  Gesetzes  zur  Schaffung  der 
Voraussetzungen 
für  eine  administrative  Unterstützung  der  KSchD,  ausdrückliche 
Verlagerung 
der  Beweislast  bei  Verfahren  vor  der  KSchD  und  verbesserte 
Rechenschaftspflicht der  KSchD. 

der  nationalen  Rechtsvorschriften  über  Gleichbehandlung 

2014  und  2015  unterstützte  die  OSZE-Mission  in  Skopje  eine  umfassende  Analyse  der 
Harmonisierung 
und 
Nichtdiskriminierung  nach  außen  (in  Bezug  auf internationale  Standards)  und  nach innen 
(in  Bezug  auf  die  innerstaatlichen  Gesetze und  Verordnungen).  Das  Ergebnis  der  Analyse 
nennt  verschiedene  Punkte  einer  Harmonisierung  mit  dem  EU-Recht  und  der  Praxis  des 
EuGH 
und 
Nichtdiskriminierungsnormen.7 5 

Gleichstellungs- 

internationalen 

anderen 

sowie 

mit 

3. Wichtigste  Grundsätze  und  Begriffe 

Das  ADG  enthält  Definitionen  von  unmittelbarer  und  mittelbarer  Diskriminieru ng, 
Belästigung,  Anweisung  zur  Diskriminierung  und  Viktimisierung.  Im  Vergleich  zu  den 
Richtlinien  ist  die  Definition  von  unmittelbarer  Diskriminierung  unnötig  kompliziert,  die 
Definition  der mittelbaren  Diskriminierung  entspricht dagegen  den  Richtlinien.  Das  Gesetz 
enthält einen  Artikel  über  Belästigung  und  sexuelle  Belästigung  und  einen  eigenen  Artikel 
über die Diskriminierung  von Menschen mit  Behinderung.  Mehrfachdiskriminierung  wird als  
besonders  schwere  Form  der  Diskriminierung  genannt,  ebenso  wiederholte  und 
andauernde  Diskriminierung.  Das Gesetz enthält auch Bestimmungen  über  die Aufhetzung 
und  Ermutigung  zur  Diskriminierung.  Diskriminierung  durch  Assoziierung  wird  nicht 
erwähnt. 

Das  Gesetz  enthält  eine  Reihe  von  Ausnahmeregeln.  Diese  beziehen  sich  auf  die  Art 
bestimmter  beruflicher  Tätigkeiten bzw.  auf besondere  Schutzmaßnahmen  für  bestimmt e 
Gruppen  (Senioren,  junge  Menschen, Schwangere, Menschen mit Behinderung  und Eltern). 
Angemessene  Vorkehrungen  werden  vorwiegend  im  Gesetz  über  die  Beschäftigung  von 
Menschen  mit  Behinderung  behandelt.  Allerdings 
ist  der  persönliche  und  sachliche 
Anwendungsbereich  der  Ausnahmeregelungen  nicht  besonders  genau  abgegrenzt.  Dies 
ermöglicht  Auslegungen,  die  den gesetzlichen Schutz vor  Diskriminierung  schwächen.  

Vor  der Verabschiedung  des ADG  waren die  Definitionen  von Diskriminierung  auf mehrere 
Gesetze  verteilt.  Da  das  ADG  keine  Vereinheitlichung  der  Bestimmungen  dieser 
unterschiedlichen  Gesetze  in  ihren  Übergangs-  und  Schlussvorschriften  vorsieht,  stehen 
die  Institutionen,  die  das  Gesetz  umsetzen  sollen,  vor  der  Frage,  welches  Gesetz  bzw. 
welche  Bestimmung  sie  in  einem  bestimmten  Fall  anwenden  sollen,  d.  h.  welche 

74   Da das Antidiskriminierungsgesetz selbst keine Bestimmung zu seinen Zielen enthält, kam das mit der 

Ex-post-Evaluation betraute Team durch Auswertung anderer Dokumente zu dem Ergebnis, dass es sich bei 
diesen Zielen um die Verhütung von und den Schutz vor Diskriminierung handelte.  

75   Kotevska, Biljana, Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation 

(Veröffentlichung demnächst – 2016; OSZE und KSchD). 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Bestimmungen  Vorrang  haben. Lex specialis derogat legi generali  und lex posterior derogat 
legi  priori  sind  traditionelle  juristische  Grundsätze,  aber  Richter  verlassen  sich,  selbst bei 
scheinbar  widersprüchlichen  Bestimmungen, 
in  der  Regel  eher  auf  die  bestehende 
Rechtsprechung  als  auf  allgemeine  rechtliche  Grundsätze.  Allgemeine  Rechtsgrundsätze 
werden nur  dann angewendet, wenn eine Partei versucht, eine Gesetzeslücke  auszunutzen 
(gemäß  dem  Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz). 

Zwischen  2012  und  2015  wurde  die  „Nationale  Strategie  für  Gleichstellung  und 
Nichtdiskriminierung  aufgrund  von  ethnischer  Zugehörigkeit,  Geschlecht,  Alter  und 
Behinderung“  (erste  umfassende  politische  Strategie  für  Gleichstellung)  mithilfe  jährlic h 
verabschiedeter  operativer  Pläne  umgesetzt.  Im  Dezember  2015  führte  das  Ministeriu m 
für  Arbeit  und  Sozialpolitik  die  erste  öffentliche  Anhörung  zur  neuen  Strategie,  der 
„Strategie für  Gleichstellung  und  Nichtdiskriminierung  2016-2020“,  durch.7 6  

4. Sachlicher  Anwendungsbereic h 

Das  ADG  gilt  für  den  privaten  und  den  öffentlichen  Sektor  und  für  alle  Bereiche.  Gemäß 
dem  Gesetz  ist  das  Diskriminierungsverbot  insbesondere  zu  beachten  in  den  Bereichen 
Beschäftigung  und  Arbeitsverhältnisse,  Mitgliedschaft  und  Mitwirkung  in  Gewerkschaften, 
politischen  Parteien,  NROs,  Stiftungen  und  anderen  Mitgliederorganisationen,  soziale 
Sicherheit,  einschließlich  von  Sozialschutz,  Renten-  und  Berufsunfähigkeitsversicheru ng, 
Krankenversicherung  und  Gesundheitsversorgung,  Bildung,  Zugang  zu  Gütern  und 
Dienstleistungen  und  Wohnraum.  Damit  geht das Gesetz über  die  Richtlinien  hinaus.  Auch 
andere  Gesetze  enthalten  ein  Verbot  von  Diskriminierung  und  erweitern  damit  den 
sachlichen  Anwendungsbereich.  All  diese  Gesetze  gelten  für  den  öffentlichen  und  den 
privaten  Sektor,  mit  Ausnahme  des  Gesetzes  über  die  Ombudsstelle,  die  nur  vor 
Diskriminierung  durch  die  öffentliche Hand  schützt. 

Kapitel  III des ADG  – Ausnahmen  vom  Grundsatz  der Nichtdiskriminierung  – sieht folgende 
drei  Ausnahmen  und  Befreiungen  vor: 

- 

- 

- 

die 

keine 

darstellen 

Diskriminierung 

Fördermaßnahmen  (Art. 13): Maßnahmen  natürlicher  oder  juristischer  Personen,  die 
keine  Diskriminierung  darstellen,  wenn ihre  Rechtmäßigkeit  früher,  jetzt oder künftig 
nachgewiesen  wurde.  Diese  Maßnahmen  dürfen  aufrecht erhalten  werden,  bis  eine 
völlige  sachliche  Gleichstellung  erreicht  und  sachliche  Ungleichheiten  beseitigt  oder 
gemindert  wurden. 
Ungleichbehandlungen, 
(Art. 14): 
Ungleichbehandlung  von  Personen,  die  keine  Staatsbürger  sind,  wesentliche 
berufliche  Anforderungen,  Ungleichbehandlung  von Personen  aufgrund  von Religion, 
Weltanschauung,  biologischem  Geschlecht  oder  anderen  Merkmalen  bei  der 
allgemeinen  und  beruflichen  Bildung  für  eine  Tätigkeit  in  Bezug  auf  die  jeweilige 
Religion,  Handlungen  von  Mitgliedern  und  Organen  von  Kirchen  und  religiösen 
Gemeinschaften,  Vereinen,  politischen  Parteien,  Gewerkschaften  und  anderen 
Organisationen  gemäß  einer  Doktrin,  Überzeugung  oder eines Glaubens  und/oder  der 
in  einer  Satzung,  einem  Programm  und/oder  Vorschrift 
festgelegten  Ziele,  
Ehevorschriften,  Ausübung  der  durch  die  Verfassung  garantierten  Redefreiheit , 
Versammlungsfreiheit,  Meinungs-  und  Informationsfreiheit,  und  Festlegung  eines 
Mindest-  und  Höchstalters  für  den  Eintritt  in  einen  Beruf,  die  Gewährung  von 
Vorrechten  oder  das  Ausscheiden  aus  dem  Beruf,  sofern  damit  ein  legitimes  Ziel 
verfolgt wird. 
Schutzmechanismen  für  spezielle  Gruppen  (Art. 15):  Schutz von  Schwangeren  und 
Müttern,  elternlosen  Kindern,  Jugendlichen,  Alleinerziehenden  und  Menschen  mit  
Behinderung;  Chancengleichheit  von Frauen und Männern;  Beschäftigungsförderung ; 

76   Zum Zeitpunkt der Abfassung dieses Berichts ist die Strategie noch nicht verabschiedet worden. 

Öffentlichen Informationen zufolge wurde außerdem keine Analyse der Umsetzung der vorherigen Strategie 
veröffentlicht. 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
allgemeine  und  berufliche  Bildung  für  Menschen  mit  Behinderung;  ein  erwartetes 
Mindest- und Höchstalter für den Zugang  zu bestimmten  Stufen der allgemeinen  und 
beruflichen  Bildung,  sofern  dieses  zur  Erreichung  eines  rechtmäßigen  Ziels  objektiv 
gerechtfertigt ist, und  das erforderliche  Alter das Ausmaß  dieser  Ungleichbehandlung 
im  Hinblick  auf  die  Natur  der  Fort -  oder  Ausbildung  oder  die  Umstände  ihrer 
Ausübung  und das Ausmaß  dieser  Ungleichbehandlung  nic ht den Rahmen  übersteigt, 
der  für  die  Erreichung  des rechtmäßigen  Ziels  notwendig  ist; Fördermaßnahmen  für 
bestimmte  Personen  oder  Gruppen,  die  wegen  eines  Diskriminierungsgru ndes 
benachteiligt  sind,  zum  Zweck  der  Verbesserung  der  Chancengleichheit,  solang e 
diese  Maßnahmen  notwendig  sind;  Maßnahmen  zum  Schutz der  Merkmale  und  der 
Identität von Personen,  die einer  ethnischen, religiösen  oder  sprachlichen  Minderheit  
angehören,  und deren Rechte zur Pflege und Entwicklung  der eigenen Identität, allein 
oder gemeinsam  mit  anderen Mitgliedern  der Gruppe,  und Maßnahmen  zur Schaffung 
günstiger  Bedingungen  für die Förderung  dieser Identität und Maßnahmen  im  Bereic h 
der  Aus-  und  Weiterbildung,  mit  denen  die  Teilhabe  ethnischer  Minderheit en 
gewährleistet  wird,  sofern diese  Maßnahmen  notwendig  sind. 

Im  Bereich  Beschäftigung  wird  ein  Diskriminierungsverbot  neben  dem  ADG  auch  vom 
Gesetz  über  Arbeitsverhältnisse7 7  gewährleistet,  das  Diskriminierung  gemäß  den  in  den 
Richtlinien  genannten Vorgaben verbietet. Diese Gesetze gelten sowohl für den öffentlichen 
als auch den privaten  Sektor. 

5. Rechtsdurchsetzung 

Gemäß  der Verfassung  haben Bürger  bei einer  Verletzung  ihrer  Grundrechte  und Freiheiten 
das Recht auf ein schnelles Verfahren  vor einem  ordentlichen  Gericht. In der Praxis  wurden 
zwar entsprechende Verfahren  eingeleitet, das Verfassungsgericht  hat jedoch auf Fälle von 
Diskriminierung,  d.  h.  bei  Verletzungen  der  Grundrechte  und  Freiheiten  der  Bürger  nur 
sehr  zögerlich  reagiert. 

ist.  Unterschiedliche  Gesetze  sehen 

Die  derzeit  geltenden  Gesetze  regeln  nicht  eindeutig,  wer  für  Diskriminierungskla gen 
für  ähnliche  Fälle  verschiedene 
zuständig 
Verfahrensweisen 
behördliche  Kontrollen, 
Ordnungsverfahren,  zivilrechtliche Klagen,  Verwaltungsverfahren  oder Strafverfahren.  Das 
ADG  sieht  mehrere  Schutzverfahren  vor,  nämlich  Verwaltungsverfahren,  Klagen  und 
Ordnungsverfahren.   

sind  unter  anderem 

vor.  Möglich 

Verwaltungsverfahren  vor der KSchD  sind  kostenlos. Die  Kommission  kann  Gutachten und 
Empfehlungen  erstellen.  Das  Verfahren  kann  bis  zu  90  Tage  dauern.  Wenn  die 
Empfehlungen  nicht befolgt  werden,  kann  die  KSchD  ein  Verfahren  bei  einer  zuständigen 
Stelle  anstrengen  (das  Gesetz  führt  dies  nicht  näher  aus).  2015  gingen  bei  der  KSchD 
70  Beschwerden  ein  –  ein  Drittel  weniger  als  im  Jahr  2014.  In  ihrem  Jahresbericht  stellt 
die  Kommission 
fest,  der  Rückgang  der  gemeldeten  Fälle  hänge  mit  ihren  geringen 
technischen Kapazitäten  zusammen  – was jedoch  nicht erklärt,  warum  sich 2015  weniger 
Menschen  bei  der  KSchD  beschwerten  als  2014.  Eine  überzeugendere  Erklärung  für  den 
Rückgang  der  Fallzahlen  könnte  sein,  dass  es  infolge  der  Abhöraffaire,  aus  den  in 
Abschnitt 1  erläuterten  Gründen,  zu  einem  Vertrauensverlust 
in  diese  Institution 
gekommen  ist. 

Außerdem  kann  vor  den  ordentlichen  Gerichten  auf Grundlage  des  ADG  Klage  eingereicht  
werden.  Wenn  beide  Verfahren  gleichzeitig  eingeleitet  werden,  legt  das  Gesetz  keine 

77   Gesetz über Arbeitsverhältnisse (З акон за работните односи), Amtsblatt der Republik Mazedonien 
Nr. 62/2005, 106/2008, 161/2008, 114/2009, 130/2009, 149/2009, 50/2010, 52/2010, 124/2010, 
47/2011, 11/2012, 39/2012, 13/2013, 25/2013, 170/2013, 187/2013, 113/2014; Urteile des 
Verfassungsgerichts: U. Nr. 139/2005, U. Nr. 161/2005, U. Nr. 134/2005, U. Nr. 187/2005, 
U. Nr. 111/2006, U. Nr. 188/2006, U. Nr. 170/2006, U. Nr. 200/2008, U. Nr. 20/2009, U. Nr. 176/2009, 
U. Nr. 263/2009, U. Nr. 62/2013. 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Rangfolge  fest.  Wenn  die  Klage  vor  Gericht  bereits  eingeleitet  ist,  kann  jedoch  kein 
Verfahren  bei  der  KSchD  mehr  eröffnet werden.  Für  den Fall,  dass zuerst  Beschwerde  bei 
der  KSchD  eingelegt  und  vor  der  Entscheidung  der  Kommission  auch vor  Gericht  geklagt  
wird,  enthält das Gesetz keine  Bestimmungen.  Auch die Rangfolge  zwischen Verfahren  vor 
der  Ombudsstelle  und  der  KSchD  sind  nicht  gesetzlich  geregelt,  sondern  durch  eine 
Absichtserklärung  zwischen den  beiden  Stellen. 

Nach  dem  ADG  hängt  das  mögliche  Ergebnis  davon  ab, für  welches Verfahren  das  Opfer 
sich entscheidet. Im  Verwaltungsverfahren  wird  innerhalb  von 30  Tagen eine  Empfehlung 
zur Berichtigung  des Verstoßes (d. h. der Diskriminierung)  ausgesprochen,  bei einer  Klage 
erhält  das  Opfer  gegebenenfalls  Schadensersatz  und  Ordnungsverfahren 
führen  zu 
Geldbußen  in  Höhe  von 70  bis 1000  Euro  (in  mazedonischen  Denar).  Das  Strafgesetzbuch 
sieht 
vor.  Diese 
Strafbestimmungen  wurden  bisher  noch nie  angewandt. 

für  Diskriminierung 

andere  Sanktionen 

Geldstrafen 

und 

und 

Zum  Schutz der  eigenen  Rechte, einschließlich  des  Rechts auf Gleichbehandlung,  können 
Diskriminierungsopfer  auch Beschwerde  bei  der  Ombudsstelle  einreichen.  Dies  ist  jedoch 
ist  für  den  Schutz  des 
auf  den  öffentlichen  Sektor  beschränkt.  Die  Ombudsstelle 
Gleichbehandlungsgrundsatzes 
gleichberechtigten 
der 
Repräsentation  zuständig.  Der  Anteil  der  Diskriminierungsbeschwerden  war  nach wie  vor 
gering:  2015  gingen  53  derartige  Beschwerden  bei  der  Ombudsstelle  ein,  das  ents prach 
1,2  %  aller  bei  der  Ombudsstelle  eingereichten  Beschwerden.  Wie  schon  in  den 
vergangenen  Jahren  bezogen  sich  die  meisten  Diskriminierungsbeschwerden  auf  den 
Bereich  der  Beschäftigung  und  das Merkmal  der  ethnischen  Herkunft.  Die  Tatsache, dass 
die  Zahl  der  bei  der  Ombudsperson  eingereichten  Beschwerden  weniger  stark 
zurückgegangen  ist  wie  die  Zahl  der  bei  der  KSchD  eingereichten,  stützt die  Vermut ung 
eines  Vertrauensverlusts  in die  KSchD  infolge  der  Abhöraffaire  (siehe  oben Abschnitt 1). 

des  Grundsatzes 

Weder  im  ADG  noch in  früheren  Gesetzen  werden  Situationstests und  statistische Daten 
als  zulässige  Beweise  und  Hilfsmittel  in  Diskriminierungsfällen  eingeführt.  Auch  in  der 
Praxis  wurden  diese  Beweisformen  noch  nie  genutzt.  Statistische  Daten  werden  im 
mazedonischen  Recht nicht erwähnt. Allerdings  gehört die Erhebung  statistischer Daten  zu 
den Pflichten der  Gleichbehandlungsstelle. 

Das  ADG,  wie  auch verschiedene  andere  Gesetze,  sieht  eine  Verlagerung  der  Beweislast  
vor.  Deren  Definition  entspricht jedoch nicht den  Vorgaben  der  Richtlinien,  da das  Gesetz 
von  dem  potenziellen  Diskriminierungsopfer  verlangt,  Fakten  und  Beweis  vorzulegen,  um 
seine  Behauptung  zu  untermauern.  Dadurch  liegt  ein  unverhältnismäßig  großer  Teil  der 
Beweislast  beim  potenziellen  Opfer.  Bei  Strafdelikten  im  Zusammenhang  mit  einem 
Verstoß  gegen  das  Gleichbehandlungsgebot  kommt  die  Verlagerung  der  Beweislast  nicht 
zur  Anwendung.  Bisher  hat die  KSchD  die  Verlagerung  der Beweislast  in Übereinstimmu ng 
mit  den nationalen  Rechtsvorschriften angewandt. 

NROs  unterstützen die Klage  von Opfern  und  machen  Fälle  von Diskriminierung  öffentlich. 
Die  Medien  und  die  Öffentlichkeit  behandeln  die  Berichterstattung  über  Diskriminie ru ng 
jedoch nicht konstruktiv,  sondern  setzen eher  auf reinen  Sensationsjournalismus.  

6. Gleichbehandlungsste lle n 

Durch  das  ADG  wurde  die  erste  Gleichbehandlungsstelle  des  Landes  eingeführt  –  die 
KSchD.  Ihre  Mitglieder  wurden  im  Dezember  2010  gewählt  und  im  Jahr  2011  nahm  die 
Kommission  ihre  Arbeit auf. Die  KSchD  behandelt Diskriminierungsfälle,  die unter das ADG 
fallen.  Sie  ist  für  folgende  Diskriminierungsgründe  zuständig:  biologisches  Geschlecht, 
Rasse,  Hautfarbe,  soziales  Geschlecht,  Zugehörigkeit  zu  einer  marginalisierten  Gruppe, 
ethnische  Zugehörigkeit,  Sprache,  Staatsbürgerschaft,  soziale  Herkunft,  Religion  oder 
religiöse  oder  sonstige  Weltanschauung,  Bildung,  politische  Zugehörigkeit,  persönlicher 
und sozialer  Status, geistige  oder körperliche  Behinderung,  Alter, Familienstand,  Eigent um 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
und  Gesundheitszustand  und  alle  sonstigen  durch  ein  Gesetz  oder  ein  ratifiziertes 
internationales  Abkommen  geschützten Gründe. 

oder 

religiöse 

2015  wurden  bei  der  KSchD  70  Beschwerden  eingereicht  (ein  starker  Rückgang  um  ein 
Drittel  im  Vergleich  zu 2014,  als es 106  Beschwerden  waren,  und  de r  erste Rückgang  der 
Fallzahlen  seit Bestehen  der  Kommission).  Die  2015  eingereichten  Beschwerden  bezogen 
sich auf folgende Diskriminierungsgründe:  ethnische Herkunft   (9), persönliche  oder soziale 
Stellung  (8), geistige oder körperliche  Behinderung  (8), Alter (8), Gesundheitszustand  (8), 
politische  Zugehörigkeit  (5), Familienstand  (4), soziale  Herkunft   (4), Sprache (3), Bildung 
(3),  biologisches  Geschlecht  (2),  rassische  Zugehörigkeit  (2),  Staatsangehörigkeit  (2), 
Religion 
Überzeugungen  (2), 
Vermögensverhältnisse  (2), Hautfarbe  (1), soziales Geschlecht (1), Zugehörigkeit  zu einer 
marginalisierten  Gruppe  (1);  in  17  Fällen  wurde  keinerlei  Grund  angegeben,  14  Fälle 
beriefen  sich auf „sonstige  Gründe“.  Die  mutmaßlichen  Fälle  von  Diskriminierung,  auf die 
sich  die  eingereichten  Beschwerden  bezogen,  betrafen  folgende  Bereiche:  Beschäftigung 
und  Arbeitsbedingungen  (30),  Zugang  zu  Gütern  und  Dienstleistungen  (4),  soziale 
Sicherheit  (14),  Justiz  und  Verwaltung  (4),  öffentliche  Inf ormationen  und  Medien  (3), 
Bildung,  Wissenschaft  und  Sport  (3),  Wohnungswesen  (4);  in  13  Fällen  gaben  die 
Beschwerdeführenden  keinerlei  Bereich,  in  3  Fällen  andere  Bereiche  als  die  im  Gesetz 
vorgesehen  an. Wie schon in  früheren  Jahren  legte die Kommission  keine  Zahlen dazu vor, 
wie viele  Fälle  2015  bearbeitet und/oder  abgeschlossen  wurden. 7 8 

Überzeugung 

andere 

(2), 

Berichten 

Die  KSchD  hat folgende  Aufgaben:  Beratung  und  Empfehlungen  in  Diskriminierungsfäl len, 
Information  und  Einleitung  von  Verfahren  bei  zuständigen  staatlichen Stellen,  Erstellung 
von 
von 
Gesetzesänderungen,  Zusammenarbeit  mit  örtlichen  Behörden,  NROs  und  andere 
Gleichbehandlungsstellen  und 
internationale  Organisationen,  Erhebung  statistischer 
Daten, Einrichtung  von Datenbanken  und  Durchführung  von Forschungsprojekten.  

Fortbildungsunterlagen, 

Empfehlung 

Aus- 

und 

und 

im  Bereich  Diskriminierung 

Vor  Verabschiedung  des  ADG  gab  es  keine  nationale  Gleichbehandlungsstelle.  Einige 
Aufgaben 
in  den  Zuständigkeitsbereich  der 
Ombudsstelle.  Die  Beziehung  zwischen der Ombudsperson  und  der KSchD  ist im  ADG  nicht 
geregelt  (zum  Teil  basiert  diese  Beziehung  auf  einer  gemeinsamen  Absichtserklärung). 
Dem  allgemeinen  Mandat  der  Ombudsstelle  zufolge  kann  diese  Einzelbeschwerden 
entgegennehmen  und  untersuchen,  Empfehlungen  aussprechen  und  Gutachten  erstellen, 
Verfahren  einleiten sowie spezielle Themen  beobachten und untersuchen, mit  Schwerpunkt  
auf  den  in  der  Verfassung  geschützten Diskriminierungsgründen  und  auf  Verstößen,  die 
von staatlichen Stellen  begangen  werden. 

fallen 

7. Wichtige  Punkte 

Zu den  wichtigsten Problemen  in  Mazedonien  gehören  folgende: 

- 

- 

- 

- 

innerstaatlichen 

Rechtsvorschriften 

die  sexuelle  Ausrichtung  wird  im  allgemeinen  Antidiskriminierungsgesetz  nicht 
ausdrücklich  als geschützter Diskriminierungsgrund  genannt ; 
die 
Antidiskriminierungsgesetz  noch auf internationale  Normen  abstimmt; 
beide 
und 
Nichtdiskriminierung  zuständig  sind,  verfügen  über  geringe  Mittel  und  können  ihre 
Aufgaben  daher  nicht in  vollem  Umfang  wahrnehmen; 
Hassverbrechen  und  Hassreden,  vor  allem 
Ausrichtung,  bleiben  straflos; 

nationale  Menschenrechtsstellen, 

im  Zusammenhang  mit  sexuelle r 

für  Gleichbehandlung 

wurde 

weder 

das 

auf 

die 

78   Kommission zum Schutz vor Diskriminierung (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација), Jahresbericht 

2015 (2016), http://www.akademik.mk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/diskriminacija.pdf. 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
- 

- 

gravierende  Rechtsstaatlichkeitsmängel  wie  fehlende  Unabhängigkeit  der  Justiz  und 
Parteilichkeit  der  staatlichen  Stellen  führen  zu  einem  Vertrauensverlust  in  die 
Institutionen; 
der  Gleichbehandlungsstelle  mangelt  es  an  Unabhängigkeit  und  sie  kann,  in  ihrer 
derzeitigen  Aufstellung  und  Arbeitsweise,  nicht als richtlinienkonform  gelten. 

30 

 
 
 
INTRODUC TION 

The  national  legal  system 

The Former  Yugoslav Republic  of Macedonia7 9  is a unitary,  semi-parliamentarian,  civil law 
country,  which  adopts  the  monism  principle  regarding 
the  relationship  between 
international  and municipal  law, the former  being considered part of the latter, and superior 
to domestic  laws  and  bylaws,8 0  and  where,  if it is  deemed  fit and  appropriate,  courts can 
use  the  final  judgments  of the  European  Court  for  Human  Rights  (ECtHR),  International 
Criminal  Court  (ICC),  or  any other  international  court with  jurisdiction  over  the country.8 1 
Although  in theory  directly applicable,  references to international  law in  the jurisprudenc e 
of the domestic  courts are  still  very rare  and, in  practice, the courts do  not seem  to treat 
it as higher  in  the national  legal  hierarchy  than the national  laws.  

The Constitution  prescribes  the principle  of the separation  of powers.  The three branches 
of power  are:  legislative,  executive and judicial. 

Legislative  power is vested in the Assembly  of the Republic   (the Parliament).  The members 
are  elected  on  what  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  set  out  as  general,  direct  and  free 
elections,  and  by  secret ballot.8 2   The  Parliament  has  the  power  to  adopt and  amend  the 
Constitution,  ratify  international  treaties  as  well  as  to adopt  and  amend  laws.  There  are 
special  procedures  in  place  that  aim  to  ensure  that  no  law  touching  upon  issues  of 
relevance for  the non-majority  ethnic communities  in  the country will  be  adopted without 
them.  This voting mechanism  is called the Badinter  principle  and it requires  that a law gain 
two-thirds of the votes of the members  with an affiliation  to one of the non-majority  ethnic 
communities.  The Parliament  has a  Standing  Inquiry  Committee  on  Human  Rights,  which 
is tasked to follow  and alert the Parliament  on developments  related  to human  rights. The 
Parliament  also  elects  and  appoints  the  members  of  the  two  national  human  rights 
institutions  –  the  Commission 
for  Protection  against  Discrimination  (CPAD)  and  the 
Ombudsperson. 

The executive branch is represented  by the President (who holds  a rather  ceremonial  role) 
and  the  Government,  which  has  15  ministries,  four  Deputy  Prime  Ministers  and  six 
ministers  without  portfolio.  The President  is  directly  elected, whereas  the  Government  is 
appointed  by  the  Parliament.  Within  the  Government,  several  ministries  share  human 
rights  competences.  The  Ministry  of  Foreign  Affairs  hosts  the  inter-ministerial  body  on 
human  rights,  established  with  the  aim  of  improving  coordination  and  communicat ion 
among  the Government  departments  on  key human  rights  issues. Aside  from  this body  — 
and  of relevance  to this  report ,  an important  division  of the executive Government  is  the 
Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Policy  (MLSP),  which  is  tasked  with  coordination  and 
development  of  non-discrimination  activities. The  Representative  for  Equal  Opportunities 

79   The constitutional name of the country is ‘Republic of Macedonia’. However, pending settlement with Greece 
on the (on-going) name dispute, under the UN Resolution A/RES/47/225, the country was admitted as a UN 
member under the temporary reference ‘the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’ Former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia, which is the term used by the European Commission, thus also used for the 
purposes of this report. 

80   Article 118 of the C onstitution states: ‘International agreements ratified in accordance with the Constitution 
are part of the internal legal order and cannot be changed by law’. Source: Constitution of the Republic of 
Macedonia (Устав на Република Македонија). Official Website of the Assembly of the Republic of 
Macedonia, www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-macedonia.nspx. All hyperlinks were 
accessed on 18 March 2015. 

81   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Law on Courts (Закон за судовите), Official Gazette of the Republic 
of Macedonia No. 58/2006, 62/2006, 35/2008, 150/2010; Constitutional Court Decisions: У.бр.256/2007 
(16.04.2008), У .бр.74/2008 (10.09.2008), У.бр.124/2008 (14.01.2009), У.бр.12/2011 (29.02.2012). 
Article 18(5). 

82  Please see section 11 below for information on the wire-tapping affair, which cast doubt on the respect for 
these principles in practice, as well as on the separation of powers and the rule of law in the country in 
general. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
of  Women  and  Men  is  based  in  the  MLSP;  each  state  administrative  body  has  a  legal 
obligation  to appoint  a coordinator  for equal  opportunities.8 3  

The judiciary  consists of the courts. 8 4 There are  27  courts of first  instance (14  with  basic 
competences,  and  13  with  expanded  competences),  four  courts  of  appeal,  and  one 
Supreme  Court. There is also an Administrative  Court (court of first instance), and a Higher 
Administrative  Court  (court  of  second  instance)  with  competence  in  processing 
administrative  cases. Aside  from  the ordinary  courts, there is the Constitutional  Court, the 
primary  duty of which is to decide on the constitutionality of laws and  bylaws.8 5  

There  are  two institutions  that  can be  considered  as  national  human  rights  institutions, 
both acting as quasi-judicial  bodies:  the Commission  for  Protection against Discriminat ion  
(CPAD),  which  is  the  national  equality  body,  and  the  Ombudsperson  of  the  Republic  of 
Macedonia,  (the Ombudsperson),  which  has  duties  pertaining  to human  rights  extending 
beyond  equality  and non-discrimination. 

Local  governance  in  the  country  is  organised  through  decentralisation  of  local  self-
government  units.  These units  are  made  up  of 80  municipalities8 6  and  the City  of Skopje 
(which is a separate local self-government  unit). 

Protection in  discrimination  cases, depending  on  the  personal  and  material  scope  of the 
case,  can  be  sought  under  several  procedures:  criminal  procedure, 8 7   civil  procedure,8 8 
administrative  procedure,8 9   quasi-judicial  procedure,9 0  and  a  procedure  before  the 
Constitutional  Court.9 1 

List  of main  legislation  transposing  and implementing  the  directives 

The  Law  on  Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination9 2   (the  Anti-discrimination 
Law,  ADL)  was  adopted  on  8  April  2010,  and  entered  into  force  on  21  April  2010 
(implementation  began  on  1  January  2011).  It was  last amended  on  2  September  2015. 
Under  Article  3, an  open-ended  clause, the following  discrimination  grounds  are  explicitly 
protected: sex, race, colour, gender,  belonging  to a marginalised  group,  ethnic affiliation, 
language,  citizenship,  social  origin,  religion  or  religious  conviction, other  forms  of  belief, 
education, political  affiliation,  personal  or  social  status, mental  or  physical  disability,  age, 

83   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Equal Opportunities of Women and Men (Закон за еднакви 

можности на жените и мажите), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No.06/2012, 30/2013, 
166/2014, 150/2015. 

84   The Judicial C ouncil is the body established to secure and guard the autonomy and independence of the 

courts. Under the Law on the Academy of Judges and Public Prosecutors a public institution was established 
for vocational training of candidates for judges and public prosecutors. 

85   Please see section 11 below on the allegations of the complete control of the ruling party over the judiciary 

as well as on the way in which the appointment of judges has been operating. 

86   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Territorial Organisation of Local Self-government (З акон за 
територијална организација на локалната самоуправа ), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, 
No.55/2004, 12/2005, 98/2008, 149-2014; Constitutional Court Decision: У .бр.40/2005 (26.10.2005). 
Article 16. 

