Country report non-discrimination : : transposition and implementation at national level of Council Directives 2000/43 and 2000/78 : North Macedonia 2022.
Date: 2022-09-05
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

North Macedonia 

2022 

including summary 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 
Directorate D — Equality and Union citizenship 
Unit D.1 Non-discrimination and Roma coordination 

European Commission 
B-1049 Brussels 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Country report  

Non-discrimination 

Transposition and implementation at national level of 
Council Directives 2000/43 and 2000/78 

North Macedonia 

Biljana Kotevska 

Reporting period 1 January 2021 – 31 December 2021 

2021  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, 2022 

© European Union, 2022 

PDF  

ISBN 978-92-76-49077-7 

ISSN 2599-9176  

doi:10.2838/415189  

  DS-BB-22-025-EN-N 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ 5 
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 12 
GENERAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK .................................................................. 15 
1 
THE DEFINITION OF DISCRIMINATION .................................................... 16 
2 
2.1  Grounds of unlawful discrimination explicitly covered ................................ 16 

3 

4 

2.1.1  Definition of the grounds of unlawful discrimination within the 

directives ................................................................................. 16 
2.1.2  Multiple discrimination ............................................................... 19 
Assumed and associated discrimination ....................................... 20 
2.1.3 
2.2  Direct discrimination (Article 2(2)(a)) ...................................................... 20 
Indirect discrimination (Article 2(2)(b)) ................................................... 21 
2.3 
Statistical evidence ................................................................... 21 
2.3.1 
2.4  Harassment (Article 2(3)) ...................................................................... 23 
2.5 
Instructions to discriminate (Article 2(4)) ................................................ 25 
2.6  Reasonable accommodation duties (Article 2(2)(b)(ii) and Article 5 Directive 

2000/78) ............................................................................................. 26 
PERSONAL AND MATERIAL SCOPE ............................................................ 28 
3.1  Personal scope ..................................................................................... 28 

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) ........... 28 
3.1.2  Natural and legal persons (Recital 16 Directive 2000/43) ............... 28 
Private and public sector including public bodies (Article 3(1)) ........ 29 
3.1.3 
3.2  Material scope ...................................................................................... 29 
3.2.1  Conditions for access to employment, to self-employment or to 

3.2.2 

3.2.3 

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)) ........................................ 29 
Employment and working conditions, including pay and dismissals 
(Article 3(1)(c)) ........................................................................ 30 
Access to all types and all levels of vocational guidance, vocational 
training, advanced vocational training and retraining, including 
practical work experience (Article 3(1)(b)) ................................... 31 

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

3.2.5 

employers, or any organisation whose members carry on a particular 
profession, including the benefits provided for by such organisations 
(Article 3(1)(d)) ........................................................................ 32 
Social protection, including social security and healthcare (Article 
3(1)(e) Directive 2000/43) ......................................................... 32 
Social advantages (Article 3(1)(f) Directive 2000/43) .................... 33 
Education (Article 3(1)(g) Directive 2000/43) ............................... 34 
Access to and supply of goods and services which are available to the 
public (Article 3(1)(h) Directive 2000/43) .................................... 40 
3.2.9  Housing (Article 3(1)(h) Directive 2000/43) ................................. 42 
EXCEPTIONS ............................................................................................. 44 
4.1  Genuine and determining occupational requirements (Article 4) .................. 44 
4.2  Employers with an ethos based on religion or belief (Article 4(2) Directive 

3.2.6 
3.2.7 
3.2.8 

2000/78) ............................................................................................. 44 

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

19 Directive 2000/78) ........................................................................... 46 
4.4  Nationality discrimination (Article 3(2)) ................................................... 47 
4.5  Health and safety (Article 7(2) Directive 2000/78) .................................... 48 
4.6  Exceptions related to discrimination on the ground of age (Article 6 Directive 

2000/78) ............................................................................................. 49 
4.6.1  Direct discrimination ................................................................. 49 

3 

 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

4.6.2 
Special conditions for younger or older workers ............................ 50 
4.6.3  Minimum and maximum age requirements ................................... 50 
4.6.4  Retirement ............................................................................... 50 
4.6.5  Redundancy ............................................................................. 52 
4.7  Public security, public order, criminal offences, protection of health, protection 
of the rights and freedoms of others (Article 2(5), Directive 2000/78) ......... 52 
4.8  Any other exceptions ............................................................................. 52 
POSITIVE ACTION (Article 5 Directive 2000/43, Article 7 Directive 
2000/78) .................................................................................................. 53 
REMEDIES AND ENFORCEMENT ................................................................. 55 
6.1 

Judicial and/or administrative procedures (Article 7 Directive 2000/43, Article 
9 Directive 2000/78) ............................................................................. 55 

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

Directive 2000/78) ................................................................................ 59 
6.3  Burden of proof (Article 8 Directive 2000/43, Article 10 Directive 2000/78).. 60 
6.4  Victimisation (Article 9 Directive 2000/43, Article 11 Directive 2000/78) ...... 61 
6.5  Sanctions and remedies (Article 15 Directive 2000/43, Article 17 Directive 

2000/78) ............................................................................................. 61 

BODIES FOR THE PROMOTION OF EQUAL TREATMENT (Article 13 Directive 
2000/43) .................................................................................................. 63 
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES........................................................................ 71 
8.1  Dissemination of information, dialogue with NGOs and between social partners
 .......................................................................................................... 71 

8.2  Measures to ensure compliance with the principle of equal treatment (Article 

5 

6 

7 

8 

14 Directive 2000/43, Article 16 Directive 2000/78) .................................. 72 
9 
COORDINATION AT NATIONAL LEVEL ....................................................... 74 
10  CURRENT BEST PRACTICES ....................................................................... 76 
11  SENSITIVE OR CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES .................................................. 76 
11.1  Potential breaches of the directives at the national level ............................ 76 
11.2  Other issues of concern ......................................................................... 76 
12  LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN 2021 .............................................................. 78 
12.1  Legislative amendments ........................................................................ 78 
12.2  Case law .............................................................................................. 78 
ANNEX 1: MAIN TRANSPOSITION AND ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LEGISLATION  79 
ANNEX 2: INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS ....................................................... 81 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

1. Introduction 

The  Republic  of  North  Macedonia  (hereinafter  North  Macedonia),1  a  land-locked,  multi-
ethnic country in south-eastern Europe, declared its independence in 1991, following the 
dissolution  of  the  Socialist  Federal  Republic  of  Yugoslavia.  It  became  a  European  Union 
candidate country in 2005 with a recommendation to open negotiations from 2009. North 
Macedonia joined the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization on 27 March 2020. Euro-Atlantic 
integration  is  a  foreign  affairs  priority  for  the  country.  However,  progress  has  stalled, 
initially due to the name dispute2 with Greece and most recently due to conditions imposed 
by  Bulgaria  around  issues  of  history  and  identity.3  As  noted  in  several  European 
Commission progress reports,4 this was compounded by fundamental rule of law  issues. 
However,  since  the  2017  change  of  Government,  the  situation  has  been  improving, 
including regarding equality and non-discrimination issues. 

The preliminary results of the 2021 census show a decrease in the overall population, with 
the total population being 1 836 713, compared with 2 022 547 in the previous census in 
2002.5 Ethnic affiliation is important in the national context, as sets of rights and positive 
action measures are tied to the numerical representation of each ethnic community in the 
total population. The ethnic composition according to the 2021 census 6 is 58.44 % ethnic 
Macedonians  (64 %  in  the  2002  census);  24.30 %  ethnic  Albanians  (25 %  in  the  2002 
census); 3.86 % ethnic Turks (3.86 % in the 2002 census); 2.53 % ethnic Roma (2.66 % 
in  the  2002  census);  1.30 %  ethnic  Serbs  (1.77 %  in  the  2002  census);  0.87 %  ethnic 
Bosniaks (0.84% in the 2002 census); 0.47 % ethnic Vlachs (0.47% in the 2002 census); 
and 1 % ‘others’ (a term used in the Constitution). A high proportion, at 7.20 %, are added 
in a separate category entitled ‘Persons for whom data are acquired from administrative 
sources’  –  these  are  persons  for  whom  the  data  were  taken  from  state  registers.  It  is 
known  that  these  persons  actively  live  and  work  in  the  country,  but  they  were  not 
registered by the census interviewers and they did not approach the local census offices to 
register themselves, so they are registered without ethnicity, religion or mother tongue. 
Considering the widespread campaign for a boycott of the 2021 census, ‘Не отварам врата’ 
(‘I Won’t Open My Front Door’) by ethnic Macedonians, a significant part of  this 7.20 % 
might  be  ethnic  Macedonians,  which  would  explain  the  high  drop  in  representation  of 
Macedonians  compared  with  the  2002  census  –  6 %,  when  all  other  ethnic  groups  are 
represented equally or roughly equally as they were in the 2002 census.7 

1   The constitutional name of the country changed from the Republic of Macedonia to the Republic of North 
Macedonia following the conclusion of the Prespa Agreement – a treaty bringing resolution of the two-
decades-long name dispute with Greece. For this reason, the name used throughout this report is North 
Macedonia, as per the Prespa Agreement. 

2   On the name dispute, please see the introduction to the 2018 or earlier reports. 
3   On the conditions set by Bulgaria, including an assessment against international law, see: Just Access E.V. 
(2021), Access to the EU and justice denied: How Bulgaria’s actions against North Macedonia amount to 
abuse of the EU’s accession procedural rules, available at: https://just-access.de/access-to-the-eu-and-
justice-denied/; Ristevska-Jordanova, M. and Kacarska, S. (2020), EU - North Macedonia accession 
negotiations: the implications of the Bulgarian conditions, European Policy Institute, Skopje, available at: 
https://epi.org.mk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/EU_MK-accession-negotiations_implications-of-BG-
conditions_small-font.pdf. 

4   European Commission (2019), North Macedonia 2019 Report, available at: 

https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/20190529-north-macedonia-report.pdf.  

5   Various estimates before the census took place showed that 250 000 to 500 000 people have left the 

country in the past few years to work abroad. This overlaps in part with the non-residential population who 
self-registered in the 2021 census (online), which was 260 606 people. 

6   All figures presented here are rounded percentages from the 2002 census, which is still the most recent 
one. A new census was scheduled for April 2020; however, it was postponed until April 2021 because of 
pre-term elections. All statistics from the State Statistical Office can be found at: www.stat.gov.mk/. 