87   C riminal procedure is an option for discrimination cases that amount to a criminal offence. 
88   Under various laws, in civil proceedings (more details follow in the report below). 
89   Including for misdemeanours. 
90   Procedures before the Commission for Protection against Discrimination and also the Ombudsperson. 
91   C itizens have the right to lodge ‘Requests for protection of human rights and freedoms’ to this court when 

they believe that they have been discriminated against on the grounds stipulated in the C onstitution. This is 
a procedure based on urgency, and is envisaged as a mechanism to safeguard the set of rights laid out in 
the C onstitution from unconstitutional acts (laws and bylaws). However, the effectiveness of this mechanism 
is still under question (according to the EC tHR, a legal reme dy needs to be effective not just in theory but 
also in practice), given that in over 20 years of existence of the mechanism, the Constitutional C ourt has 
only once decided in favour of applicants seeking protection under such a request, and has discarded almost 
all of the filed cases. 

92   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Anti-discrimination Law, 2010. Full title: Law on Prevention and 

Protection against Discrimination (Закон за спречување и заштита од д искриминација) Official Gazette of 
the Republic of Macedonia No.50/10, 44/2014, 150/2015, Constitutional C ourt Decision: U.no.82/2010. 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
family  or  marital  status,  property  status,  health  condition.  Article  4  on  fields  of 
implementation  of  the law  lists  several  fields,  but  states that the law  also  applies  to any 
other  field  specified  under  law.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  applies  to  both  public  and 
private sector and  to natural  and legal  persons. 

The Law  on  Labour  Relations  (Labour  Law)9 3   was adopted  on  28  July  2005,  entered  into 
force  on  5  August  2005  and  was  last  amended  on  31  July  2015.  Under  Article  6(1),  an 
open  ended  clause, the following  grounds  are  covered by the law:  racial  or  ethnic  origin, 
colour,  gender,  age,  health  condition,  that  is,  disability,  religious,  political  or  other 
belief,  membership  of  trade  unions,  national  or  social  origin,  family  status,  propert y 
and  financial  situation,  sexual  orientation  or  other  personal  circumstances .  The Labour 
Law  applies  to  labour  relations  among  employers  and  employees  established  by 
conclusion  of employment  contract s (Article  1), which  is understood  as any  contractual 
relationship  between  the  employee  and  the  employer  where  the  employee  takes  part  
in  the  employer’s  organised  working  process  voluntarily, 
for  salary  and  other 
remunerat ions,  personally  and  continuously  carries  out  the  work  acc ording  to  the 
instructions  and  under  the supervision  of the  employer  (Art icle  5(1)1). 

The Law on Employment  of Persons with Disabilities9 4   was adopted on 2 June 2000, entered 
into  force on  10  June  2000,  and  was last amended  on 27  August 2015.  In  October 2014, 
the  Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Policy  presented  a  new  draft -law  and  opened  a  public  
discussion  process. At the time  of writing  of this report , the draft-law was not yet adopted. 
The law  refers  to the ground  of disability  in  the field  of employment,  namely  with regards 
to: 

in  the  state  administration, 

‘special  conditions  for  employment  and  work  of persons  with  disability  [defined  as] 
activity individually  as  a  sole  proprietor,  with  an  employer  or  in  the capacity of  an 
employer 
the  loc al  self-government  units,  public  
enterprises,  institutions,  agencies and  funds  and  other  state institutions,  as  well  as 
the conditions  for establishment  and advantages for  working  in a trade company  for 
employment  of  disabled  persons  –  protection  company  (hereinafter:  protection 
company)’  (Article 1). 

The Law on  Social Protection9 5 was adopted on 24 June  2009,  entered into force on 2 July 
2009,  and  was  last  amended  on  5  November  2015.  It  provides  for  protection  against  
discrimination  in  relation  to  the  rights  established  by  this  law  and,  in  a  closed  list, 
encompasses  the  following  grounds:  sex,  race,  colour,  national,  ethnic,  social,  political, 
religious,  cultural,  language,  property  and  social belonging,  disability,  and  origin.  

Please note that these are only the main  pieces of legislation  transposing  the two directives, 
and  the ones that, at the time  of adoption  were  explicitly  referred  to as being  adopted for 
the purposes  of transposition  of EU  law.  As the Anti-discrimination  Law  was adopted only 
in  2010,  there  are  provisions  on  equality  and  non-discrimination  scattered through  many 
laws, including  those on primary,  secondary and higher  education, adult education, various 

93   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Labour Law, 2005. Full title: Law on Labour Relations (Закон за 
работните од носи) Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia Nos. 62/2005, 106/2008, 161/2008, 
114/2009, 130/2009, 149/2009, 50/2010, 52/2010, 124/2010, 47/2011, 11/2012, 39/2012, 13/2013, 
25/2013, 170/2013, 187/2013, 113/2014, 20/2015, 33/2015, 72/2015, 129/2015; Constitutional Court 
Decisions: U. no. 139/2005, U. no. 161/2005, U. no. 134/2005, U. no. 187/2005, U. no. 111/2006, U. no. 
188/2006, U. no. 170/2006, U. no. 200/2008, U. no. 20/2009, U. no. 176/2009, U. no. 263/2009, U. no. 
62/2013. 

94   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities (Закон за 
вработување на инвалидни лица), Official Gazette of Republic of Macedonia, No. 44/00, 16/2004, 
62/2005, 113/2005, 29/2007, 88/2008, 161/2008, 99/2009, 136/2011, 129/2015, 147/2015. 

95   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection (Закон за социјалната заштита), Official 

Gazette of Republic of Macedonia No. 79/2009, 36/2011, 51/2011, 166/2012, 15/2013, 79/2013, 
187/2013, 38/2014, 44/2014, 116/2014, 180/2014, 33/2015, 72/2015, 104/2015, 150/2015, 173/2015, 
192/2015 33/2015, 72/2015, 104/2015, 150/2015, 173/2015, 192/2015; Constitutional C ourt Decision: 
U.no.165/2009. 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
aspects of social protection (including  the pension  system  and health  security), and  in the 
field  of employment. 

34 

 
 
1  GENERAL  LEGAL  FRAMEWORK   

Constitutional  provisions  on protection  against discrimination  and the promotion 
of equality 

The  Macedonian  Constitution 
discrimination: 

includes 

the 

following  articles  dealing  with  non-

- 

- 

Article  9,  a general  equality  clause on  equality  before  the law,  covers the  following 
grounds:  sex,  race,  colour  of  skin,  national  or  social  origin,  political  and  religious 
belief, property and social status (closed list  of grounds).  Its personal  sc ope is limit ed 
to citizens and, according to the Constitutional  Court’s  practice, natural  persons. 
Article 54  prohibits  discriminatory  limitations  of constitutionally prescribed  rights and 
freedoms  on grounds  of sex, race, colour, language,  religion,  national  or social origin, 
property  or social status. 

These  provisions  apply  to  all  areas  covered  by  the  directives.  Their  material  scope  is 
broader  than those of the directives. 

In theory, the constitutional anti-discrimination  provisions  are directly applicable.  However, 
in  practice, this  is  not  the  case.9 6 Under  the  Constitution,  every  citizen  may  invoke  the 
protection of freedoms  and rights  prescribed  in  the Constitution before the ordinary  courts 
and  before  the  Constitutional  Court,  through  a  procedure  based  upon  the  principles  of 
priority  and  urgency.  However,  the  ordinary  courts  have  a  practice  of  rejecting 
Constitution-based  human  rights  claims.  The  Constitution  also  guarantees  judicial 
protection of the legality  of individual  acts of the  state  administration  and  of  other  public 
institutions  (Article  50).  One  might  conclude  from  this  that  the  provisions  are  directly 
applicable.  However,  this  does  not  seem  to  be  the  case  in  practice.  The  mechanisms 
provided  in  the laws  that enable  ordinary  courts to directly  apply  the constitutional  anti-
discrimination  provision  have  not  been  used  and  no  verdicts  have  been  delivered  under 
this  mechanism.  In  practice,  regardless  of  the  procedure  invoked,  courts  insist  that  a 
lawsuit  is  brought  invoking  provisions  of  specific  laws,  and  tend  not  to  implement  the 
Constitution directly. On the other hand, the Constitutional Court’s  positioning  and practice 
is such that it does not enter into revisions  of ordinary  courts’ verdicts and decisions.9 7 As 
a  result,  there  are  no  requests  for  interpretation  of  constitutional  provisions  from  the 
ordinary  courts to the Constitutional  Court.  Also,  ordinary  courts  rarely  seem  to use  the 
Constitutional  Court’s  interpretations  in their  own practice. 

Although  judicial  interpretation  would  be  required,  there  is  no  reason  to  expect  that 
constitutional  equality  clauses  cannot  be  enforced  against  private  actors (as  opposed  to 
public  actors). 

96   See section 1(b) of the 2013 Report: http://www.equalitylaw.eu/component/edocman/2013-mk-country-

report-ln-final/Download.  

97   See, for example, C onstitutional Court cases: U.No.55/2015 (para.4) [24.06.2015]; U.No.152/2012-0-0 
(para.4) [14.11.2012]; U.No.172/2002 (para.4) [25.12.2002]; U.No.37/1997 (para.3) [19.03.1997]. 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
2  THE  DEFINITION  OF DISCRIMINATION   

2.1  Grounds  of  unlawful  discrimination  explicitly  covered  

The following  grounds  of discrimination  are  explicitly  prohibited  in national  law: 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Law  on Prevention  and  Protection against  Discrimination:  sex,  race, colour,  gender, 
belonging  to  a  marginalised  group,  ethnic  affiliation,  language,  citizenship,  social 
origin,  religion  or  religious  conviction,  other  forms  of  belief,  education,  political 
affiliation,  personal  or  social  status,  mental  or  physical  disability,  age,  family  or 
marital  status, property  status, health condition  (open-ended clause) (Article 3). 
Law on Courts: article on aims  and functions of courts states that courts aim to secure 
equality,  equal  rights  and  non-discrimination  on  any  ground  (Article  3  (1)  to (3)); 
everybody has equal access to the courts (Article 6(1));  during  the election of judges 
and lay judges,  there should  be no discrimination  on the basis of sex, race, colour of 
skin,  national  and  social  background,  political  and  religious  beliefs,  or  property  or 
social status (Article 43(1)). 
Criminal  code: article on breach  of equality  among  citizens covers sex,  race, colour, 
national  or  social  origin,  political  and  religious  belief,  property  and  social  position, 
language  or  any  other  personal  quality  or  occurrence  (Article  137(1));  article  on 
incitement  of  national,  racial  or  religious  hatred,  divisions  and  intolerance  covers 
national  belonging,  race  and  religious  belief  (Article  319(1));  article  on  spread  of 
racist  and  xenophobic  materials  through  computer  systems  covers  racial,  colour, 
national  or ethnic origin,  or religious  belief (Article 394-г); article on racial and  other 
discrimination  covers race, colour, national  or ethnic origin  (Article 417(1)). 
Law on Execution of Sanctions: race, colour, sex, language,  religion,  political or other 
beliefs,  national  or  social origin,  relation,  property  and  social status or  other status. 
Grounds  refer  to the  person  whose  sanction  is  being  executed.  Special  mention  is 
made  of the religious  feelings,  personal  convictions and  moral  norms  of the persons 
against whom  the sanctions are enforced and  which must  be respected (Article 4(2) 
and (3)). 
Law on Labour  Relations:  race or  ethnic origin,  colour, sex,  age, health condition  i.e. 
disability,  religious,  political  or other belief,  membership  of a trade union,  national  or 
social  origin,  family  status,  property  status,  sexual  orientation,  or  other  personal 
circumstances (Article 6(1)). 
Law  on  Child  Protection:  race, colour,  sex,  language,  religious  conviction,  political 
and  other  belief,  national,  ethnic  of  social  origin,  cultural  and  other  affiliation, 
property  status, disability,  birth,  or  other status (Article 12(1)). 
Law on Social Protection: sex, race, colour, national, ethnic social, political, religious, 
cultural, language,  property and social belonging,  disability  and origin  (Article 20(1)). 
Law  on  Patients’  Rights:  sex,  race, colour,  language,  religion,  political  or  any  other 
belief,  national  or  social  origin,  belonging  to  a  national  minority,  material  position, 
birth  origin,  sexual  orientation  or  any other status (Article 5(2)). 
Law  on  Public  Health:  race, sex,  national  or  social  origin,  property  status, religious 
belief,  sexual  orientation,  or  status of a person  with disability  (Article 16(5)). 
Law  on  Volunteering:  race, colour,  sex,  age,  health  status or  disabilit y,  religious  or 
other  conviction,  national  or  social  origin,  family  status,  property  status,  sexual 
orientation,  and  other personal  circumstances (Article 9). 
Law  on  Higher  Education:  selection  criteria  for  enrolment  will  guarantee  equality  of 
all  candidates  on  grounds  of race,  colour,  sex,  language,  religion,  political  or  other 
belief,  ethnic,  national  or  social  origin,  property,  birth,  social  position,  disability, 
sexual  orientation  and age (Article 108(5)). 
Law on Voluntary  Financed Pension  Insurance: sex, race, colour,  language,  faith and 
religion,  political  or  other  position,  national  or  social  origin,  belonging  to a  national 
or ethnic minority,  or on grounds  of property, family,  health condition and age ( Article 
3). 

36 

 
 
 
 
- 

- 

- 

- 

Law  on Health  Protection: race, sex,  age, national  belonging,  social  origin,  religious 
conviction, political  or other belief, property  status, culture, language,  type of illness, 
intellectual9 8  and physical  disability  (Article 9). 
Law  on  Mental  Health:  sex,  language,  religion,  political  or  other  belief,  national  or 
social origin,  relatedness,  property  and social position  or  other status ( Article 20(4)) 
Law on Equal  Opportunities  of Women  and  Men: race, colour, gender,  belonging  to a 
marginalised  group,  ethnic belonging,  language,  citizenship,  social origin,  religion  or 
a  religious  belief,  education,  political  belonging,  personal  or  social  status, 
intellectual9 9  or  physical  disability,  age,  family  or  marital  status,  property  status, 
health condition  or  any other ground  (Article 4(3)). 
Law on Institutions:  sex, race, colour,  national  or social origin,  political  and  religious 
belief,  property  and social position  or  other status (Article 13(1)). 

2.1.1  Definition  of the grounds  of  unlawful  discrimination  within  the  directives 

Although  the Anti-discrimination  Law contains an article defining  key terms  used in  the law  
(Article 5), it does not contain definitions  of the directives’ grounds.  Grounds  are only listed 
in  the article  on  discrimination  grounds  (Article  3)  and  in  the  definition  of discriminat ion 
(Article 5(3)).  The only  ground  with  a definition  in  the law is  ‘belonging  to a marginal ised 
group’.  Article 5(1),  line  11, defines  marginalised  group  as: 

‘a  group  of  individuals  unified  by  a  specific  position  in  the  society,  subjected  to 
prejudices, who have special characteristics that make them suitable for certain types 
of violence, who have less opportunity  for exercising  and protecting their own rights, 
or who  are exposed  to a greater chance of further  victimisation’. 

A  2013  research  study highlighted  the fact that two elements  of  this  definition,  ‘specific 
position  in  the  society’  and  ‘certain  types  of  violence’,  stand  out  as  being  unclear.  The 
former  refers to an easily  identifiable  characteristic or group  (such as, geographic  position 
or  smaller  religious  community)  matched  with  unequal  access  to  resources  or  to 
opportunities  (for  example  infrastructure,  education,  employment),  whereas  the latter is 
to be interpreted in accordance with the criminal  law. 1 0 0 Also, it can be argued  that ‘persons 
that are protected under this ground  are persons who are likely  to be discriminated  against  
on several  grounds’1 0 1   and that: 

‘For  some  of  these  persons,  the  claim  for  protection  against  unjustified  unequal 
treatment  on  grounds  of  belonging  to  a  marginalised  group  would  best reflect the 
status that these persons  have  and  which  needs  to be  protected (for  example  sex 
workers),  while  for other groups  this ground  should  be applied  if in the circumstances 
of  the specific case it can be  concluded that  the  determining  conditions  will  be  the 
conditions  of specific position  in  society and  susceptibility to violence.’1 0 2  

In  addition,  although  it does  not define  disability,  the ADL  refers  to ‘physical  and  mental 
disability’,  out  of  which  ‘mental  disability’  could  be  interpreted  to  include  psychosocial 
disability  and  intellectual  disability.  In  addition  to this, several  other  laws include  various 
terms  to  refer  to  disability  and  various  types  of  disability.  A  2015  analysis  of  the 
harmonisation  of  the  national  legislation  found  insensitive  disability  terminology  to  be  a 
cross-cutting issue. The analysis was conducted on 139  laws, out of which 40 laws referred 
to disability;  in  all  of these 40 laws  the terminology  used could  not be considered  to be in 

98   Literal translation would be ‘psychological invalidity’ (психички инвалидитет). 
99   Literal translation would be ‘mental disability’ (ментална попреченост). 
100  Kotevska B. (2013), Guide on Discrimination Grounds, Skopje, OSCE and CPAD, available at: 

www.osce.org/skopje/116789?download=true pp. 51-52. 

101  Najcevska M. and Kadriu B. (2008), Terminology glossary for discrimination, Skopje, OSCE and MCIC. p. 61. 
102  Kotevska B. (2013), Guide on Discrimination Grounds, Skopje, OSCE and CPAD, available at: 

www.osce.org/skopje/116789?download=true pp. 51-52. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
line  either  with  the  spirit  of  the  directives,  or  with  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of 
Persons  with Disabilities  (CRPD),  to which the country is a party.1 0 3  

There are  no equivalent  terms  of the directive grounds  defined  elsewhere  in  national  law, 
although  references  can be  found  in  bylaws.  This  can  be  aggravating  for  the  design  and 
implementation  of public  policies  and related actions. For example,  in  relation  to ethnicity, 
a complex  set of measures  is  activated in  relation  to ethnicity and  the implementation  of 
the  Ohrid  Framework  Agreement.  However,  the  legislative  changes  and  strategic 
documents  do not define what ethnicity, or ethnic origin/belonging/affiliation  is. 

It is  important  to note, however, that ratified  international  treaties stand higher  than laws 
in  the  national  legal  hierarchy.  As  reported  in  Annex  2,  the  country  has  ratified  the 
International  Convention  on  the  Elimination  of  All  Forms  of  Racial  Discrimination,  the 
Convention  on  the  Elimination  of  all  Forms  of  Discrimination  Against  Women,  the  CRPD 
and  the  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  the  Child,  so  interpretation  of  the  discriminat ion 
grounds  ensuing  from  these treaties  should  be  considered  as valid  at the  national  level. 
The  same  applies  to  the  European  Convention  on  Human  Rights  and  the  Framew ork 
Convention on National  Minorities,  to which the country is also a party. The resourcefulness 
and  absolute  necessity  of  turning  to  international  law  for  the  definitions  of  the 
discrimination  grounds  is made  clear in  the Guide  on Discrimination  Grounds,  published  by 
the  Commission 
for  Protection  against  Discrimination  (the  national  equality  body)  in 
cooperation  with  the  OSCE.  In  particular,  the  guide  relies  heavily  on  international  law  
sources (including  practice from  the human  rights  bodies and  courts) in order  to carve out 
the definitions  of the discrimination  grounds  prescribed  under  the national  law. 1 0 4  

In  conclusion,  national  law  does  not  provide  definitions  for  age,  ethnicity,  race,  sexual 
orientation  and  disability.1 0 5  

2.1.2  Multiple  discrimination 

In  Macedonia, prohibition  of multiple  discrimination  is included  in the law. 

Multiple  discrimination  is  specified  in  the  Anti-discrimination  Law  as  a  severe  form  of 
discrimination,  and it is defined as discrimination  against a person on several discriminat ion 
grounds  (Article  12).  Given  the  scope  of  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  this  means  that 
multiple  discrimination  is  prohibited  in  all  fields  covered  by  any  national  law.  No  further 
legal  rules  or  case law  exists  that would  provide  more  detailed  guidance  on  how  to deal 
with  multiple  discrimination  cases, including  on  the  consequent  sanctions  (no  separate 
provisions  on  sanctions for this form  of discrimination  exist). 

In  Macedonia there is no case law dealing  with multiple  discrimination.  In  20151 0 6   no such 
cases were  reported  by  the  courts.  The  Ombudsperson  has  not  yet  reported  a  case on  
multiple  discrimination.  According  to  its  2015  annual  report,  the  national  equality  body 
CPAD  received  12  cases  (17  %  of  its  annual  case  load)  where  applicants  claimed 
discrimination  on several grounds. However, the body either did not accept the applications 
on  procedural  grounds,  or  did  not  find  discrimination. 1 0 7  The  situation  was  similar  in 

103  The analysis was conducted on 139 laws. Table 2 includes all provisions that contain disability terminology 
that needs revising. Source: Kotevska, B.  Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-
discrimination legislation (forthcoming – 2016; OSCE and C PAD). 

104  Kotevska B. (2013), Guide on Discrimination Grounds, Skopje, OSCE and CPAD, available at: 

www.osce.org/skopje/116789?download=true. 

105  For disability it notes two types – mental disability and physical disability. On this matter, please see 2.1.1 

above. 

106  Please note that at the time of writing of this report, the annual report for 2015 of the Constitutional Court 

has not yet been published. 

107  C ommission for Protection Against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација) 2015 Annual 

Report of the C ommission for Protection Against Discrimination (2016) http://www.akademik.mk/wp-
content/uploads/2016/04/diskriminacija.pdf. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
previous  years,  so  we  still  cannot tell  how  the  equality  body  will  process  such  cases in 
terms  of consideration  of all,  several or  one ground,  the levels  of sanctions, etc. 

2.1.3  Assumed  and associated discrimination 

a) 

Discrimination  by assumption 

In  Macedonia  the national  law  (including  case law)  does not prohibit  discrimination  based 
on perception  or assumption  of what a person  is. 

b) 

Discrimination  by association 

In  Macedonia  the national  law  (including  case law)  does not prohibit  discrimination  based 
on association with persons  with particular  characteristics. 

2.2  Direct  discrimination  (Article  2(2)(a)) 

a) 

Prohibition  and  definition  of direct discrimination 

In  Macedonia,  direct  discrimination  is  prohibited  in  national  law.  It is  defined  in  the Anti-
discrimination  Law, however  the definition  is unnecessarily  more  complicated than the one 
in  the directives. Under  the Anti-discrimination  Law, direct discrimination  is taken to occur 
when  one  person  is  treated less  favourably,  or  when  there  is  a differentiation,  exclusion, 
or  limitation  that results  or could  result  in  deprivation,  violation  or  restriction of the equal 
recognition  or  exercise of human  rights  and  basic freedoms  as compared  to the treatment  
that another  person  has  or  could have in  the same  or  similar  conditions  ( Article 6(1)).  As 
opposed to the simple  comprehensive  encompassing  wording  of the definition  contained in 
the  directives,  this  definition  includes  types  of  treatment  (which  are  gradations  of  less 
favourable  treatment),  thus adding  the risk  of excluding  gradations  not mentioned  in  the 
definition  if restrictive judicial  interpretation is applied.  It ties the definition  to human  rights 
and basic freedoms,  which is the formulation  contained in the Constitution. Given  the weak 
practice  of  using  international  human  rights  law  in  domestic  courts,  this  could  also  be 
interpreted  restrictively by courts (meaning  only to apply  to discrimination  by deprivation,  
violation  or  restriction  of  the  equal  recognition  or  exercise  of  rights  mentioned  in  the 
Constitution). 

Before  the  adoption  of  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  direct  discrimination  was  defined  in 
several  other laws  as well;  the Law on  Labour  Relations  (Article 7(2))  replicating  fully  the 
definition  from  the directives and  the Law  on Social  Protection (Article 21(1)),  which also 
provides  a  definition  in  line  with  the  directives.  The  Law  on  Child  Protection  prohibit s 
(Article  13(1))  and  defines  (Article  14(1))  direct discrimination.  The definition  in  this law  
is not in  line  with the directives as it defines  direct discrimination  only as a situation where 
a person  has been treated less favourably  in  a comparable  situation,  but not if the person 
would  be  treated  in  such  a manner.  Although  the  literal  meaning  of  the  provision  might  
suggest that a person that is treated less favourably  is also not covered under  the provision 
(because  of the  use  of  past  tense in  the  provision),  such a  reading  does  not  seem  very 
likely. 

b) 

Justification of direct discrimination 

Although  the Anti-discrimination  Law does not allow  for  direct discrimination  (justification 
strictu sensu)  (Article 6(1)),  it does contain provisions  where differences  in treatment  will 
not be considered  as discriminatory.  These are prescribed  in  more  general  terms   and  are  
not tied to single  grounds  (Article  14), although  several  grounds  are  much  more  frequent  
in the justifications that are listed, notably religion  or belief, age, ethnic origin,  gender (for 
more  on  exceptions, see section 4 below). There are  tests that must  be satisfied to justify 
such  difference  in  treatment,  which  include:  objective  justification,  proportionalit y, 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
legitimate  aim,  appropriateness  and  necessity,  genuine  and  determining  occupational 
requirement.  This also includes the possibility  for the justification of ethnicity as a ‘genuine 
and  determining  occupational  requirement ’  (Article  14(1)).  Although  the  wording  of  the 
provision  states  ‘overstepping  the  level  necessary  for  implementation’ 
instead  of 
‘proportional’,  it can be expected that its interpretation  will largely  be in line  with the Racial 
Equality  Directive. 

Prior  to the  adoption  of  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  legislation  only  included  exceptions 
from  discrimination,  without  referring  to  justified  direct  discrimination  as  such  (thus  no 
related  tests existed). 

2.2.1  Situation  testing 

a) 

Legal  framework 

In Macedonia, the law is silent  on situation testing. There is no mention  of situation testing 
in  the  Anti-discrimination  Law.  It  is  worth  noting  that  Article  206  of  the  Law  on  Civil 
Procedure  states that all  facts  that  are  important  for  reaching  a  decision  can be  used  as 
evidence, but that it is up to the courts to decide which facts need to be proven and which 
do not. The Law on Civil Procedure goes on to mention examples  of evidence, but situation 
testing is not one of those examples. 

b) 

Practice 

In Macedonia, situation testing is used in  practice by CSOs. In 2014,  it was announced that 
findings  from  a  situation  testing  case conducted by  the  Macedonian  Helsinki  Committ ee 
and the OSCE Mission to Skopje  will  be used for bringing  cases to courts and/or the equality 
body, however  no further  information  has been published  since. 

2.3  Indirect  discrimination  (Article  2(2)(b)) 

a) 

Prohibition  and  definition  of indirect discrimination 

In  Macedonia,  indirect  discrimination  is  prohibited  in  national  law. It is  defined.  The Anti-
discrimination  Law  fully  replicates  the  definition  of  indirect  discrimination 
from  the 
directives.  Indirect  discrimination  on  any  protected  ground  is  taken  to  occur  when  an 
apparently1 0 8   neutral  provision,  criterion  or  practice would  put  a  person  or  a  group  at a 
particular  disadvantage  compared  with  other  persons,  unless  that provision,  criterion  or 
practice is  objectively  justified  by  a legitimate  aim  and  the  means  of achieving  that aim 
are appropriate  and  necessary (Article 6(2)). 

Definitions  of indirect  discrimination  in  accordance with the  directives are also  included  in 
the Law on Labour  Relations  (Article 7(3)),  the Law on Child  Protection (Article 14(2))  and 
the Law on  Social Protection (Article 21(2)). 

b) 

Justification test for indirect  discrimination 

Under  the Anti-discrimination  Law, indirect  discrimination  is justified  if  

‘the  provision,  criterion,  or  practice can be  considered  to  have  a  justified  aim,  and 
the means  of achieving  that aim  are appropriate  and  necessary ’ (Article 6(2)).  

108  Please note that a literal translation of the term used for ‘apparently’ in the Macedonian language version of 
the law would be ‘obviously’. However, this is a clear language error, as the term in the Albanian version of 
the law (also an official version of the law) is ‘të dukshme’ (‘apparently’). Thus, the intent of the legislator 
seems clear. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
The lack of judicial  practice prevents any  further  comprehension  of the elements  of those 
tests. 

Also,  the  definitions  of  indirect  discrimination  included  in  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations 
(Article 7(3)), the Law on Child  Protection (Article 14(2))  and the Law on  Social Protection 
(Article 21(2))  provide that an exception is justified  if the differentiation  is based on criteria 
and practices objectively justified  by a legitimate  aim  and  the means  of achieving  that aim 
are appropriate  and  necessary. 

c) 

Comparison  in  relation  to age discrimination 

There  are  no  specific  references  provided  on  how  to  develop  a  test  and  how  to   use 
comparable  data in  particular  cases, including  in  age discrimination  cases. 

2.3.1  Statistical  evidence 

a) 

Legal  framework 

In  Macedonia  there  are  national  rules  permitting  data  collection. The  main  legislation  in 
this area is the Law on State Statistics. Data are collected covering all five grounds  except 
for  sexual  orientation.  The data are anonymous  and  therefore  the collection of such data 
does not conflict with the Law on Protection of Personal  Data.1 0 9  

In  relation  to data  collection,  it is  also  worth  noting  that Article  206  of  the  Law  on  Civil 
Procedure  states that all  facts  that  are  important  for  reaching  a  decision  can be  used  as 
evidence, but that it is up to the courts to decide which facts need to be proven and which 
do not. Furthermore,  the text of the law’s  subsequent  articles focuses on specific forms  of 
evidence, but statistical evidence is  not mentioned. 

The Ministry  of Information  Society and  Administration1 1 0   collects data on  administrative 
servants in  the form  of a Register  of Public Sector Employees.  The data to be collected and 
the access to the register  are  specified  in  a  bylaw.  The  data are  not  publically  available, 
and  only  persons  specified  in  the  rulebook  can have  access to the register.  The data  are 
not anonymous  and include  the following  grounds  covered by the directives: ethnic origin, 
disability,  sex and  age. 

The  (state)  Employment  Agency  also  collects  data  on  job  seekers.  The  data  are  not 
anonymous  and cover the grounds  of racial  or ethnic origin  and age. The grounds  of belief, 
disability  and  sexual  orientation  are  not covered. 

Statistics are  not used  in  litigation.  However,  they are widely  used  for  designing  strategic 
policy  documents,  including  the  design  and  planning  of  national  action  plans  (including 
those  on  positive  action).  The  ministerial  cabinet  uses  statistics extensively  in  national 
strategies  and  positive  action measures.  With  regard  to issues  of  ethnicity,  use  of  data 
includes  planning  employment  of under-represented  non-majority  communities  (national 

109  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Protection of Personal Data (2005), Full title: Law on 
Protection of Personal Data (Закон за заштита на лични податоци) Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia No. 7/2005, 103/2008, 124/2010, 135/2011, 43/2014, 153/2015. 

110  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Administrative Servants (2014), Full title: Law on 

Administrative Servants (Закон за административни службеници) Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia, No. 27/2014, 199/2014, 48/2015, 154/2015. Article 7(1)-(9). 

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
minorities)  and  the priorities  in  relation  to the now-closed Decade  of the Roma1 1 1   and the 
‘National  Strategy on Roma  2014-2020’.1 1 2 

On  disability,  statistics were used  for the ‘National  Strategy on  Equalisation  of the Right s 
of Persons  with  Disabilities’  and  on  age, they were  used  for the ‘National  Strategy on the 
Elderly’.  Statistics  were  also  used  during  the  preparation  of  the  first  equality  strategy 
adopted in 2012,  the ‘National  Strategy on Equal  Opportunities  and Non-Discrimination  on 
Grounds  of  Ethnicity,  Age,  Mental  and  Physical  Disability’,  as  well  as  for  the  2015-2020 
National  Action  Plan  for  the  Implementation  of  the  Law  on  Prevention  and  Protection 
against Discrimination. 

In  Macedonia  the law  is  silent  on  using  statistical evidence  in  order  to  establish  indirect  
discrimination.  It neither  permits  nor  prohibits  it, which means  it would  be possible  to use 
statistical evidence in  discrimination  cases. 

The Anti-discrimination  Law  does  not regulate  the use  of statistical evidence  to  establish 
indirect discrimination.  This was not even discussed in the course of the preparation  of the 
draft-law.  Statistical evidence  is  only  mentioned  in  the  law  as  part  of  the  duties  of  the 
CPAD  (Article  24(10)).  Statistical evidence  is  not  mentioned  in  provisions  regulating  the 
procedure  before the CPAD  or  in  other procedural  laws. 

Statistical evidence as such is not mentioned  elsewhere  in  national  law. The Law on State 
Statistics1 1 3  does not discuss the use of statistical data as evidence in general,  meaning  it 
also does  not mention  such a possibility  in  the context of indirect discrimination.  Thus, no 
procedures  or  conditions  for  admissibility  of  such  statistical  evidence  exist,  making  a 
breakthrough  and  usage of such data a distant possibility. 

b) 

Practice 

In  Macedonia,  statistical evidence  in  order  to establish  indirect  discrimination  is  not used 
in  practice. It  remains  an  issue  of a  general  disregard  for  statistics and  the  collection of 
statistics overall,  rather  than  an  issue  of  the courts’  reluctance to use  statistics. Thus, it 
cannot  be  said  that  the  practice  in  other  countries  influences  the  national  law  or 
developments  in  this respect. 

2.4  Harassment  (Article  2(3)) 

a) 

Prohibition  and  definition  of harassment  

In  Macedonia,  harassment  is  prohibited  in  national  law.  It  is  defined  under  the  Anti-
discrimination  Law.  Harassment  is  taken  to  occur when  there  is  an  act that violates  the 
dignity  of a person  or  group  of persons  on  any of the discrimination  grounds,  with an aim 
to or result in violation of the dignity of a specific person or creating an intimidating,  hostile, 
degrading,  humiliating  or  offensive  environment  (Article  7).  The definition  complies  with 
the directives. 