7   The Prespa Agreement and the name change of the country sparked further public distrust in the 

Government and the state institutions, which in this campaign manifested as fear that the numbers in the 
public poll would be manipulated to show a decrease in the numbers of ethnic Macedonians. Including the 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Regarding cooperation with civil society organisations, or non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs), following the appointment of the Government in June 2017, the climate rapidly 
changed  from  one  of  scapegoating  and  openly  prosecuting  NGOs,  which  was  the  case 
during  the  Gruevski  Government,  to  one  that  is  much  more  open  to  including  NGOs  in 
decision-making  processes  and  working  groups  and  in  stepping  up  to  support  NGO 
activities,  including  on  equality  and  non-discrimination.  NGOs  have  remained  vocally 
critical  of  the  Government  and  the  Parliament  and  the  dubious  political  commitment  to 
equality and non-discrimination issues throughout 2021. A number of public reactions and 
cases demonstrating this are listed throughout this report. 

After  the  law  was  adopted,8  NGOs  continued  to  press  for  the  appointment  of  the  new 
equality  body  –  the  Commission  for  Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination 
(CPPD), and the body was finally established and started operating in 2021. 

2. Main legislation 

The Constitution  of the Republic  of North  Macedonia9 is a written one and 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  the  law,  stating  that 
citizens 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, before 
the Constitutional Court. Upholding the monism principle on the 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  across  various  laws,  including 
criminal  and  labour  law,  and  also  beyond.  As  an  EU  candidate  country,  part  of  the 
conditionality and an aspect of the transposition of the EU  acquis was the adoption of a 
comprehensive  Anti-Discrimination  Law  (ADL).  Thus,  in  April  2010,  the  first  such 
comprehensive law – the Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (2010 
ADL, old ADL)10 – was adopted. However, this law did not comply with the directives on 
many points,11 including regarding the equality body it established - the Commission for 
Protection  against  Discrimination  (CPAD).  In  order  to  address  these  shortcomings, 
following several years of campaigning by NGOs and international pressure, a new Law on 
Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination  was  adopted  in  May  2019  (annulled 
ADL).12 This Law was annulled by the Constitutional Court on 14 May 2020 on the grounds 
that  it  was  adopted  without  an  adequate  majority  as  required  by  the  Constitution.  On 
28 October  2020,  the  Parliament  adopted  the  same  text  annulled  by  the  Constitutional 

diaspora as part of the census population added additional fuel to this, because it was interpreted as an 
effort to increase the number of ethnic Albanians, which parts of the ethnic Macedonian population feel were 
exaggerated in the previous (2002) census. The census figures are important in North Macedonia since a 
number of rights are linked to them (such as quotas for employment in the public administration). 

8   Anti-Discrimination Law, 2020. Full title: Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (Закон за 

спречување и заштита од дискриминација), Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
No. 258/2010 (30 October 2020). 

9   English language version of the Constitution of the Republic of North Macedonia: Constitution of the 
Republic of North Macedonia, available at: www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-
macedonia.nspx. 

10   Anti-Discrimination Law, 2010. Full title: Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (Закон за 
спречување и заштита од дискриминација), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 50/10, 
44/2014, 150/2015, 31/2016, 21/2018, Constitutional Court Decision: U.no.82/2010. 

11   See previous reports by the European Equality Law Network, available at: 

https://www.equalitylaw.eu/country/north-macedonia. 

12   Anti-Discrimination Law, 2019. Full title: Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (Закон за 

спречување и заштита од дискриминација), Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
No. 101/2019 (22 May 2019). 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Court as a new Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (ADL). The Law 
was published in the  Official  Gazette  on 30  October 2020 and  entered into force  on the 
same day. 

The aim of the law is to ‘ensure the principle of equality and prevention of and protection 
against discrimination in terms of exercising human rights and freedoms’ (Article 2). The 
ADL is in line with the directives. Furthermore, it goes well beyond the directives, including 
going  beyond  the  proposed  equal  treatment  directive.  In  Article  5,  the  ADL  provides 
protection on the following grounds: race, skin colour, origin, nationality or ethnicity, sex, 
gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, belonging to a marginalised group, language, 
citizenship, social origin, education,  religion  or  religious belief, political conviction, other 
convictions,  disability,  age,  family  or  marital  status,13  property  status,  health  condition, 
personal  capacity  and  social  status.  Thus,  the  ADL  includes  all  grounds  required  by  the 
directives and goes beyond them. Moreover, Article 5 is an open-ended provision, ending 
with ‘any other ground’.  

Article  3  foresees  that  the  law  applies  to  ‘all  natural  persons  and  legal  entities’ 
(paragraph 1) and that its material scope is even across all areas (paragraph 2), providing 
the following areas as examples: labour and employment; education, science and sport; 
social  security,  including  social  protection,  pensions  and  disability  insurance,  health 
insurance  and  health  protection;  judiciary  and  governance;  housing;  public  information 
and  the  media;  access  to  goods  and  services;  membership  of  and  activity  in  political 
parties, associations, foundations, trade unions and other membership organisations; and 
culture. It also recasts the equality body as the Commission for Prevention and Protection 
against Discrimination (CPPD), removing the previously existing issues with independence, 
internal  organisation  and  capacity.  The  CPPD’s  mandate  has  been  re-envisaged  and  its 
remit now includes proactive action, which is also reflected in the fact that its new name 
includes ‘protection’. 

3. Main principles and definitions 

The ADL contains definitions of direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, harassment, 
incitement, encouragement and instruction to discriminate, victimisation and segregation. 
The definitions of direct and indirect discrimination are fully replicated from the directives. 
The law contains articles on harassment and on sexual harassment. Multiple discrimination 
and  intersectional  discrimination  are  included  as  a  graver  form  of  discrimination,  as  are 
repeated and extended14 discrimination. Discrimination by association and by perception 
are  defined.  Not  providing  reasonable  accommodation  is  considered  to  constitute 
discrimination. 

The  law  defines  a  list  of  measures  and  activities  that  are  not  considered  to  be 
discrimination.  These  include  affirmative  measures,  genuine  occupational  requirements, 
protection  measures  and  other  different  treatment  which  is  not  considered  to  be 
discrimination. 

Before the ADL currently in force and the 2010 ADL, various laws incorporated definitions 
of  discrimination.  The  ADL  did  include  a  provision  in  the  Transitory  and  Final  Provisions 
Section on unification of the various laws with the ADL. This process is to be completed 
within two years of the ADL’s entry into force. 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 

13   This ground is pending judicial interpretation. Both grounds should be read to include same-sex families; 

however, this may not apply in the case of ‘marital status’ in proceedings in the courts, which may use the 
definition of marriage under the law, thus effectively excluding same-sex marriages and partnerships. 

14   Extended discrimination is discrimination committed on a discrimination ground/s against a person or a 

group of persons without interruption, during a longer period of time (ADL, Article 4(1-12)). 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

contradictory provisions exist, as general legal principles are used primarily in the event of 
legal loopholes (as prescribed under the Law on Courts). 

4. Material scope 

The ADL is applicable to both the private and public sectors and applies to all fields. The 
law illustratively notes several fields and closes with ‘all other fields’. The explicitly listed 
fields  are:  employment  and  working  relations;  education,  science  and  sport;  social 
security,  including  social  protection,  pensions  and  disability  insurance,  health  insurance 
and healthcare; judiciary and administration; housing; public information and the media; 
access to goods and services; membership of and involvement in political parties,  NGOs, 
foundations, trade unions and other membership organisations; and culture. 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 sectors, apart from the 
Law  on  the  Ombudsperson,  which  provides  protection  against  discrimination  only  in  the 
public sphere. 

In the field of employment, aside from the Anti-Discrimination Law, there is also a Law on 
Labour  Relations,15  which  prohibits  discrimination  in  line  with  the  standards  of  the 
directives. These laws apply to both the public and private sectors. 

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  Constitutional  Court  in  a  prompt  procedure. 
However,  in  practice,  although  these  procedures  have  been  invoked,  the  Constitutional 
Court has been very reluctant to act in such cases. 

There is ambiguity when it comes to addressing discrimination  complaints. Various laws 
provide different types of proceedings in similar cases. Proceedings vary from monitoring 
conducted  by 
litigation  procedures, 
administrative procedures and criminal procedures. The ADL envisages several options for 
procedural protection. These are administrative, litigation and misdemeanour procedures. 

inspectorates  to  misdemeanour  procedures, 

Administrative  procedures  before  the  CPPD  are  free  of  charge.  This  body  may  give  its 
opinion  and  recommendations.  The  procedure  can  last  up  to  60  days.  If  the 
recommendation is not  acted upon, the CPPD  can initiate a  misdemeanour  procedure in 
front of the competent misdemeanours court. 

In 2021, the first year of its operation, the CPPD received 90 cases and inherited a backlog 
of 77 cases from the former equality body. From these cases, it seems that it is mainly 
natural persons, predominantly men, living or residing in Skopje,16 who file discrimination 
cases with the CPPD. Among the 167 cases, the highest number related to social status, 
national  or  ethnic  belonging,  sex,  and  political  belief;  and  in  the  fields  of  employment, 
access to goods and services and access to information, media and social media. The CPPD 
found discrimination in 40 cases, where direct discrimination was the most frequent form 
identified, and the discriminator was most predominantly from the public sector.  

15   Law on Labour Relations (Закон 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, 27/2016, 120/2018, Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
Nos. 110/2019, 151/2021, 288/2021; 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, U. no. 114/2014. 

16   Commission for Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (CPPD) (2022), Годишен извештај за 

2021 година (Annual report for 2021), pp. 15-19. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Litigation procedures can be brought in ordinary courts, based on the provisions of the ADL 
and the Civil Procedure Law. Court procedures have priority over procedures in front of the 
equality body. The CPPD may not act or must cease acting on a case if a procedure before 
the court has already been filed regarding the same matter or is being filed in the course 
of  the  CPPD  procedure  or  has  been  completed  under  an  enforceable  decision.  The 
relationship between procedures before the Ombudsperson and the CPPD is not regulated 
by law. The former body (CPAD) and the Ombudsperson had concluded a memorandum of 
understanding. By the time of the cut-off date for this report, the new equality body and 
the Ombudsperson had still not regulated their relationship in any way. 