Harassment  does not constitute a criminal  offence. It is  part  of the provisions  of the Law 
on  Labour  Relations,  which  deal  with  harassment,  sexual  harassment  and  mobbing.  The 
definition  of harassment  is in  line  with the directives (Article 9, 9-a). This definition  states 

111  For more information on the projects implemented within the frame of the Decade of the Roma and MLSP 

activities on Roma rights and integration, please see: Проекти произлезени од декадата на Ромите (Roma 
Decade Related Projects), Ministry of Labour and Social Policy Website, http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/proekti-
proizlezeni-od-dekadata-na-romite.nspx. 

112  Strategy on Roma 2014-2020 (Стратегија за Ромите 2014-2020), 

http://arhiva.vlada.mk/registar/files/Strategija_Romite_%202014-2020.pdf. 

113  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on State Statistics (1997), Full title: Law on State Statistics 
(З акон за д ржавната статистика) Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 54/1997; 21/2007; 
51/2011; 104/2013; 42/2014, 192/2015. 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
that harassment  is an unwanted conduct related to the protected grounds  with the purpose 
or  effect of  violating  the  dignity  of  the  applicant  for  employment  or  the  worker,  and  of 
creating  an  intimidating,  hostile,  humiliating  or  offensive  environment  (Article  9(3)). 
Sexual  harassment  is  every  verbal,  non-verbal  or  physical  conduct of  a sexual  character 
with  the  purpose  or  effect of  violating  the  dignity  of  the  job  applicant  or  worker,  or  o f 
creating  an  intimidating,  hostile,  humiliating  or  offensive  environment  (Article  9(4)).  The 
law  defines  psychological  harassment  or  so-called  ‘mobbing’  as  every  negative  and 
repetitive  (for at least a six-month  period)  conduct with the purpose  or  effect of violating 
the dignity  of the job applicant or worker,  or of creating an intimidating,  hostile, humiliat i ng 
or  offensive  environment  and  which  has  the  final  objective  of  ending  the  working 
relationship  or forcing  victims  to leave their  working  positions  (Article 9-a(2)). 

In  Macedonia  harassment  does  explicitly  constitute a  form  of  discrimination  in  the Anti-
discrimination  Act (Article  7) and in  the Law on  Labour  Relations  (Article 9). 

It is important  to note that in  2013  a special Law on Protection against  Harassment  in the 
Workplace1 1 4   was  adopted.  In  terms  of  the  elements  constituting  harassment,  the 
definitions  of the different  types of harassment  —  psychological  and  sexual  —  are  in  line 
with  the  ones  in  the  directives.  This  legislation  also  outlaws  instruction  or  incitement  to 
harass.  The  law  is  silent  as  to  the  grounds  it  covers  for  psychological  harassment.  For 
sexual  harassment,  the ground  – sex — is contained in the title of the type of harassment , 
although  without  any  clear  guidance  as  to  whether  multiple  grounds  could  also  be 
considered.  An  important  note here  is  that the legislature  obviously  intended  to create a 
distinction  between  harassment  in  the  workplace  and  other  activities  that would  not  be 
considered as such, including  ‘any unjustified  distinction during  unequal  treatment towards 
the employee  on any ground  of discrimination  which is prohibited  and for which protection 
is provided  for under  a law’.1 1 5 

b) 

Scope of liability  for harassment  

Where  harassment  is perpetrated  by an employee,  in  Macedonia  the employer  and/or  the 
employee  could be held  liable.  Who  will  be held  liable  will  depend  on the complaint  –  who 
the alleged  victim  of harassment  is  identifying  as  the discriminator,  as well  as the details 
of the case (most  notably whether the person  has decided to first seek protection from the 
employer  or  whether he/she  has  decided to go directly  to court/quasi-judicial  body). It is 
also worth noting that, under  the provision  on psychological harassment  or mobbing  in the 
Law on Labour  Relations  (Article 9-a), a group  of persons/employees  can be held  liable  for 
harassment  as  well.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  does  not  specify  in  greater  detail  how 
liability  is  established  beyond  identification by the potential victim  herself/himself. 

The Law on Protection against Harassment  in  the Workplace  is  in the field  of employment . 
The liability  scope is the same  as the one under  the Law on Labour  Relations.   An important  
note  here  is  that  the  legislator  obviously  intended  to  create  a  distinction  between 
harassment  at the workplace  and  other  activities  that would  not  be  considered  as  such, 
including  ‘any  unjustified  distinction  during  unequal  treatment  towards  the  employee  on 
any  ground  of discrimination  which  is  prohibited  and  for  which  protection is  provided  for 
under  a law’.1 1 6  

The  liability  for  actions  of  third  parties  (tenants,  clients,  customers,  etc .), seems  to  be 
subject to judicial  interpretation. 

114  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Protection against Harassment in the Workplace (2013), 

Full title: Law on Protection against Harassment in the Workplace (Закон за заштита од вознемирување на 
работно место) Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No.79/2013. 

115  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Protection against Harassment in the Workplace (2013), 

Article 8(3). 

116  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Protection against Harassment in the Workplace (2013), 

Article 8(3). 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
2.5  Instructions  to discriminate  (Article  2(4)) 

a) 

Prohibition  of instructions to discriminate 

In  Macedonia,  instructions  to discriminate  are  prohibited  in  national  law.  Instructions  are 
not  defined.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  contains  an  article  on  invoking  and  inciting 
discrimination,  which  also includes  instructions  to discriminate.  Notably,  this article states 
that  it  considers  as  discrimination  every  activity  that  directly  or  indirectly  invokes, 
encourages, instructs or instigates another  person  to commit  discrimination  ( Article 9). 

The Criminal  Code  also contains a prohibition  on instructions  to discriminate.  Although  its 
articles  do  not  include  the  specific  term  ‘instruction’,  they  do  speak  of  instigating  or 
stimulating  discrimination,  notably when fuelling  national, racial or religious  hatred, discord 
or intolerance, which will  be considered a criminal  offence (Article 319),  or when spreading 
racist and  xenophobic  materials  through  computer  systems  (Article 394-d). 

The law does not make  specific reference to the liability  of legal  persons  for such actions. 
However, given the general  clause that under the law a person  is deemed  to be any natural 
or legal  person,  one could argue  that this is a possibility. 

It is important  to note that a case whose  facts point to possible elements o f instruction  to 
discriminate  was put  before  the  CPAD  in  2013.  The  case involves  discrimination  against  
Roma  persons  hired  for  the  provision  of  services  through  a  sub-contracted company.  In 
this  case,  the  sub-contracted  company,  Land  Service,  was  asked  by  the  contracted 
company,  MARCEM,  to ‘remove’  all  employees  of  Roma  ethnic  origin  who  worked  in  the 
food department  at City Mall  (one of the largest trade centres in Skopje).  In this case, the 
CPAD  found  that there  was  direct  discrimination  on  grounds  of  ethnic  belonging  by  the 
contracted company,  but  it did  not  find  instruction  to discriminate.  The case was  filed  by 
Sumnal,  a  CSO  dealing  with  Roma  rights. 1 1 7   Land  Service  itself  later  filed  a  case at the 
CPAD,  however  the  CPAD  did  not  initiate  proceedings,  as  it  has  already  decided  on  the 
matter.  Land  Service  also  filed  a  request  to  the  Constitutional  Court  for  protection  of 
freedoms  and  rights  (protection against discrimination).  However,  in  line  with the already 
established  principle  of the Constitutional  Court, Land  Service’s case was rejected as it had 
been  filed  by a legal  and  not a natural  person. 1 1 8   There has  still  been no  follow  up  on this 
case.1 1 9  

In  Macedonia instructions  do explicitly  constitute a form  of discriminat ion.1 2 0  

b) 

Scope of liability  for instructions  to discriminate 

In  Macedonia  the  instructor  and/or  the  discriminator  are  liable  (Article  9,  Anti-
discrimination  Law). This applies  to both natural  and legal  persons.  Who  will  be held  liable 
depends  on  the  complaint  –  who  the  potential  victim  of  discrimination  identifies  as  the 
potential discriminator. 

It  is  worth  noting  here  that in  the 2013  City  Mall  case (mentioned  above,  under  section 
2.5.a),  the  CPAD  found  direct  discrimination  on  grounds  of  et hnic  belonging  by  the 
contracted company, MARCEM,  which requested the sub-contracted company Land Service 
to ‘remove’  all employees  of Roma  ethnic origin  who worked  in the food department  at City 

117  C ommission for Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација) No.07-633/4 

Association for Development of the Roma Community Sumnal vs Marcem DOO Skopje, 23.05.2013.  

118  C onstitutional Court (Уставен Суд) Decision U.no.65/2013-0-0, 06.11.2013. 
119  It is important to note, however, that the supermarket, which was part of an international chain of 
supermarkets and was serviced by Land Service and MARCEM, closed for business in autumn 2015.  

120  Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (Закон за спречување и заштита од 
д искриминација) Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No.50/10, 44/2014, 150/2015; 
C onstitutional Court Decision: U.no.82/2010. Article 9. 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Mall  (one of the largest  trade centres in  Skopje).  However,  the CPAD  found  that the case 
failed  to qualify  as one of instruction to discriminate. 

The Criminal  Code  contains provisions  making  it a criminal  offence to fuel  national,  racial 
or  religious  hatred,  discord  or  intolerance  (Article  319;  provides  for  one  to  ten  years  of 
imprisonment)  and  to spread  racist and  xenophobic  materials  through  computer  systems 
(Article 394-г; provides  for one to ten years of imprisonment).  It provides  that the persons 
committing  the  crimes  will  be  held  liable  for  the  actions  (including  where  the  crime  is 
conducted via  the media;  Article 395-г (2)). 

2.6  Reasonable  accommodation  duties  (Article  2(2)(b)(ii)  and  Article  5 

Directive  2000/78) 

a) 

Implementation  of  the  duty  to  provide  reasonable  accommodation  for  people  with 
disabilities  in  the area of employment 

In  Macedonia  the duty to provide  reasonable  accommodation  is  included  in  the law.  It is  
defined.   

To begin  with,  it  is  worth  mentioning  that the  Convention  on  the Rights  of  Persons  with 
Disabilities  was signed  and ratified in 2012. Although  no further steps were taken regarding 
the implementation  of this document,  according to the Constitution  the ratification of  the 
convention means  that it has become part of domestic law. The c onvention defines a failure 
to make  a reasonable  accommodation  as a form  of discrimination.  

The  Anti-discrimination  Law,  which  also  applies  in  the  field  of  employment,  tackles  the 
issue  of  reasonable  accommodation 
in  two  ways,  by  first  defining  adjustment  of 
infrastructure  and  services  and  second  by  defining  discrimination  against  people  with 
disability  –  both  considered  to  be  forms  of  discrimination.  It  defines  adjustment  of 
infrastructure  and  services as an  act of undertaking  appropriate  measures,  where  needed 
in a particular  case, to enable a person  with ‘mental’1 2 1   or physical disability  to have access 
to,  participate  in,  or  advance  in  employment,  unless  such  measures  would  impose  a 
disproportionate  burden  on  the  employer  (Article  5(12)).  This  definition  is  similar  in 
wording  to  Article  5  of  Directive  2000/78,  although  it  is  limited  to  infrastructure  and 
service. It also  does not define  what would  be a disproportionate  burden  for employers  or 
whether the availability  of financial  assistance from  the state is to be taken into account in 
assessing  whether there is a disproportionate  burden.  The second point is the definition  of 
discrimination  against  people  with disability.  Notably,  the law deems  the lack  of measures 
undertaken  for  the  removal  of obstacles and  limitations,  or  the absence of  measures  for 
the  adjustment  of  infrastructure,  space,  usage  of  publicly  available  resources  or 
participation  in  public  and  social  life  for  people  with  intellectual  disability  and  physical 
disability  to amount  to discrimination  (Article 8(2)). However, the law does not go into this 
issue  in any more  detail. 

The Law  on Labour  Relations  does not specifically mention  reasonable  accommodation  for 
people with disabilities.  The Law on Employment  of People with Disabilities 1 2 2   also does not 
contain  a  definition  of  reasonable  accommodation,  but  it  contains  references  to 
accommodation-related  measures  for improving  employment  conditions and  the conditions 
for  the execution of work  duties  of people  with disabilities.  The law  establishes  a duty  on 
the employer  to provide  for  working  space, equipment,  and  other  relevant  conditions  for 
work  and  for  the  adaptation  of  the  working  environment  (Article  7(2)).  Employers’ 
measures  undertaken  to accommodate  people  with disability  are subject to inspection and 

121  Mental disability could be understood to include psychosocial disability and intellectual disability.  
122  Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities (Закон за вработување на инвалидни лица), Official 

Gazette of Republic of Macedonia, No. 44/00, 16/2004, 62/2005, 113/2005, 29/2007, 88/2008, 161/2008, 
99/2009, 136/2011, 129/2015, 147/2015. 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
employers  can  be  fined,  however  the law  makes  no  special  reference  as to  whether  the 
worker  themselves  can request that such measures  be undertaken. 

b) 

Practic e 

There are  no  legally  established  specific criteria  to assess issues  in  relation  to reasonable 
accommodation  such as the extent of the duty, what is  a disproportionate  burden,  etc. It 
is not possible  to know  whether  state financial  assistance will  be taken  into account when 
assessing  whether there is a disproportionate  burden. 

c) 

Definition  of disability  and  non-discrimination  protection 

In  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  disability  is  understood  as  intellectual  and  physical 
disability,  however  this  law  does  not go  into  more  details  than  this  in  defining  disability. 
Thus,  in  the  context of  reasonable  accommodation,  disability  is  to be  understood  in  the 
same  way. 

d) 

Duties  to  provide  reasonable  accommodation  in  areas  other  than  employment  for 
people  with disabilities 

In  Macedonia,  there  is  a  duty  to  provide  reasonable  accommodation  for  people  with 
disabilities  outside  the  employment  field.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  deems  lack  of 
measures  undertaken  for  the removal  of obstacles and  limitations,  or  for  the adjustment  
of infrastruc ture,  space, usage of publicly  available  resources or participation  in public  and 
social  life,  including  in  education  and  training  (Article  15(3)),  for  people  with  intellectual 
disability  or  physical  disability  to amount  to discrimination  (Article 8(2)).  The article  uses 
the same  formulation  as is  used in  the field  of employment. 

e) 

Failure  to meet  the duty of reasonable  accommodation  for people  with disabilities 

In  Macedonia  failure  to  meet  the  duty  of  reasonable  accommodation  does  count  as 
discrimination. 

The  Anti-discrimination  Law  classifies  the  lack  of  reasonable  accommodation  for  people 
with  intellectual  or  physical  disabilities  as discrimination  (Article  8(2)).  However,  the Law 
on  Employment  of  People  with  Disabilities  and  the  Law  on  Construction  do  not  include 
specific sanctions  if  proper  adaptation  is  not  carried  out.  This  failure  is  not considered  to 
be  discrimination.  The  misdemeanour  provisions  in  the  Anti-discrimination  Law  do  not 
contain a  special  provision  on  fines  regarding  Article  8(2),  which  provides  for  reasonable 
accommodation,  thus the issue  would  be subject to judicial  interpretation.  

There is  no exception  for  the shift of burden  of proof  rule  for reasonable  accommodation, 
as  lack  of  it  is  considered  a  form  of  discrimination,  thus  the  same  rules  for  shifting  the 
burden  of proof  should  apply. 

f) 

Duties  to provide  reasonable  accommodation  in  respect of other grounds  

In  Macedonia  there  is  a  duty  to  provide  reasonable  accommodation  in  respect of  other 
grounds  in  the public  and  in the private sector. These include  ethnicity, religion  and  age. 

Limited  accommodation  in  respect of ethnicity can be found  in  the Law on Holidays  of the 
Republic  of Macedonia.1 2 3  Under  this law, vacation days are  to be  granted  for  the specific 
celebrations  of some  ethnic communities  (Art icles 1 and  2). 

123  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Holidays (2007), Full title: Law on Holidays of the Republic 

of Macedonia (Закон за празниците во Република Македонија) Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia, No. 21/98, 18/2007. 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Limited  accommodation  in  respect of  religion  is  mentioned  in  the Law  on  Holidays  of the 
Republic  of  Macedonia.  Under  this  law,  vacation  days  are  to  be  granted  for  religious 
celebrations  on the basis  of the faith of the employee  (Articles 1 and 2). 

With  respect to age, there are  special measures  for the protection of older  workers  in  the 
Law on  Labour  Relations,  regarding  the working  hours  of  older  (and  younger)  workers.  It 
provides  that these workers  cannot be assigned to work overtime  or  on night  shifts (Article 
180).  This measure  is applicable  to workers  over the age of 57  for women  and 59  for men 
(Article 179). 

g) 

Accessibility of services, buildings  and  infrastructure   

In Macedonia national  law indirectly  requires  services available  to the public, buildings  and 
infrastructure  to be  designed  and  built  in  a disability-accessible  way.  Namely,  under  the 
Anti-discrimination  Law, discrimination  against  persons  with  disabilities,  which  is  deemed 
a  separate  form  of  discrimination, 
includes  inaccessibility  of  services,  buildings  and 
infrastructure  (Article 8(2)).  This would  apply both in  the employment  field  and beyond. 

The Law on  Construction  creates the potential  to reduce  the standard  basic requirement s 
governing  re-construction and adaptation of buildings  if such reconstruction and adaptation 
is  intended  to  provide  for  the  free  access, movement,  stay  and  work  of  people  with 
disability  (Article 10).  According  to Article  3(2)  of the law, the basic requirements  for the 
construction include:   

‘mechanical  endurance,  stability  and  seismic  protection,  fire  protection,  sanitary 
and health  protection, protection of the working  and living  environment,  protection 
against  noise,  safety  in  the  use,  efficient  use  of  energy  and  thermal  protection, 
unobstructed  access  and  movement  to  and  in  the  construction,  and  technical 
characteristics of the construction products used in  building.’   

Reducing  the standard  means  that some  of these requirement  will  not be met,  should  an 
approval  of the Ministry  of Labour  and  Social Policy be acquired  stating that the reduction 
of the basic standards would go in favour of the above provisions,  namely,  the free access, 
movement,  stay and work  of people  with disability. 

The Law on Construction requires  public  buildings  to be designed  and built  in an accessible 
way. It states that the construction of  

‘public  buildings  and  structures  for  commercial  use,  those  with  the  purpose  of 
residential  housing  and  buildings  with  housing  and  business  purpose  must  be 
designed and constructed to allow unimpeded  access, movement, residence and work 
to persons  with disabilities’  (Article 11).   

The  Anti-discrimination  Law  states that failure  to comply  with  such  legislation  (referring 
also  to  relevant  provisions  in  any  other  laws,  such  as  the  aforementioned  Law  on 
Construction) would  be treated as discrimination. 

The Law on  Construction also states that: 

‘The  manner  of  providing  unimpeded  access, movement,  residence  and  work  for 
people  with disability  to buildings  … should  be prescribed  by the minister  who heads 
the state authority responsible  for performing  the work  in  the field of urban planning. ’ 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The same  law  states that there is  no  need  for approval  to build  structures that  allow  and 
facilitate the movement  of people  with disability  in the building. 1 2 4   Furthermore,  public and 
business  facilities  

‘must  ensure  unimpeded  access to persons with a disability  as prescribed  by this Law 
within  four  years  of  the  date  of  entry  into  force  of  this  law,  and  adapt  outside 
staircases for  public  use  within  two years  of the date of  the entry  into  force of  this 
Law’  (the law entered  into force on 5 November  2009).1 2 5    

A  2014  Government  information  report  submitted  to the UN  Committee  on  the  Rights  of 
Persons  with Disabilities  states that the provisions 

‘are  little  or  not  applied  at  all,  both  in  adapting  existing  buildings  and  in  the 
construction of new buildings.  This includes  inadequate public  areas with high  kerbs, 
inconvenient  pedestrian  crossings,  sidewalks,  parking  spots, access to bus  stations, 
adapted toilets for  persons  in wheelchairs,  etc.’1 2 6  

In  Macedonia  national  law  does  not  contain  a  general  duty  to  provide  accessibility  by 
anticipation for  people  with disabilities. 

h) 

Accessibility of public  documents 

No  such requirements  currently  exist.  However,  it is worth  noting  that a recent vacancies 
advertisement  by the Government  for employment  of people with disabilities  was published 
in  Braille.1 2 7   This was not a general  recruitment  advert - only  people  with disabilities  could 
apply  for the positions. 

124  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Construction (2009), Full title: Law on Construction (Закон 
за град ење) Official Gazette, No. 130/2009, 124/2010, 18/2011, 36/2011, 54/2011, 13/2012, 144/2012, 
25/13, 79/13, 137/13, 163/2013, 27/2014, 28/2014, 42/2014, 115/2014, 149/2014, 187/2014, 44/2015, 
129/2015, 217/2015, 226/2015; Constitutional Court Decisions: U.no. 262/2009 (02.02.2011), U.no. 
212/2010 (30.03.2011). 

125  Former Yugoslav Republic of MacedoniaLaw on Construction (2009), Article 170. 
126  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2014), Initial report of the Republic of Macedonia pursuant to article 

35, paragraph 1 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, available at: 
http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CRPD%2fC%2fMKD%2f
1&Lang=en. 

127  Press24 (2014), ‘People with visual impairments hailed vacancy ad for employment of 300 persons with 

disability’, (Слепите лица го поздравија огласот за вработување 300 лица со инвалидност), 
www.press24.mk/slepite-lica-go-pozdravija-oglasot-za-vrabotuvanje-300-lica-so-invalidnost. 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
3  PERSONAL  AND  MATERIAL  SCOPE 

3.1  Personal  scope 

3.1.1  EU  and  non-EU  nationals  (Recital  13  and  Article  3(2)  Directive  2000/43 

and Recital  12  and Article  3(2)  Directive  2000/78) 

In Macedonia, there are no residence or citizenship/nationality  requirements  for protection 
under  the relevant national  laws transposing  the directives. On  provisions  of relevance for 
non-discrimination,  the Constitution sets a requirement  of citizenship  in order  for a person 
to  enjoy  the  protection  of  rights  under  the  Constitution,  including  protection  against 
discrimination.  Stricter  conditions  also  apply  to residents  without  Macedonian  citizenship 
with  regards  to employment  and  acquiring  social  protection.1 2 8   In  other  areas,  including 
self-employment,  access to training  and membership  in workers'  organisations ,  there is no 
legal  inhibition  and  there  are  no  reports  of less  favourable  treatment.  With  regard  to  the 
Constitution,  the approach  implemented  in  practice gives  foreign  citizens  the opportunity 
to participate  in  the  social  and  economic  life  of  the country.  No  such requirement  exists 
under  the Anti-discrimination  Law. 

The country is a candidate for EU  membership.  So far, the course of harmonisation  of the 
legislation  has not reached the stage where provisions  on distinctions between EU and non-
EU  nationals  are  incorporated  in  laws. As yet, no clear plans  have  been made  on how  this 
will  be regulated.  A sign of planned  developments  in this direction is that special provisions 
have  been  inserted  in  the  Law  on  Internal  Affairs,  which  regulate  special  rules  for  EU 
citizens, with much  eased procedures  for short -term  and long-term  stay and  residence. 

3.1.2  Protection  against  discrimination  (Recital  16 Directive  2000/43) 

a) 

Natural  and legal  persons 

In Macedonia the personal  scope of anti-discrimination  law covers natural and legal  persons 
for  the  purpose  of  protection  against  discrimination  and  for  the  purpose  of  liability  for 
discrimination.  It  does  not  distinguish  between  natural  and  legal  persons,  either  for  the 
purposes  of protection against  discrimination  or  for liability  for  discrimination.  Article  2 of 
the  Anti-discrimination  Law  provides  that  the  law  is  applied  to  both  natural  and  legal 
persons,  while  Article  5(9)  defines  a person  as both  a  natural  and  legal  person.  Article 4 
provides  for the fields  of discrimination  covered by the law,  adding  that the law applies  to 
all  natural  and  legal  persons. 

As  the  law  uses  the  term  ‘person’  throughout  for  both  protection  against  discriminat ion 
and  liability  for  discrimination,  it  is  clear  that  such  a  distinction  is  not  made.  However, 
there  is  a  distinction  when  speaking  of  the  sanctions,  as  fines  for  misdemeanours  are 
divided  between fines  for natural  and for legal  persons  and  vary in  amount  (Articles 42  to 
45). Furthermore,  it should  be noted that under  the Constitution, only  citizens are included 
in the general  equality  clause, and also that the Constitutional Court’s  practice is clear that 
human  rights  protection,  which  also  includes  protection  against  discrimination,  can  be 
sought by natural  persons  only. 

b) 

Private and  public  sector including  public  bodies 

In  Macedonia the personal  scope of national  law covers private and  public  sector including 
public  bodies  for  the  purpose  of protection  against  discrimination  and  for  the  purpose  of 

128  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection (2009), Full title: Law on Social Protection 
(З акон за социјалната заштита) Official Gazette of Republic of Macedonia No. 79/2009, 36/2011, 51/2011, 
166/2012, 15/2013, 79/2013, 187/2013, 38/2014; 44/2014; 116/2014; 180/2014, 33/2015, 72/2015, 
104/2015, 150/2015, 173/2015, 192/2015; Constitutional Court Decision: U.no.165/2009 (07.04. 2010), 
Article 15. 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
liability  for  discrimination.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  states that the  law  applies  to  all 
natural  and  legal  persons  (Article  2)  and  that  it  covers  both  the  private  and  the  public  
sector, including  public  bodies  (Article 4). 

3.2  Material  scope 

3.2.1  Employment,  self-employment  and occupation   

In  Macedonia, national  legislation  applies  to all  sectors of private  and public   employment , 
self-employment  and  occupation,  including  contract  work,  self-employment,  milit ary 
service, and holding  statutory office, for the five grounds.   

The  Anti-discrimination  Law  applies  to  all  sectors of  public  and  private  employment  and 
occupation (Article 4).  Articles  6  to 11  of  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations1 2 9   prohibit  various 
aspects of  discrimination  in  labour  relations  and,  in  general,  do  not  distinguish  between 
different  types of actors (public  or  private, secular  or  religious).  It states that it  regulates 
the  labour  relations  of  workers  employed  by  the  state,  local  government,  public  
institutions,  public  enterprises,  institutes, foundations,  organisations  and  other  legal  and 
individual  employers,  unless  another law  determines  otherwise.1 3 0 

Having  agreed with the general  approach, it should  be noted that prac tically all major  areas 
of public  employment  are covered also by the Law on  Administrative  Servants1 3 1  (adopted 
in  2014,  and  replacing  the  previous  Law  on  Public  Servants  and  Law  on  State Servants; 
implementation  started in  2015),  the  Law  on  the  Police,1 3 2   the  Law  on  Defence  and  the 
Law on Foreign  Affairs for labour  relations  of the employees  in  the respective ministries.  

3.2.2  Conditions  for  access to employment, to self-employment or to occupation, 
including  selection  criteria,  recruitment  conditions  and  promotion, 
whatever  the  branch  of  activity  and  at  all  levels  of  the  professional 
hierarchy  (Article  3(1)(a))   

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  includes  conditions  for  access to employment,  to  self-
employment  or  to  occupation,  including  selection  criteria,  recruitment  conditions  and 
promotion,  whatever  the branch  of activity and  at all  levels  of the professional  hierarchy 
for the five grounds  in  both private and  public  sectors as described  in  the directives. 

The  Anti-discrimination  Law  includes  labour  and  labour  relations  in  public  and  private 
sectors  (Article  4),  thus  should  be  read  as  including  employment,  self -employment  or 
occupation. It does not seem  t o deal  differently  with the private  sector on this matter. 
The  general  non-discrimination  article  in  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations 1 3 3   encompasses 
selection  criteria,  recruitment  conditions,  treatment  at  work,  promotion,  professional 
training  and other benefits, as well as ending  employment.  A specific ban on discriminat ion 

129  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Full title: Law on Labour Relations 

(З акон за работните односи) Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia Nos. 62/2005, 106/2008, 
161/2008, 114/2009, 130/2009, 149/2009, 50/2010, 52/2010, 124/2010, 47/2011, 11/2012, 39/2012, 
13/2013, 25/2013, 170/2013, 187/2013, 113/2014, 20/2015, 33/2015, 72/2015, 129/2015; Constitutional 
C ourt Decisions: U. no. 139/2005, U. no. 161/2005, U. no. 134/2005, U. no. 187/2005, U. no. 111/2006, U. 
no. 188/2006, U. no. 170/2006, U. no. 200/2008, U. no. 20/2009, U. no. 176/2009, U. no. 263/2009, U. 
no. 62/2013. Articles 6 to 11. 

130  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 3. 
131  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Administrative Servants (2014), Full title: Law on 

Administrative Servants (Закон за административни службеници) Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia No. 27/2014, 199/2014, 48/2015, 154/2015. 

132  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on the Police (2006), Full title: Law on the Police (Закон за 
полицијата), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 114/2006, 06/2009, 145/2012, 41/2014, 
33/2015. Article 96 and Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Internal Affairs (2014), Full title: 
Law on Internal Affairs (Закон за внатрешни работи) Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 
42/2014, 116/2014, 33/2015. 

133  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 6. 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
in  vacancy announcements  is  prescribed  in  the Law  on  Labour  Relations.1 3 4   However,  in 
relation  to  access,  both  in  that  provision  and  the  law  overall,  the  protection  against  
discrimination  for  people  with  disabilities  can be considered  as being  very  weak  because, 
although  the  applicant  is  not  obliged  to  submit  a  health  certificate when  concluding  an 
employment  contract, the employer  can send her or him  for a medical  examination.1 3 5   The 
only  legal  limitation  is that the examination  should  be strictly and necessarily linked  to the 
specific post. 

None  of  the  provisions  in  the  non-discrimination  articles  should  be  interpreted  as 
restrictions  on  the  employer’s  right  to  refuse  to  hire  a  person  who  does  not  meet  the 
occupational requirements  in  that particular  field,  as long  as the measures  are  objectively 
justified  by a legitimate  aim  and the methods  pursued  are adequate and necessary. 1 3 6 

Conditions  for access to employment  and  criteria  for  various  professional  activities in  the 
public  sector  are  mostly  determined  by  specialised  laws.  However,  no  equivalent  and 
consistent  approach  or  scope  of  protection  is  contained  in  these  laws.  Health  status is 
mentioned  as  a condition  for employment  in  the Law  on  the Police and  the Law on  Army 
Service, and in the Law on Administrative  Servants.1 3 7  The Law on Administrative  Servants 
sets out general  conditions for employment  as an administrative  servant, which aside from 
general  health  capability,  also  include  citizenship,  active  knowledge  of  the  Macedonian 
language,  being  at least 18  years  of age, and  having  no  criminal  conviction in  relation  to 
conducting a profession  or duty (Article 31(1)).1 3 8    

There  is  an  established  system  of  state  inspection  that  conducts  supervision  of  the 
implementation  of  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations,  and  of  other  laws  and  regulations  for 
labour  relations,  collective  agreements  and  job  contracts that  regulate  the  rights  and 
obligations  of  the  employee  and  the  employer.  Such  inspections  are  carried  out  by  the 
state body responsible  for labour  inspection. 1 3 9 

3.2.3  Employment  and working  conditions,  including  pay and dismissals  (Article  

3(1)(c)) 

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  includes  working  conditions,  which  include  pay  and 
dismissals,  for all  five grounds  and for both private  and public  employment . 

Article 4 of the Anti-discrimination  Law covers the area of employment  and labour relations, 
thus  it  is  to  be  considered  to  include  pay  and  dismissals  (it  applies  to  both  public  and 
private sector). 

Aside from  this law, the Law on Labour  Relations  contains a provision  stating that for equal 
work,  workers  should  be equally  paid.  The only category explicitly  mentioned  is women,1 4 0  
however  in  the  general  provisions  section,  in  Article  7(4),  it  explicitly  states  that 
discrimination  is  prohibited  on  all  grounds  mentioned  in  Article  6  (which  include  all  the 
directives  grounds)  in  relation  to, inter  alia,  ‘working  conditions,  all  rights  from  a  labour 
relation  and  in  relation  to such a relation,  including  equality  of pay’. 

The Law on Administrative  Servants devotes a chapter – Chapter XIV — to salaries,  without 
mentioning  equality  of  pay.  It  establishes  the  following  as  the  main  elements  on  which 

134  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 24. 
135  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 25. 
136  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 8. 
137  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Administrative Servants (2014), Full title: Law on 

Administrative Servants (Закон за административни службеници), Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia No. 27/2014, 199/2014, 48/2015, 154/2015. 

138  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Administrative Servants (2014), Article 31(1). 
139  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 256. 
140  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 108. 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
salary  is  based:  education level,  level  of working  position,  and  years  of experience. 1 4 1 No 
case law on this new law exists. 

3.2.3.1  Occupational pensions  constituting part of pay 

There  are  three  laws  dealing  with  pensions. 1 4 2   However,  only  one  of  these  contains  a 
prohibition  of discrimination:  the Law on Voluntary  Fully Funded Pension  Insurance  (Article 
3).1 4 3  It states that voluntary,  fully  funded pension  insurance  schemes  are prohibited  from 
discriminating  against  members  on  the grounds  of  sex,  race, colour,  language,  faith and 
religion,  political  or  other  orientation,  national  or  social  origin,  belonging  to a national  or 
ethnic minority,  or on the basis of property, family,  health and  age.  

However,  in  the  same  law  it  states  that  a  c ompany  cannot  refuse  membership  of  the 
Voluntary  Pension Fund to any employee  if the person  is at least 15 years old and not more 
than 70  years  of age.1 4 4  This means  that disability  is  not a ground  for  refusal,  although  if 
it is  treated as a health  condition  it falls  under  anti-discrimination  protection. The Law on 
Voluntary  Fully  Funded  Pension  Insurance  does not include  any sanction equivalent  to the 
prohibition  of  discrimination  for  voluntary  pension  schemes.  There  are  no  articles  on 
discrimination  or  equality  in  the framework  Law  on  Pensions  and  Disability  Insurance1 4 5  
and in  the Law on Mandatory  Fully  Funded Pension  Insurance. 

3.2.4  Access  to  all  types  and  to  all  levels  of  vocational  guidance,  vocational 
training,  advanced  vocational  training  and  retraining,  including  practical 
work  experience  (Article  3(1)(b)) 

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  applies  to vocational  training  outside  the employme nt  
relationship,  such  as  that provided  by  technical schools  or  universities,  or  such as  adult  
lifelong  learning  courses. 

Article 4 of the Anti-discrimination  Law covers the area of employment  and labour relations, 
and  includes  education, thus it  can also  be  interpreted  to include  access to guidance  and 
training,  as per the directives. 

Though  not  expressly  using  the  wording  of  Article  3(1)(b)  of  Directive  2000/43,  the 
prohibitions  against discrimination  in  access to vocational guidance,  professional  training, 
continuing  professional  training  and practical work experience  are stipulated in the general 
prohibition  on  discrimination  in  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations 1 4 6   and  in  laws  on  different 
stages  of  education.  National  legislation  gives  everyone  equal  rights  to  acquire  higher 
education and to be educated throughout their lives, and equal rights to lifelong  learning.1 4 7  

141  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Administrative Servants (2014), Articles 85 to 97. 
142  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Pension and Disability Insurance (2012), Full title: Law on 
Pension and Disability Insurance (Закон за пензиско и инвалидско осигурување), Official Gazette of the 
Republic of Macedonia No.98/2012, 166/2012, 15/2013, 170/2013, 43/2014, 44/2014, 97/2014, 113/2014, 
160/2014, 188/2014, 20/2015, 61/2015, 97/2015, 129/2015, 147/2015, 154/2015, 173/2015, 217/2015); 
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Voluntary Fully Funded Pension Insurance (Закон за 
д оброволно капитално финансирано пензиско осигурување), 2008, Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia No.07/2008, 124/2010, 17/2011, 13/2013, C onstitutional Court Decision: U.no.117/2008 
(17.12.2008); Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Mandatory Fully Funded Pension Insurance 
(З акон за задолжително капитално пензиско осигурување ), 2002, Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia No.29/2002, 85/2003, 40/2004, 113/2005, 29/2007, 88/2008, 48/2009, 50/2010, 171/2011, 
36/2011, 98/2012, 13/2013, 164/2013, 44/2014, 192/2015; Constitutional Court Decision: U.no.163/2002 
(02.04.2003), U.no.165/2008 (11.03.2009). 

143  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Voluntary Fully Funded P ension Insurance, 2008. 
144  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Voluntary Fully Funded P ension Insurance, 2008, Article 94. 
145  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012. 
146  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 7. 
147  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education (Закон за високото образование), 2008, 
Article 3. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 35/08, 103/2008, 26/2009, 83/2009, 99/2009, 
115/10, 17/2011, 51/2011, 123/2012, 15/2013, 24/2013, 41/2014, 116/2014, 130/2014, 10/2015; 
20/2015; 98/2015; 145/2015; 154/2015; C onstitutional Court Decision: U.no. 98/2011 (03.04.2011).  

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
According to the Law on Higher  Education,1 4 8  citizens of the country are equally  entitled to 
education in  higher  educational  institutions  in  the country. The approach  to nationality  is 
different,  and  foreign  nationals  can  use  the  principle  of  reciprocity  (meaning  that  if 
Macedonian  students are  given  national  treatment  in  a certain  country, natio nals  of that 
country  may  study  in  Macedonia  as  if  they  were  Macedonian  citizens).  The  right  to 
education  of  stateless  persons  has  still  to  be  determined  in  law  and  under  ratified 
international  agreements. 

The selection of  candidates by  the university  cannot be  discriminatory  on  the grounds  of 
race, colour  of  skin,  sex,  language,  religion,  political  or  other  beliefs,  ethnic ,  national  or 
social origin,  property,  birth,  social position,  disability,  sexual  orientation  or age.1 4 9  
The  Law  on  Adult  Education  states  that  the  aim  of  adult  education  is  to  provide  an 
opportunity  for  everyone  in  all  adult  groups  to achieve their  appropriate  educational  level 
and  enable  them  to  acquire  knowledge,  skills  and  attitudes  that  will  comply  with  the 
requirements  of society and t he labour  market  (Article 4).1 5 0  

3.2.5  Membership  of,  and  involvement  in,  an  organisation  of  workers  or 
employers,  or  any  organisation  whose  members  carry  on  a  particular 
profession,  including  the  benefits  provided  for  by  such  organisations 
(Article  3(1)(d)) 

In  Macedonia, national  legislation  includes  membership  of, and involvement  in  workers  or 
employers’  organisations  as formulated  in  the directives  for  all  five  grounds  and  for  both 
private and public employment.  Article 4 of the Anti-discrimination  Law covers membersh ip 
and  acting in  unions,  politic al  parties,  associations of citizens  and  foundations,  and  other 
organisations  based on  membership. 

The Law  on  Labour  Relations  only  provides  for  the freedom  of workers  and  employers  to 
establish  and  participate  or  not  in  the work  of  such an  association. 1 5 1  There  are  no  anti-
discrimination  provisions  related to the grounds  of the directives. Having  said that, it should 
be also noted that mutatis mutandi  the general  anti-discrimination  provision  in  the Law on 
Labour  Relations  should  be  applicable  to these situations  as well.  Following  the same  line 
of reasoning,  the provisions  in  the Anti-discrimination  Law  would  also be applicable.   

3.2.6  Social  protection,  including  social  security  and healthcare  (Article  3(1)(e ) 

Directive  2000/43) 

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  includes  social  protection, including  social  security and 
healthcare as formulated  in  the Racial  Equality  Directive. 

According to the Constitution, the Republic  provides  for social protection and social security 
of citizens in  accordance with the principle  of social  justice, and  it guarantees  the right  of 
assistance to those who are  infirm  or unfit for work  (Article 35). 

The  Anti-discrimination  Law  provides  for  prohibition  of  discrimination  in  social  security 
(including  social  protection,  pension  insurance  and  health  protection)  (Article  4(3)).  The 
provision  on  the  protected  grounds  is  open-ended,  and  explicitly  lists  racial  and  ethnic 
origin,  disability,  belief,  and  age.  Sexual  orientation  is  not  explicitly  mentioned  in  this 
provision. 

148  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education, 2008, Article 7. 
149  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education, 2008, Article 108. 
150  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Adult Education (Закон за образование на возрасните), 
2008, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No.07/2008, 17/2011, 51/2011, 74/2012, 41/2014, 
144/2014, 146-2015; Constitutional Court Decision: U.no. 46/2008. 

151  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Articles 183, 184, 185, 198. 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
The general  and  specific provisions  on  prohibition  of discrimination  in  social  services are 
also  listed  in  the  Law  on  Social  Protection; 1 5 2  racial  and  ethnic  origin  and  disability  are 
protected as  grounds,  while  belief,  age  and  sexual  orientation  are  not.  According  to the 
Law  on  Social Protection, the ban  is  related  to both  public  institutions  for  social care  and 
private  institutions.1 5 3   Protection  in  cases  of  discrimination  in  the  field  of  social  care  is 
covered by  the  potential  for  the ‘applicant  or  user  of  social  protection to seek  protection 
from  the competent authority’.1 5 4   In  cases of discrimination,  there is a shift of the burden 
of  proof1 5 5  and  financial  sanctions  of  EUR  3  000-5  000  (in  national  currency)  are 
envisaged.1 5 6  

The Law on Healthcare defines, as one of the basic principles  of the provision  of healthcare, 
the principle  of equity, which it defines  through  the prohibition  of discrimination.  Notably, 
in  Article  9,  the  law  states  that  the  healthcare  is  realised  through  prohibition  of 
in  provision  of  healthcare  protection  on  grounds  of  race,  sex,  age, 
discrimination 
nationality,  social  origin,  religion,  political  or  other  belief,  property  status,  culture, 
language,  type  of  illness,  ‘mental’1 5 7   or  physical  disability.1 5 8  It  does  not  include  sexual 
orientation as one of the protected grounds. Article 2 of the Law on Health Insurance  states 
that health insurance  is mandatory  for all  citizens on the principles  of ‘comprehensiveness, 
solidarity,  equality  and effective use of resources  under  conditions  determined  by  Law’.1 5 9  

The Child  Protection Law has articles on discrimination.1 6 0   In addition to definitions  of direct 
and  indirect  discrimination,  specific  measures  are  included  for  the protection  of  children 
and their parents or guardians  when applying  for social care. However,  the procedure  is so 
complicated  that it is  very  unlikely  that these articles  will  be  used  in  practice (especially 
because the  whole  procedure  should  be  carried  out  by  the potential  victims  without  any 
institutional  help). 

3.2.6.1  Article 3.3 exception  (Directive  2000/78) 

Macedonian  legislation  does not include  any exemptions  from  payments  of any kind  made 
by  state schemes  or  similar,  including  state social  security  or  social  protection schemes, 
relying  on  the exception allowed  in  Article 3(3),  Directive  2000/78.  

3.2.7  Social  advantages (Article  3(1)(f)  Directive  2000/43) 

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  includes  social  advantages  as  formulated  in  the Racial 
Equality  Directive. 

The Constitution  states that the Republic  provides  for social  protection and  social security 
of  citizens  in  accordance with  the  principle  of  social  justice.  It  guarantees  the  right  to 

152  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection, 2009, Article 21. 
153  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection, 2009, Article 20. 
154  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection, 2009, Article 22. 
155  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection, 2009, Article 23. 
156  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection, 2009, Article 254. 
157  Includes intellectual and psychosocial disability. 
158  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Healthcare (Закон за здравствената заштита), 2012. 
Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 43/2012, 145/2012, 87/2013, 164/2013, 39/2014, 
43/2014, 132/2014, 188/2014, 10/2015, 61/2015, 154/2015, 192/2015; Constitutional C ourt Decision: 
U.no. 59/2012 (24.04.2013), U.no. 69/2012 (11.06.2014). 

159  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Health Insurance (Закон за здравственото осигурување), 
2000. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 25/2000, 34/2000, 96/2000, 50/2001, 11/2002, 
31/2003, 84/2005, 37/2006, 18/2007, 36/2007, 82/2008, 98/2008, 6/2009, 67/2009, 50/2010, 156/2010, 
53/2011, 26/2012, 16/2013, 91/2013, 187/2013, 43/2014, 44/2014, 97/2014, 112/2014, 113/2014, 
188/2014, 20/2015, 61/2015, 98/2015, 129/2015, 150/2015, 154/2015, 192/2015, 217/2015; 
C onstitutional Court Decision: U.no.85/2000, U.no.173/2000, U.no.37/2001, U.no.60/2006, U.no.40/2007, 
U.no.167/2006, U.no.45/2006, U.no. 199/2008, U.no.109/2009, U.no.185/2009, U.no.112/2011. 
160  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Protection of Children (Закон за заштита на д ецата), 

2013, Articles 12, 13, 14, 15. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 23/2013, 12/2014, 44/2014, 
144/2014, 10/2015, 25/2015, 150/2015, 192/2015.  

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
assistance to those who are infirm  or unfit for work. It also provides for particular protection 
for people  with disability  and  ensures  that their  involvement  in  social life is  possible. 1 6 1 

Social  advantages  are  stipulated  by  law.  For  instance,  the  Law  on  Social  Protection 
envisages  that due  to  age  and  disability,  beneficiaries  of  social  financial  as sistance  are 
relieved  from  the  obligation  to  conduct public  service  duties  in  a  duration  of  up  to  90 
days.1 6 2  This  law  also  contains a general  anti-discrimination  provision  (Article  20)  and an 
article  defining  direct  and  indirect  discrimination  (Article  21).  Although  not  explicitly 
addressed, discrimination  in the area of social advantages is likely  to be unlawful  also under 
the  Anti-discrimination  Law  (Article  4(1),  line  3).  Albeit  not  containing  a  special  anti-
discrimination  provision  specifically  concerning  social  advantages,  it  is  safe  to  conclude 
that the legal  framework  implicitly  upholds  the concept of non-discrimination  with  regard 
to the social advantages.  

In  Macedonia, the lack  of definition  of social advantages does not raise  problems.  

3.2.8  Education  (Article  3(1)(g)  Directive  2000/43) 

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  includes  education  as formulated  in  the Racial  Equalit y 
Directive. 

Under  the Anti-discrimination  Law, discrimination  is prohibited  in  the educational process, 
at all  levels  and  in  all  forms,  both  private  and  public.  All  directive  grounds  are  explicitly 
listed in  the provision  on protected grounds,  apart from  sexual  orientation.  Aside from  the 
Anti-discrimination  Law  (Article  4(2)),  laws  that  regulate  primary1 6 3  and  secondary1 6 4  
education also  prohibit  discrimination.  Primary  and  secondary education  is compulsory  in 
the country. The legislation  covers the directives’ grounds  of race or ethnic origin  and belief  
(political  and  religious),  while  disability,  age, sexual  orientation  and belief  (other  aspects) 
are missing. 

a) 

Pupils  with disabilities 

In  Macedonia  the  general  approach  to  education  for  pupils  with  disabilities  does  raise 
problems. 

The laws that regulate  primary1 6 5   and  secondary1 6 6  education prohibit  discrimination,  and 
although  they do  not cover disability  as  a ground  for discrimination,  they include  specific 
articles dealing  with the education of children  with disabilities.  In  this sense, a parent o f a 
child  with  ‘special  educational  needs’  has  the  right  to  enrol  the  child  at primary  school, 

161  C onstitution of the Republic of Macedonia (Устав на Република Македонија). Article 35. Official Website of 
the Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia, http://www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-
macedonia.nspx.  

162  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Social Protection, 2009, Article 55. 
163  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Primary Education (З акон за основното образование), 

2008. Article 2 states: ‘Every child has the right to primary education. (2) Discrimination on the grounds of 
sex, race, colour, national, social, political, religious, property and social background in realisation of the 
rights of education and primary education, as defined by this Law are prohibited.’ Source: Official Gazette of 
the Republic of Macedonia No. 103/2008, 33/2010, 116/2010, 156/2010, 18/2011, 51/2011, 100/2012, 
24/2013, 41/2014, 116/2014, 135/2014, 10/2015, 98/2015, 145/2015; Constitutional Court Decisions: 
U.no. 212/2008 (01.04.2009), U.no. 202/2008 (15.04.2009), U.no.234/2008 (24.06.2009), U.no.226/2008 
(01.07.2009).  

164  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Secondary Education (Закон за средното образование), 
1995, Article 3. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, No. 44/95, 24/96, 34/96, 35/97, 82/99, 
29/2002, 40/2003, 42/2003, 67/2004, 55/2005, 113/2005, 35/2006, 30/2007, 49/2007, 81/2008, 
92/2008, 33/10, 116/10, 156/10, 18/2011, 42/2011, 51/2011, 100/2012, 24/2013, 41/2014, 116/2014, 
135/2014, 10/2015, 98/2015, 145/2015; Constitutional C ourt Decision: U.no. 355/1995 (20.03.1996), 
U.no. 210/2000 (16.05.2001), U.no. 83/2003 (19.11.2003), U.no. 31/2005 (15.06.2005), U.no. 102/2005 
(21.12.2005), U.no. 226/2008 (01.07.2009).  

165  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Primary Education, 2008, Article 2. 
166  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Secondary Education, 1995, Article 3. 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
except in  cases where  the ‘special  educational  needs’  of the child  are  such that the  child 
should  be  taught in  a  specialised  primary  school. Also,  students with  special  educational 
needs are to be provided  with appropriate  conditions  for acquiring  basic education and life 
skills  in regular  and special primary  schools and are entitled to individual  assistance for the 
acquisition  of primary  education.1 6 7  

The manner  and  conditions  for  the enrolment  of  students with  special  educational  needs 
in  primary  schools  is  determined  by  the  Minister,  on  a  proposal  of  the  Bureau  for 
Development  of  Education  (an  independent  body  within  the  ministry).1 6 8   According  to 
Macedonian  legislation  there  is  specialised  primary  education for  children  with  disabilities 
and  specialised  schools are  considered  equivalent  to state schools. 1 6 9  In  general,  children 
are  enrolled  in  these specialised  schools instead  of being  enrolled  in  mainstream  schools. 
The Law on Higher  Education1 7 0  does not explicitly  prohibit  discrimination  on the ground  of 
disability;  however, there  are  articles on  the special  benefits for  students with disabilities 
(exemption  from  payment  of tuition  fees, 1 7 1  selection  of students,1 7 2  and  special benefits 
provided  by the university).1 7 3   It also lists special conditions for enrolment  of students with 
a citizenship  other than Macedonian. 

Special  curricula  for  students  with  disabilities  are  developed  by  the  Department  for 
Development  of Education.1 7 4  At present there is much  stronger support for the segregated 
education  of  children  with  disabilities  than  for  their  inclusion  in  mainstream  schools.1 7 5  
According to the Law on Primary  Education, children  with disabilities  are entitled to shorter 
class  time,  a  lower  number  of  children  per  class  and  the  engagement  of  specialists.  In 
practice, just a few of the standards  in the law are implemented.  

In 2006,  the Ombudsperson  of the Republic  of Macedonia (the Ombudsperson)  prepared  a 
special  report  on  the inclusion  of  children  with  special  needs  in  education. 1 7 6 This  report 
underlines  that the  practical application  of legal  provisions  entails  a  lot  of problems  and 
obstacles that do not allow for the provision  of adequate and equal  access to education for 
children  with disabilities,  thus practising  this right  often results  in  discrimination.1 7 7 

There are separate secondary schools for children  with special needs. 1 7 8  Secondary school 
students with ‘special educational needs’  are educated under  adjusted programmes  for job 

167  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Primary Education, 2008, Article 6. 
168  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Primary Education, 2008, Article 51. 
169  C urrently there are: four primary schools for students with moderate intellectual disabilities; one elementary 
school for children with more severe intellectual disabilities; a primary school for blind and visually impaired 
children; a primary school for deaf and hearing impaired children; a  primary school for students with serious 
physical disabilities; two secondary schools for students with moderate intellectual disabilities; a  school for 
blind and partially blind students; a school for deaf and hard of hearing students; 80 special classes  for 
pupils in regular primary schools; and two day care centres for young people with moderate or severe 
combined disabilities. These schools enrol in total about 1 700 students. Please see: Former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia, Law on Primary Education, 2008, Article 186. 

170  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education, 2008, Article 7. 
171  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education, 2008, Article 87. 
172  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education, 2008, Article 108. 
173  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education, 2008, Article 150. 
174  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Higher Education, 2008, Article 30. 
175  Nova Makedonija Newspaper (11.09.2009), ‘Roma Pupils are Ghettoised in Bitola’ (Се гетоизираат 

ромските ученици во Битола), 
www.novamakedonija.com.mk/NewsDetal.asp?vest=9119922592&id=9&setIzdanie=21785.  

176  Ombudsperson of the Republic of Macedonia (2006), Посебен извештај на народниот правобранител за 
вклученоста на децата со посебни потреби во образованието (Special Report of the Ombudsperson on 
the Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Education), available at: 
http://ombudsman.mk/upload/documents/Posebni%20potrebi%20na%20dec ata1%20-mak.pdf. 

177  There are cases of non-admittance of children with disabilities into regular primary education, or in some 

other cases these children were admitted at first, but after a certain period they were expelled, thus leaving 
their parents to cope with the children on their own. Teachers themselves have problems dealing with these 
children because they are not trained adequately to work with them and to find the most appropriate 
methods for including children with special needs in school activities. 

178  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Secondary Education, 1995, Article 43. 

56 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
training.1 7 9  A  programme  called  ‘Open  the  Windows’  has  run  for  several  years  now  and 
aims  to promote  assistance technology for children  with disabilities  from  primary  school.1 8 0  
There  are  no  specific  articles  that regulate  the  education  of  children  with  disabilities  in 
ordinary  secondary schools; these are out of the reach of children  with disabilities. 

b) 

Trends and  patterns regarding  Roma  pupils 

In Macedonia, there are specific patterns existing  in education regarding  Roma  pupils  such 
as segregation. 

According to the data from  the State Statistical Office, one in ten Roma children completes 
primary  education  (please  also  note that  95  %  of  the  children  on  the  streets are  Roma 
children),1 8 1   in spite of the fact that primary  (as well as secondary) education is compulsory 
in  the country. According to 2008  data from  the United  Nations  Children's  Fund (UNICEF ), 
Roma  children  have  the lowest  level  of  educational  achievement :  39  %  of Roma  do  not 
attend primary  school  and  the  lowest  proportion  of  children  attending  primary  school  is 
observed  in  the poorest wealth quintile  (86.3  %),  and among  the Roma  (61.1  %).1 8 2  

In  2005,  the policy  document,  ‘Strategy  for  the Roma  in  the Republic  of Macedonia’  was 
adopted.1 8 3   In  this  strategy, education  for  Roma  was  proclaimed  a  government  priority. 
The strategy highlighted  the following  concerns with  regard  to the situation  of the  Roma 
population  (of  relevance  for  education):  the  poor  economic  and  social  position  of  a 
significant  number  of  Roma  families;  the  high  percentage  of  children  not  attending 
preschool  education;  the small  number  of  children  attending  elementary  education;  lack 
of adequate  conditions  in  the  homes;  economic  exploitation  of children;  lack  o f sufficient 
knowledge  of  Macedonian  language;  high  number  of children  dropping  out of  education; 
and  a  lack  of  awareness  for  the  need  of  education. 1 8 4   Some  parents  of  Roma  origin 
intentionally  enrol  their non-disabled  children  in  special schools for children  with moderat e 
intellectual  disabilities  where  they  can learn  crafts. The  reasons  for  this  include  the  fact 
that it is  much  easier  for the children  to complete  these schools and  find employment. 1 8 5  

According to the strategy document,  segregation  often occurs in  the process of education. 
However,  in  spite of numerous  inspections and  public  statements, no sanctions have been 
imposed  in  relation  to  segregation  in  schools.  Eight  Roma  information  centres  were  
established  to support  the implementation  of the strategy and  to monitor,  inter  alia,  this 
situation  on  the  ground.1 8 6   Many  Roma  NGOs  are  working  on  countering  the  issue  of 
segregation  in  education. However,  segregation  continues  to take place  and  is  becoming 
even more  visible  with the increase  in the number  of Roma  pupils. 

A case was filed  with the CPAD  by the Helsinki  Committee  of the Republic  of Macedonia  in 
2011  regarding  the  segregation  of Roma  children  in  schools  in  Bitola.  After breaching  all 
possible  procedural  deadlines,  the CPAD  finally  decided this case in  September  2014,  and 
the applicants  received  the  decision  in  December  2014.  CPAD  did  not find  discriminat ion 

179  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Secondary Education, 1995, Article 50. 
180  ‘Open the Windows’ website: http://openthewindows.org. 
181  Institute on Human Rights (2013), Breaking the Wall of Silence, www.ihr.org.mk/images/pub/covekovi-

prava-web.pdf. 

182  UNIC EF (2008), Children in FYR Macedonia – A Situation Analysis, 

www.unicef.org/tfyrmacedonia/MK_SITAN_ENG.pdf. 

183  There are also several policy documents targeting Roma women. For more, please see MLSP website at: 

http://mtsp.gov.mk/?ItemID=6FC822BBA79A61429117F41943673AE4. 

184  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (Министерство за труд и социјална политика), ‘Strategy on Roma 

2014-2020’ (Стратегија за Ромите 2014-2020) 
http://mtsp.gov.mk/content/word/Roma%20Strategy%20in%20Macedonia%202014-2020.docx. 

185  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, (Министерство за труд и социјална политика), ‘Strategy on Roma 

2014-2020’ (Стратегија за Ромите 2014-2020) 
http://mtsp.gov.mk/content/word/Roma%20Strategy%20in%20Macedonia%202014-2020.docx. 

186  For more information on the Roma Information C entres, please see Ministry of Labour and Social Policy 

website: http://mtsp.gov.mk/?ItemID=16963527D912DC41B48380E0B6034274. 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
on  grounds  of ethnicity  in  the case, nor  did  it find  segregation.  The CPAD  actually  found 
the  situation  to  be  a  result  of  the  parents’  choice to  register  their  children  in  a  specific 
primary  school, however it failed  to state on what it bases its argument, and bluntly added 
that it  ‘further  supports  this  argument ’  with  a  report  from  a  person  from  another  state 
institution  who claims  that this  process is  one of ‘natural  segregation’.1 8 7   Although  having 
deliberated  on  this  case  for  over  three  years,  the  CPAD  adds  a  surprisingly  short 
elaboration  on  its opinion,  the largest  portion  of which consists of a bullet  point  list  of  14 
letters/requests that it has sent and received while processing  this case, one of which is a 
rather  vague  explanation  of proceedings  which states, ‘numerous  phone  calls on  the case 
topic with  relevant  sides  and  numerous  meetings  on  the case topic ’.  There  is  no  further 
elaboration  as to whom  the CPAD  talked  to or  with whom  and  when  they met,  and  what 
was  discussed  and  possibly  decided.  It  also  disregards  reports  on  Roma  children  in 
education and  on segregation  in  education, including  a statement from  the director  of the 
primary  school saying  that the parents of children  from  other ethnicities, although  living  in 
the school’s  region,  choose to register  their  children  in  other  primary  schools  in  order  to 
avoid  sending  them  to school with Roma  children. 1 8 8  

Many  reports  have  been  published  on  the  issue  of  Roma  education  in  the  country   — 
including  an  Open  Society Institute  (OSI)  report,1 8 9   Roma  Education  Fund  reports,1 9 0   a 
UNICEF  situation  analysis1 9 1   and  a UNICEF  analysis  of segregation  in  education1 9 2 —  with 
very  similar  conclusions  on  segregation  and  enrolment  barriers.  They  find  that the  most  
significant problems  in Roma  education are similar  to those faced by Roma  throughout  the 
Western Balkans.  Critical issues include low enrolment,  poor performance,  and a high drop-
out  rate  for  Roma  children,  combined  with  in-school  segregation  and  discriminat ion, 
referral  to special schools, restricted access to preschool, and a lack of support for further 
education.1 9 3  

The most  recent study published  in  2013  by the Institute for  Human  Rights,  supported  by 
the  Roma  Education  Fund,  looks  at  Roma  children  in  primary  and  secondary  education, 
noting that the problems  range from  general living  conditions, to discrimination,  up to clear 
examples  of  segregation  (including  making  Roma  children  sit  in  the last  rows  in  classes, 
complaints  by parents  from  other  ethnicities that they do  not want their  children  to study 
with  Roma  children,  even  reporting  getting  lower  grades  with  explicit  comments  by  the 
teacher that the grade  is lower  because the student is  of Roma  ethnic origin).1 9 4  

3.2.9  Access to and supply of goods and services which  are available to the public  

(Article  3(1)(h)  Directive  2000/43) 

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  includes  access to and  supply  of goods  and  services as 
formulated  in  the Racial  Equality  Directive.  The Anti-discrimination  Law includes  access to 
goods  and  services in  the fields  of the law’s  implementation  (Article  4), and  applies  to all 

187  C ommission for Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација), Opinion of 

the C ommission for Protection against Discrimination, 05.09.2014, 
http://www.kzd.mk/sites/default/files/dokumenti/mislenja/2014/etn_pripadnost/07-80.%2005.09.2014.pdf. 

188  C ommission for Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација), Opinion of 

the C ommission for Protection against Discrimination, 05.09.2014, 
http://www.kzd.mk/sites/default/files/dokumenti/mislenja/2014/etn_pripadnost/07-80.%2005.09.2014.pdf. 

189  Open Society Institute (2007), Equal Access to Quality Education for Roma, Volume 2: Croatia, Macedonia, 

Montenegro and Slovakia, www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/equal_20071218.pdf. 

190  Roma Education Fund (2007), Advancing Education of Roma in Macedonia, 

www.romaeducationfund.hu/sites/default/files/publications/macedonia_report.pdf . 

191  UNIC EF (2008), Children in FYR Macedonia – A Situation Analysis, 

www.unicef.org/tfyrmacedonia/MK_SITAN_ENG.pdf. 

192  UNIC EF (2009), Multiculturalism and interethnic relations in education (Мултикултурализмот и 

меѓуетничките односи во образованието), www.unicef.org/tfyrmacedonia/New_MKVersionsm2(3).pdf. 

193  Roma Education Fund (2007), Advancing Education of Roma in Macedonia, 

www.romaeducationfund.hu/sites/default/files/publications/macedonia_report.pdf . 

194  Institute on Human Rights (2013), Breaking the Wall of Silence, www.ihr.org.mk/images/pub/covekovi-

prava-web.pdf. 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
the grounds  of the directives and  more  (Articles 3 and 5(3)),  except for sexual  orientation 
which is  not explicitly  included  in  this article  or the law, although,  as Article 3 is  an open-
ended  provision  and  includes  ratified  international  treaties  as  well  as  other  grounds 
established  under  law,  there is  space to seek  protection  on  this  ground  as well.  It  is  also 
important  to note that Article  11,  which is  part  of the chapter on  forms  of discriminat ion, 
establishes  that ‘disabling  or  limiting  the use of  goods  and  services to persons  or  groups 
of  persons  on  any  of  the  grounds  established  in  Article  5,  point  3  of  this  law  is 
discrimination’. 

3.2.9.1  Distinction  between goods and  services available  publicly  or privately  

There  are  no  specific  articles  forbidding  discrimination  concerning  goods  and  services 
available  to the public  that make  a distinction between the goods and services available  to 
the public   and  those available  privately. 

The  Law  on  Consumer  Protection1 9 5   notes  that  a  merchant  providing  public  services 
through  a distribution  network  must allow users to join and use the network and e -services 
under  non-discriminatory,  previously  known and agreed conditions. 1 9 6  There are no specific 
grounds  for discrimination  mentioned. 

There has been a rise in  the number  of cases reported  to the equality  body in  this field;  in 
2013,  there were nine  cases in  relation  to access to goods  and services, whereas  in  2014 
the number  rose to 22.1 9 7  

3.2.10 Housing  (Article  3(1)(h)  Directive  2000/43) 

In  Macedonia,  national  legislation  includes  housing  as  formulated  in  the  Racial  Equalit y 
Directive.  The Anti-discrimination  Law  clearly  states that housing  is  an  area  to which the 
law  applies  (Article  4(5)).  The  ADL  includes  all  the  grounds  of  the  directives  except for 
sexual  orientation,  which  is  not  explicitly  included  in  the  article  or  the law,  although,  as 
Article 3  is  an open-ended  provision  that includes  ratified  international  treaties as well  as 
other  grounds  established  under  law,  there  is  space to seek  protection on  this ground  as 
well. However, a prohibition  on discrimination  (with regard to any of the protected grounds ) 
is  not  included  in  the  Law  on  Housing,  which  deals  specifically  with  selling  or  renting  a 
piece of land  or  a building  for housing  purposes,  or  illegal  forced evictions.  

Under  Article 104  of the Law on Housing,1 9 8   a regulatory  commission  was established  with 
a  mandate,  inter  alia,  to  prevent  discrimination  in  the  field  of  housing,1 9 9   however  the 
provision  does not contain any further explanations  as to protective mechanisms,  nor  does 
it mention  grounds  of discrimination.  Disability  is  only  mentioned  insofar  as  the manager 
of  the  building  should  know  the  standards  and  norms  for  accessibility  for  persons  with 
disabilities  in  a residential  facility (Article 19(12))  (under  the same  article, this can also be 

195  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Consumer Protection (Закон за заштита на 

потрошувачите), 2004. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 38/2004, 77/2007, 103/2008, 
24/2011, 164/2013, 97/2015, 152/2015. 

196  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Consumer Protection, 2004, Article 119. 
197  One of the cases initially processed by the equality body, and later (March 2015), taken to court, concerned 
accessibility of pavements for persons with disability in the town of Delcevo. Both the equality body and the  
Delcevo court of first instance found discrimination. C ommission for Protection Against Discrimination 
(Комисија за заштита од дискриминација) (2015), 2014 Annual Report of the Commission for Protection 
Against Discrimination, p.14, www.sobranie.mk/materialdetails.nspx?materialId=d93111d8-975d-471e-
be2c-e07a2df372f3; Primary Court Delcevo (Основен суд Делчево), Judgment P-4. no.14/2014 
(20.03.2015). 

198  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Housing (Закон за домување), 2009. Official Gazette of 
the Republic of Macedonia No. 99/2009, 57/2010, 36/2011, 54/2011, 13/2012, 55/2013, 163/2013, 
42/2014, 199/2014, 146/2015; C onstitutional Court Decisions: U.no. 246/2009 (14.07.2010), 
U.no.14/2010 (15.09.2010). 

199  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Housing, 2009, Article 104. 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
taken  as  imposing  an  obligation  on  her/him  to  initiate  court  procedures  against  the 
constructors for  improper  and incomplete  execution  of the appropriate  actions). 

The  Law  on  Housing  neither  requires  nor  promotes  the  availability  of  housing  that  is 
accessible to the elderly.  The article  on  types of apartments  contains a  special  provision 
defining  housing  units for elderly  and inc apacitated people as units where such tenants get 
24-hour  assistance from  an  institution  under  the  condition  that these  are  architecturally 
adjusted as apartments  for elderly  (Article 7(3)), however it does not go beyond  providing 
for the possibility  of establishing  such a unit  and the issue  has  no further  clarification.  No 
assessment on the implementation  of or compliance with this provision  has been conducted 
yet. 