Under  the  ADL,  the  outcome  of  the  procedure  depends  on  the  procedure  chosen. 
Administrative procedures provide for a recommendation to rectify the violation (i.e. the 
discrimination) within 30 days; a longer period of up to six months can be assigned if there 
are justified reasons. A misdemeanour procedure can lead to fines in the range of EUR 400 
to  EUR 5 000.17  Financial  and  other  sanctions  for  discrimination  are  provided  in  the 
Criminal Code. These provisions have not been applied to date. A litigation procedure can 
have  several  outcomes,  depending  on  the  type  of  lawsuit  filed.  The  lawsuit  can  be 
declaratory, prohibitive, restitutional, reparational or a publishing claim. The ADL provides 
that the Civil Procedure Law is to be applied.  The  Constitutional Court is another venue 
where a claim for protection of fundamental rights and freedoms can be filed. In 2021, the 
Constitutional  Court  received  14  cases  regarding  protection  of  fundamental  rights  and 
freedoms (out  of 174),  of  which eight  were discrimination  cases. The  Court did not  find 
violation in any of the cases regarding protection of fundamental rights and freedoms, as 
was the case in previous years.18 

The  Ombudsperson  is  another  possible  forum  for  public  sector  discrimination  cases.  In 
2021, 43 cases were filed as non-discrimination and equitable representation cases. That 
represents 1.6 % of the total number of cases filed with this institution in 2021, which was 
2 686 cases, and a slight increase compared with 2020. Of the 43 cases, a predominant 
majority  were  in  the  area  of  employment  and  labour  relations,  and  on  the  grounds  of 
national or ethnic origin.19 

Aside from the types of proof provided in the Civil Procedure Law, the ADL explicitly allows 
for situation testing and statistics as means of proof. Article 206 of this law states that any 
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. No cases of situation testing were reported in 2021. 

The ADL prescribes shifting the burden of proof, as do several other laws. The definition is 
fully in line with the directives. 

NGOs support complaints and bring cases of discrimination to public attention. The media 
report discrimination cases, although further awareness-raising and training is needed. 

6. Equality bodies 

The ADL sets out the requirement to establish the CPPD. Its predecessor (the CPAD) was 
the  country’s  first  equality  body.  Following  the  entry  into  force  of  the  new  ADL  on 
30 October 2020, the period for its transitory provisions started running, including on the 

17   All amounts are indicated in EUR and are to be paid in national currency, unless stated otherwise. 
18   Constitutional Court (2022), Преглед на работата на Уставниот Суд за 2021 година (Overview of the work 

of the Constitutional Court in 2021), February 2021, pp. 8, 10. 

19   Ombudsperson of the Republic of North Macedonia (2022), Годишен извештај за степенот на 

обезбедувањето почитување, унапредување и заштита на човековите слободи и права 2021 (Annual 
report on the degree of ensuring, respecting, advancing and protecting human rights and freedoms 2021), 
pp. 84-85. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

selection  and  appointment  of  the  members  of  the  new  equality  body  –  the  CPPD.20  The 
vacancy  advertisement  was  published  at  the  end  of  November,  with  a  deadline  of 
24 December  2020.  A  public  interview  process  for  all  applicants,  regardless  of  whether 
they fulfilled the minimum criteria for membership under the law, took place  on 29 and 
30 December  2020.  From  these  applicants,  a  shortlist  was  developed  and  adopted  on 
4 January 2021. The vote on appointment took place on 25 January 2021. However, at no 
point was there a check of whether any of the candidates, including the appointed ones, 
fulfilled  the  membership  criteria  established  in  Article  17  of  the  ADL.  In  addition,  the 
composition of  society  at  large was not  taken  into account, with  only  two  women being 
appointed out of seven members (one of  whom resigned due to personal reasons a few 
weeks  after  the  appointment)  and  no  persons  who  self-identified  as  persons  with  a 
disability.21  

According  to  the  ADL,  the  CPPD  is  to  undertake  promotion,  protection  and  prevention 
activities for the purposes of ensuring equality, human rights and non-discrimination, and 
its remit includes the following competences: 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Advise: establish advisory bodies comprised of experts in specific matters related to 
the  promotion,  prevention  of  and  protection  against  discrimination;  give  general 
recommendations on particular matters in the area of equality and non-discrimination 
and monitor their implementation; provide opinions and recommendations regarding 
the implementation of the ADL. 
Promote: promote the principle of equality, the right to non-discrimination and the 
addressing  of  all  forms  of  discrimination  through  raising  public  awareness, 
information  and  education;  advocate  for  the  ratification  of  bilateral  or  multilateral 
international  agreements  in  the  area  of  human  rights  or  for  accession  thereto  and 
monitor their implementation. 
Educate: contribute to the development and application of programmes and materials 
in the sphere of formal and informal education. 
Monitor:  monitor  the  implementation  of  the  ADL  and  give  opinions  and 
recommendations thereon. 
Regulate: promote and propose the harmonisation of national legislation, regulations 
and practices with international and regional human rights instruments; initiate the 
modification  of  regulations  for  the  purposes  of  implementing  and  promoting 
protection against discrimination; provide opinions on proposals regarding laws which 
have a bearing on the prevention of and protection against discrimination. 
Cooperate: contribute to producing the reports which the country is obliged to submit 
to  the  international  and  regional  authorities  competent  for  human  rights  and 
contribute  to  the  implementation  of  their  recommendations;  establish  cooperation 
with natural persons and legal entities, as well as with associations, foundations and 
social  partners  for  the  purposes  of  implementing  the  principal  of  equality  and 
promoting  the  prevention  of  and  protection  against  discrimination;  cooperate  with 
relevant national bodies of other countries, as well as with international and regional 
organisations in the area of protection against discrimination. 
Protect:  act  upon  complaints,  adopt  opinions,  recommendations  and  conclusions 
regarding specific cases of discrimination; initiate ex officio procedures for protection 
against discrimination; provide information to stakeholders pertaining to their rights 
and  possibilities  for  initiating  a  court  or  another  procedure  for  protection  against 
discrimination;  monitor  the  implementation  of  the  opinions  and  recommendations 
pertaining  to  specific  cases  of  discrimination  for  as  long  as  the  recommendations 
given by the Commission are complied with; initiate and appear as an intervener in 
court procedures for protection against discrimination; upon the request of the party 

20   There was no functioning equality body in the country at the time. 
21   Flash Report, ‘Following the adoption of a new Anti-discrimination Law, a new equality body is being set up’, 

23 March 2021, https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/5378-north-macedonia-new-equality-body-
establishing-and-setbacks-100-kb.  

10 

 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

- 

- 

- 

- 

or upon its own initiative, it may file a request to the court to enable it to perform 
the capacity of аmicus curiae. 
Research:  collect  and  publish  statistical  and  other  data  and  establish  databases 
related to discrimination; prepare and publish special and thematic reports pertaining 
to particular issues in the area of equality and non-discrimination. 
Inform:  share  information  with  the  public  on  a  quarterly  basis  regarding 
discrimination  cases;  disseminate  the  Commission’s  opinions, 
findings  and 
recommendations and address the public through a range of media. 
Report: submit the annual report on the Commission’s operation for consideration to 
the Parliament of the Republic of North Macedonia at the latest by 31st March of the 
ongoing year for the previous year. 
Internal activities: adopt rules of procedure, an annual plan and a work programme 
and  other  actions  related  to  the  Commission’s  operation;  publish  any  reports, 
including  financial  statements,  on  the  webpage  of  the  Commission;  and  organise 
promotion, protection and prevention activities for the purposes of ensuring equality, 
human rights and non-discrimination. 

In  exercising  these  competences,  the  CPPD  is  obliged  by  law  to  ensure  accessibility  for 
persons  with  disabilities.  However,  the  offices  that  were  provided  for  the  CPPD  are  not 
accessible, and the budget for 2022 also does not provide any funds to this end. 

Before the old law of 2010  there was no equality body. Public sector  discrimination  was 
under  the  mandate  of  the  Ombudsperson.  The  ADL  does  not  regulate  the  relationship 
between  the  Ombudsperson  and  the  current  body,  the  CPPD.22  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.23 

7. Key issues 

The key issues of concern in the national context include: 

• 
• 

• 

• 

• 

national legislation has still not been harmonised internally; 
underfunding and understaffing prevents the national human rights institutions from 
fully exercising their competences and is now again a major problem for the CPPD; 
impunity  of  hate  crime  and  hate  speech  persists,  especially  with  regard  to  sexual 
orientation; 
persisting  rule  of  law  issues  and  residual  state  capture  features  erode  trust  in 
institutions, including the judiciary; 
actors  who  oppose  equality  or  equality  for  certain  groups  are  gaining  traction  and 
political influence (widely known as the “anti-gender movement”).24 

22   This was also the case with the previous law and the CPAD. The relationship was regulated by a 

memorandum of understanding. 

23   Law on the Ombudsperson (Закон за народниот правобранител), Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia, Nos. 60/2003, 114/2009, 181/2016, 189/2016, 35/2018, Constitutional Court Decisions: 
U. no. 111/2007. 

24   This is a resurgence of the anti-gender movement, after its initial decline following the fall of the Gruevski 
Government in 2017. In 2021, ‘informal anti-gender groups operating on social media (Facebook) and one 
registered organisation ‘Od nas za nas’ (‘From Us For Us’) have targeted those individuals and CSOs most 
vocal in gender and LGBTQI equality advocacy. Two topics stood out: opposition to gender-sensitive and sex 
education, and spreading transphobia. The methods are – as already well identified in the abundant 
literature on the anti-gender movement – a mix of methods traditionally used by human rights 
organisations (such as bringing cases to NHRIs and courts, asking to participate in public policy processes); 
fake news and fear-mongering, recently supplemented by anti-vaccination positions.’ Source: Kotevska, B., 
Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting fundamental rights and the rule of 
law – North Macedonia, FRA, January 2022. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

INTRODUCTION 

The national legal system 

The  Republic  of  North  Macedonia  (hereinafter  North  Macedonia)  is  a  unitary,  semi-
parliamentarian, civil law country. It 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,25 and where, if it is deemed fit and appropriate, 
courts can use the final judgments of the European Court  of Human Rights (ECtHR), the 
International Criminal Court (ICC)  or any  other  international court  with jurisdiction over 
the country.26 Although in theory directly applicable, references to international law in the 
jurisprudence 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 national laws. 