3.2.10.1  Trends and  patterns regarding  housing  segregation  for Roma 

In  Macedonia  there  are  patterns  of  housing  segregation  and  discrimination  against  the 
Roma.  Roma  are  primarily  concentrated in  10  municipalities,  and  the Roma  population  is 
usually  concentrated in  one part of the town,2 0 0  with 95  %  of Roma  living  in  towns, while 
only  5 %  live  in  villages.2 0 1  About 70  %  of Roma  do not have any proof  of ownership  over 
their  property. 

There  are  no  official  statistics on  racist  incidents  and  discrimination  in  housing  against  
Roma.  However,  the  media  and  NGOs  report  cases of  institutional  violence  and  a ssault 
against  Roma,2 0 2   particularly  police  raids  and  evictions  (after  the  Roma  are  accused  of 
residing  in  unlawfully  built  buildings),  that deprive  the Roma  of their  housing,  and  do not 
provide  them  with alternative accommodation. 2 0 3  

An  older  (2008)  report  on  the  conditions  of housing  and  health  in  the  Roma  communit y , 
which  is  to date  the  one  with  most  robust  and  primary  data,  states that Roma  families 
often  live  in  badly  built,  sub-standard  houses,  without  in-house  water  supply  and 
sanitation. Data show that 7.25  %  of the families  live  in improvised  houses built from  non-
construction  materials  (cardboard,  nylon,  tin,  plastic,  etc.), 29.5  %  in  dilapidated  and 
montage  houses,  and  only  63  %  in  solid-construction  houses.2 0 4   More  than  10  %  of the 
families  don’t  have  access to  any  kind  of  water  supply.  The  sewerage  conditions  are 
extremely  bad,  with an  estimate  of 50  %  of  families  having  no  access to proper  solution 
for the discharge of the sewage and  communal  water. 2 0 5  

The UNICEF  study, Children  in  FYR Macedonia  –  a situation  analysis,2 0 6   claims  that Roma 
generally  live  in informal  settlements on the outskirts of urban  centres and that this further 
obstructs their  access to basic social services. In  general,  while  many  Macedonians  live  in 

200  C RPRC Studiorum and Mesecina (ЦРИС Студиорум и Месечина), Report on the condition of housing and 

health among the Roma Community in Macedonia, www.studiorum.org.mk/?p=41. 

201  Samet Skenderi (2014) Домување на ромите и социјална интеграција во Република Македонија 

(Housing of Roma and Social Intergration in the Republic of Macedonia). p.7. 

202  National Roma Centrum (Национален ромски центар) Report to the Committee on Economic, Social and 

Cultural Rights of the United Nations (Извештај д о комитетот за економски, социјални и културни права 
на Обед инетите нации), www.nationalromacentrum.org/mk/publikacii/istrazuvanja/izvestaj-do-komitetot-
za-ekonomski/; Kanal 5, ‘Discoteque Kalipso Prohibits Entrance to Roma’ (Во д искотеката Калипсо во 
Берово е забранет влезот за Ромите) [Cache]; A1, ‘Entrance Banned for Roma at the New Aqua Park’ 
(З абранет влез за Роми во новиот Аква парк) [31.07.2013]. 

203  Helsinki C ommittee for Human Rights of the Republic of Macedonia (2014), Assessment of the Progress of 

the Roma Decade (Проценка на напредокот на д екадата на ромите), 
www.mhc.org.mk/?ItemID=3DE4E8C7F50F194281021DB76FAD9E1E. 

204  Roma houses are small, planned to serve only elementary needs, with housing space of less than 5 m2 per 
member for more than 50 % of the families. About 40 % of the families live in shared houses. Only 16 % of 
the houses have a toilet and bathroom in the house; 77 % of the families use a toilet in the yard and 58 % 
use a tap in the yard. 

205  C RPRC Studiorum and Mesecina (ЦРИС Студиорум и Месечина), Report on the condition of housing and 

health among the Roma Community in Macedonia, www.studiorum.org.mk/?p=41. 

206  UNIC EF (2008), Children in FYR Macedonia – A Situation Analysis, 

www.unicef.org/tfyrmacedonia/MK_SITAN_ENG.pdf. 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
privately  owned  apartments  (former  state-owned public  housing  that was made  available 
for sale), some  15 to 25  % of the population  live  in about 100  informal  urban  settlements. 
According to the same  study, 

‘there  has been no  research to date on how  housing  conditions  in  Macedonia  impac t  
on children,  but official government  statistics suggest that 95  %  (or 47,408)  of Roma 
live  in  informal  settlements  located  on  the peripheries  of Macedonia’s  cities. These 
settlements are  typified by higher  levels  of unemployment,  crime,  illiteracy,  juvenile 
delinquency,  drug  abuse and other social problems,  all  of which can negatively  affect 
children’s  social development.’ 

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
4  EXCEPTIONS 

4.1  Genuine  and determining  occupational  requirements  (Article  4) 

In  Macedonia  national  legislation  provides  for  an  exception  for  genuine  and  determining 
occupational requirements. 

The Anti-discrimination  Law contains a general  clause stating that difference  of treatment  
that  is  based  on  a  characteristic  related  to  any  of  the  discriminatory  grounds  will  not 
constitute discrimination  if, by reason  of the nature of the particular  occupational activities 
concerned or of the context in  which they are carried  out, such a characteris tic constitutes 
a  genuine  and  determining  occupational  requirement,  provided  that  the  objective  is 
legitimate  and  the requirement  does not overstep the level  necessary for implementat ion  
(Article 14(2)). 

Article 8 of the Law on Labour  Relations2 0 7   uses wording  on exemptions  from  occupational 
requirements  in  the  context of  access to  labour,  which  corresponds  to  the  language  of 
Article 4 of Directive  2000/43/EC.  Notably,  the law states that  

‘it  will  not  be  considered  discrimination  making  a  difference,  exclusion  or  giving 
priority  in  terms  of a certain thing,  when the nature  of the work  is such or  the work 
is  performed  in  such conditions  that the characteristics associated with some  of the 
cases Article  6  of  this  law  are  essential  and  decisive  conditions  for  performing  the 
work,  providing  that the objective to be achieved is justified  and the requirement  has 
been carefully  considered.’2 0 8   

Although  a  careful  consideration  of  the requirement  (одмерен)  is  not  the same  as being 
proportionate  (пропорционален),  there is  room  to interpret  it as such. 

The  grounds  covered  by  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations  are  broader  than  the  protected 
grounds  of  the  two directives,  and  the  differences  in  treatment  in  cases  of  determining 
occupational requirements  need  not  only  be  based  on  the  five grounds  mentioned  in  the 
directives, but can cover all  protected grounds. 2 0 9  

4.2  Employers  with  an  ethos  based  on  religion  or  belief  (Article  4(2)  Directiv e  

2000/78) 

In  Macedonia national  law provides  for an exception for employers  with an ethos based on 
religion  or  belief.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  includes  such  an  exception  fully  in 
compliance  with  Article  4(2)  of Directive  2000/78  (Article  14(3-4)).  However,  under  this 
same  law  it does not constitute discrimination  if members  of duly registered  churches and 
religious  communities  (this  also applies  to NGOs,  political  parties,  trade unions  and  other 
organisations)  act  in  accordance  with  their  belief  (Article  14(5)),  which  goes  beyond 
religion  and  into  the  realm  of  any  belief  which  they  might  have  in  their  founding  and 
internal  acts, programmes  or  statutes. 

The Law on the Legal  Position of Churches, Religious  Communities  and Religious  Groups2 1 0  
contains no  specific articles  on  employment  and  labour  relations.  Other  laws  also  do  not 
include  specific provisions  on exemptions  for employers  with  an ethos based on religion  or 

207  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005.  
208  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 8. 
209   The directives’ grounds of race, belief, disability, age and sexual orientation are all covered, and the Law on 
Labour Relations goes beyond them in an open-ended list: sex, health condition, membership of a trade 
union, social origin, position of the family, property, or other personal circumstances. 

210  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on the Legal Position of the C hurch, Communities of Faith and 

Religious Groups (Закон за правна положба на црква, верска задница и религиозна група), 2007. 
Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 113/07. 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
belief. However,  in  the exemptions  from  prohibition  of discrimination  in the Law on Labour 
Relations  there  is  sufficient space  for  churches,  religious  communities  and  groups  to  be 
exempt  in  accordance with Article 4(2)  of Directive  2000/78  (Article 8). 

- 

Conflicts between rights of organisations  with an ethos based on religion  or belief and 
other rights  to non-discrimination 

In  Macedonia  there  are  specific  provisions  or  case  law  in  this  area  relating  to  conflicts 
between  the  rights  of  organisations  with  an  ethos  based  on  religion  or  belief  and  other 
rights  to non-discrimination.   

Laws  that  regulate  the  founding  and  eligible  activities  of  associations  (civil  society 
organisations,  foundations,2 1 1   as  well  as  religious  communities  and  religious  groups) 
regulate  this  issue,  stating  that an  association  will  cease to exist  if  they engage  in  such 
actions contrary  to the  Constitution  and  laws,  and  violating  other  people’s  rights,  which 
includes  the right  to non-discrimination.   

In  the Anti-discrimination  Law there  is no  such anti-conflict provision.  However,  it should 
be noted that it would  not constitute discrimination  if members  of duly registered  religions 
(this  also  applies  to  NGOs,  political  parties,  trade  unions  and  other  organisations)  act in 
accordance  with  their  belief  (Article  14(5)).  This  would  mean  that  it  excuses  these 
members  even if, in  doing  so, they are discriminating  on the grounds  mentioned  in  Article 
3,  however  there  is  no  case  law  on  this  provision  yet .  It  also  declares  that  it  will  not 
constitute discrimination  when a marriage,  out -of-wedlock union  and family  are regulated 
exclusively  as  unions  of opposite  sexes  i.e. of  one  man  and  one  woman  (Article  14(6)  of 
the Anti-discrimination  Law).  

In the Law on the Legal  Position of Churches, Religious  Communities  and Religious  Groups , 
there  are  no  specific articles  related  to such conflicts. So far  there  is  no  case law  on  the 
issue.  However,  the  Macedonian  Orthodox  Church  and  the  Islamic  Religious  Commun it y 
have very clearly expressed  their opinions  that sexual  orientation  should  not be mentioned 
in  the  anti-discrimination  legislation.2 1 2   Also,  the  end  of  2010  saw  an  initiative  on  their 
behalf to open a cycle of constitutional changes that should, in their words, strengthen the 
traditional  form  of  the  family,  but  which  are  clearly  intended  to  target  homosexuals. 
Notably,  these changes state that a marriage  is  a  union  of  one  woman  and  one  man,  as 
well  as to insert  provisions  that will  limit  the possibility  for homosexuals  to adopt children.  
The  draft  amendments  to  the  Constitution,  which  entered  parliamentary  procedure  and 
proposed  a  definition  of  marriage  as  a  union  of  one  man  and  one  woman,  as  well  as 
mandatory  registration of unmarried  couples (‘out-of-wedlock communities’)  defined in the 
same  manner,  were not adopted by the Parliament.  Thus, this issue  is, for now, closed. 

- 

Religious  institutions affecting employment  in  state funded  entities  

In  Macedonia religious  institutions are not permitted  to select people  (on the basis  of their 
religion)  to hire  or  to dismiss  from  a job  when  that job  is  in  a state entity, or  in  an  entity 
financed by the state. However, there was an attempt in that direction with the introduction 
of religious  education into state elementary  schools. Without any legal  basis, the two main 
religious  groups  –  the Macedonian  Orthodox  Church  and  Islamic  Religious  Community  – 
selected the teachers. However,  the Constitutional  Court, acting upon  a petition by NGOs, 
declared  the introduction  of religious  education null  and  void. 2 1 3  

211  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Associations and Foundations  (Закон за здруженија и 
фонд ации), 2010, Article 4. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No.52/2010, 135/2011.  

212  Dnevnik Newspaper, ‘Oriented Towards Sexual Discrimination’ (Ориентирани кон сексуална 

д искриминација) www.dnevnik.com.mk/default.asp?ItemID=2747A65351BB6544AC31869A1784FEDC . 

213  C onstitutional Court, Decision U.No. 202/2008, (15.04.2009). 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
4.3  Armed  forces  and  other  specific  occupations  (Article  3(4)  and  Recital  18 

Directive  2000/78) 

In Macedonia national  legislation  provides  for an exception for the armed  forces in relation 
to age or disability  discrimination  (Article 3(4),  Directive  2000/78). 

The Law  on  Army  Service establishes  different  age  limitations,  and  disability  is  a  ground 
for  losing  military  status. Professional  soldiers  must  not be  older  than 26  years  of age2 1 4  
at the day of the closing  of the recruitment  advert. The contract is renewable  every  three 
years  up  to a maximum  age  of  45.2 1 5   Junior  officers  must  not be  older  than  25  years  of 
age (or 33 years of age, depending  on experience,  qualifications, as well as previous  status 
in  the armed  forces, if any),2 1 6 or  senior  officers older  than 30  years of age when  entering 
the Army  (or  35  years  of age  if  coming  to the senior  officer position  from  a junior  officer 
position).2 1 7   The upper  limit  for  civilian  personnel  is  40  years  of age.  The retirement  age 
for active military  and  civilian  personnel  is 25  years of  pension  insurance,  out of which 15 
have been spent in army  service (if this has not been fulfilled,  and army  service has ended, 
the  Ministry  of  Defence  must  provide  for  further  employment  or  education  to  allow  the 
person  to accumulate  the years necessary to reach retirement  age).2 1 8 

According to the 2014  amendments  to this law, after 45 years of age, professional  soldiers 
will  be  transferred  to  an  appropriate  position  in  the  central  state  or  municipal 
administration,  under  a  contract  with  an  unlimited  duration.  There  is  a  retroactive 
application  for  this  provision,  according  to  which  it  also  applies  to  professional  soldiers 
whose  army  service  ceased under  the law  previously  due  to reaching  the maximum  age 
limit  of 35 or 38 years of age, if they have an unemployed  person status up to 31 December 
2013.2 1 9  

People  with  disability  are  prevented  from  entering  the  Army  since  general  and  specific 
health  and  good  physical  condition  are unavoidable  prerequisites. 2 2 0   This  is  not a specific 
disability  exception,  but  rather  a  general  exception  that  refers  to  health  and  physical 
condition.  As  noted  in  the  2015  analysis  on  the  harmonisation  of  the  national  equality 
legislation,  the  medical  check  up  that is  mandatory  for  issuing  a  certificate for  fulfilling 
these  criteria  includes  checking  the  nervous  system  and  ‘mental  condition’,  ‘ment al 
disorders’  in the family  (including  epilepsy),  sight and hearing  senses, personal  habits and 
physical  injuries  –  one  of  the  rulebooks  even  includes  notes  on  tattoos as  part  of  this 
assessment.  This  is  documented  in  detail  in  the  above-mentioned  2015  analysis,  which 
identifies a number  of provisions  that include  a general health condition as a discriminat ory 
criterion,  meaning  that  this  criterion  is  a  cross-cutting discriminatory  issue,  preventing 
access to public  service.2 2 1 

Even if the disability  is a result of army  service it would  still  lead  to loss of military  status. 
The best scenario is that the person  could remain  as civilian  personnel  retaining  the salary 
received  and  rank  held  prior  to the health  degradation  (or  would  drop  one  rank  down,  if 
the same  rank  could not be awarded).2 2 2   An  extra three days  of vacation are  provided  for 
personnel  with a disability  or a person  taking  care of a disabled  child.2 2 3  

214  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service (Закон за служба во армијата), 2010, Article 
36. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 36/2010, 23/2011, 47/2011, 148/2011, 55/2012, 
29/2014, 33/2015, 193/2015; Constitutional C ourt, Decision: U.no.60/2010, (22.09.2010).  

215  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 40, 42, 43.  
216  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 34 and 35.  
217  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 32. 
218  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 220 (paragraph 2).  
219  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 40-а, 40-б. 
220  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 31 and 202-210. 
221  See Table 3 in: Kotevska, B. Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination 

legislation (forthcoming – 2016; OSCE and CPAD). 

222  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 78. 
223  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 98 (para.2). 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Ethnicity is dealt with in law in  several respects. Persons belonging  to minorities  should  be 
adequately  and  fairly  represented  in  the  Army  providing  that they  are  duly  trained  and 
competent.2 2 4  Public vacancy ads need to be published  in, inter alia, at least one newspaper 
printed  in a language  used by at least 20 % of the population  in the country.2 2 5  With regard 
to the oath, the document  to be signed  is both in  Macedonian  and  in  the language  of that 
person.2 2 6  

4.4  Nationality  discrimination  (Article  3(2)) 

a) 

Discrimination  on  the ground  of nationality 

In Macedonia national  law includes  exceptions relating  to difference of treatment  based on 
nationality.  The  Constitution  does  not  clearly  distinguish  between  nationality  (in  the 
meaning  of state citizenship)  and  ethnic affiliation.  The Constitution  states that 

‘citizens  of the Republic  of Macedonia  have citizenship  of the Republic  of Macedonia 
[and it declares] the free expression  of national  identity [as] a fundamental  value’.2 2 7  

However,  in  later  articles, nationality,  rather  than ethnicity, is  mentioned  as  a ground  of 
discrimination  (Articles  9,  20,  54  and  110).  The  words  ethnic  and  ethnicity  are  not 
mentioned  in  the  Constitution  at all.  The  Constitution  makes  it  clear  that the  rights  and 
freedoms  enshrined  in  it  are  reserved  for  citizens, and  that a foreigner  e njoys  freedoms 
and  rights  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution  only  under  conditions  regulated  by  law  and 
international  agreements.  In this context, the term  discrimination  on grounds  of nationality 
in  Macedonian  law actually refers  to ethnic discrimination.   

In  Macedonia,  nationality  (as in  citizenship)  is  explicitly  mentioned  as a protected ground 
in  national  anti-discrimination  law. Nationality  understood  as origin  from  another  country 
is  not  covered  by  the  Anti-discrimination  Law.  However,  citizenship,  understood  as  the 
legal  link  of a  person  with  a certain  country, is  part  of  the grounds  covered by  the Anti-
discrimination  Law  (Article  3).2 2 8   Although  not  explicitly  referred  to,  the same  would  be 
true for stateless persons. 

b) 

Relationship  between nationality  and ‘race or  ethnic origin’ 

Nationality  understood  as  origin  from  another  country  is  not  covered  by  the  Anti-
discrimination  Law.  However,  citizenship,  understood  as the legal  link  of  a person  with  a 
certain country, is part of the grounds  covered by the Anti-discrimination  Law (Article 3).2 2 9  
Although  not explicitly  referred  to, the same  would  be true for stateless persons.  

The lack of clarity deepens in  some  laws that refer  to nationality  and  ethnicity as different  
grounds  for discrimination.2 3 0   No definition  is provided,  which also adds to the confusion of 
the  terms,  since  in  some  laws  the  term  'national  belonging'  is  used. 2 3 1   The  courts 
consistently use the terms  ‘foreigner’  and  'foreign'  when  referring  to nationals  of another 
country. 

224  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 30 (para.5). 
225  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 39 (para.2). 
226  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 7 (para.2). 
227  C onstitution of the Republic of Macedonia (Устав на Република Македонија). Official Website of the 

Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia. www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-
macedonia.nspx. Articles 4 and 6. 

228  However, please see the exceptions in relation to nationality mentioned in section 4.4.b. 
229  However, please see the exceptions in relation to nationality mentioned below. 
230  For example, Article 3 of the Law on Voluntary Fully Funded Pension Insurance and Article 20 of the Law on 

Social Protection. 

231  Article 6 of the Law on Primary Education and Article 6 of the Law on Labour Relations.  

65 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
4.5  Work-related  family  benefits  (Recital  22  Directive  2000/78) 

a) 

Benefits  for married  employees 

In  Macedonia it would  not constitute unlawful  discrimination  in  national  law if an employer 
only  provides  benefits to those employees  who are  married. 

Macedonian  legislation  does not mention  the right  of employers  to provide  benefits solely 
to a certain category of employees  (such as those married  or with children).  However,  the 
constitutional  provision  under  which  the Republic  provides  particular  care and  protection 
for the family2 3 2   could be interpreted as opening  space for, inter alia, such privileges.2 3 3  An 
addition  to  this  argumentation  is  the  provision  that  is  part  of  an  article  on  unequal 
treatment  that will  not  be  considered  as  discrimination,  in  the  Anti-discrimination  Law, 
which includes  the regulation  of the family,  marriage,  and  out of wedlock  partnerships  as 
limited  to opposite  sex partners  (Article 15(6)). 

b) 

Benefits  for employees  with opposite-sex partners 

In  Macedonia it would  not constitute unlawful  discrimination  in  national  law if an employer 
only  provides  benefits  to  those  employees  with  opposite-sex  partners.  Same-sex 
partnership  is  not recognised  under  Macedonian  legislation,  while  the Law  on  Family  and 
Marriage  clearly  states that marriage  is  a  union  between  a  man  and  a  woman,  and  the 
same  applies  for  unmarried  couples recognised  under  this law. There has not been a case 
on  these issues.  Moreover,  the Anti-discrimination  Law  provides  as  part  of the  article on 
unequal  treatment  that  will  not  be  considered  as  discrimination,  the  regulation  of  the 
family,  marriage,  and  out  of  wedlock  partnerships  as  limited  to  opposite  sex  partners 
(Article  15(6)).  A  2015  analysis  of  the  harmonisation  of  the  national  equality  and  non-
discrimination  legislation  against  international  standards  and  of the harmonisation  at the 
national  level  with  the  comprehensive  Anti-discrimination  Law  raises  the  issue  of 
inequalities  in  relation  to  out-of-wedlock  partnerships  as  well  as  to  partnerships  and 
marriages  of same  sex  couples. It  notes that limiting  partnerships  solely  to opposite-sex 
couples is discriminatory  and  not in  line  with the ECHR  and  the practice of the ECtHR. 2 3 4  

4.6  Health  and safety (Article  7(2)  Directive  2000/78) 

a) 

Exceptions  in relation  to disability  and health/safety 

In Macedonia there are no exceptions in relation  to disability  and health and safety (Article 
7(2),  Directive  2000/78).  The anti-discrimination  legislation  does  not provide  for  specific 
exceptions in relation  to disability  in  the context of health and  safety regulations  similar  to  
the  provisions  of  Article  7(2)  of  Directive  2000/78.  However,  the  general  exception  of 
objective and  justified  limitation,  allowed  for  by Article  8 of the Law  on  Labour  Relations , 
could be applicable. 

This article states that  

‘it  will  not  be  considered  discrimination  making  a  difference,  exclusion  or  giving 
priority  in  terms  of a  certain  thing,  when  the nature  of  the work  is  such  or  work  is 
performed  in  such  conditions  that  the  characteristics associated  with  some  of  the 

232  C onstitution of the Republic of Macedonia (Устав на Република Македонија). Official Website of the 

Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia. www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-
macedonia.nspx. Article 40. 

233  One needs to bear in mind here that although family is not defined in the C onstitution, it is defined in the 

Law on Family as a community of parents and children and/or other relatives, provided that they live in the 
same household (Article 2(1); Law on Family). 

234  Kotevska, B.  Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation 

(forthcoming – 2016; OSCE and CPAD). 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
cases in  Article  6  of  this  law  are  an  essential  and  decisive  condition  for  performing 
the work,  providing  that the objective to be achieved is justified and the requirement 
is carefully  considered.’2 3 5    

However,  aside  from  this,  issues  of dress  or  personal  appearance  (turbans,  hair,  beards, 
jewellery,  etc .)  are  not  subject  to  special  regulation  in  relation  to  health  and  safety, 
meaning  that general  provisions  and principles  in deciding  a discrimination  case will  apply.  

The Law  on  Labour  Relations  does  not specify exceptions in  relation  to health  and  safety 
on  any other  ground,  thus the legitimacy  and  proportionality  test indicated  in  the Law on 
Labour  Relations  would  be  applicable  for  exceptions  based  on  dress  codes  or  religious 
tenets (Article 8). However, the law does provide  for other health and safety related special 
protective measures  in  relation  to employees  under  18  years  of age,  as well  as for  older 
employees2 3 6   (over 57 years of age for women  and 59 years of age for men).  The protection 
encompasses  hours  of  work,  night  work,  work  in  special  conditions  and  supplement ary 
vacation (for workers  under  18) and prohibition  of overtime  work and night shifts (for older 
workers),  as  well  as other  special  measures  provided  in  this  and  other  laws.2 3 7  There are 
also exceptions  for protective measures  related  to pregnancy and  parenting.2 3 8 

4.7  Exceptions related to discrimination  on the ground  of age (Article  6 Directiv e  

2000/78) 

4.7.1  Direct  discrimination 

In Macedonia national  law provides  an exception for direct discrimination  on age. The Anti-
discrimination  Law contains a provision  that is in  line  with the test required  in  Article  6 of 
Directive  2000/78  (Article  14(9)).  The Law on  Labour  Relations  does not mention  specific 
exceptions  concerning  discrimination  on  the ground  of  age  that relate  to the  wording  of 
Article 6  of  Directive  2000/78.  However,  the general  exception  laid  out in  Article  8 of the 
Law  on Labour  Relations  could  be used  to justify  such discrimination.  The Law on  Labour 
Relations  could  be  interpreted  more  widely  to  give  the  employer  the  option  of  setting 
specific conditions  connected with  the  age  of the  employee.  It  states that at  the  time  of 
signing  of  the  contract the  applicant  is  obliged  to  submit  evidence  to  the  employer  of 
capability to fulfil  the terms  of the contract (Article 26). 

a) 

Justification of direct discrimination  on  the ground  of age 

In  Macedonia  it  is  possible,  generally,  or  in  specified  circ umstances,  to  justify  direct 
discrimination  on  the ground  of age (Article 14(8  and 9), Article 15(4)). 

b) 

Permitted  differences of treatment  based on age 

In  Macedonia national  law permits  differences of treatment based on age for any activities 
within  the  material  scope  of  Directive  2000/78.  The  Anti-discrimination  Law  contains  a 
clause that is in line  with the test required  in Article 6 of Directive  2000/78  (Article 14(9)). 
The  Law  on  Labour  Relations  provides  for  specific  protective  measures  in  relation  to 
employees  younger  than  18,  as  well  as  for  older  employees  (over  57  years  of  age  for 
women  and  59  years  of  age for  men).  The  protection encompasses  hours  of  work,  night  
work,  work  in  special  conditions  and  supplementary  vacation (for  workers  under  18)  and 

235  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 8. 
236  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Chapter XV. 
237  See Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Chapter XIII: Protection of 

Workers under 18 Years, and Chapter XV: Special protection of older workers. 

238  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 161. 

67 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
prohibition  of overtime  work  and  night  shifts (for  older  workers),  as well  as  other special 
measures  provided  by this and  other laws. 2 3 9  

c) 

Fixing  of  ages  for  admission  or  entitlements  to  benefits  of  occupational  pension 
schemes 

In  Macedonia  national  law  allows  occupational pension  schemes  to fix  ages for  admission 
to the scheme  or  entitlement  to benefits, taking  up  the possibility  provided  for  by  article 
6(2).  The Anti-discrimination  Law  contains  a  clause  that allows  for  occupational  pension 
schemes to fix  ages for admission  to the scheme or  entitlement  to benefits ( Article 14(9)). 

The  pension  system  is  composed  of  three  pillars  established  by  three  laws:  the  Law  on 
Voluntary  Fully  Funded  Pension  Insurance,  the Law  on  Pension  and  Disability  Insurance, 
and  the  Law  on  Mandatory  Fully  Funded  Pension  Insurance.  The  Law  on  Pension  and 
Disability  Insurance2 4 0   establishes  the general  age of retirement ,  which is 64  years  of age 
for  men  and  62  years  of age  for  women.  At least  15  years  of pension  contributions  (i.e. 
working  years covered by pension  insurance)  is also  required  (Article 18). 

4.7.2  Special conditions  for young people, older  workers  and persons with  caring 

responsibilities   

In Macedonia there are special conditions set by law for older  and younger  workers  in order 
to  promote  their  vocational  integration,  and  for  persons  with  caring  responsibilities  to 
ensure  their  protection. 

In  the Anti-discrimination  Law there is a general  clause making  an exception  in relation  to 
special protection of parentless children  and of single  parents (Article 15(7)). Although  the 
term  ‘parentless  children’  should  mean  persons  up to 18  years of age, it is also used in the 
context of protective measures  once those people have reached adulthood (such as priorit y 
housing  and employment). 

The  Law  on  Labour  Relations  provides  for  specific  protective  measures  in  relation  to 
employees  younger  than 18  years  of age.2 4 1   The protection encompasses  hours  of work, 
night  work,  work  in  special conditions  and supplementary  vacation. It allows  for  providing 
special  protection  for  older  workers  (Article  179).  The  same  law  restricts  overtime  and 
night  work  for  older  workers  (Article  180).  The  same  restrictions  apply  to  persons  with 
caring  responsibilities  for children  not older  than seven years of age.2 4 2  

4.7.3  Minimum  and maximum  age requirements 

In  Macedonia  there are  exceptions  permitting  minimum  and  maximum  age  requirement s 
in  relation  to access to employment  (notably in  the public  sector) and  training. 

The Anti-discrimination  Law makes  two provisions  exempting  discrimination  with regard  to 
minimum  age  in  relation  to  professional  requirements  and  career  advancement  as  well 
maximum  age  for  recruitment  for,  as stated in  law, the need  for  rational  time  limitations 
connected to retirement  and stipulated  by law  (Article 14 (8  and 9)). 

Law on Labour  Relations  establishes 15  years of age as the minimum  age  for employme nt  
(Article 250).  There is a general  prohibition  on the employment  of children  under  15 years 
of age, except for  recording  films,  preparing  and  performing  arts, stage and  other similar 
works (cultural, artistic, sports and advertising activities). A special procedure and approval 

239  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Chapter XIII: Protection of 

Workers under 18 Years, and Chapter XV: Special protection of older workers.  

240  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012. 
241  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Chapter XIII. 
242  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 164. 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
is required  for this. There are also  special provisions  for the work  of students (as practical 
work  experience)  and for apprentices. 2 4 3  

4.7.4  Retirement   

a) 

State pension  age 

In  Macedonia  there  is  state pension  age  at which,  in  principle,  individuals  must  begin  to 
collect their  state pensions.  If  an  individual  wishes  to  work  longer,  the  pension  can  be 
deferred.  An individual  cannot collect a pension  and  still  work. 

The Law  on Pension  and  Disability  Insurance2 4 4  establishes  the general  pension  age as 64 
years  of age  (for  men)  or  62  years  of age  (for women)  with  at least 15  years  of pension 
contributions  accrued.2 4 5  If someone  chooses to continue working,  they are not entitled to 
receive  a  pension;  pension  payments  can only  start  after a  person  ceases working.  The 
Law on Pension  and Disability  Insurance provides  for different criteria for the calculation of 
pensions  in  special  cases.2 4 6  According  to this  law, pension  and  disability  insurance  rights 
depend  on wages earned and the tot al length of contributions. The amount  of the awarded 
age pension  depends  on  the monthly  average  wage, which  determines  the pension  base, 
while  the  percentage  of  the  pension  is  determined  according  to  the  length  of  pension 
contributions. 

b)  Occupational pension  schemes 

In  Macedonia  there  is  a  normal  age  when  people  can  begin  to  receive  payments  from 
occupational  pension  schemes  and  other  employer-funded  pension  arrangements.  If  an 
individual  wishes  to work  longer,  payments  from  such occupational pension  schemes  can 
be deferred,  and the individual  can continue to work  if their employer  agrees, but not after 
the age  of 65  (women)  and  67  (men).2 4 7   An  individual  cannot collect a  pension  and  still 
work. 

c) 

State imposed  mandatory  retirement  ages 

In  Macedonia  there  is  a  state-imposed  mandatory  retirement  age.  The  state-imposed 
retirement  age  is  mandatory.  Under  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations,  Article  104,  when  an 
employee  reaches the age of 64, but wants to work  longer,  s/he can continue to do so, but 
only until  the age of 65 and 67 for women  and men  respectively.2 4 8 There are no sanctions 
in the Law on Labour  Relations  tied to a breach of this provision.  Under  the Law on Pension 
and  Disability  Insurance,  the age set for  acquiring  the right  to a  pension  by  age remains 
as 62 for women  and 64  for men.2 4 9    

d) 

Retirement  ages imposed  by employers 

In  Macedonia  national  law does  not permit  employers  to set retirement  ages by contract, 
collective  bargaining  or  unilaterally.  The  retirement  ages  are  as  set  in  the  national 
legislation  (the Law on Labour  Relations  and the Law on Pension  and Disability  Insurance). 
However,  according  to  the Law  on  Labour  Relations,  individual  employment  contract s or 
collective  agreements  may  determine  rights  for  workers  that  are  more  favourable  than 
those determined  by law (Article 12).2 5 0  The same  article stipulates that employers  cannot 

243  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 251. 
244  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012. 
245  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 104. 
246  The standard calculation system is given in Articles 18 and 18-a of the Law on Pension and Disability 
Insurance; Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012. 

247  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 104. 
248  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 104. 
249  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012, Article 18. 
250  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005. 

69 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
include clauses introducing  fewer rights than those established  in the Constitution and law. 
National  collective  agreements  for  the  public  sector  and  the  economy  do  not  mention 
reductions or  expansions  of the pensionable  age in any sector. 

e) 

Employment  rights  applicable  to all  workers  irrespective  of age 

General  anti-discrimination  articles do not include  any provisions  on different  treatment in 
relation  to protection  against  dismissal  on  grounds  of  age. The  Law on  Labour  Relations' 
protection against dismissal  applies  to all  workers  irrespective of age. If the employee  has 
reached  the standard  pensionable  age  and  has contributed  the required  number  of years 
of  contributions  to  state  pension  schemes,  the  employer  can  ask  for  termination  of 
employment  even  if the employee  has not filed  a request  for retirement  or does  not want 
to retire. 

f) 

Compliance  of national  law with CJEU  case law 

In  Macedonia  national  legislation  is  in  line  with  the  CJEU  case  law  on  age  regarding 
compulsory  retirement.  However,  the issue  of mandatory  retirement  ages has  not been  a 
subject  of  wider  discussions  as  yet  (nor  have  EU  Directives  and  CJEU  case-law  been 
discussed in  this context). 