The Constitution prescribes the principle of the separation of powers. The three branches 
of power are: legislative, executive and judicial.27 

Legislative power is vested in the Assembly of the Republic (the Parliament). The members 
are elected through what the Constitution and the laws set out as general, direct and free 
elections  and  by  secret  ballot.  The  Parliament  has  the  power  to  adopt  and  amend  the 
Constitution and 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 
must 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, 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  tasked  with  an  equality  mandate  –  the  Commission  for  Prevention  and 
Protection  against  Discrimination  (CPPD)  (Комисија  за  спречување  и  заштита  од 
дискриминација, КСЗД)28 and the Ombudsperson (Народен правобранител). 

The executive branch is represented by the President (whose role is largely ceremonial) 
and  the  Government,  which  has  16  ministries  and  four  Deputy  Prime  Ministers.29  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  communication  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 
and hosts the National  Coordinating Body for  Non-discrimination Issues.  However,  since 
the  legal  ground  for  convening  this  body  was  the  Strategy  on  Equality  and  Non-
discrimination 2016-2020, and the strategy has now expired, this body formally no longer 

25   Article 118 of the Constitution 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 
North Macedonia, 1991 and subsequent amendments. Full title: Constitution of the Republic of North 
Macedonia (Устав на Република Северна Македонија), official website of the Parliament of the Republic of 
North Macedonia, available at: www.sobranie.mk/the-constitution-of-the-republic-of-macedonia.nspx.  
26   Law on Courts, 2006. Article 18(5). Full title: Law on Courts (Закон за судовите), Official Gazette of the 
Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 58/2006, 62/2006, 35/2008, 150/2010; 83/2018, 198/2018, 96/2019; 
Constitutional Court Decisions: U.no.256/2007, U.no.74/2008, U.no.124/2008, U.no.12/2011. 

27   Please see the 2018 version of this report, Section 11, for information on the wire-tapping affair, which cast 

doubt on the respect for the separation of powers and the rule of law in the country in general. 

28   The first equality body, the Commission for Protection against Discrimination (CPAD) (Комисија за заштита 
од дискриминација, КЗД) ceased to exist with the adoption of the new Law on Prevention and Protection 
against Discrimination in 2020 (and its predecessor, the repealed version from 2019). 

29   The minister for the political system and intercommunity relations is also Deputy Prime Minister. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

exists.  The  Representative  for  Equal  Opportunities  for  Women  and  Men  is  based  in  the 
MLSP;30 each state administrative body has a legal obligation to appoint a coordinator for 
equal  opportunities.31  The  Ministry  of  Political  System  and  Inter-Community  Relations  is 
tasked,  inter  alia,  with  the  coordination,  monitoring  and  financing  of  the  government 
priorities  related  to  the  implementation  of  the  Ohrid  Framework  Agreement  and  the 
advancement of the rights of ethnic communities in the country.32 

The judiciary consists of the courts.33 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. 

There are two institutions that can be considered national human rights institutions and 
that have been tasked with an equality mandate, both acting as quasi-judicial bodies. One 
is  the  national  equality  body  –  the  CPPD  (with  a  sole  mandate  on  equality  and  non-
discrimination).  The  second  is  the  Ombudsperson  (which  has  a  general  human  rights 
mandate, extending beyond equality and non-discrimination). 

Local governance in the country is organised through decentralised, local self-government 
units. These units are made up of 80 municipalities34 and the City of Skopje (as a separate 
local self-government unit). 

Protection in discrimination cases, depending on the personal and material scope  of the 
case, can be sought through several procedures: criminal procedure,35 civil procedure,36 
administrative  procedure,37  quasi-judicial  procedure38  and  a  procedure  before  the 
Constitutional Court.39 

30   However, this representative is, in practice, not operational. For further details, see: Kotevska, B. (2021), 

Country Report on Gender Equality (European Commission), p. 75. 

31   Law on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men, 2013. Full title: Law on Equal Opportunities for Women 

and Men (Закон за еднакви можности на жените и мажите), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, 
Nos. 06/2012, 30/2013, 166/2014, 150/2015. 

32   Website of the Ministry (not available in English): https://mpsoz.gov.mk/mk/.  
33   The Judicial Council 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, the Academy of Judges and Public 
Prosecutors was established as a public institution for vocational training of candidates for judges and public 
prosecutors. Source: Republic of North Macedonia, Law on the Academy of Judges and Public Prosecutors, 
2015. Full title: Law on the Academy of Judges and Public Prosecutors (Закон за Академијата за судии и 
јавни обвинители), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 20/2015, 192/2015, 231/2015, 
163/2018. 

34   Law on Territorial Organisation of Local Self-government, 2004, Article 16. Full title: Law on Territorial 

Organisation of Local Self-government (Закон за територијална организација на локалната самоуправа), 
Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 55/2004, 12/2005, 98/2008, 149-2014; Constitutional 
Court Decision: U.no. 40/2005. 

35   Criminal procedure is an option for discrimination cases that amount to a criminal offence. 
36   Under various laws, in civil proceedings (more details follow in the report below). 
37   Including for misdemeanours. 
38   Procedures before the CPAD and the Ombudsperson. 
39   Citizens have the right to lodge ‘Requests for protection of human rights and freedoms’ with the 

Constitutional Court if they believe that they have been discriminated against on the grounds stipulated in 
the Constitution. This is a procedure based on urgency and is envisaged as a mechanism to safeguard the 
package of rights set out in the Constitution from unconstitutional acts (laws and bylaws). However, the 
effectiveness of this mechanism is still in question (according to the ECtHR, a legal remedy needs to be 
effective not just in theory but also in practice) because of the very low success rate of claimants. In the 
more than 20 years that it has been in operation, the Constitutional Court has only once decided in favour 
of claimants seeking protection through such a request and has rejected almost all of the filed cases. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

List of main legislation transposing and implementing the directives 

The  Law  on  Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination  (hereinafter  Anti-
Discrimination Law, ADL or 2020 ADL) was adopted on 30 October 202040 after the 2019 
Law  on  Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination  (hereinafter  2019  Anti-
Discrimination Law or 2019 ADL)41 was annulled by the Constitutional Court in May 2020.42 
The 2019 ADL replaced the Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination (2010 
Anti-Discrimination Law or 2010 ADL)43 adopted on 8 April 2010. The new ADL includes all 
the  grounds  covered  by  the  directives  and  goes  well  beyond  them.  Article  5  of  this  law 
explicitly includes the following discrimination grounds: race, skin colour, origin, nationality 
or ethnicity, sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, belonging to a marginalised 
group, language, citizenship, social origin, education, religion or religious belief, political 
conviction,  other  convictions,  disability,  age,  family  or  marital  status,  property  status, 
health condition, personal capacity, and social status. Like its predecessor, it has a wide 
material  scope,  which  includes  labour  and  employment;  education,  science  and  sport; 
social  security,  including  social  protection,  pensions  and  disability  insurance,  health 
insurance  and  health  protection;  judiciary  and  governance;  housing;  public  information 
and  the  media;  access  to  goods  and  services;  membership  of  and  activity  in  political 
parties,  associations,  foundations,  trade  unions  and  other  membership  organisations; 
culture; and all other areas.’ (Article 3(2)). 

The Law on Labour Relations44 was adopted on 28 July 2005. Under Article 6(1), an open-
ended  clause,  the  following  grounds  are  explicitly  covered  by  the  law:  racial  or  ethnic 
origin, colour, gender, age, health condition (i.e. disability), religious, political or other 
belief,  membership  of  trade  unions,  national  or  social  origin,  family  status,  property 
and financial situation, sexual orientation or other personal circumstances. The Labour 
Law  applies  to  labour  relations  among  employers  and  employees  established  by  the 
conclusion of employment contracts (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 
remunerations, and personally and continuously carries out the work according to the 
instructions and under the supervision of the employer (Article 5(1)1 ). 

It should be noted that these are only the two main pieces of legislation transposing the 
two directives, and those which, at the time of adoption, were explicitly referred to as being 
adopted for the purposes of transposing EU law. As the country’s first comprehensive Anti-
Discrimination Law was only adopted 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  aspects  of  social  protection  (including  the 
pension system and health security) and in the field of employment.  

40   Anti-Discrimination Law, 2020. 
41   Anti-Discrimination Law, 2019. 
42   On this, see: Flash report, ‘The Constitutional Court Repealed the 2019 Anti- Discrimination Law’ 29 May 

2020, https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/5148-north-macedonia-the-constitutional-court-repealed-the-
2019-anti-discrimination-law-104-kb.  

43   Anti-Discrimination Law, 2010. 
44   Labour Law, 2005. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

1 

GENERAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK  

Constitutional provisions on protection against discrimination and the promotion 
of equality 

The  Constitution  of  North  Macedonia  includes  the  following  articles  dealing  with  non-
discrimination: 

- 

- 

Article 9  explicitly  covers the  following grounds: sex,  race,  skin colour, national or 
social  origin,  political  and  religious  belief,  property  and  social  status  (closed  list  of 
grounds) (paragraph 1). Paragraph 2 contains a general equality clause on equality 
before  the  law,  which  is  not  tied  to  a  discrimination  ground,  making  the  personal 
scope  of  the  article  open,  including  for  the  grounds  not  explicitly  mentioned  in 
paragraph 1, but still limited only to citizens and, in accordance with the practice of 
the Constitutional Court, to natural persons.45 
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 (mainly interpreted as an exhaustive list). 

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

In theory, these provisions are directly applicable, but this is not so in practice.46 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). Thus, the letter of the law says 
that the constitutional provisions are directly applicable, but practice indicates otherwise. 
The  mechanisms  enabling  ordinary  courts  to  directly  apply  the  constitutional  anti-
discrimination provision have not been used.47  

In practice, there are no requests for interpretation of constitutional provisions from the 
ordinary  courts  to  the  Constitutional  Court  and  there  is  no  practice  of  referencing  the 
Constitutional Court by the ordinary courts. This is for two reasons. First, regardless of the 
procedure  used,  ordinary  courts  insist  that  a  lawsuit  is  brought  invoking  provisions  of 
specific  laws,  and  they  tend  not  to  implement  the  Constitution  directly.  Second,  the 
Constitutional Court’s positioning and practice is such that it does not enter into revisions 
of verdicts and decisions of the ordinary courts.48 

Although  judicial  interpretation  would  be  required,  there  is  no  reason  to  expect  that 
constitutional equality clauses cannot be enforced against private actors (as well as against 
the state). However, in view of the comments above on the actual use of these provisions 
before the ordinary courts, the practical relevance of this is questionable. 

45   Individual cases are filed under Article 54. 
46   See Section 1(b) of the 2013 report: https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/4174-fyr-macedonia-country-

report-non-discrimination-2013-1-11-mb. 

47   This does not mean that ordinary courts do not mention provisions from the Constitution. 
48   See, for example, Constitutional Court cases: U.No.55/2015 (para.4) (24 June 2015); U.No.152/2012-0-0 
(para.4) (14 November 2012); U.No.172/2002 (para.4) (25December 2002); U.No.37/1997 (para.3) (19 
March 1997). 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

2 

THE DEFINITION OF DISCRIMINATION  

2.1  Grounds of unlawful discrimination explicitly covered  

The  following  grounds  of  discrimination  are  explicitly  prohibited  in  the  main  legislation 
transposing  the  two  EU  anti-discrimination  directives  (listed  in  the  Introduction  in  the 
section on the main legislation transposing and implementing the directives): 

- 

- 

The  Law  on  Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination:49  race,  skin  colour, 
origin,  nationality  or  ethnicity,  sex,  gender,  sexual  orientation,  gender  identity, 
belonging  to  a  marginalised  group,  language,  citizenship,  social  origin,  education, 
religion  or  religious  belief,  political  conviction,  other  convictions,  disability,  age, 
family  or  marital  status,  property  status,  health  condition,  personal  capacity  and 
social status (open-ended clause) (Article 5). The ADL is in line with the directives 
and goes beyond their scope. 
The Law on Labour Relations (Labour Law) includes the  following grounds: 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)). 

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  4),  it  does  not  contain  definitions  of  the  grounds  from  the  directives  except  for 
disability (see section c here, below). No issues arising from this have yet been reported. 

The resourcefulness and absolute necessity of turning to international law for definitions of 
the discrimination grounds is made clear in the Guide on discrimination grounds, published 
by  the  previous  equality  body  -  the  CPAD.  In  particular,  the  guide  relies  heavily  on 
international law sources (including practice from the human rights bodies and courts) in 

49   Other laws which include provisions with discrimination grounds and general provisions outlawing 
discrimination are the following: Law on Courts (Articles 3 (1-3), 6 (1), 43 (1)), Criminal Code 
(Articles 137 (1), 319 (1), 394-г, 417 (1), Law on the Execution of Sanctions (Article 4(2) and (3)), Law on 
Volunteering (Article 9), Law on Voluntary Financed Pension Insurance (Article 3), Law on Primary Education 
(Article 5(1)), Law on Secondary Education (Article 3(3)), Law on Higher Education (Article 108 (5)), Law on 
the Protection of Children (Article 12 (1)), Law on Social Protection (Article 16 (2)), Law on Patients’ Rights 
(Article 5(2)), Law on Public Health (Article 16(5)), Law on Health Protection (Article 9), Law on Mental 
Health (Article 20(4)), Law on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men (Article 4(3)), Law on the Media 
(Article 4), Law on Audio and Audio-visual Media Services (Articles 45, 53, 61), Law on Culture 
(Article 4(1)), Law on Agencies for Temporary Employment (Article 3b(3)), Law on Insurance in Case of 
Unemployment (Article 1а(2), Law on Employment of and Work by Foreigners (Article 4(8)), Law on Public 
Prosecutors (Article 5(2)), Law on Border Control (Article 8(3)), Law on Customs Administration 
(Article 13(1)), Law on the Protection of Personal Data (Article 5), Law on the Rights of Communities that 
Represent Less than 20 % of the Population of the Republic of North Macedonia (Article 3), Law on 
Probation (Article 7(4)), Law on the Protection of Whistle-blowers (Article 8(1)), Law on Child Justice 
(Article 8), Law on Services (Articles 8(2), 9(2-1), 14 (2-1), 35 (2-1)), Law on Prevention of Corruption and 
Conflicts of Interest (Articles 4(2) and 5), Law on Teachers and Expert Associates in Primary and Secondary 
Schools (Articles 5, 15(5), 43, 45), Law on Internships (Article 5), Law on Recordkeeping in the Area of 
Health (Article 2 (1-34)), Law on the National Security Agency (Article 68), Law on Archival Materials 
(Article 45(1)), Law on Youth Participation and Youth Policies (Article (5(1-1)). The need for harmonisation 
of the discrimination grounds across laws has already been identified (see Kotevska B. (2016), Analysis of 
the harmonisation of national equality and non-discrimination legislation, Skopje, OSCE and CPAD). The new 
ADL contains a transitory provision that all other laws that contain provisions on the prevention of and 
protection against discrimination ‘shall be harmonised with the Law on the Prevention of and Protection 
against Discrimination within two years as of the day of the entry into force of this Law’ (Article 51). 
Keeping legal provisions with different personal and material scopes of protection in force, while resolvable 
under the lex specialis derogat legi generali rule, contributes to a reduction of legal certainty. An analysis 
was prepared in 2019 proposing several models for harmonisation of the national legislation (see 
Najchevska, M. (2019), Aнализа на хармонизацијата на легислативата во областа на 
антидискриминацијата (Analysis of the harmonisation of the legislation in the area of anti-discrimination), 
OSCE). 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

order to carve out the definitions of the discrimination grounds prescribed under national 
law.50 It is important to note that ratified international treaties  rank higher than laws in 
the  national  legal  hierarchy,  but  below  the  Constitution.  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 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Convention on 
the Rights of the Child, so interpretation of the discrimination grounds following from these 
treaties  should  be  considered  as  valid  at  the  national  level.  The  same  applies  to  the 
European  Convention  on  Human  Rights  and  to  the  Framework  Convention  on  National 
Minorities, to which the country is also a party. 

The lack of definitions of discrimination grounds in national law 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  around  ethnicity  and  the 
implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement. However, the legislative changes and 
strategic  documents  do  not  define  ethnicity  or  ethnic  origin/belonging/affiliation. 
Nevertheless, for protection against discrimination purposes, since in the national context 
the personal scope is wide and the discrimination ground provisions open, the definitions 
of specific grounds become less important and their absence less limiting. 

a) 

Racial or ethnic origin 

As discussed above, national law does not define ‘racial or ethnic origin’ in an equality and 
non-discrimination  context. In  fact, such definitions do not appear anywhere in national 
law,  except  in  the  Law  on  International  and  Temporary  Protection.51  This  law  has  a 
definition of race and ethnicity provided in the context of criteria that should be taken into 
consideration  in  cases  of  persecution  as  characteristics  attributed  to  the  person  by  the 
persecutor (Article 7).This definition states the following: ‘Race includes skin colour, origin 
or belonging to an ethnic group’ (Article 7(1-2)). According to this definition, ethnicity is 
subsumed  under  race.  In  addition,  this  definition  ties  in  with  that  of  nationality,  which 
states  that  ‘[n]ationality  does  not  denote  citizenship,  its  possession  or  lack  thereof,  but 
belonging  to  a  group  defined  by  its  cultural,  ethnic  and  linguistic  identity,  common 
geographical  or  political  origin  or  relatedness  with  the  population  of  another  country’ 
(Article 7(1-2)). 

b) 

Religion and belief 

As  discussed  above,  national  law  does  not  define  ‘religion  and  belief’.  The  Law  on 
International  and  Temporary  Protection  contains  a  definition  of  religion  provided  in  the 
context  of  criteria  that  should  be  taken  into  consideration  in  cases  of  persecution  as 
characteristics attributed to the person by the persecutor (Article 7): 

‘Religion  shall  include  theistic,  non-theistic  and  atheistic  beliefs,  participation  in  or 
abstention from formal worship in private or in public, either alone or in community 
with  others,  other  religious  acts  or  expressions  of  view,  or  forms  of  personal  or 
communal conduct based on or mandated by any religious belief.’ (Article 7(1-3)) 

According  to  the  CPAD’s  general  recommendation52  on  the  exercise  of  religion  without 
discrimination,  the  forum  externum  will  fall  within  the  understanding  of  religion,  as  per 

50   Kotevska, B. (2013), Guide on discrimination grounds, Skopje, OSCE and CPAD, available at: 

https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/6/b/116789.pdf. 

51   Law on International and Temporary Protection, 2018, Full title: Law on International and Temporary 

Protection (Закон за меѓународна и привремена заштита), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, 
No. 64/2018. 

52   The ADL does not deal with the issue of relevance of the previous opinions or general recommendations of 
the CPAD for the new CPPD. This is not problematic considering that (1) the opinions of the CPAD were not 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

CJEU Achbita C-157/15, para 28. The recommendation was inspired by a case where girls 
were refused entry to their school (a state school) on the first school day of the new school 
year because they were wearing head scarves. Refusing them entry to the school was a 
violation of the principle of equal treatment.53 

c) 

Disability 

While  the  ADL  does  not  define  disability,  it  defines  persons  with  disabilities  in 
Article 4(1(3))  as  ‘any  person  with  a  long-term  physical,  intellectual,  mental  or  sensory 
disability which, in interaction with various  social barriers, may obstruct his/her  full and 
effective participation in society on equal terms with everyone else’ (Article 4(1(3)). This 
definition  is  based  on  the  CRPD.  This  definition  has  been  transposed  in  the  Law  on 
Protection of Patients’ Rights (Article 4(2)) and is used in the new Law on Social Protection 
(Article 4(1-5)). 

The Law on Protection of Children54 uses a medical approach definition, enumerating forms 
of  disabilities.  Article  33  of  this  Law  considers  as  children  with  disabilities  children  with 
physical  disabilities,  intellectual  disabilities,  chronic  illness,  sight  impairment,  hearing 
impairment,  speech  impairment,  autism  and  combined  forms  of  disabilities.  This  Law 
prohibits discrimination (Articles 12(1), 13-15) and harassment (Article 12(2)) of children. 
It defines as a child any person up to the age of 18 and any person with disabilities up to 
the age of 26. 