4.7.5  Redundancy 

a) 

Age and  seniority  taken into account for redundancy  selection 

In  Macedonia national  law is silent  on permitting  age or  seniority  to be taken  into account 
in  selecting workers  for  redundancy. 

b) 

Age taken into account for redundancy  compensation 

In  Macedonia  national  law  does  provide  compensation  for  redundancy.  Article  97  of  the 
Law  on  Labour  Relations  provides  the  criteria  applied  to  calculate  the  compensation. 
Although  the number  of years  an  employee  has  spent  working  for  an  employer  is  one  of 
the criteria for  establishing  the amount  of compensation,  this is  not tied to the age  of the 
worker. 

4.8  Public  security,  public  order,  criminal  offences,  protection  of  health, 
protection  of  the  rights  and  freedoms  of  others  (Article  2(5),  Directiv e  
2000/78) 

In  Macedonia  national  law  includes  exceptions  that  seek  to  rely  on  Article  2(5)  of  the 
Employment  Equality  Directive.  In  the  Anti-discrimination  Law  there  is  one  exception  of 
this  type,  which  concerns  freedom  of  speech,  public  appearance,  thought  and  public 
information.  The  provision  states  that  ‘the  exercise  of  the  constitutionally  guaranteed 
principle  of freedom  of speech, public  appearance, opinion  and public  information’  will  not 
be deemed  to be discrimination  (Article 14(7)).  No related  case law exists thus far. 

4.9  Any other  exceptions 

In  Macedonia,  other  exceptions  to  the  prohibition  of  discrimination  (on  any  ground) 
provided  in  national  law  include  those  that  are  considered  as  protective  mechanisms  of 
groups,  and  are  established  in  Article  15  of the Anti-discrimination  Law.  Article 15  states 
that  

‘the following  shall  not be deemed  to be discrimination:  the measures  provided  for in 
the  Law  on  Employment  Promotion  (Article  15(2)),  the  measures  for  protection  of 
the  specifics and  identity  of  the persons  belonging  to  ethnic,  religious  or  linguistic  

70 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
minorities  and  their  right  to maintain  and  develop  their  own  identity  individually  or 
in  a community  with other members  of their  group  as well  as  to stimulate  conditions 
for promotion  of that identity (Article 15(8));  and the special measures  to benefit the 
persons  or  groups  placed  in  a  less  favourable  position  as  a  result  of  any  of  the 
discriminatory  grounds,  for the purpose  of equalising  their  opportunities,  as  long  as 
those measures  are necessary (Article 15(6))’.2 5 1 

251  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Anti-discrimination Law, 2010. 

71 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
5  POSITIVE  ACTION  (Article  5 Directive  2000/43,  Article  7 Directive  2000/78) 

a) 

Scope for positive  action measures 

In  Macedonia,  the  law  allows  for  positive  action to be  undertaken  in  relation  to racial  or 
ethnic origin,  religion  or belief, disability,  age or sexual  orientation.  Also, the national legal 
and policy frameworks  envisage specific  positive actions. Among  these, the main  emphasis 
is placed on positive action with respect to ethnic origin,  disability  and age. The frameworks 
do  not  provide  for  positive  action with  regard  to religion  or  belief,  or  sexual  orientation. 
Although  beyond  the  scope  of  this  report,  it  is  also  worth  noting  that  there  are  public  
policies  on positive  actions pertaining  to gender  equality. 

In  the Anti-discrimination  Law there is a special  provision  in  Article  13 named  'affirmative 
measures'  that corresponds to the directive term  'positive action'. This article encompasses 
measures  to  eliminate  or  reduce  factual inequality  in  favour  of:  (1)  a  person,  group  of 
persons  or  community;  and  (2)  marginalised  groups.  People  with  disabilities  are  not 
specifically mentioned  in this article as in  Directive 2000/78,  however, there is no basis for 
preventing  them  from  being  covered by the provision. 

Ethnic origin  seems  to be the dominant  ground  for undertaking  positive action, and has its 
basis  in  the  2001  amendments  to  the Constitution,  which  were  tailored  according  to the 
Ohrid  Framework  Agreement  (a  political  agreement  ending  the  2001  conflict).  Several 
institutions  are  tasked  to ensure  the proper  implementation  of these measures,  the main 
ones  being  the  Secretariat  for  Implementation  of  the  Ohrid  Framework  Agreement ,  the 
Committee  for  Inter-Community  Relations  and  the Agency for  Realisation  of the Rights  of 
the Communities.  The Committee  for Inter-Community  Relations  considers  issues of inter-
community  relations  in the Republic  and makes  appraisals  and proposals  for their  solution, 
and can propose  positive action measures  to Parliament,  which decides in  plenary  on such 
issues. The Parliament  is obliged  to take into consideration  the appraisals  and propos als  of 
the  committee  and  to  make  decisions  regarding  them.  In  the  event of  a  dispute  among 
members  of the Parliament  regarding  the application  of  the voting  procedure  specified  in 
Article  69(2),  the committee  will  decide by  majority  vote whether  the procedure  applies. 
The  Committee  for  Inter-Community  Relations  consists of  seven  members  from  each of 
the ranks  of the ethnic Macedonians  and  ethnic Albanians  within  the Parliament,  and  five 
members  from  among  the ethnic Turks,  Serbs, Vlachs, Roma  and Bosniaks.  The members 
of the Committee  are elected by the Parliament. 

Political  participation  of Roma  has changed a lot in  the past 10  years, partly  as a result  of 
the  Ohrid  Framework  Agreement  and  partly  because  of  the  Decade  of  Roma  Inclusion. 
There is a Roma  minister  in the Government,  a Roma  municipality  (the direct result  of the 
arrangements  within  the Ohrid  agreement)  and  the Roma  language  is  legally  a  language 
in  official use in  the Shuto Orizari  municipality. 

On  disability,  the  main  instrument  for  positive  action  measures  related  to  persons  with 
disabilities  is the Law on  Employment  of People  with Disabilities. 2 5 2  Its main  goals  are the 
integration  of  people  with  disability  in  the  working  environment  and  their  safety  in  the 
workplace.  In 2013  the Government  published  a recruitment  announcement  open solely  to 
people  with  disabilities,  which  result ed  in  the  employment  of  300  people  in  the  public  
sector. There is also  a new draft law that was initiated by the Ministry of Labour and Social 
Policy, which is has still  not entered parliamentary  procedure. 

On  age, in  relation  to young  people,  actions are  undertaken  based on  Cabinet  decrees. In 
relation  to  older  people,  there  is  a  ‘National  Strategy  for  Elderly  People  2010-2020’. 
However  results  from  its implementation  are  not expected soon,  as the coordinating  body 
tasked to follow  its implementation  was only  recently established. 

252  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities, 2000, Article 2. 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
The  2012-2015  ‘National  Strategy  on  Equal  Opportunit ies  and  Non-Discrimination  on 
Grounds  of  Ethnicity,  Age,  Mental  and  Physical  Disability,  and  Gender’2 5 3   and  its 
accompanying  action  plan,2 5 4   were  the  first  documents  of  their  kind  in  the  country, 
establishing  the  general  goals  of  the  strategy,  and  specific  goals  for  each  targeted 
discrimination  ground.  The general  strategic goals  are: advancing  the legal  framework  for 
equality  and  non-discrimination;  strengthening 
the  capacities  of  the  institutional 
mechanisms  for  the  prevention  and  protection  against  discrimination  and  promotion  of 
equal  treatment;  and  awareness  raising  towards recognising  forms  of  discrimination  and 
promoting  the concepts of non-discrimination  and equal opportunities.  This document  does 
not provide  for positive  action measures.  A public  debate on the new ‘Strategy on Equalit y 
and Non-discrimination  2016-2020’  was organised  towards the end of 2015.  However, the 
new strategy had not yet been adopted by the end  of the reporting  period.2 5 5  

b)  Main  positive  action measures  in  place on national  level 

Quotas (ethnicity, including  Roma) 

There  is  a special  secretariat within  the Government  charged  with  the implementation  of 
the Ohrid  Framework  Agreement.2 5 6   Although  no  quotas  exist  on  paper,  they do  exist in 
practice due  to  the implementation  of the  principle  of  equitable  representation,  which  is 
used  when  implementing  positive  actions.  This  principle  operates  on  the  basis  of  self-
identification and aims  to bring  about representation  of the communities  in the institutions 
to  reflect  the  representation  and  composition  of  the  ethnic  communities 
in  society 
according  to the latest  census  results  (for  example,  a target  percentage  for  the  Albanian 
population  would  be  a  representation  of  25  %,  as  this  is  the  percentage of  the Albanian 
community  from  the total population  of the country, according to the 2002  census). 

As  equitable  representation  of  members  of  ethnic communities  in  state institutions   is  an 
important  role  of the Secretariat for Implementation  of the Ohrid  Framework  Agreement , 
one  of its  main  tasks  has  been  to  ensure  the  employment  of  people  belonging  to these 
communities  in  the state and public administration.  To that end, various  training  initiatives  
have been carried  out with great support from  the international  community.  

Additional  social and  other measures  (Roma) 

There is a Minister  without Portfolio  in  charge of coordination  of the Government  activities 
in  relation  to  the  Decade  of  Roma  Inclusion.  He  is  tasked  with  the  inter-ministerial 
coordination  on  all  Roma  issues.  National  strategic  documents  on  Roma  rights  and 
integration,  which take the EU  Framework  for National  Roma  Integration  Strategies up  to 
2020  into account, are regularly  adopted and updated, however,  systematic monitoring  of 
any progress  is mainly  done  by NGOs. 

Preferential  treatment (disability) 

Preferential  treatment  of  people  with  disabilities  is  provided  for  in  the ‘National  Strategy 
for Equalisation  of the Rights  of People with Disabilities  2010-2018’  (and  its predecessor). 
The  strategy  acts as  an  operational  framework  for  the  UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of 

253  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2012), Национална стратегија за еднаквост и недискриминација по 
основ на етничка припадност, возраст, ментална и телесна попреченост и пол 2012-2015 (National 
Strategy on Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical 
Disability, and Gender 2012-2015), www.mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/strategija_ednakvost.doc. 

254  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2013), Action Plan - 2013 for implementation of the National Strategy 
on Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical Disability, 
and Gender for 2012-2015, www.mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/akciski_l_eng.doc. 

255  Please note that this was also the case at the time of writing of this report. 
256  Although it is not OFA itself that is being implemented, but constitutional, legal and policy documents 

resulting from its signing, the expression ‘implementation of OFA’ is used here to avoid lon g explication 
pretexts for the wave of reforms after 2001 resulting from it being signed. 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Persons  with  Disabilities.2 5 7  This  convention  was  ratified  in  November  2011.  The  country 
submitted  the initial  report  to the UN  Committee  on the Rights  of Persons  with Disabilit ies 
in  2014.  However,  as  can  be  seen  from  this  report,  save  for  training  activities  with 
interpreters  and  pharmacists  reported  as undertaken  pursuant  to Article  21  (Freedom  of 
Expression  and  Opinion,  and  Access  to  Information),2 5 8   no  other  information  on  the 
implementation  or  the progress  of this strategy exists. 

Broad  social policy (age) 

Young  people  are  covered  in  two  policies.  The  Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Policy 
supported  a  programme  entitled  ‘Intermediation  for  Employment  of  Unemployed  Young 
Graduates’.  This programme  provides  free  training  for  young  graduates,  as well  as taxes 
from  which employers  can benefit in hiring  a first-time employee.  The Ministry  of Transport  
and  Communications  had  a  programme  called  ‘Flats  for  Young  Married  Couples’.  The 
programme  enables young  couples in  civil marriage  to engage in  buying  a flat under  more 
favourable  conditions  than in  the regular  market. 

There  is  a  ‘National  Strategy  for  Elderly  People  2010-2020’.2 5 9   However  results  from  its 
implementation  are  not  yet  expected,  as  the  coordinating  body  tasked  to  follow  its 
implementation  was only recently established. However, special programmes  for recreation 
(free ski  trips and use of thermal  baths facilities) and transport (free use of public transport  
in  the capital on selected week  days, and use of train  transportation  in  the whole  territory 
of  the  country  on  selected  week  days)  have  been  implemented.  There  are  also  housing 
facilities and  newly built  housing  for elderly  persons. 

257  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2010), National Strategy for Equalisation of the Rights of Persons with 

Disabilities, http://mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/FINALNA%20Revidirana%20Nacionalna%20Strategija.pdf. 

258  The initial report can be accessed at: https://documents-dds-

ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G15/275/23/PDF/G1527523.pdf?OpenElement. 

259  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2010), Национална стратегија за стари лица 2010-2020 (National 

Strategy for Elderly People 2010-2020), 
http://mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/Strategija%20za%20stari%20lica%20juni.pdf. 

74 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
6  REMEDIES  AND  ENFORCEMENT   

6.1  Judicial  and/or  administrative  procedures  (Article  7  Directive  2000/43, 

Article  9 Directive  2000/78) 

a) 

Available  procedures  for enforcing  the principle  of equal  treatment  

In  Macedonia the following  procedures  exist  for enforcing  the principle  of equal  treatment  
(judicial/  administrative/alternative  dispute  resolution  such as mediation) : 

The Anti-discrimination  Law provides  several  options for procedural  protection. These are: 
administrative,  litigation  and misdemeanour  procedures. 

Administrative  procedures  can  be  raised  before  the  Commission  for  Protection  against  
Discrimination  (Chapter  V,  Anti-discrimination  Law),  and  the  Labour  and  Education 
inspectorates. The procedure before the CPAD  is free of charge. The entire duration  of the 
procedure  is  set to last no  more  than 90  days  (including  15  days for  the CPAD  to forward 
the complaint  to the respondent, and 15 days for the respondent to reply).  This may  result  
in  the CPAD  giving  an  opinion  and  recommendation.  If  the recommendation  is  not acted 
upon,  the  CPAD  can  initiate  a  procedure  with  a  competent  body  (without  further 
specifications). The location of the CPAD is problematic,  as it is situated in a building  where 
there are offices of other  ministries  (including  the Ministry  of the Interior). 

Litigation  proceedings  can also be initiated  before ordinary  courts, based on the provisions 
of the  Anti-discrimination  Law (Chapter  VI,  Articles 34-41).  The law  does  not resolve  the 
priority  of the procedures,  in case of simultaneous  procedures. It states that if a procedure 
is raised  before a court, no procedure  can be raised  before the CPAD.  However, it does not 
say  what  one  does  if  a  procedure  is  raised  before  the  CPAD,  and  after  that  another 
procedure  is started in  front  of a court before the  procedure  before  the  CPAD  has  ended. 
Also,  the  law  does  not  regulate  the  relations  between  the  procedures  in  front  of  the 
Ombudsperson  and  the  CPAD,  in  cases  of  overlap.  This  issue  has  been  resolved  by  a 
memorandum  of understanding  between the two institutions. 2 6 0  

Under  the Anti-discrimination  Law, the outcome of a claim  depends  on  the procedure  that 
one  chooses  to  pursue.  The  CPAD  registered  70  cases  in  2015.  The  administrat ive 
procedure  envisages a recommendation  for rectifying the violation  (i.e. the discriminat ion) 
within  30  days;  litigation  could  lead  to  an  award  of  regular  compensation;  while  the 
misdemeanour  procedure  envisages  fines  in  the range  of  EUR  400  to 1  000  (in  national 
currency). 

Financial  sanctions and other  sanctions for discrimination  are provided  under  the Criminal 
Code. These provisions  have not been  applied  thus far. 

The procedures  for employment  in the private and public sectors are diff erent. In the public  
sector, the Law  on  State Administration  elaborates  a  detailed  procedure,  which  must  be 
conducted in  accordance with  the  law  and  under  very  strict criteria,  while  in  the private 
sector,  according  to  Law  on  Labour  Relations,  employers  are  free  to  choose  their  own 
methods  to  find  adequate  candidates  for  employment.  A  worker  who  believes  that they 
have  been  discriminated  against,  can inform  the  employer  within  eight  days,  giving  the 
employer  a  chance to resolve  the  issue  (Article  181).  If  this  is  not  done  within  the next  
eight days, the worker can lodge a lawsuit against the employer (within  the next 15 days). 
This last deadline  is directly applicable  in cases of dismissal  and rejection in the recruitment  
process  due  to  discrimination.  This  is  rather  costly  procedure,  as  hiring  a  lawyer  is  an 

260  A memorandum for cooperation between these two institutions and the Commission for Equal Opportunities 
of Women and Men of the Assembly of Republic of Macedonia and the Macedonian Women Lobby was signed 
in December 2011. 

75 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
obligation  and  the claimant  must  pay  the court costs in  advance.  Moreover,  if  a  claimant  
loses  a  lawsuit  against  a  state employer,  he  or  she  has  to  pay  the  costs of  the  State 
Defender.2 6 1   As it is a judicial  litigation, there are strict time limits  for all procedural  actions. 

Mediation  is  an optional  instrument  at the disposal  of the judge  in  any  litigation.  There is 
no record  that it has been used  in a discrimination  case. 

There are  no statistical data on  discrimination  cases brought  to the courts. Discriminat ion 
claims  can be found  in other  cases (notably, mostly  cases from  the field  of employment).  

Although  non-binding,  if  the CPAD  finds  discrimination,  it  issues  an  opinion  accompanied 
by  recommendations.  The person  to whom  the recommendation  is  directed needs  to act 
upon  it, and  notify  the CPAD  within  a deadline  of  30  days  (Article  28(2)  and  (3)).  If  the 
person  does  not  act  upon  the  recommendation,  the  CPAD  can  open  a  procedure  to  a 
competent  body  (the law  does  not  specify further  which  body  would  be  considered  as  a 
competent body) to establish  the person’s  responsibility  (Article 29). 

b) 

Barriers  and  other deterrents faced by litigants  seeking  redress 

The procedure  before  the Commission  for Protection against Discrimination  (CPAD)  is  free 
of  charge.  No  legal  representative  is  needed  for  this  procedure.  However,  it  should  be 
noted that there  are some  obstacles in  filing  a case at the commission.  The offices of the 
commission  are in the building  where the Ministry  of Interior  has some  of its offices. Taken 
alongside  the  politicised  procedure  of  the  appointment  of  the  first  members  of  the 
commission,  one can say that there is a psychological barrier  to accessing the commission. 
There  is  also  a  physical  barrier  as  the offices are  on  the 20th  floor  and  the  elevator  only  
goes up to the 19th floor. 

Watchdog  CSOs  have  reported  a  substantial  backlog  in  the  CPAD’s  handling  of cases.2 6 2  
The  Network  against  Discrimination  (a  network  of  CSOs  working  on  equality  and  non-
discrimination  issues)  reported  that in  2014  it  submitted  seven  cases to  the CPAD,  four 
cases to the Ombudsperson,  as well as other cases, responses, requests and so on to other 
institutions.  Of  these,  the  CPAD  resolved  four  out  of  the  seven  cases,  not  finding 
discrimination  in  any of them,  and  the Ombudsperson  resolved  all  four  cases submitted  to 
it.  Three  of  the  four  cases  were  discrimination  cases,  and  the  Ombudsperson  found 
discrimination  in all three. The fourth case is a case that the Network against Discriminat ion 
brought  against  the CPAD. 

Following  silence  from  the  CPAD  on  10  cases submitted  to  it  in  the  period  2011-  2013, 
which is  in  clear violation  of its obligation  to respond  within  90  days, the Network  against  
Discrimination  filed  a case to the Ombudsperson  against the CPAD.  Once instructed by the 
Ombudsperson  (with  a  notice  in  which  it  points  out  to  the  CPAD  that  it  is  not  acting  in 
accordance with  the  law),  the  CPAD  sent  the  opinions  on  all  these cases to  the  Network 
against Discrimination.  The annual  report of the Network  against Discrimination  containing 
this  information  highlights  that it  is  evident  from  the  dates  stated on  the  opinions  that 
some  of them  were  delivered  quite some  time  before  being  sent to the network,  which  it 
interprets  as a sign  of weak  administrative  capacity and  negligence  on  part of the CPAD. 
The report  also notes that due  to the CPAD’s  tendency not to respect the legal deadline of 
90  days to respond  to a  filed  case, the network  has  decided to address  its cases to other 
institutions, rather than to the CPAD,  should  it be in a position to choose. The network also 
notes  that,  up  to  the  present  day,  the  Ombudsperson,  although  having  a  more  limit ed 
mandate,  seems  to be a more  efficient institution in resolving  cases when compared  to the 
CPAD. 

261  The State Defender is a state budget financed institution. However, it has a practice of requesting litigation 

costs as private solicitors. When combined with court costs, this is a serious burden on the claimant.  
262  See: http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2864-fyr-macedonia-cso-network-annual-report-pdf-72-kb. 

76 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
In  relation  to the courts, the obstacles can be even bigger. These proceedings are  subject 
to administrative  taxes  and  they  can  take  much  longer.  The  time  limits  are  strict. Also, 
they raise  the issue of the obligation  to engage  a lawyer. 

c) 

Number  of discrimination  cases brought  to justice 

In  Macedonia  there  are  partially  available  statistics on  the  number  of  cases  related  to 
discrimination  brought  to  justice.  There  are  statistics  on  the  work  of  the  CPAD,  the 
Ombudsperson  and  the  Constitutional  Court,  however  statistics from  ordinary  courts are 
lacking.  The CPAD  received 70 cases in 2015  (a striking  fall of one third compared  to 2014, 
when  it  received 106  cases, and  the  first fall  in  the number  of  cases since this  body  was 
established).  The cases in  2015  were  brought  on  the following  discrimination  grounds:  9  
on ethnicity, 8  on personal  or social  status, 8 on  mental  or physical  disability,  8 on  age, 8 
on  health status, 5  on political  affiliation,  4  on family  or  marital  status, 4 on  social origin, 
3  on  language,  3  on  education,  2  on  sex,  2  on  race,  2  on  citizenship,  2  on  religion  or 
religious  belief,  2  on other  beliefs,  2 on  property  status, 1  on colour  of skin,  1 on gender, 
1  on  belonging  to a  marginalised  group,  17  cases where  no  ground  was claimed,  and  14 
under  ‘any  other  ground’.  In  filed  cases, the  alleged  discrimination  was  in  the following 
fields:  30  in  employment  and  labour  relations,  4  in  access to goods  and  services,  14  in 
social  security, 4  in  judiciary  and  administration,  3  in  public  information  and  media,  3  in 
education,  science  and  sports,  4  in  housing,  13  in  which  no  field  was  claimed  by  the 
applicant,  and  3  in  other  fields  as  provided  for  under  the law.  As  in  previous  years,  the 
body  did  not  produce  accurate  statistics on  how  many  of  these  cases  were  processed 
and/or  were closed in  2015.2 6 3 

In  2015,  the percentage of discrimination  cases remained  low:  53  cases were directed  to 
the  Ombudsperson  (representing  1.2  %  of  the  total  number  of  cases  received  by  the 
Ombudsperson).  This  is  small  drop  compared  to  2014,  when  it  registered  66  cases 
(representing  1.55  %  of the total number  of cases it received).  As  in  the  previous  years, 
the Ombudsperson  did  not publish  detailed  statistics as to grounds  and fields  in relation  to 
the cases, but did  mention  that the trend  of cases relating  to employment  and  on grounds 
of ethnicity forming  the largest number  of cases has continued. 

In 2014, the Constitutional Court 2 6 4 received 13 cases in relation to the protection of human 
rights  and  fundamental  freedoms  (protection  against  discrimination 
falls  within  this 
category and  seven of the cases were  cases for protection against discrimination).  This is 
a substantial  drop  in  the number  of such cases filed  to the Constitutional  Court  compared 
to previous  years  (there were 22  cases in  2013,  25  cases in  2012  and 23  cases in  2011).  
In  2014  the  Constitutional  Court  did  not  report  in  how  many  of  these  cases it  found  a 
violation  of human  rights,  but  simply  mentions  that it  did  not  consider  two of  the cases 
because there was no breach of rights. 2 6 5  

d) 

Registration  of discrimination  cases by national  courts 

In  Macedonia discrimination  cases are not registered  as such by national  courts.  

6.2  Legal standing and associations (Article 7(2) Directive  2000/43,  Article  9(2) 

Directive  2000/78) 

a) 

Engaging  on behalf  of victims  of discrimination  (representing  them) 

263  C ommission for Protection Against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација) (2016), 2015 

Annual Report of the C ommission for Protection Against Discrimination http://www.akademik.mk/wp-
content/uploads/2016/04/diskriminacija.pdf. 

264  At the time of writing of this report, the 2015 report has still not been published. 
265  Overview of the Work of the Constitutional Court in 2014 [Преглед на работата на У ставниот Суд за 2014 

год ина] (February 2015). 

77 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
In  Macedonia  associations/organisations/trade  unions  are  entitled  to  act  on  behalf  of 
victims  of  discrimination.  Under  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  associations  of  citizens  (as 
well as institutions, foundations, and other civil organisations)  with a legitimate  interest as 
well  as any other  person  working  on  the right  to equal  treatment are  explicitly  allowed  to 
join  a  potential  victim’s  case (Article  39),  and  in  practice they are  also  allowed  to act  on 
behalf of victims  of discrimination  (legitimate  interest is defined in  Article 5(10)).  In labour 
cases, the  Law  on  Labour  Relations  provides  the  option  only  for  trade  unions  to  act on 
behalf  of the victim,  as long  as they have the approval  of the complainant  (Article 93). 

b) 

Engaging  in support  of victims  of discrimination 

In  Macedonia  associations/organisations/trade  unions  can  act  in  support  of  victims  of 
discrimination.  There does not seem  to be a procedural  obstacle for  such support,  and for 
joining  in existing  proceedings. However,  it needs to be underlined  that it is up to the court 
to  allow 
the 
associations/organisations/trade  unions  have an equality  mandate  (most  likely  judging  by 
their founding  articles) and then decide whether it will  allow  for this or not (as specified by 
Article 39  of the Anti-discrimination  Law). 

this  or  not.  The  court  will  be 

into  whether 

looking 

for 

c) 

Actio popularis 

In  Macedonia  national  law  allows  associations  / organisations  / trade  unions  to act in the 
public  interest on their own behalf,  without a specific victim to support or represent ( actio 
popularis).  Although  this is  not expressly  provided  for under  the Anti-discrimination  Law, 
this  is  the  well-established  practice  of  the  equality  body.  It  does  exist  expressly  as  an 
option  under  other  laws, and  in  other procedures.  The Constitutional  Court  has the ability 
to  look  into  actio  popularis  cases in  relation  to  human  rights  cases, including  cases on 
discrimination. 

d) 

Class  action 

In Macedonia national  law allows  associations, organisations  and trade unions  to act in the 
interest of more  than one individual  victim  (class action) for  claims  arising  from  the same 
event. Class  action (‘joint  lawsuit’  under  the  Anti-discrimination  Law)  can be  brought  by 
associations  of  citizens,  foundations,  or  other  civil  society  institutions  and  organisations 
that have  a  justified  interest  in  pursuing  the case. The main  condition  for  undertaking  a 
class action is  to have the authorisation  of the person  that finds  him/herself  discriminat ed 
against  (Article 41(4)),  i.e. an actual person  concerned with the class action. Persons  will 
be  considered  as  co-litigants  against  the  person  that  has  violated  the  right  to  equal 
treatment  (Article  41(1)).  This  specific article  refers  to court proceedings,  however  such 
an approach  is also permitted  in  cases before the equality  body. 

6.3  Burden  of proof  (Article  8 Directive  2000/43,  Article  10 Directive  2000/78) 

In  Macedonia  national  law  requires  a shift of the burden  of proof  from  the complainant  to 
the respondent  (save for criminal  and misdemeanour  proceedings). 

The  Anti-discrimination  Law  declaratively  states that it  is  up  to  the respondent  to prove 
that  no  violation  of  the  right  to  equal  treatment  has  occurred.  However,  in  order  for  a 
procedure  to be  initiated,  the  law  asks  for  facts and  proof  from  the  complainant  ( Article 
38). As according to the directives, people  who consider themselves  wronged  because the 
principle  of equal  treatment has  not been  applied  to them  establish  only  facts from  which 
it may  be presumed  that there has been discrimination,  the Anti-discrimination  Law seems 
to place a huge part of the burden  in  proving  discrimination  on the complainant,  asking  for 
the submission  of ‘facts and  proofs  from  which the  act or action of  discrimination  can be 
established’,  unlike  the  directives,  which  set  a  requirement  for  facts  from  which  the 
discrimination  may  be presumed (emphasis  added). 

78 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This  means  that although  the law  claims  that it  is  not the complainant  who  has  to prove 
the facts but the respondent, we cannot say that it provides  for a reversed burden  of proof, 
as  per  the  directives,  as  a  step  towards  proving  the  facts  is  a  burden  placed  on  the 
complainant  by asking  for proofs  aside from  laying  out of all known  facts in relation  to the 
case and  leaving  the  respondent  to show  these  facts to be  non-existent  (i.e.it  makes  a 
step from  onus  proferendi to onus  probandi). 

The Law  on  Labour  Relations  and  the Law  on  Social  Protection also  include  provisions  on 
the shift of burden  of proof (Articles 11(1)  and  (2) and  Article 23 respectively). The newly 
adopted  Law  on  Psychological  and  Sexual  Harassment  also  provides  for  a  shift  of  the 
burden  of proof  (Article  33).  Since  these provisions  differ  from  the provision  in  the Anti-
discrimination  Law,  it  remains  subject  to  judicial  interpretation  which  provision  will  be 
applied  to  a  labour  case. The Law  on  Child  Protection  prescribes  that the  procedure  for 
protection  against  discrimination  shall  be  conducted  as  prescribed  by  the   Anti-
discrimination  Law,  thus  one  can conclude that the  same  rules  for  shifting  the burden  of 
proof  will  apply. 

6.4  Victimisation  (Article  9 Directive  2000/43,  Article  11 Directive  2000/78) 

In  Macedonia  there  are  legal  measures  of  protection  against  victimisation.  The  Anti-
discrimination  Law  declares  victimisation  to be  a  form  of  discrimination.  Victimisation  is 
extended  beyond  the  person  who  reports  discrimination,  to  the  person  who  files  the 
complaint  and  to any witnesses (Article  10). The Constitution  also  provides  for protection 
against victimisation,  as it states that a citizen cannot be called to account or suffer adverse 
consequences for  attitudes expressed  in  petitions,  unless  they entail  the committing  of a 
criminal  offence (Article 24).  The Law on  Labour  Relations  provides  for  protection against  
victimisation2 6 6  in  a procedure  related to psychological  harassment  (referred  to in  the law 
as  mobbing).  This  protection  also  extends  to  cover  witnesses.  Protection  against  
victimisation  is also  granted  under  the new  Law on  Psychological  and Sexual  Harassment  
(Article 30). 

6.5  Sanctions  and  remedies  (Article  15  Directive  2000/43,  Article  17  Directiv e  

2000/78) 

a) 

Applicable  sanctions in  cases of discrimination  – in  law  and in  practice 

Under  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  sanctions  vary  according  to  the  procedure.  The 
administrative  procedure  envisages  a recommendation  for rectifying  the violation  (i.e. the 
discrimination)  within  30  days;  litigation  could  lead  to regular  compensation  awards;  and 
the misdemeanour  procedure envisages fines in the range of EUR  702 6 7  to 1 000, in national 
currency (Articles 42  to 45(6)).  Alignment  with the new Law on  Misdemeanours  (adopted 
23  July  2015),  resulted  in  amendments  to  Chapter  VII-Misdemeanours,  of  the  Anti-
discrimination  Law. Following  the amendments,  paragraphs  one in  Articles 42-45  are  now 
on  legal  persons,  paragraphs  two  on  responsible  persons  from  the  legal  person,  and 
paragraphs  three for responsible  persons at the public bodies, while  new fourth paragraphs 
are  added  for  natural  persons.  The  charges  for  legal  persons  are  raised,  the  fines  for 
responsible  persons  with public  duties  and natural  persons  are lowered,  whereas  the fines 
for  the responsible  person  in  the legal  person  are  set on a  strict scale, which  is  the mid-
value  from  the amount  that was prescribed  thus far. Before  the amendments,  paragraphs 
one  prescribed  fines  for  ‘anyone’  that conducts the above  noted  actions,  paragraphs  two 
were on fines for the responsible  person  from  the legal  person  (be it private or public)  and 
paragraphs  three were  fines for the legal  person  itself. 

266  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 11(3). 
267  Lowest fine dropped from EUR 100 to EUR 70 with the 2015 amendments of the ADL. 

79 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
In  labour  cases as well  as other civil  court litigation,  only  compensation  for pecuniary  and 
non-pecuniary damages  can be claimed.2 6 8   In cases of child and social protection, sanctions 
are  fines imposed  in  a misdemeanour  procedure.  These can  amount  to EUR  500  to 1  000 
(in  national  currency)  in  child  protection  cases  and  EUR  3  000  to  5  000  (in  national 
currency) in  cases concerning  social protection.2 6 9  

b) 

Ceiling  and amount  of compensation 

There  are  no  limits  stipulated  by  law,  and  the amount  of compensation  fully  depends  on 
the court verdict. In  other areas of compensation  (such as traffic accidents), court practice 
is to relate  the sum  of compensation  to the living  standard  in the country. 

c) 

Assessment  of the sanctions 

At present no conclusions  can be drawn  as to whether the  available  sanctions are likely  to 
be effective, proportionate  and  dissuasive,  as required  by the directive s.  When  compared 
to  the  available  sanctions  provided  for  other  misdemeanours 2 7 0  and  so  on,  the  anti-
discrimination  sanctions cannot be  seen as dissuasive,  effective or  proportionate.  Further 
consideration  of the  issue  through  legal  practice is  not  possible  y et, due  to  lack  of  case 
law. 