A  2015  analysis  of  the  harmonisation  of  national  legislation  found  insensitive  disability 
terminology to be a cross-cutting issue. The analysis was conducted on 139 laws, of which 
40 laws  referred to disability; in all of these 40 laws the terminology  used could not be 
considered to be in 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.55 A 2020 
analysis of the harmonisation of the national legislation focused on 12 laws confirmed and 
updated these findings.56  

d) 

Age 

The national law does not define ‘age’. Case-law points to this ground being understood 
very broadly. For example, in a 2018 case, the CPAD found discrimination on grounds of 
age in a job advertisement because the way the advertisement was worded implied that 
anyone above the age of 26 was excluded from applying.57 

e) 

Sexual orientation 

The national law and case law do not define ‘sexual orientation’. 

legally binding, and nor are the CPPD’s opinions, and (2) the CPAD did not have an express competence to 
issue general recommendations under the 2010 ADL. 

53   CPAD (2017), ‘General Recommendation on equal enjoyment of the freedom of religion’ (text on file with 

author). 

54   Law on the Protection of Children, 2013. Full title: Law on the Protection of Children (Закон за заштита на 

децата), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 23/2013, 12/2014, 44/2014, 144/2014, 
10/2015, 25/2015, 150/2015, 192/2015, 27/2016, 163/2017, and Official Gazette of the Republic of North 
Macedonia, Nos. 104/2019, 146/2019, 275/2019, 311/2020, 294/2021. 

55   The analysis was conducted on 139 laws and includes a list of all provisions that contain disability 

terminology that needs revising. Source: Kotevska, B. (2016), Analysis of the harmonization of national 
equality and non-discrimination legislation, Skopje, OSCE and CPAD. 

56   Scullion, G. and Kotevska, B., ‘Harmonization of the national legislation in North Macedonia with the Law on 

the Prevention and Protection against Discrimination’, 2021, MLSP and CoE HFII, pp. 6-7. 

57   CPAD (2018), Case No. 08-34, Macedonian Helsinki Committee v Divajn Zoran DOOEL export-import 

Skopje, 8 March 2018. 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

2.1.2  Multiple discrimination 

In North Macedonia, multiple discrimination is prohibited by law. 

Multiple  discrimination  is  prohibited  in  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law  as  a  graver  form  of 
discrimination (Article 13) and is defined as ‘discrimination practised against a person or a 
group based on multiple grounds of discrimination’ (Article 4(1(10))). Given the scope of 
the  Anti-Discrimination  Law,  this  means  that  multiple  discrimination  is  prohibited  in  all 
fields.  There  is  a  separate  article  on  fines  for  multiple  discrimination,  prescribing  higher 
fines  for  it.  No  further  legal  rules  or  case-law  exists  that  would  provide  more  detailed 
guidance on how to deal with multiple discrimination cases. 

In  addition  to  multiple  discrimination,  the  new  Anti-Discrimination  Law  also  explicitly 
prohibits intersectional  discrimination (Article 13), as a graver form of discrimination.  It 
defines  intersectional  discrimination  as  ‘any  discrimination  upon  two  or  more  grounds 
which are concurrently and inseparably related’ (Article 4(1(13))). This definition helps to 
clearly differentiate intersectional discrimination and to provide visibility for the particular 
harm as manifested in intersectional discrimination cases. 

In North Macedonia, there is no court case law dealing with multiple discrimination.  The 
current equality body and the former one are the only institutions that have been reporting 
multiple discrimination cases. In 2021, the CPPD received 55 cases (32.93 % of its annual 
case  load)  in  which  claimants  claimed  discrimination  on  two  or  more  grounds,  and  the 
CPPD  found  discrimination  on  more  than  two  grounds  in  16  of  these  cases.58  Of  these 
16 cases, three were on intersectional discrimination, and in all three, the discriminated 
persons were Roma. However, the way in which intersectional discrimination was engaged 
with  in  the  three  cases  was  unsatisfactory.  Namely,  the  core  of  intersectional 
discrimination, the synergistic effect and its value – pointing out wider power relations at 
play  –  seems  to  have  been  either  not  identified  or  not  well  elaborated  on  in  the  CPPD 
opinions. The CPPD dealt best with intersectional discrimination in a case in which a Roma 
woman, a mother, was expelled violently from a bus by the driver in Skopje with her two 
minor children, one of whom was a child with disabilities (used a wheelchair).59 The driver 
of  the  bus  –  a  public  bus  operated  by  the  public  enterprise  JSP  -  yelled  at  them  while 
throwing  them  out,  including  using  a  racial  slur  to  address  them.  The  CPPD  found 
intersectional  discrimination.60  Regrettably,  however,  the  CPPD  did  not  comment  on  the 
particular way in which a synergistic effect had arisen in the case of the Roma child with a 
disability in this specific instance nor what the wider social implications of the case were. 
It  also  did  not  expressly  identify  an  intersectional  aspect  in  the  position  of  the  Roma 
mother.  In  addition,  in  the  opinion  and  the  accompanying  recommendation  to  the 
discriminator, there was no engagement with the fact that the driver’s action was actually 
a reaction to the fact that other passengers were pushing the Roma mother and her two 
children around the bus. In another case, no synergistic effect was identified but the CPPD 
nevertheless found intersectional discrimination. This was a case of discrimination in access 
to services on the grounds of ethnic affiliation, belonging to a marginalised group, societal 
status, and social status in a case in which a group of Roma were denied entry to a café 
bar.61 However, the CPPD did not explain where it identified a synergistic effect; it simply 
reiterated the definition of intersectional discrimination from the law. Similarly, in a case 
in  which  a  group  of  Roma  were  denied  entry  to  a  pool,  the  CPPD  found  intersectional 
discrimination  on  grounds  of  race,  colour  of  skin,  social  origin,  ethnic  belonging  and 
belonging  to  a  marginalised  group,  but  did  not  engage  with  the  interaction  of  the 

58   CPPD (2022), Annual Report for 2021, pp 20, 26. 
59   The CPPD opinion states that one of the children was using a wheelchair, but the information that the author 

acquired from the CSO which brought the case to the CPPD states that it was a child in a stroller. 

60   CPPD, No.0801-136 (01.09.2021). 
61   CPPD, No.0801-19 (26.07.2021). 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

discrimination grounds and missed the opportunity to discuss the wider social  origin and 
implications of the case, including the power relations at play, in the specific cases.62 

It  is  also  worth  mentioning  that  cases  of  multiple  discrimination  from  North  Macedonia 
have been brought before international bodies. The ERRC successfully argued the case of 
six  pregnant  Roma  women  in  front  of  the  UN  Committee  on  the  Elimination  of 
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) for subjecting them to eviction during pregnancy. 
CEDAW found intersectional discrimination and identified a clear obligation of the state to 
provide suitable, secure accommodation and make reparations to the Roma women.63 

2.1.3  Assumed and associated discrimination 

a)  Discrimination by assumption 

In  North  Macedonia,  discrimination  based  on  a  perception  or  assumption  of  a  person’s 
characteristics  is  prohibited  in  national  law.  Article  4(1(9))  defines  discrimination  by 
perception  as  ‘any  distinction,  exclusion  or  restriction  of  a  person  due  to  a  presumed 
belonging to a particular group upon any ground of discrimination’. There is no case law 
yet regarding this form. 

b)  Discrimination by association 

In  North  Macedonia,  discrimination  based  on  association  with  people  with  particular 
characteristics is prohibited in national law. Article 4(1(8))  defines it as  ‘any distinction, 
exclusion or restriction of a person due to being associated with another person or group 
upon any ground of discrimination’. There is no case law yet regarding this form. The case 
of the Roma mother, discussed in section 2.1.2. above, was a missed opportunity by the 
CPPD to discuss discrimination by association for the mother and her child with a disability. 

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

a) 

Prohibition and definition of direct discrimination 

In North Macedonia, direct discrimination is prohibited in national law. It is defined in the 
Anti-Discrimination Law as being, ‘where a person or a group is treated, has been treated 
or would be treated less favourably than another person or group in an actual or a probable 
comparable  or similar situation, based upon  a  ground of discrimination’ (Article 8(1)). A 
person is considered to be both a natural and a legal person (Articles 3(1) and 4(1(2)) and 
this has not been interpreted so far as to exclude groups from the protection. 

Before the adoption of the 2010 Anti-Discrimination Law, direct discrimination was defined 
in several  other laws as well. The Law  on Labour Relations (Article 7(2)) replicates fully 
the  definition  from  the  directives.  The  Law  on  the  Protection  of  Children  prohibits 
(Article 13(1))  and  defines  (Article  14(1))  direct  discrimination.  The  definition  was 
amended in 2019 and is now in line with the directives. According to this definition, direct 
discrimination is when, ‘the claimant and the beneficiary of child protection is, has been, 
or would be treated less favourably than another person or group in an actual or a probable 
comparable or similar situation, based upon a ground of discrimination’.64  

62   CPPD, No.0801-147 (30.08.2021). 
63   ERRC, ‘North Macedonia ordered to pay compensation for evicting pregnant Roma’, press release, 23 March 
2020, http://www.errc.org/press-releases/north-macedonia-ordered-to-pay-compensation-for-evicting-
pregnant-roma. 

64   Law on the Protection of Children, 2013, Article 14(1). 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

b) 

Justification of direct discrimination 

The Anti-Discrimination Law does not allow direct discrimination (Article  8(1)). However, 
it does contain an article on measures that will not be considered discrimination (Article 7). 
The  old ADL  was  consistently criticised for its extensive list  of  exceptions. The new ADL 
provides a much more concise and clear scope for exceptions. In Article 7, the new ADL 
provides  a  definition  of  affirmative  action,  and  prescribes  that  different  treatment  of 
Macedonian citizens compared to non-citizens and genuine and determining occupational 
requirements  (which  replicates  the  old  ADL’s  Article  14(2))  will  not  be  considered  to  be 
discrimination. 

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

a) 

Prohibition and definition of indirect discrimination 

In North 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 
apparently neutral provision, criterion, programme or practice puts a person or a group in 
a  less  favourable  position  in  relation  to  a  discrimination  ground  compared  with  other 
persons or groups of persons, unless it stems from a legitimate objective, and the means 
for  achieving  that  objective  are  proportionate,  that  is  appropriate  and  necessary’ 
(Article 8(2)). 

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

b) 

Justification test for indirect discrimination 

Under  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law,  indirect  discrimination  is  justified  if  the  ‘apparently 
neutral  provision,  criterion,  programme  or  practice’  that  results  in  less  favourable 
treatment ‘stems from a legitimate objective, and the means for achieving that objective 
are proportionate, that is appropriate and necessary’ (Article 8(2)). 

In  addition,  the  definition  in  the  Law  on  the  Protection  of  Children  (Article  14(2))65 
replicates  the  definition  from  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law  and  thus  also  the  justification 
test  for  indirect  discrimination.  The  justification  test  in  the  definition  of  indirect 
discrimination included in the Law on Labour Relations (Article 7(3))66 stipulates that the 
differentiation is justified if it is based on criteria and practices objectively justified by a 
legitimate aim and the means of achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary. 

2.3.1  Statistical evidence 

a) 

Legal framework 

In North Macedonia, there is legislation regulating the collection of personal data. The main 
legislation in this area is the Law on State Statistics.67 Data are collected covering all five 

65   Law on the Protection of Children, 2013, Article 14(2). 
66   Labour Law, 2005. Article 7(3). 
67   Law on State Statistics (1997). Full title: Law on State Statistics (Закон за државната статистика), Official 
Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 54/1997; 21/2007; 51/2011; 104/2013; 42/2014, 192/2015, 
27/2016, 83/2018, 220/2018, 31/2020. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

grounds  except  for  sexual  orientation.68  The  data  are  anonymous  and  therefore  the 
collection of such data does not conflict with the Law on Protection of Personal Data.69 

The ADL foresees an obligation for data collection disaggregated by discrimination grounds 
for  the  ‘purposes  of  promotion  and  advancement  of  equality  and  prevention  of 
discrimination’ for all data controllers and data processors (Article 3(4)). Article 21, which 
regulates the  competences of the CPAD, foresees an  obligation for this equality body  to 
‘collect  and  publish  statistical  and  other  data  and  to  create  databases  in  relation  to 
discrimination’  (Article  21(1(24)). The CPPD has included a section on its website  called 
‘Analytics’; it contains two parts, one of which is a search option whereby one can search 
by  date,  type  of  opinion  (which  is  basically  the  form  of  discrimination  and  whether  the 
CPPD  found  or  did  not  find  discrimination),  field  of  discrimination  and  ground  of 
discrimination.70 

The Ministry of Information Society and Administration collects data on civil servants in the 
form of a Register of Public Sector Employees.71 The data to be collected and the access 
to the register are specified in a bylaw. The data are not publicly 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  racial  or  ethnic  origin  and  age.  Belief,  disability  and  sexual 
orientation are not covered. 

Statistics are not used in litigation.72 However, they are widely used for designing strategic 
policy  documents  and  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  for  under-
represented, non-majority communities (national minorities) and the priorities in relation 
to the national One Society for All Strategy73 and the Strategy on Roma 2014-2020.74 

On disability, statistics were used for the ‘National Strategy on Equalisation of the Rights 
of Persons with Disabilities’75 and on age they were used for the ‘National Strategy on the 
Elderly’.76 Statistics were also used in the 2016-2020 ‘National Strategy on Equality and 

68   This means that, for state statistics purposes, no data is to be collected on sexual orientation.  
69   Law on Protection of Personal Data, 2020. Full title: Law on Protection of Personal Data (Закон за заштита 

на лични податоци), Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, Nos. 42/2020, 294/2001. 

70   CPPD website: https://kszd.mk/аналитика/број-на-мислења/.  
71   Law on Administrative Servants (2014). Full title: Law on Administrative Servants (Закон за 

административни службеници), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 27/2014, 199/2014, 
48/2015, 154/2015, 5/2016, 142/2016, 11/2018 and Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
Nos. 275/2019, 14/2020, 215/2021; Constitutional Court Decisions: U.no. 163/2014 (27 December 2016), 
U.br.121/2015 (01 February 2017), Article 7(1)-(9). 

72   Before the adoption of the 2019 Anti-Discrimination Law they were not explicitly admissible as evidence, 

since the law was silent on the issue. 

73   Strategy for Development of the ‘One Society For All’ Concept and Interculturalism, available at: 

https://vlada.mk/sites/default/files/dokumenti/strategii/strategy_one_society_interculturalism_en.doc. 

74   See Стратегија за Ромите 2014-2020 (Strategy on Roma 2014-2020), available at: 

http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/strategii/Strategija%20za%20Romite%20vo%20RM%202014-
2020.pdf. Outside the cut-off date for this report, a new strategy on Roma was adopted: the Strategy on 
Inclusion of Roma 2022-2030. 

75   See Национална стратегија за изедначување на правата на лицата со инвалидност 2010-2018 – 

ревидирана (National Strategy on Equalisation of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities), available at: 
http://mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/FINALNA%20Revidirana%20Nacionalna%20Strategija.pdf.  

76   See Национална стратегија за стари лица 2010-2020 (National Strategy on the Elderly), available at: 

http://mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/Strategija%20za%20stari%20lica%20juni.pdf.  

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Non-discrimination’77 and for its predecessor, the ‘National Strategy on Equal Opportunities 
and Non-Discrimination on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical Disability,’78 as 
well  as  for  the  2015-2020  ‘National  Action  Plan  for  the  Implementation  of  the  Law  on 
Prevention and Protection against Discrimination’.79 

In North Macedonia, statistical evidence may be admitted under national law in order to 
establish indirect discrimination. The Anti-Discrimination Law explicitly allows for the use 
of statistical evidence in discrimination cases in Article 38. In addition, Article 206 of the 
Law on Civil Procedure80 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. Statistical evidence as such 
is not mentioned elsewhere in national law. The Law on State Statistics81 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. 

b) 

Practice 

In North Macedonia, statistical evidence is not used in practice in order to establish indirect 
discrimination. 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. 
Moreover, before the new Anti-Discrimination Law, statistical evidence was not explicitly 
allowed for under law, thus making it a risky endeavour for a court party to raise a case 
on grounds of statistics. 

2.4  Harassment (Article 2(3)) 

a) 

Prohibition and definition of harassment 

In North Macedonia, harassment is prohibited in national law. It is defined under the Anti-
Discrimination  Law.  Harassment is  ‘unwanted behaviour towards a person or a group of 
persons on discriminatory grounds, the purpose or consequence of which is to undermine 
the  dignity  or  create  a  threatening,  hostile,  demeaning,  or  fear-provoking  environment, 
approach or practice’ (Article 10).82 The personal and material scope match the scope of 
the ADL – they apply to both natural and legal persons, on all discrimination grounds, in 
the public and private sphere and in all fields of the life of society. The definition complies 
with the directives. 

Harassment does not constitute a criminal offence yet.83 It is part of the provisions of the 
Law on Labour Relations, which deal with harassment, sexual harassment and mobbing. 

77   See Национална стратегија за еднаквост и недискриминација 2016-2020 (National Strategy on Equality 

and Non-discrimination), available at: 
http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/dokumenti/7.7_Strategija%20za%20ednakvost%20i%20nediskrimin
acija.pdf. 

78   See Национална стратегија за еднаквост и недискриминација по основ на етничка припадност, возраст, 
ментална и телесна попреченост и пол (National Strategy on Equal Opportunities and Non-Discrimination 
on Grounds of Ethnicity, Age, Mental and Physical Disability), available at: 
http://mtsp.gov.mk/WBStorage/Files/strategija_ednakvost.doc.  

79   See ‘Национален акциски план за спроведување на Законот за заштита и спречување од 

дискриминација 2015-2020’ (‘National Action Plan for the Implementation of the Law on Prevention and 
Protection against Discrimination’), available at: 
http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/word/NAP%20for%20ADL%202015-2020_MK.doc. 

80   Law on Civil Procedure, 2005. Full title: Law on Civil Procedure (Закон за парничната постапка), Official 

Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 79/2005, 110/2008, 83/2009, 116/2010, 124/2015. 

81   Law on State Statistics, 1997. 
82   Paragraph 1 of Article 10 covers harassment and paragraph 2 covers sexual harassment. 
83   At the time of writing of this report, a legislative proposal for amending the Criminal Code is in Parliament. 

The aim of these amendments is to align the national legislation with the Istanbul Convention. One of the 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

The definition of harassment is in line with the directives (Article 9, 9-a), as is its personal 
scope (Article 6). This definition states that harassment is unwanted conduct related to the 
protected grounds with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of the applicant for 
employment or the worker, resulting in the creation of an intimidating, hostile, humiliating 
or offensive  environment (Article 9(3)). Sexual harassment is  any  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 of creating an intimidating, hostile, humiliating or offensive 
environment  (Article  9(4)).  The  law  defines  psychological  harassment  or  so-called 
‘mobbing’ as any 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,  humiliating  or  offensive  environment  and  which  has  the  ultimate 
objective  of  ending  the  working  relationship  or  forcing  the  victim  to  leave  their  job 
(Article 9-a(2)). 

In North Macedonia, harassment explicitly constitutes a form of discrimination in the ADL 
(Article 10) 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 
Workplace84  was  adopted.  In  terms  of  the  elements  constituting  harassment,  the 
definitions of the different types of harassment — psychological and sexual — are in line 
with those 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. It is important to note here 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  in  law’.85  The  Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Policy  included  in  its  annual 
report information that a working group has been drafting amendments to this  Law, but 
no information on what the amendments will refer to has been made public.86 

b) 

Scope of liability for harassment 

Where harassment is perpetrated by an employee, in North Macedonia the employer and/or 
the employee may be held liable. Who will be held liable will depend on the complaint: who 
the alleged victim of harassment identifies as the discriminator, as well as the details of 
the case (most notably whether the individual has decided to first seek protection from the 
employer or whether he/she has decided to go directly to a 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 people/employees can be held liable 
for harassment as well. The Anti-Discrimination Law does not specify in any more detail 
how liability is established beyond being identified by the alleged victim themselves. Under 
the law, liability can be shared between employer and employee(s). There is, however, no 
established practice related to this. Harassment can also be subject to misdemeanour law. 

amendments proposes introducing harassment as a criminal offence. It remains to be seen if and in what 
form this proposal will pass. 

84   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, Nos. 79/2013, 147/2015, Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
No. 103/2021. 