268  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Articles 264-266. 
269  Please bear in mind that the average gross monthly salary in the country is approximately EUR 380. 
270  For example, the value of the fine in some discrimination cases is equal to the value of a fine for throwing a 

cigarette butt on the street. 

80 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
7  BODIES  FOR  THE  PROMOTION  OF EQUAL  TREATMENT  (Article  13 Directive 

2000/43) 

a) 

Body/bodies  designated  for  the  promotion  of  equal  treatment  irrespective  of 
racial/ethnic origin  according to Article 13  of the Racial  Equality  Directive 

The Anti-discrimination  Law, adopted in  the course of harmonising  the national  legislation 
with the acquis, provided  for the establishment  of an equality  body  –  the Commission  for 
Protection against  Discrimination  (CPAD).2 7 1   This  commission  is  tasked  to deal  with  both 
the  public  and  the  private  sector.  It  is  the  first  specialised  body  for  equal  treatment . 
According to the preparation  materials  of the Anti-discrimination  Law, the CPAD is the body 
established  and  tasked with equality according  to the transposition  process. 

Before  this, the Ombudsperson  was the only  institution  that had  duties  for the protection 
of the principles  of non-discrimination  and  equality  as part of its broader  mandate  for  the 
protection  of  human  rights  in  the  public  sector. 2 7 2  It  has  a  special  unit  focused  on  non-
discrimination  and  equitable  and  just representation. 

b) 

Status of the designated body/bodies  – general  independence 

According to the Anti-discrimination  Law,2 7 3  the CPAD  is established  as an autonomous  and 
independent  body. The CPAD  is composed  of seven members  appointed by the Parliament  
with  five-year  mandates.  Macedonian  citizens  with  regular  residence  in  the  country, 
university  degrees  and  experience  in  human  rights  are  eligible 
for  membersh ip. 
Applications  are collected through  a public  call for applications. 

The commission  is financed through  the state budget, but its activities can also  be funded 
through other sources. The members  of the commission  receive honorarium  of two average 
monthly  salaries2 7 4  (around  EUR  700  gross  per  month).  However,  its  annually  allocated 
budget  in  the  state  budget  remains  very  small,  creating  a  barrier  to  the  CPAD  fully 
exercising  its duties. It should also be noted that the CPAD has been a beneficiary of several 
projects conducted by CSOs, and  has been one of the main  institutions  in  the focus of the 
OSCE  Mission  in  Skopje  anti-discrimination  project for the past four  years. 

The  other  body  of  relevance  here,  the  Ombudsperson, 
is  tasked  to  protect  the 
constitutional  and  legal  rights  of  citizens  when  violated  by  state  bodies  and  other 
authorities  and  organisations  with  public  powers. This  quasi-judicial  institution  has  a 
mandate  to  safeguard  inter  alia  principles  of  non-discrimination,  and  adequate  and 
equitable  representation  of  communities  in  the  organs  of  state  power,  bodies  of  local 
government  and public  institutions  and services (Article 77).2 7 5 

The Ombudsperson  is elected by the Parliament  under  the Badinter  principle  (i.e. majorit y 
vote of the  total number  of  parliamentarians,  which  must  include  a  majority  of the  total 
number  of  MPs  who  belong  to ethnic communities  that are  not  the ethnic  majority).  The 
Ombudsperson  is  elected for a term  of eight  years, with the possibility  for one re-election. 
The  Ombudsperson  has  deputies  who  are  elected  under  the  same  procedure  as  the 
Ombudsperson,  one  of  whom  is  tasked  to  focus  on  non-discrimination  and  equitable 
representation. 

271  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination, 2014, 

Articles 16 to 33. 

272  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on the Ombudsperson, 2003, Articles 6, 11. 
273  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination,  2010. 
274  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination,  2010, 

Article 21. 

275  C onstitution of the Republic of Macedonia (Устав на Република Македонија). Official Website of the 

Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia, www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-
macedonia.nspx, Article 77. 

81 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
if  they  meet  the  general 
Any  Macedonian  citizen  can  be  appointed  Ombudsperson 
conditions  specified  in  law  for  employment  in  a  state body,  and  if  they  are  a  graduate 
lawyer with over nine  years’ experience  in legal  affairs, whose activity is proven  in the field 
of  protection  of  citizens'  rights  and  who  enjoys  a  suitable  reputation  for  performing  the 
function of  Ombudsperson.2 7 6   The Ombudsperson  and  the Deputy  Ombudsperson  cannot 
be  held  responsible  for  actions,  measures  and  ac tivities  undertaken  in  exercising  their 
function. The independence  and  autonomy  of the office is  guaranteed  by the Constitution 
and by law. 

In  practice, the  election  of  the  Ombudsperson  very  much  depends  on  the  votes  of  the 
governing  political  parties.  Also,  given  that its funding  comes  from  the state budget,  the 
Ombudsperson  could  also  be  seen  as  financially  dependent  (as  no  law  prescribed 
percentages  of  its  budget).  The  institution  has  a  working  unit  for  protection  against 
discrimination. 

A study on national  human  rights  institutions  in  Macedonia (conducted in  2012)  looked  at 
both  these  institutions,  aiming  to  assess  them  against  the  international  framework  of 
standards,  including  the  EU  acquis.  For  the  CPAD,  on  the  part  of  the  legal  framework, 
related  to issues  raised  in  this  question  of the report,  it  recommended  that: a  guarantee 
for pluralism  of the CPAD  beyond  ethnicity should  be entered in  the law  in order  to enable 
the  composition  of  CPAD  to  mirror  the  society  as  a  whole;  the  law  should  include  an 
obligation  for  the  Parliament  to  debate  the  CPAD  annual  report,  accompanied  with  an 
obligation  for representatives from  the Government  to be present at the session where this 
report  will  be  discussed;  and  that social  sciences  should  not  be  included  in  the  provision, 
so  as  to allow  only  people  with  specific equality  and  non-discrimination  or  human  rights 
education and  experience  to be  able  to stand  as candidates for  members  of the CPAD.2 7 7  
Also,  it  reiterated  previous  findings  that  ‘the  discussions  at  the  parliamentary  session 
devoted to the appointment  on members,  prove the whole  process of the establishment  of 
the first composition  of the first equality body in  the country as a highly  politicised  one.’2 7 8  
On  the resources  of the CPAD,  it made  the  following  recommendations:  allow  under  law  
the creation of a secretariat, or  any form  of administrative  support for the CPAD;  give due 
consideration  to  the  possibility  for  professionalisation  of  the  members  of  the  CPAD  by 
making  this their full-time  job and  position;  for the CPAD  to be in a position, similar  to the 
Ombudsperson,  to agree upon its annual budget with the Government  for funds that should 
be sufficient for  CPAD  to be able  to exercise  its full  mandate;  consider establishing  formal 
links  with  the regional  offices of  the Ombudsperson,  in  order  to expand  the reach  of the 
CPAD.2 7 9  

The  study’s  recommendations  on  independence  for  the  Ombudsperson,  which  has  non -
discrimination  duties, suggested appointing  the Ombudsperson  for a single  non-renewable 
term,  as a way to reduce susceptibility  to political  pressure,  while  in  relation  to resources 
it recommended  the allocation of sufficient funds for the Ombudsperson  to exercise its full 
mandate.2 8 0  

276  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on the Ombudsperson, 2003, Article 6. 
277  Kotevska, Biljana (2012), National Human Rights Institutions in Macedonia: Normative Models and 

Challenges. CRPRC Studiorum, Skopje, http://studiorum.org.mk/en/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/NHRI_Study_MKD-2012for_web.pdf, pp. 48-49. 

278  Kotevska, Biljana (2012) National Human Rights Institutions in Macedonia: Normative Models and 

Challenges. CRPRC Studiorum, Skopje, http://studiorum.org.mk/en/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/NHRI_Study_MKD-2012for_web.pdf, p. 45. 

279  Kotevska, Biljana (2012) National Human Rights Institutions in Macedonia: Normative Models and 

Challenges. CRPRC Studiorum, Skopje, http://studiorum.org.mk/en/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/NHRI_Study_MKD-2012for_web.pdf, p. 50. 

280  Kotevska, Biljana (2012) National Human Rights Institutions in Macedonia: Normative Models and 

Challenges. CRPRC Studiorum, Skopje, http://studiorum.org.mk/en/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/NHRI_Study_MKD-2012for_web.pdf, pp. 39-40. 

82 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Concerns  about  the  independence  of  the  body  were  further  strengthened  with  the  wire -
tapping  affair.  In  February  2015,  the  largest  opposition  party  started  to publicly  release 
what are allegedly  recordings  from  the illicit  interception of communications  of more  than 
20,000  people  that are  alleged  to have been  carried  out by  the state Counterintelligenc e 
Agency.2 8 1  The  content  of  the  published  recordings  removed  doubt s  about  the  already 
existing  claims  of a state capture2 8 2 and extreme  concentration of power in the ruling  party, 
including  the complete  exercise of party control over not only  the judiciary,  but all  aspects 
of society. It  is  of interest  for  this  report  to highlight  that what seems  to be  the voice of 
the  president  of  the  equality  body,  Dushko  Minovski,  also  featured  in  the  publicly 
broadcasted conversations; he can be heard to be a person working for the ruling party on 
the  ground  during  the  election  campaign,  and,  even  more  seriously,  to  be  (ab)using  his 
position  as  someone  in  the  employment  of  the  Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Policy  by 
instructing  people  that have been  awarded  social assistance how  to vote. 2 8 3  

c)  Grounds  covered by the designated  body/bodies 

The  Commission  on  Protection  Against  Discrimination  deals  with  the  following  grounds : 
sex,  race, colour,  gender,  belonging  to a marginalised  group,  ethnic affiliation,  language, 
citizenship,  social  origin,  religion  or  religious  belief,  other  beliefs,  education,  political 
belonging,  personal  or social status, mental  or  physical impairment,   age, family  or  marit al 
status, property  status, health  condition,  any  other  ground  prescribed  by  law  or  ratified 
international  treaty.  The  Ombudsperson  can  also  deal  with  the  following  grounds:  sex, 
race, colour,  national,  ethnic,  social,  political,  religious,  cultural,  language,  property  and 
social background,  disability,  origin  and  any other ground.   

d) 

Competences  of the designated body/bodies  – and  their independent  exercise 

The  Commission  on  Protection  Against  Discrimination  can  receive  individual  complaints, 
investigate, provide independent  assistance to victims, make  recommendations  and initiate 
procedures to establish the responsibility  of people  who will  not obey its recommendations. 
It  has  the  competence  to  collect statistics and  other  data,  and  to  conduct surveys  and 
research on  discrimination. 

The  Ombudsperson  can  receive  individual  complaints,  investigate,  provide  independent  
assistance  to  victims,  make  recommendations  and  submit  independent  reports  to  the 
media  and  the Parliament.  The Ombudsperson  is  empowered  to conduct special research 
and investigations  on specific issues. 

e) 

Legal  standing  of the designated  body/bodies 

Under  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  the  CPAD  does  not  have  the legal  authority  to  bring 
discrimination  complaints  or to intervene  in  legal  cases concerning  discrimination  in  court. 
It can only  bring  to ‘competent  authorities’  cases of persons  to whom  a recommendat ion 
was directed but who have not acted upon it (Articles 39, 41). However, in  2013, the CPAD 
made  a  request  to  one  of  the  courts  and  was  allowed  to  intervene  in  a  case  of 
discrimination,  which  means  that although  such a  competence is not explicitly  granted  in 
the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  the  CPAD  can  intervene 
legal  cases  concerning 
discrimination. 

in 

281  Balkan Insight, ‘Macedonia PM Accused of Large-Scale Wire-Tapping’ (09.02.2015), Balkan Insight Website, 

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/eavesdropping-bombshell-explodes-in-macedonia. 
282  The concept of state capture is mentioned here in terms of the understanding by Transparency 

International, that is: ‘a situation where powerful individuals, institutions, companies or groups within or 
outside a country use corruption to shape a nation’s policies, legal environment and economy to benefit 
their own private interests’. 

283  A1On online media portal, ‘SDSM: Jankulovska says “By the ears, Gipsy by Gipsy, we’ll drag them”’ [ СДСМ: 

Јанкулоска вели – За уши, циган по циган ќе вадиме] http://a1on.mk/wordpress/archives/465799. 
Please notе that in the national context ‘Gipsy’ (Циган) is a derogatory word for Roma. 

83 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
The Ombudsperson  can act on a request from  an individual  or ex  officio, however  it cannot 
intervene  in  court  cases (Article  13).  When  the  Ombudsperson  concludes that violations 
are made,  s/he may  make  recommendations,  suggestions,  opinions  and indications on how 
to  act  upon  detected  violations;  propose  a  retrial  (reopening  of  the  case);  initiate 
disciplinary  proceedings  against   officials  or  responsible  persons;  and  apply  to  the 
competent public  prosecutor for initiating  criminal  procedures. 

f) 

Quasi-judicial  competences 

In  Macedonia the bodies  are  quasi-judicial  institutions. 

The  CPAD  has  elements  of  a  quasi-judicial  institution,  however  it  does  not  impose 
sanctions, but only  delivers  opinions  and  recommendations.  It can receive a  case on  any 
of the grounds  in the public and private sphere in order to protect complainants. Complaint s 
are filed  free of charge, but need  to contain facts and proof  to support  the claims.  

Once  the  CPAD  receives  a  complaint,  it  forwards  it  to the  respondent  within  15  days  of 
receipt. The respondent  has 15  days to reply  to the complaint.  Altogether, the CPAD  must  
deliver  an  opinion  in  90  days from  the day of receipt of the complaint.  The respondent  to 
whom  a  recommendation  has  been  directed  needs  to act in  accordance with  it within  30 
days of  the notification  it has  received from  the CPAD.  If  a person  does not act upon  the 
recommendation,  the CPAD  can initiate  a procedure  in front of a ‘competent  authority’. 

The  Ombudsperson  also  has  elements  of  a  quasi-judicial  institution.  Under  law,  state 
organs  should  implement  its recommendations  (Article 32). If state bodies do not respond, 
the Ombudsperson  has the right  to inform  the higher  responsible  body, the Parliament  and 
the public  through  the media. 

g) 

Registration  by the bodies  of complaints  and decisions 

In Macedonia the bodies  register the number  of complaints  and decisions (by ground,  field, 
type of discrimination,  etc.). These data are not available  to the public . However, they are 
made  available  in  the annual  reports. In addition,  they could be made  available  throughout  
the year upon  request. The CPAD  has the software to generate such statistics, and it also 
grants access to anonymised  documents  from  the complete case documentation.  Although 
the software is capable of providing  updated statistics on the website, this is not done and 
the statistics are made  public only  in the annual  reports. Aside from  the annual  report, the 
Ombudsperson  grants access only to the statistics upon request, but it does not give access 
to  other  case  documentation.  An  issue  in  relation  to  the  statistics  coming  from  the 
Ombudsperson’s  office is that they mix  the fields  and the grounds  of discrimination. 

h) 

Roma  and  Travellers 

Neither  the  Ombudsperson  nor  the  CPAD  has  shown  through  their  actions  thus  far  that 
they  consider  the  situation  of  Roma  and  Travellers  as  a  priority  issue.  However,  the 
Ombudsperson  has  been  vocal on  many  occasions about  the complexity  and  specificities 
of  the problems  Roma  face, including  problems  related  to discrimination.  Moreover,  it is 
thanks  to the instruction that the Ombudsperson  issued  to the CPAD  that the CPAD  finally 
resolved  a  case filed  by  the  Helsinki  Committee  of  the  Republic  of  Macedonia  in  2011 
regarding  the  segregation  of Roma  children  in  schools  in  Bitola.   As  reported  above  (see 
section 6.1.b.),  the Ombudsperson  acted upon  a case filed  with it by the Network  against  
Discrimination  against  the CPAD  for  violating  the  body’s  obligation  to respond  to  a  filed 
case within  90 days. 

Further  to the argument  for  there  being  a lack  of prioritisation  of Roma  issues  is  the fact 
that even after this intervention,  and after breaching  all possible  procedural  deadlines,  the 
CPAD  finally  decided this case in September  2014,  and the applicants received the decision 

84 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
only  in  December  2014.  The CPAD  did  not  find  discrimination  on  grounds  of ethnicity  in 
the case, nor  did  it find  segregation.  As already  explained  above, the CPAD  actually found 
the  situation  to  be  a  result  of  the  parents’  choice to  register  their  children  in  a  specific 
primary  school, however  it failed  to state on what it bases its argument  and bluntly  added 
that it  ‘further  supports  this  argument’  with  a  report  from  a  person  from  another  state 
institution  who claims  that this  process is  one of ‘natural  segregation’. 2 8 4   Although  having 
deliberated  on  this  case  for  over  three  years,  the  CPAD  adds  a  surprisingly  short 
elaboration  on  its opinion,  the largest  portion  of which consists of a bullet  point  list  of  14 
letters/requests that it has sent and received while  processing  the case, one  of which is  a 
rather  vague  explanation  of proceedings  which states, ‘numerous  phone  calls on  the case 
topic with  relevant  sides  and  numerous  meetings  on  the case topic’.  There  is  no  further 
elaboration  as to whom  the CPAD  talked  to or  with whom  and  when  they met,  and  what 
was  discussed  and  possibly  decided.  It  also  disregards  reports  on  Roma  children  in 
education and  on segregation  in  education, including  a statement from  the director  of the 
primary  school saying  that the parents of children  from  other ethnicities, although  living  in 
the school’s  region,  choose to register  their  children  in  other  primary  schools  in  order  to 
avoid  sending  them  to school with Roma  children. 2 8 5  

284   C ommission for Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација), Opinion of 

the C ommission for Protection against Discrimination, 05.09.2014, 
http://www.kzd.mk/sites/default/files/dokumenti/mislenja/2014/etn_pripadnost/07-80.%2005.09.2014.pdf. 

285  C ommission for Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација), Opinion of 

the C ommission for Protection against Discrimination, 05.09.2014, 
http://www.kzd.mk/sites/default/files/dokumenti/mislenja/2014/etn_pripadnost/07-80.%2005.09.2014.pdf. 

85 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
8 

IMPLEMENTATION  ISSUES   

8.1  Dissemination  of  information,  dialogue  with  NGOs  and  between  social 

partners 

Dissemination  of  information 

In  2015,  the  main  activities  in  relation  to  the  dissemination  of  information,  including 
capacity building  of institutions, continued to be organised  and implemented  by CSOs (with 
the Network  against  Discrimination  and  its  members  leading  most  of  the initiatives)  and 
the OSCE Mission  to Skopje.  They regularly  include the Ministry  of Labour  and Social Policy 
(MLSP)  and  the Commission  for  Protection against Discrimination  (CPAD)  as partners/co -
implementers  in  the activities. 

The OSCE  completed  an  analysis  of the  harmonisation  of the  national  equality  and  non-
discrimination  legislation  with  international  standards  and  an  analysis  of  the  internal 
harmonisation  of  the laws.2 8 6   It  also  published  a  ‘Guide  on  Situation  Testing’,  ‘Practicum 
on the Law on Prevention  and Protection against Discrimination’  (describing  the procedure 
followed  by the  CPAD  and  providing  comparative  analysis  of different  European  models),  
and ‘Judgements  from  the European  Court of Human  Rights  and  the Court  of Justice of the 
European  Union’  (a compilation  of the case law  of international  jurisdictions  in  relation  to 
discrimination  cases), as well  as preparing  an  analysis  of discrimination,  stereotypes and 
prejudice  in  primary  school textbooks.2 8 7  The OSCE  continued its capacity building  efforts, 
reporting  that in the period  2011-2015  it had organised  the training  of 270  judges  and 130 
lawyers.2 8 8 In  addition,  in cooperation with the CPAD  and MLSP, it published  an analysis of 
discriminatory  practices in  the field  of education, and in  cooperation with CPAD  a research 
report  on the segregation  of Roma  children  in  education. 

The civil  society organisation  H.E.R.A.  implemented  a project together with the CPAD  with 
the  aim  of  increasing  its  capacities, visibility  and  activity in  relation  to  discrimination  on 
grounds  of  sexual  orientation  and  gender  identity.  Aside  from  a public  media  campaign , 
which  seemed  to be  well  received on  social  media,  this  cooperation  ultimately  resulted  in 
the  adoption  of  a  protocol  on  processing  discrimination  cases  on  grounds  of  sexual 
orientation  and  gender  identity  in  front of  CPAD, 2 8 9   which  significantly  contributes to the 
recognition  of  the  legal  protection  of  these  two  grounds,  given  that  they  are  still  not 
explicitly  included  as  protection  grounds  in  the  open-ended  Article  3  of  the  Anti-
discrimination  Law. 

The  MLSP,  the  British  Council,  the  Citizens  Initiative  for  Equal  Opportunities  (‘Equal 
Access’) and  the Organisation  of Social  Workers  of Bitola  and  Demir  Hisar,  carried  out  a 
project,  ‘Effective  Implementation  of  the  Law  for  Prevention  and  Protection  Against  
Discrimination’.  They produced  a  manual  for  better implementation  of the  law,2 9 0  with a 
platform  for  cooperation  between  the  local  authorities  relat ing  to  the implementation  of 
the law,2 9 1  ultimately  resulting  in the adoption of a memorandum  of understanding  through 
which  the  duties  of  the  local  coordinators  were  extended  to  include  equality  and  non-
discrimination  issues  in  general  and  not  just  on  gender.  In  addition,  by  the end  of  2013 
they completed  a series  of training  events on various  topics regarding  non-discriminat ion 
and  equality  for  600  representatives  from  the  courts,  attorneys,  various  profiles  of 

286  Kotevska, Biljana Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation 

(forthcoming – 2016; OSCE and CPAD). 

287  This analysis has not been published yet. 
288  See the OSCE website: http://www.osce.org/skopje/194961. 
289  See flash report: http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2963-equality-body-and-civil-society-organizations-

join-to-make-sure-that-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-is-regarded-as-a-protected-ground-in-
macedonia-pdf-86-kb. 

290  The manual in Macedonian language is accessible on this page: 

http://ednakvimoznosti.mk/img_upload/Priracnik%20za%20implementacija%20na%20Zakonot.doc . 
291  About the Project (З а проектот) Ednakvi moznosti website, http://ednakvimoznosti.mk/za_proektot.asp. 

86 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
employees  from  bodies  working  on social  policy  and  other  areas  under  the MLSP,  a s well 
as in education, health, local self-government,  commerce  chambers,  trade unions,  etc. 

In  2014  and  beginning  of 2015,  in  connection with  a  PROGRESS  project,  two CSOs,  the 
MLSP and  the CPAD  conducted a project for raising  public awareness  on equality   and non-
discrimination  and advancing the legal  framework  for countering  discrimination.  They have 
conducted  various  activities  (a  series  of  conferences,  workshops,  a  public  campaign, 
photography  competition,  etc .) all  of which aim  to further promote  the c urrent framew ork 
and to discuss possible  amendments. 2 9 2  

Dialogue  with  NGOs 

The  trend  of  building  of  negative  sentiments  around  NGOs  has  continued.2 9 3   Massive 
protests  of  university  students,  followed  by  protests  of  high-school  students,  honoraria 
workers,  and unemployed  persons  did  not change anything  in  the Government’s  approach 
to dialogue  with NGOs  and citizens. 

The  adoption  of  important  laws  pertaining  to  human  rights  issues  continues  without 
including  NGOs  in  the  processes.  Public  statements  slandering  NGOs  that  criticise 
Government  policies  and  activities  continued.  In  spite  of  this,  the  CPAD  continued  the 
practice of good cooperation with CSOs.2 9 4  CPAD  has partnered  up with CSOs in conducting 
projects,  including  a  PROGRESS  project  this  past  year  (see  above),  and  its  members 
regularly  participate in  CSO events. 

The LGBTI  Support  Centre,  which has  been  in  operation  since 2012,  providing  support  to 
LGBTI  persons  and  to  their  family  and  friends,  has  been  subject to  attacks ever  since  it 
was  opened.  People  working  at the centre have  been  physically  attacked, and  its  offices 
have  been  damaged  several  times.  Following  one of  the attacks, the Centre  had  to close 
down for renovation  for a period  of time. 2 9 5  No  proper  investigation  and prosecution of the 
attackers on the LGBT  centre has  happened  yet and no  charges have been  raised  despite 
numerous  calls  by  CSOs,  protests organised  demanding  action, existing  video  recordings  
from  which  the attackers can be easily  identified  (available  on  YouTube), and  calls by the 
European  Commission  itself.2 9 6 

Dialogue  between  social partners 

The mechanism  for social dialogue  between social partners  is the Economic -social  Council. 
It  consists  of  representatives  from  the  Government,  the  Unions  and  the  Associations  of 
Employers.2 9 7   It  has  been  reported  that  this  council  held  over  20  meetings,  discussing 
workers’  rights,  and  other  labour  relations.  However,  it  cannot be said  that this would  be 
in  line  with  what  the  directives  are  demanding  as  promoting  a  dialogue  with  a  view  to 
giving  effect to the principle of equal treatment. Similar  councils have also been established 

292  PolioPlus. From Norm to Practice (Oд норма до пракса) Polio Plus website, 

http://www.polioplus.org.mk/vesti/proekt1.html. 

293  Notably, whenever the Government and/or Opposition presented a new position or was preparing grounds 
for introducing/proposing a new policy, or simply just wanted to distract the general public from another 
emerging problem, an NGO would hold a press conference (mostly NGOs registered a week/two weeks 
before) to support their claims or harshly refute the opposing side’s positions. This was done by both the 
Government and the Opposition and happened on numerous occasions. 

294  However, a not-so-promising development is the appointment of new members of the equality body, which 

although falling outside the reporting period is important and warrants a footnote. Please see: 
http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/3752-macedonia-appointment-of-new-members-of-the-equality-
body-pdf-123-kb. 

295  For more on this, please see flash Report: http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2177-mk-29-lgbti-centre-

attacks-no-reactions. 

296  ‘Absence of Reaction to Series of Attacks on the LGBTI Support C entre’. Network against Discrimination. 

http://www.equalitylaw.eu/component/edocman/mk-29-lgbti-centre-attacks-no-reactions. 

297  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (Министерство за труд и социјална политика) Economic-social Council 

http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/socijalno-partnerstvo-ns_article-ekonomsko-socijalen-sovet.nspx. 

87 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
on  local  level  in  seven  municipalities.  The  Organisation  of  Employers  of  Macedonia 
undertook  a project  that aimed  to foster dialogue  between the social  partners.2 9 8  Part of 
the project’s activities was the promotion  of the implementation  of acquis communautaire 
in  the area of social dialogue. 

Brief  note  on activities on  Roma 

The  Government  took  part  in  the  implementation  of  the  activities under  the  Decade  of 
Roma  Inclusion  (2005-2015).2 9 9   For  the whole  duration  of the Decade, action plans  were 
adopted for each year, and activities were implemented,  including  the establishment  of the 
Roma  Information  Centres  (RICs),  which  serve  also  as  points  of  contact with  the  NGO 
sector. Sixteen  NGOs  ran  a contact point as part  of the Decade  of Roma  Inclusion.  These 
monitored  the  implementation  of  the  plans,  carried  out  advocacy  activities,  issued 
recommendations  and  implement ed  joint  activities. After  the  closing  of  the  Decade,  the 
Government  continued  to support  the RICs.  It also  adopted a national  ‘Strategy on  Roma 
2014-2020’.3 0 0   In  addition  to this,  the Government  continues  to  have  a  Minister  without 
Portfolio3 0 1  tasked  to coordinate  Government  activities in  relation  to the  Roma,  although 
still  without much  visibility. 

8.2  Compliance  (Article  14 Directive  2000/43,  Article  16 Directive  2000/78) 

a)  Mechanisms 

No  mechanisms  exist  that ensure  all  contracts, collective agreements,  international  rules 
of  undertakings  and  rules  governing  independent  occupations  are  not  in  conflict  with 
(solely)  the  principle  of  equal  treatment.  However,  general  mechanisms  for  complianc e 
with  the  Constitution  and  national  laws,  and  with  legal  principles  such  as  lex  specialis  
derogat legi  generali  and lex  posterior derogat legi  priori  do exist. 

international 

rules  of  undertakings  and  rules  governing 
Collective  agreements, 
independent  occupations if  challenged  can be subject to a review  of constitutionality  and 
legality  before  the Constitutional  Court.  The Law  on  Obligations  provides  that a contract 
contrary  to  the  Constitution,  laws  and  good  customs  is  null  and  void. 3 0 2  Compliance  of 
contracts,  collective  agreements,  internal  rules  of  undertakings  and  rules  governing 
independent  occupations can  be  challenged  if  brought  before  court,  where  parts  or  f ull 
documents  can be deemed  null  and  void. 

The Law on Courts  provides  that loopholes  in  laws  are no  justification for  courts to refuse 
to  act on  upon  a  filed  case  —  courts  have  an  obligation  to  act based  on  the  general 
principles  of law, except when  that is strictly forbidden  by law.3 0 3   Also, respecting general 
legal  principles  is  in  the tradition  and teaching of the legal  system, and  applies  to national 
laws.  These  laws  almost  always  include  in  the  final  provision  section a  notion  of  the  lex 

298  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (Министерство за труд и социјална политика) Social dialogue and 
possibilities for compromise and balance between the economic and social development ( Социјалниот 
д ијалог-можност за копромис и баланс меѓу економскиот и социјалниот развој) 
http://vlada.mk/node/1927. 

299  For more information on the projects implemented in the context of the Decade of Roma Inclusion and MLSP 
activities on Roma rights and integration, please see: Проекти произлезени од декадата на Ромите, (Roma 
Decade Related Projects) Ministry of Labour and Social Policy Website, http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/proekti-
proizlezeni-od-dekadata-na-romite.nspx. 

300  Стратегија за Ромите 2014-2020 (Strategy on Roma 2014-2020), 

http://arhiva.vlada.mk/registar/files/Strategija_Romite_%202014-2020.pdf. 

301  The website and profile of the Minister without Portfolio can be accessed at this link: www.mbr-

ds.gov.mk/?q=node/2. 

302  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Obligations (З акон за облигациони односи), 2001, Article 
95, paragraph 1. Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No. 18/2001, 78/2001, 04/2002, 59/2002, 
05/2003, 84/2008, 81/2009, 116/2009, 123/2013. 

303  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Courts, 2006. 

88 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
specialis derogat legi generali including  changes made  on the principle  lex posterior derogat 
legi  priori. 

b) 

Rules  contrary to the principle  of equality 

Harmonisation  of the legal  framework  with the Anti-discrimination  Law has been identified 
as  a  general  strategic  goal  in  the  ‘National  Strategy  on  Equal  Opportunities  and  Non-
Discrimination  on Grounds  of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical Disability ’  adopted in May 
2012.  The action plan  for  the implementation  of the strategy envisaged  that this activity 
would  be completed  by the end  of 2013,3 0 4  however this activity has not been  conducted. 

In 2014  and 2015,  with OSCE support,  the CPAD  conducted an in-depth assessment of the 
harmonisation  of  the  Anti-discrimination  Law  with  international  equality  and  non-
discrimination  standards,  and  of  other  laws/provisions  pertaining  to  equality  and  non-
discrimination  with the Anti-discrimination  Law and with international  standards. The study 
identifies  points  for  harmonisation,  contains  concrete  proposals  for  amendments  of 
legislative  provisions  from  a  range  of  laws,  but  also  draws  some  general  conclusions, 
including  a need for urgent harmonisation  of the Anti-discrimination  Law with international 
standards  followed  by  harmonisation  of  other  laws  with  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  as 
well as reviews  of the terminology  on disability,  criteria for access to public service  and the 
position  of  LGBTIQ  persons.  The study  also  identifies  a  need  for  gender  mainstreami ng, 
equalisation  of  married  and  unmarried  couples  and  a  change  in  policy-making  processes 
which will,  in  principle,  result in  the consideration  of equality  and non-discrimination  when 
adopting  laws and  policies,  including  scrutinising  them  for possible  indirect effects.3 0 5  This 
study has not yet been published. 

304  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2013), Action Plan - 2013 for implementation of the National Strategy 
on Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical Disability, 
and Gender for 2012-2015, p.5. www.mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/akciski_l_eng.doc.  

305  Kotevska, Biljana Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation 

(forthcoming – 2016; OSCE and CPAD). 

89 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
9  COORDINATION  AT  NATIONAL  LEVEL 

The MLSP is tasked with coordinating  issues on anti-discrimination  on the grounds  covered 
in  this  report,  as well  as on  other  grounds  mentioned  in  national  legislation. 3 0 6   There  is a 
department  for  equal  opportunities,  as  well  as  a  deputy-minister  tasked  with  non-
discrimination  issues.3 0 7  Aside from  this ministry,  several other sections from  the executive 
Government  also  have duties that touch upon  anti-discrimination  on the grounds  covered 
in  this report: 

- 

- 

Inter-ministerial  body  on  human  rights  (seated  in  the  Ministry  of  Foreign  Affairs): 
tasked  with,  inter  alia,  strengthening  coordination  of  all  activities of  the  ministries 
and other  bodies  of the Government  with competences in human  rights; 
Minister  without  Portfolio:  tasked  with  coordination  of  all  Government  activities 
pertaining  to Roma  (including  implementation  of the Decade of Roma  Inclusion  2005-
2015). 

There are also coordinating  bodies tasked with monitoring  the implementation  of strategic 
documents  related in part to the discrimination  grounds  that are the subject of this report, 
notably the ones on disability  and  age. 

In 2014,  the Ministry  of Labour  and Social Policy adopted an action plan for implementat ion 
of  the  Anti-discrimination  Law  2015-2020,  which  it  devised  with  the  help  of  the  OSCE 
Mission  in  Skopje.  Harmonisation  of  the  national  equality  and  non-discrimination  legal 
framework,  increasing  the capacities of the competent  institutions  and their  coordination, 
as well  as  awareness-raising  activities are  part  of the planned  activities. Implementat ion 
of  the  action plan  started in  2015.  Although  no  official  update  on  its  progress  has  been 
published,  some  of  the  activities  have  started,  such  as  preparation  of  the  new  equality 
strategy (see below) and  the analysis  of the harmonisation  of the national  legislation  with 
international  standards  and  of the internal  harmonisation  of the legislation  with the Anti-
discrimination  Law. 

The  2012-2015  ‘National  Strategy  on  Equal  Opportunities  and  Non-Discrimination  on 
Grounds  of  Ethnicity,  Age,  Mental  and  Physical  Disability,  and  Gender’,3 0 8   and  its 
accompanying  action  plan3 0 9   were  the  first  documents  of  their  kind  in  the  country, 
establishing  the  general  goals  of  the  strategy  and  specific  goals  for  each  targeted 
discrimination  ground.  The general  strategic goals  are: advancing  the legal  framework  for 
equality  and  non-discrimination;  strengthening 
the  capacities  of  the  institutional 
mechanisms  for  the  prevention  and  protection  against  discrimination  and  promotion  of 
equal  treatment;  and  awareness  raising  in  respect of recognising  forms  of discriminat ion 
and  promoting  the  concepts of  non-discrimination  and  equal  opportunities.  The  strategy 
does  not  provide  for  positive  action  measures.  A  public  debate  on  the  new  ‘Strategy  on 
Equality  and  Non-discrimination  2016-2020’  was  organised  towards  the  end  of  2015. 
However, by the end of the reporting  period,  the new strategy had not yet been adopted.3 1 0  

306  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy: www.mtsp.gov.mk/?ItemID=21E7AB9648BFC441AFD588BA0183B4A3. 
307  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy: www.mtsp.gov.mk/?ItemID=380B6B1D444D5047B575F402122ED94A. 
308  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2012), Национална стратегија за еднаквост и недискриминација по 
основ на етничка припадност, возраст, ментална и телесна попреченост и пол 2012-2015 (National 
Strategy on Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical 
Disability, and Gender 2012-2015), www.mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/strategija_ednakvost.doc. 

309  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2013), Action Plan - 2013 for implementation of the National Strategy 
on Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical Disability, 
and Gender for 2012-2015, www.mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/akciski_l_eng.doc. 

310  Please note that this was also the case at the time of writing of this report. 

90 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
10  CURRENT  BEST  PRACTICES 

In  the current national  context, there are  not many  good practices that can be pointed  to, 
especially  as  issues  of  equality  and  non-discrimination  became  the  focus  of  state 
institutions  less  than  five  years  ago,  with  the  adoption  of  the  first  comprehensive 
legislation. 

From  the developments  in 2015, the best practice would be the outcome of the joint project 
implemented  by  Health  Education  and  Research  Association  (H.E.R.A.)  and  the  national 
equality  body  (the  CPAD),  which  resulted  in  the  adoption  of  a  protocol  on  processing 
discrimination  cases on  grounds  of sexual  orientation  and gender  identity. In  the absence 
of a  political  will  to put  forward  legislat ive  amendments  that will  explicitly  include  sexual 
orientation  and gender  identity in Article 3 of the Anti-discrimination  Law, the CSO and the 
equality  body  joined  forces to  draft a  protocol,  thus  devising  instruments  that will  boost 
visibility  of  these two  grounds.  The  annex  to the  protocol  is  the  new  form  for  reporting 
discrimination  cases,  which  explicitly  includes  sexual  orientation  and  gender  identity  as 
discrimination  grounds.3 1 1  

Apart  from  this,  one of  the best practices remains  the implementation  of the principle  of 
equitable  and just representation  of all  ethnicities in the public administration  (see section 
5  above). Although  no  full  and  encompassing  report  has been  published  as to the results 
of the  implementation,  it is  noticeable  from  the  Ombudsperson’s  annual  reports  that the 
number  of people from  the minorities  who are employed  in the administration  is constantly 
rising. 

Another  good  practice is  the  exercise  of  the promotional  mandate  by  the Ombudsperson 
for several  years, including  on issues  of equality  and  non-discrimination,  regardless  of the 
lack  of  legal  grounds  for  this,  and  in  spite  of  the very  low  budget  that the  institution  is 
annually  awarded  (see section 7  above). Although  a legislative  proposal  was put through 
the  mandate  of  the 
parliamentary  procedure 
Ombudsperson  to  include  promotional  responsibilities  as  well  as  to  complete  additional 
alignments  with the Paris  Principles,  as of the date of this report, it has not progressed  any 
further  in  Parliament. 

in  February  2015 

for  expanding 

311  See also text below. 

91 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
11  SENSITIVE  OR  CONTROVERSIAL  ISSUES 

11.1  Potential  breaches of  the directives  (if  any) 

The national  anti-discrimination  legislation  is  in  breach  of  the directives  in  several  areas 
outlined  below. Breaches  of the text and the spirit  of the directives are  as follows: 

- 

In  general: 

o 

o 

The Constitution  and  the laws  are  not  consistent in  the  terminology  that they 
use  on  discrimination  and  grounds  of  discrimination,  thus  generating  legal 
uncertainty. 
The Constitution  and  the laws  prescribe  various  different  procedures  (it  could 
be  said  that  this  allows  forum  shopping  to  take  place)  and  rather  vague 
sanctions. 

- 

The Constitution: 

o 
o 

o 

The principle  of equality  is stated only for  citizens of the country. 
It  contains  a  closed  list  of  grounds  for  protection  against  discrimination,  and 
disability,  age  and  sexual  orientation  are  not  part  of this  list.  Belief  is  part  of 
this provision,  however  only  political  and religious  belief. 3 1 2 
Terminology  used  in  the  Constitution  for  people  with  disabilities  cannot  be 
considered  as in compliance  with the spirit  of the directives. 

- 

Anti-discrimination  Law: 

Essential  weaknesses: 
o 

o 
o 

o 

The object of  the law is  not  precisely  defined.  This  resulted  in  the adoption  of 
an  anti-discrimination  law  that does  not aim  to contribute to the upholding  of 
the principle  of equality,  which lies  at the heart of the directives. 
The area  of implementation  of the law  is not precisely  defined. 
Although  the act contains a list of grounds  in  an open-ended  provision,  it does 
not explicitly  include  all standard  EU  grounds  of discrimination.  Namely,  sexual 
orientation  is  not listed  as a protected ground  in  this law. 3 1 3  
According to the directives, persons  who consider themselves  wronged  because 
the  principle  of  equal  treatment  has  not  been  applied  to  them  need  only 
that  there  has  been 
establish  facts  from  which  it  may  be  presumed 
discrimination.  The Anti-discrimination  Law places a huge part of the burden  in 
proving  discrimination  on  the complainant,  asking  for  submission  of ‘facts and 

312  Out of the other grounds protected on EU level, gender is also not part of this provision, although sex is.  
313  However, the practice of the CPAD shows that it does consider sexual orientation as a protected ground, as 
it has processed several cases pertaining to this ground, using the open-ended character of this provision. 
In addition, in December 2015, as a result of a project implemented by CPAD together with H.E.R.A. (a civil 
society organisation), the CPAD adopted a protocol for handling discrimination cases on grounds of sexual 
orientation and gender identity. The biggest achievement of this action is probably not the protocol itself, as 
it largely reiterates rules of procedure already established under other (legal and internal) acts, but is 
instead the annex to the protocol, which is an amended form for filing a complaint to the C PAD. The form 
that C PAD had used previously included a special section where all protected grounds from Article 3 of the 
ADL were numbered and the claimant had to circle one of them. This section did not contain sexual 
orientation and gender identity, whereas in the amended form, an a dditional option is included where the 
claimant can circle ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’. Although somewhat symbolic, it is reasonable to 
expect that it will encourage people who want to claim discrimination on such grounds. Moreover, it shows 
an effort by the current equality body members to leave some legacy for their successors. For more on this, 
please see: http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2963-equality-body-and-civil-society-organizations-join-
to-make-sure-that-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-is-regarded-as-a-protected-ground-in-
macedonia-pdf-86-kb and the text of the protocol (in Macedonian): http://hera.org.mk/wp-
content/uploads/2015/11/Protokol-Zastita-od-diskriminacija-MK.pdf. 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
proofs  from  which  the  act or  action  of  discrimination  can  be  established’,3 1 4  
unlike  the  directives,  which  set  a  requirement 
for  facts  from  which  the 
discrimination  may  be presumed  (emphasis  added).  This means  that although 
the law  claims  that it is  not for  the complainant  to prove  the facts but for  the 
respondent,  we cannot say  that it  provides  for  a  reversed  burden  of proof,  as 
per  the  directives,  because, as  a  step  towards  proving  the  facts, a  burden  is 
placed  on  the complainant  by asking  for  proof  aside  from  laying  out of all  the 
known  facts in  relation  to the case and  leaving  the respondent  to show  these 
facts to  be  non-existent  (i.e.  it  makes  a  step  from  onus  proferendi  to  onus 
probandi). 
Unlike  the  EU  directives,  which  state  that  ‘Member  States  shall  encourage 
dialogue  with  non-governmental  organisations  which have,  in  accordance with 
their  national  law and  practice, a legitimate  interest in contributing  to the fight 
against  discrimination  on  grounds  foreseen  in  the  Directives,  with  a  view  to 
promoting  the  principle  of  equal  treatment ’,  the national  legislation  does  not 
mention  cooperation with NGOs. 
The forms  of discrimination  as well as their definitions  are not fully  harmoni sed 
with  European  ones.  The  definition  of  direct  discrimination  is  unnecessarily 
complicated. 
The law  contains a wide, imprecise  list of exceptions from  discrimination.  Such 
a  list  opens  space for  legal  uncertainty.  Moreover,  some  of  these  exceptions 
can be considered  to be in  breach of the EU  directives. For  example,  it will  not 
constitute  discrimination  if  members  of  duly  registered  religions  (this  also 
applies  to NGOs,  political  parties,  trade unions  and  other  organisations)  act in 
accordance with their  belief  (Article 14(5)).  This would  mean  that this excuses 
these  members  even  if,  in  doing  so,  they  are  discriminating  on  the  grounds 
mentioned  in  Article 3 of the Anti-discrimination  Law. 
The  mechanism  for  protection  provided  in  the  law  is  not  precisely  defined. 
Selection  of  members  of  the  equality  body  is  prone  to  political  influence. 
Moreover,  the competence of the members  cannot be  secured, as the law does 
not  strictly  require  them  to  have  education  and  practice  related  to  ‘human 
rights’  but  to social  sciences in  general.  Such  a provision  can cause problems 
in  practice.3 1 5  Also, although  the CPAD  is  financed under  the state budget, the 
state allocated budget  is not enough  for  this body to exercise its full  mandate, 
thus bringing  its effectiveness under  question. 
The provisions  on the sanctions provided  in  the law cannot be considered  to be 
good  grounds  for  making  effective, dissuasive  and proportionate  sanctions.  

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

Technical weaknesses: 
o 

The law contains an article with definitions  of terms  used in  the law  that added 
to the terminological  confusion that already  existed before its adoption, instead 
of contributing to the resolution  of such confusion. This list also contained terms 
not  used  in  the  law  at  all.  Furthermore,  legal  terms  and  key  concepts were 
unnecessarily  redefined  (for  example  the term  ‘family’). 
The  law  did  not  provide  for  any  transitional  provisions,  preparatory  activities 
for  commencement  of the implementation  of  the law, or  for any  deadlines  for 
initiation  and completion  of these activities. 
The  law  did  not  provide  procedures  for  the  unification  of  provisions,  notably 
nulling  or amending  provisions  in  other laws that are not in  line with this law as 
a lex  specialis. 

o 

o 

314  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination,  2010, 

Articles 25(2) and 38. 

315  This was already the case with the establishment of the C ommission for Protection Against Discrimination. 
For more on this, please see: flash Report, ‘The Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia appointed the 
members of the Commission for Protection against Discrimination’ (01.02.2011), 
http://www.equalitylaw.eu/index.php?option=com_edocman&task=document.viewdoc&id=2186&Itemid=29
5. 

93 

 
 
                                                 
 
Ex-post evaluation  of the implementation  of the law: 
o 

In  2013,  the Ministry  of Labour  and Social Policy (MLSP)  conducted an ex-post 
evaluation  of the implementation  of the Anti-discrimination  Law, evaluating  the 
process  and  the results  from  the  implementation  of  this  law,  focusing  on  the 
prevention  of discrimination  and  protection against   discrimination.  The results 
show that the aims  of the law were only partly reached, which, according to the 
evaluation  report, is justified  given  the amount  of state-budget funds allocated 
for  the  law’s  implementation.  Although  noting  numerous  points  where 
implementation  can  be  improved,  the  report  explicitly  spelled  out  only  three 
recommendations  for  legislative  changes  for  improving  the  implementation: 
amending 
the  Anti-discrimination  Law  to  allow  for  the  establishment  of 
administrative  support for the CPAD;  explicit prescription  of the ‘shift of burden 
of proof’  for the CPAD;  and enhancing  the CPAD  accountability mechanisms.  

- 

Other  laws:  

o 

o 

Other  laws  are  not  fully  in  line  with  the  Anti-discrimination  Law,  nor  with  the 
directives  (in  their  terminology,  listing  protected grounds,  definitions  of  direct 
discrimination,  omitting  victimisation,  social dialogue,  etc .). The harmonisat ion 
of the legal  framework  with the ADL  has  been identified  as a general  strategic 
goal  in  the  ‘National  Strategy on  Equal  Opport unities  and  Non-Discriminat ion 
on  Grounds  of  Ethnicity,  Age,  Mental  and  Physical  Disability ’  adopted  in  May 
2012,  and  was  part  of  the  activities  set  out  under  the  action  plan  for  its 
implementation  for  2013,  including  a  continuous  monitoring  of the  legisla tion 
from  the perspective of international  standards,  in  particular  the EU  directives 
and the CJEU  practice.3 1 6  However,  this harmonisation  has not yet taken place. 
An  exception  to this would  be  the Law on  Labour  Relations,  which  needs  very 
few amendments  to be in  line  with the directives. These necessary steps would 
be to amend  the definition  of harassment,  which is not completely in accordance 
with  the directives,3 1 7  to add  provisions  on  instruction  to discriminate,  as  well 
as  clarifying  the  potential  for  positive  actions and  reasonable  accommodation 
for people  with disability.3 1 8 

11.2  Other  issues of  concern  

As noted in  the last European  Commission’s  progress  report,  the country  is  backsliding  in 
terms  of  fulfilment  of  political  criteria  for  membership,  especially  with  regards  to 
independence  of the judiciary.  The same  trend also  applies  to advancing  the protection of 
human 
in  general,  and  equality  and  non-discrimination  more  specifically. 
Retrogression  of protection of rights  in  law  and  in  practice continued.  In  times  of general 
failure  of  the  system  to  administer  justice, vast politisation  of society and  partisation  of 
state institutions,  the problems  are  very  general  and  very  serious.  These also  affect the 
practical implementation  of the national  legislation. 

rights 

The end of 2014 and beginning  of 2015 saw massive  protests by university and high-school 
students, honoraria  workers,  independent  trade unions,  workers  fired  in the transition  and 
transformation  processes, etc. In  February  2015  the wire-tapping  affair  revealed  an  even 
more  serious  domestic  situation.  The  largest  opposition  party  started  to publicly  release 
what are allegedly  recordings  from  the illicit  interception of communications  of more  than 
20,000  people  that are  alleged  to have been  carried  out by  the state Counterintelligenc e 

316  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2013) Action Plan - 2013 for implementation of the National Strategy 

on Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical Disability, 
and Gender for 2012-2015, p.5 www.mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/akciski_l_eng.doc. 

317  The Law on Labour Relations definition refers to establishing behaviour, instead of creating an offensive 

environment. Source: Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005. 

318  Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 9. 

94 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Agency.3 1 9  The  content  of  the  published  recordings  removed  doubt s  about  the  already 
existing  claims  of a state capture3 2 0 and extreme  concentration of power in the ruling  party, 
including  the complete  exercise of party control over not only  the judiciary,  but all  aspects 
of society. The Ombudsperson  opened  two cases in  relation  to the wire -tapping  affair,  as 
gross  and  large-scale violations  of the right  to private  and  family  life. The Ombudsperson 
expressed  outrage  about the lack  of  response  from  the  Counterintelligence  Agency  to its 
requests  for  additional  information  in  the context of gathering  of information  pursuant  to 
the aforementioned  cases. The Ombudsperson  has reported  this obstacle to the Parliament , 
but no assistance or feedback from  the Parliament  has been  noted.3 2 1  

It is of interest for this report to highlight  that what seems  to be the voice of the President 
of  the  equality  body,  Dushko  Minovski,  also  featured  in  the  publicly  broadcasted 
conversations; he can be heard  to be a person  working  for the ruling  party on the ground 
during  the election campaign  and,  even more  seriously,  to be (ab)using  his  position  (that 
of being  employed  in  the Ministry  of Labour  and  Social  Policy)  by  instructing  people  that 
have  been  awarded  social  assistance how  to vote. In  addition  to this,  what seems  to be 
the  voice  of  the  then  Minister  of  Interior  Gordana  Jankulovska3 2 2   was  featured  in  a 
conversation  that clearly  shows  the pressure  the Roma  community  has  been  under  to  go 
out on election day and vote as instructed.3 2 3  Following  the release  of this recording,  Roma 
organisations  protested against the Government,  demanding  Jankulovska’s  resignation,3 2 4  
after which  she  published  what was  intended  to be  an  apology  to the Roma  communit y, 
however the letter was a mere  rehearsal  of all actions undertaken  in the country to improve 
the position  of Roma,  rather  than an  apology.3 2 5  

As  noted  above,  a  new  study  on  harmonisation  of  the  national  equality  and  non-
discrimination  legislation  called  for urgent  revision  of the Anti-discrimination  Law. In  view 
of the seriousness  of the state situation, as  described  above,  this  is not and  will  not be  a 
priority  in  the next year. The CPAD  continued to receive a lot of training  and  support  from 
the OSCE  Mission  to Skopje  and  to be  included  in  projects coordinated  and  led  by CSOs. 
This  might  help  with  overcoming  the  deficiencies  in  the  quality  of  the  body’s  appointed 
members.  However,  the  problem  of  not  having  administrative  support  for  its  work  is 
ongoing,  in spite of the announcement  of a Government  decision to resolve this issue being 
made  last year.3 2 6  

The  problem  of  misrepresentation  and  misunderstanding  of  the  notion  and  scope  of 
grounds  remains,  the main  ones being: 

- 

Disability  is  still  a  cause for  stigma.  Policies  regarding  accommodation  and  positive 
actions  for  people  with  disability  are  formally  adopted,  but  are  not  implement ed. 

319  Balkan Insight, (2015), ‘Macedonia PM Accused of Large-Scale Wire-Tapping’ (09.02.2015), Balkan Insight 
Website, http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/eavesdropping-bombshell-explodes-in-macedonia. 

320  The concept of ‘state capture’ is mentioned here in terms of the understanding by Transparency 

International, that is: ‘a situation where powerful individuals, institutions, companies or groups within or 
outside a country use corruption to shape a nation’s policies, legal environment and economy to benefit 
their own private interests’. 

321  Ombudsperson of the Republic of Macedonia (2016), Annual Report of the Ombudsperson for 2015. 
322  Gordana Jankulovska resigned 12 May 2015. 
323  A1On online media portal, ‘SDSM: Jankulovska says “By the ears, Gipsy by Gipsy, we’ll drag them”’ [ СДСМ: 

Јанкулоска вели – За уши, циган по циган ќе вадиме] http://a1on.mk/wordpress/archives/465799. 
Please note that in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia context ‘Gipsy’ (Циган) is a derogatory word 
for Roma. 

324  24 Vesti - National TV Broadcaster, ‘Roma request resignation from the Minister Jankulovska’ [Ромите 

бараат оставка од министерката Јанкуловска], http://24vesti.mk/romite-baraat-ostavka-od-minsiterkata-
jankulovska. 

325  This letter is no longer available online. 
326  An additional problem created by the appointment of the new composition of the CPAD falls outside of the 
reporting period, however it is mentioned here as it adds to the arguments on party -controlled state 
institutions. For more on this, see: http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/3752-macedonia-appointment-of-
new-members-of-the-equality-body-pdf-123-kb. 

95 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
However,  a positive  move  in  this direction  was the ratification of the Convention  on 
Rights  of People  with Disability  and its accompanying  Optional  Protocol.  

- 

Sexual  orientation  is  continuously  stigmatised,  or,  at  best,  ignored.  The  latest 
example  was  the  ‘National  strategy  for  equality  and  non-discrimination  on  ethnic 
affiliation,  age,  disability  and  sex’,  which  was  adopted  in  2012.  The new  strategy, 
which  is  to be  implemented  in  the  period  2016-2020,  has the  title ‘on  equality  and 
non-discrimination’,  so hopefully  it will  not exclude  sexual  orientation.  However,  the 
text has been discussed  only on  one public  discussion  and is  not adopted yet . 

Hate speech is still  vastly tolerated. Debates around  the Anti-discrimination  Law were filled 
with hate speech directed towards homosexuals,  and to people  who publicly  advocated for 
and  supported  inserting  sexual  orientation  as  a  protected  ground.  The  most  staggering 
examples  are  examples  of  hate speech  by  journalists  who  are  known  to be  close  to the 
ruling  party (including  the only two journalists  on whose shows the Prime  Minister  appears 
as a guest, one of whom  accompanied  the Prime  Minister  on a 2014  Government  visit to a 
foreign  country). Such  hate speech  features  homophobic  statements  and  spreads  ethnic 
hatred, as well  as degradation  on grounds  of sex. 

96 

 
 
 
 
 
 
12  LATEST  DEVELOPMENTS  IN  2015 

12.1  Legislative  amendments 

- 

A newly adopted Law on Misdemeanours  caused a chain reaction of changes in  other 
laws including  in the Anti-discrimination  Law. As a result, the fines for natural persons 
have  been  lowered,  as  they have  been  for  legal  persons.  However,  the lawmakers 
removed  from  the law  the potential for  responsible  persons  from  public  bodies  to be 
subject  to  fines.  This  was  previously  not  the  case.  However,  it  seemed  that  the 
adoption  of the new law  was a populist  measure  resulting  from  a series  of protests, 
public  debates  and  studies  that show  how  much  the  fines  have  been  raised  in  the 
years  of  the  current  ruling  party,  as  well  as the  number  of actions  that have  been 
turned  into misdemeanours  and criminal  offences. 

12.2  Case law 

Name  of the court:  Court  of First Instance Delcevo 
Date of  decision:  20.03.2015 
Name  of the parties:  V.M. v. Municipality  of Delcevo 
Reference  number:  Case Judgment  P-4, NO.14/2014 
Address  of  the  webpage:  http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2863-fyr-macedon ia -
disability-discrimination-pdf-59-kb3 2 7  
Brief  summary:  The  claimant  is  the  grandfather  of  a  child  with  psychosocial  disabilit y 
claiming  that  lack  of  adaptation  of  infrastructure  (in  his  case  –  pavements)  creates  an 
obstacle to free movement  for his grandson,  as they live  on one of the main  streets in the 
town and the child  cannot leave the house by himself  as there is no pavement  and no aids 
for  movement.  He  had  asked  and  was promised  by the  municipality  several  times  that it 
would  do the necessary adaptations, however  no adaptations had been  made. 

for  Protection  against  
The  claimant  first  brought  the  case  before  the  Commission 
Discrimination  (CPAD),3 2 8   which  found  discrimination  on  grounds  of  disability  due  to lack 
of  reasonable  accommodation  –  a  form  of  discrimination  under  the  national  law.  The 
claimant  also  asked  the  Ombudsperson  to intervene,  but  even  after it  did  (there  was  a 
communication  from  the  Ombudsperson  to the  Municipality  in  which  the  Ombudsperson 
points out the violation), no improvement  of the situation followed. Therefore, the claimant  
took the case to court. 

The  court  of  first  instance  in  Delcevo  established  discrimination,  as  did  the  CPAD,  and 
requested that the discriminator  removes  the obstacles for realising  the right of movement , 
i.e. by adjusting  the infrastructure in  a way that will  no longer  pose obstacles for the child 
to leave  his  house,  as  requested  by  the claimant.  It  also  awarded  damages  for  suffered 
fear and psychological  pain. 

Name  of the court:  Court  of Second Instance Skopje 
Date of  decision:  23.09.2015 
Name  of the parties:  Macedonian  Young Lawyers Association  v. Ministry of Interior 
Reference  number:  XXVIII  П4-1228/13 
Address  of the webpage:  not available   
Brief  summary:  The court of second instance confirmed  the verdict from  May 2014  from 
the court of first  instance, which found  that prohibiting  the exit  from  the country of Roma 
citizens on grounds  of reasonable  doubt that they will  be seeking  asylum  in an EU  Member 
State was discriminatory.  The claimant,  on  whose  behalf  the Macedonian  Young  Lawyers 

327  The judgment is not publicly available, which is why the author has used a link to the flash report, reporting 

the judgment. 

328  This case was reported in the 2014 report. See here: http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/3709-2015-mk-

country-report-ln-final. 

97 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
Association (MYLA)  acted, wanted to cross the border  with his  family  in  order  to travel  to 
an EU  country in order  to attend a relative’s  wedding.  He was not let out of the country by 
the border  officer, who also marked  his  passport, which means  that the next time  that he 
wants to travel abroad,  the border  officers will  know  that he has been refused  exit before. 

The court of  second instance  found  that the court  of first  instance was  right  to conclude 
that, although  the country has a right  to protect the visa-free regime  with the EU  Member 
States, it needs  to do  this  in  a  way that will  not violate  the equality  of  its citizens. Thus, 
the court goes on  to conclude, t he act of the border  officer was discriminatory,  it violated 
the principle  of  equality  and  was a  clear  breach  of the Law  on  Prevention  and  Protection 
against Discrimination. 

98 

 
 
 
ANNEX  1: TABLE  OF KEY NATIONAL  ANTI-DISC RIMINATION  LEGISLATION 

Please  list  below  the  main  transposition  and  anti-discrimination  legislation  at both 
federal  and federated/provincial  level. 

Country:  Former  Yugoslav Republic  of  Macedonia 
Date:  31 December  2015 

Title  of 
legislation   
(including 
amending 
legislation
)  

Title  of 
legislation   
(including 
amending 
legislation
)  

Title of the Law: 
Law on Prevention  and  Protection against Discrimination 
Abbreviation: 
Anti-discrimination  Law 
Date of adoption: 
08.04.2010 
Latest amendments: 
02.09.2015 
Entry into  force: 
21.04.2010 
Webpage: 
www.slvesnik.com.mk/Issues/1654343CD9A0E24998781907DC19A99F.
pdf 
Grounds  covered: 
Sex,  race,  colour  of  skin,  gender,  belonging  to  a  marginalised  group, 
ethnicity, language,  citizenship,  social  origin,  religion  or  religious  belief, 
other  sorts  of  belief,  education,  political  affiliation,  personal  or  social 
status,  mental  or  physical  disability,  age,  family  or  marital  status, 
property,  health  condition,  or  any  other  ground  or  stipulated  by  law  or 
ratified  national  treaty. 
Civil  law 
Material  scope: 
All  areas  (draws  specific  attention  to:  public  employment,  private 
employment,  access to goods and services, social protection, education). 
Principal  content: 
Prohibition  of  direct  and  indirect  discrimination,  harassment,  instruction 
to  discriminate,  reasonable  accommodation,  creation  of  a  specialised 
body. 
Title of the Law: 
Law on Labour  Relations 
Abbreviation: 
Labour  Law  
Date of adoption: 
28.07.2005 
Entry into  force: 
05.08.2005 
Latest amendments: 
31.07.2015 
Webpage: 
www.slvesnik.com.mk/Issues/ABCBBB808C582943B4A3287BD0629357.
pdf  
Grounds  covered: 
Race,  colour,  sex,  age,  health  condition,  disability,  religious,  politic al 
or  other  belief,  membership  of  trade  union,  national  or  social  origin, 
position  of  the  family,  property,  sexual  orientation  or  other  personal 
issue. 
Civil  law 
Material  scope: 
Public  employment,  private employment. 

99 

 
 
 
 
Title  of 
legislation   
(including 
amending 
legislation
)  

Title  of 
legislation   
(including 
amending 
legislation
)  

Principal  content: 
Regulation  of labour  relations. Of relevance here:  prohibition  of direct and 
indirect  discrimination,  harassment. 
Title of the law: 
Law on Social Protection 
Abbreviation: 
LSP 
Date of adoption: 
24.06.2009 
Entry into  force: 
02.07.2009 
Latest amendments: 
05.11.2015 
Webpages: 
Text of the law (2009),  as in  Official  Gazette: 
www.slvesnik.com.mk/Issues/7CEA639634D1054DB351E7F B985665DC.
pdf Grounds  covered: 
Sex,  race, colour,  nationality,  ethnicity, social  status, political,  religious, 
cultural,  language,  property  and  social background,  disability  and origin.  
Civil  law 
Material  scope: 
Social protection, social advantages. 
Principal  content: 
Social  protection.  Of  relevance  here:  prohibition  of  direct  and  indirect  
discrimination. 
Title of the law: 
Law on Employment  of Persons  with disability 
Abbreviation: 
LEPD 
Date of adoption: 
02.06.2000 
Latest amendments: 
27.08.2015 
Entry into  force: 
10.06.2000 
Web link: 
www.slvesnik.com.mk/Issues/CE827065C11B4A1ABA5546F974EFDA94.
pdf 
Grounds  covered: 
Disability 
Civil  law 
Material  scope: 
Public  employment,  private employment  
Principal  content: 
Employment  of persons  with disability,  including  shelter companies.  

100 

 
 
ANNEX  2: TABLE  OF INTERNATIONAL  INSTRUMENTS 

Country:  Former  Yugoslav Republic  of  Macedonia 
Date:  31 December  2015 

Instrument  Date of 

signature   
(if  not 
signed 
please 
indicate) 
Dd/mm/ 
yyyy 

09.11.1995 

Derogations
/ 
reservations 
relevant  to 
equality  and 
non-
discriminatio
n 

Date of 
ratificatio
n  
(if  not 
ratified 
please 
indicate) 
Dd/mm/ 
yyyy 
10.04.1997  No 

Right  of 
individual 
petition 
accepted? 

Can this 
instrument 
be directly 
relied  upon 
in  domestic 
courts  by 
individuals? 

Yes 

Yes 

European 
Convention 
on Human 
Rights 
(ECHR) 
Protocol 12, 
ECHR 

Revised 
European 
Social 
Charter 
International 
Covenant on 
Civil  and 
Political 
Rights 
Framework 
Convention 
for the 
Protection of 
National 
Minorities 
International 
Covenant on 
Economic, 
Social and 
Cultural 
Rights 
Convention 
on the 
Elimination 
of All  Forms 
of Racial 
Discrimina-
tion 

04.11.2000 

13.07.2004  No 

Yes 

Yes 

27.05.2009 

21.10.2011  No 

No 

Yes 

(succession)
3 2 9  

18.01.1994  No 

Yes 

Yes 

25.07.1996 

10.04.1997  No 

Yes 

Yes 

(succession)  18.01.1994  No 

Yes 

Yes 

(succession)  18.01.1994  No 

Yes 

Yes 

329  Under the C onstitutional Law adopted for implementing the Constitution of the Republic of Ma cedonia, as 
one of the republics to succeed from the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), the country 
assumes all obligations from SFRY membership in international organisations and with other countries, as 
provided by common principles of international law. This Law also calls upon the Vienna conventions for 
succession (1978 and 1982) for guidance on regulating the succession. Source: Constitutional Law adopted 
for implementing the Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia (Уставен закон за спроведување на 
У ставот на Република Македонија), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia No.52/91. 

101 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
Instrument  Date of 

signature   
(if  not 
signed 
please 
indicate) 
Dd/mm/ 
yyyy 

Date of 
ratificatio
n  
(if  not 
ratified 
please 
indicate) 
Dd/mm/ 
yyyy 

Derogations
/ 
reservations 
relevant  to 
equality  and 
non-
discriminatio
n 

Right  of 
individual 
petition 
accepted? 

Can this 
instrument 
be directly 
relied  upon 
in  domestic 
courts  by 
individuals? 

(succession)  18.01.1994  No 

Yes 

Yes 

n/a 

17.11.1991  No 

Yes 

Yes 

(succession)  02.12.1993  No 

Yes 

Yes 

30.03.2007 

14.12.2011  No 

Yes 

Yes 

Convention 
on 
the 
Elimination  of 
Discrimina-
tion  Against 
Women 
ILO 
Convention 
No.  111  on 
Discriminatio
n 
Convention 
on  the  Rights 
of the Child 
Convention 
on  the  Rights 
Persons 
of 
with 
Disabilities   

102 

 
 
HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS 

Free publications: 

•  one copy: 

via EU  Bookshop  (http://bookshop.europa.eu); 

•  more  than one copy or  posters/maps: 

from  the European  Union’s  representations  (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);   
from  the delegations in non-EU countries 
(http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);  
by contacting the Europe  Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.ht m) 
or calling  00  800  6 7 8 9 10  11  (freephone  number  from  anywhere  in the EU)  (*).  

(*)  The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may 
charge you). 

Priced  publications: 

•  via EU  Bookshop  (http://bookshop.europa.eu

 
 
 
 
 
D
S
-
0
4
-
1
6
-
6
8
8
-
3
A
-
N

ISBN: 978-92-79-47009-7 

doi:10.2838/616164