85   Law on Protection against Harassment in the Workplace (2013), Article 8(3). 
86   MLSP (2022), Report on the Implementation of the Annual Working Plan of the Ministry of Labour and Social 

Policy for the period 1-12.2021 (Извештај за спроведување на Годишниот план за работа на 
Министерството за труд и социјална политика за периодот 1-12.2021 година), p. 80. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

The  Law  on  Protection  against  Harassment  in  the  Workplace  applies  to  the  field  of 
employment.  The  liability  scope  is  the  same  as  that  contained  in  the  Law  on  Labour 
Relations.87 

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

2.5  Instructions to discriminate (Article 2(4)) 

a) 

Prohibition of instructions to discriminate 

In North Macedonia, instructions to discriminate are prohibited in national law. Instructions 
are not defined. The Anti-Discrimination Law contains an article on  encouraging, inciting 
and instructing discrimination. Notably, this article states that ‘any activity with which the 
practicing  of  discrimination  on  grounds  of  discrimination  is,  directly  or  indirectly, 
encouraged, stimulated, instructed or incited, shall be deemed encouragement, incitement 
and instruction of discrimination’ (Article 9). The personal and material scope match the 
scope of the ADL – they apply to both natural and legal persons, in the public and private 
sphere and in all fields of the life of society. 

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. 

In  2021,  the  CPPD  found  ‘multiple  harassment  and  instruction,  encouragement  or 
incitement of discrimination on grounds of sex, gender, belonging to a marginalised group, 
family  or  marital  status,  and  sexual  orientation  on  social  media’.  The  perpetrator  was  a 
natural  person,  who  was  found  to  have  committed  ‘instruction,  encouragement  or 
incitement  of  discrimination’  by  sharing  materials  promoting  racism  and  xenophobia  on 
social  media  (Facebook)  accompanied  by  a  post  with  the  text  ‘Radical  feminism  creates 
homosexuals  from  children;  for  this  reason,  parental  rights  should  be  taken  from  these 
women.’  The  CPPD  recommended  that  they  delete  the  post  and  they  publish  a  public 
apology.88 

In North Macedonia, instructions explicitly constitute a form of discrimination.89 

b) 

Scope of liability for instructions to discriminate 

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

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 

87   Law on Protection against Harassment in the Workplace (2013), Article 8(3). 
88   CPPD, No.0801-468, 17 December 2021. 
89   Anti-Discrimination Law, 2020, Article 9. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

committing  the  crimes  will  be  held  liable  for  the  actions  (including  where  the  crime  is 
conducted through 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 persons with 
disabilities in the area of employment 

In  North  Macedonia,  the  duty  to  provide  reasonable  accommodation  for  persons  with 
disabilities is included in the law and is defined. 

To begin with, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was signed and 
ratified in 2012. Under the Constitution the ratification of the convention means that it has 
become  part  of  domestic  law.  The  Convention  defines  a  failure  to  make  reasonable 
accommodation as a form of discrimination. 

According to the Anti-Discrimination Law, which also applies in the field of employment, 
lack  of  reasonable  accommodation  is  considered  to  be  a  form  of  discrimination.  The 
definition of reasonable accommodation is as follows:  

‘Necessary  and  appropriate  modification  and  accommodation  required  in  a  specific 
case, which does not cause a disproportionate or unnecessary burden, with a view to 
ensuring the enjoyment or realisation of all human rights and freedoms of persons 
with  disabilities  on  equal  terms  with  everyone  else.  Failure  to  ensure  reasonable 
accommodation shall be deemed to constitute discrimination.’ (Article 4(1(4))) 

The ADL does not define what constitutes a disproportionate burden. It is not possible to 
know whether state financial assistance will be taken into account when assessing whether 
there is a disproportionate burden. 

The Law on Labour Relations does not specifically mention reasonable accommodation for 
persons with disabilities. The Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities90 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 persons 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)).  Measures 
undertaken  by  employers  to  accommodate  persons  with  disabilities  are  subject  to 
inspection and employers can be fined, however, the law makes no special reference as to 
whether the worker themselves can request that such measures be undertaken. 

The Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities requires adjustments to the workplace. 
This  should  result  in  creating  conditions  allowing  persons  with  disabilities  to  work 
(Article 5). The way this obligation is formulated suggests that it goes beyond a general 
obligation to provide accessible workplaces. 

90   Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities, 2008. Full title: Law on Employment of Persons with 

Disabilities (Закон за вработување на инвалидни лица), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, 
Nos. 35/2008, 103/2008, 26/2009, 83/2009, 99/2009, 115/2010, 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, 30/2016, 
120/2016, 127/2016, 99/2018, Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, No. 103/2021. 
Constitutional Court Decisions: U.no. 80-2008, U.no. 162-2008, U.no. 98-2011, U.no. 57-2013. 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

b) 

Case law 

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. 
Further guidance on how to interpret ‘reasonable accommodation’ has not been provided 
in case-law.  

c) 

Definition of disability and non-discrimination protection 

The definition of disability for the purposes  of claiming reasonable accommodation is no 
different  from  that  for  claiming  protection  from  non-discrimination  in  general.  As 
mentioned in Section 2.1.1.(c) of this report, while the Anti-Discrimination Law does not 
define disability, it defines persons with disabilities in Article 4(1(3)) as ‘any person with a 
long-term  physical,  intellectual,  mental  or  sensory  disability  which,  in  interaction  with 
various social barriers, may obstruct his/her full and effective participation in society on 
equal terms with everyone else’. 

The  Law  on  Employment  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  does  not  include  a  definition  of 
disability or criteria for entitlement to accommodation. It also does not refer to the ADL. 

d) 

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

In  North  Macedonia,  failure  to  meet  the  duty  of  reasonable  accommodation  in  the 
employment  of  persons  with  disabilities  is  recognised  as  discrimination.  Article  6  of  the 
Anti-Discrimination  Law  includes  lack  of  reasonable  accommodation  and  ‘not  enabling 
accessibility  of  infrastructure,  goods  and  services’  in  the  general  article  which  defines 
discrimination, explicitly stating that these are to be considered to constitute discrimination 
(Article 6). Thus, it is a free-standing form of discrimination. The rules on the shifting of 
the burden of proof apply when claiming the right to reasonable accommodation. 

e)  Duties  to  provide  reasonable  accommodation  in  areas  other  than  employment  for 

persons with disabilities 

In North  Macedonia, there is  no duty to provide  reasonable accommodation  for persons 
with disabilities outside the employment field.  There is, however,  a general accessibility 
duty, including regarding infrastructure and services which, if complied with, can reduce, 
but not eliminate, the need for individual reasonable accommodation. 

‘Access to infrastructure, goods and services means taking adequate measures that 
ensure that persons with disabilities are provided with access on equal grounds with 
information  and 
everyone  else 
communications,  including  information  and  communication  technologies  and 
systems, other public facilities and services in urban and rural areas. Any failure to 
ensure  accessibility  and  availability  of  infrastructure,  goods  and  services  shall  be 
deemed discrimination.’ (Article 4(1(5)))  

the  physical  surroundings, 

transport, 

to 

In  addition,  the  Law  on  Primary  Education  replicates  the  provisions  on  reasonable 
accommodation  and  on  adjustment  of  infrastructure  and  services  from  the  Anti-
Discrimination Law (Article 11(6 and 7)). 

f) 

Duties to provide reasonable accommodation in respect of other grounds 

In North Macedonia, there is no legal requirement to provide reasonable accommodation 
in respect of other grounds in the public and private sectors. 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

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  North  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  with  regards  to  access  to  employment  and 
acquiring  social  protection  apply  to  short-term  residents  without  Macedonian  citizenship 
and to Macedonian citizens without permanent residence in the country.91 In other areas, 
including self-employment, access to training and membership of workers’ organisations, 
there  is  no  legal  restriction  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.  Under  the  ADL,  people  with  an 
irregular status would also be protected. The country is a candidate for EU membership. 
So  far,  the  level  of  alignment  with  EU  law  with  regard  to  the  concept  of  ‘third-country 
nationals’ is not very advanced. 

3.1.2  Natural and legal persons (Recital 16 Directive 2000/43) 

a) 

Protection against discrimination 

In North Macedonia, the personal scope of the Anti-Discrimination Law covers natural and 
legal persons for the purpose of protection against discrimination. It does not distinguish 
between natural and legal persons for the purposes of protection against discrimination. 
Article 3(1) of the Anti-Discrimination Law provides that the law is applied to both natural 
and legal persons, while Article 4(1(2)) defines person as both a natural and a legal person. 

It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  the  Constitution  only  includes  citizens  in  the  general 
equality clause. 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) 

Liability for discrimination 

In North Macedonia, the personal scope of the Anti-Discrimination Law covers natural and 
legal persons for the purpose of liability for discrimination.  The ADL does not distinguish 
between  natural  and  legal  persons  for  the  purposes  of  liability  for  discrimination.  Under 
the  ADL  (Article  3(1)),  the  law  is  applied  to  both  natural  and  legal  persons,  as  further 
confirmed by Article 4(1(2)), which defines person as both a natural and a legal person. 
Fines for misdemeanours are divided between fines for natural persons and fines for legal 
persons and vary in amount (Articles 41 to 43).  

91   Law on Social Protection (2019). Full title: Law on Social Protection (Закон за социјалната заштита), 
Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, Nos. 104/2019, 146/2019, 275/2019, 302/2020, 
311/2020, 163/2021, 294/2021, Article 13.  

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

3.1.3  Private and public sector including public bodies (Article 3(1)) 

a) 

Protection against discrimination 

In  North  Macedonia,  the  personal  scope  of  national  law  covers  the  private  and  public 
sectors, including public bodies, for the purpose of protection against discrimination. The 
Anti-Discrimination  Law  states  that  the  law  applies  to  all  natural  and  legal  persons 
(Article 3(1))  and  that  it  covers  both  the  private  and  the  public  sector,  including  public 
bodies (Article 3(2)). 

b) 

Liability for discrimination 

The  personal  scope  of  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law  in  North  Macedonia  covers  both  the 
private  and  public  sectors,  including  public  bodies,  for  the  purpose  of  liability  for 
discrimination (Article 3(2)). 

3.2  Material scope 

3.2.1  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)) 

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

The Anti-Discrimination Law includes labour and labour relations in the public and private 
sectors (Article 3(2)), thus it should be read as including employment, self-employment 
and occupation. It does not seem to deal differently with the private sector in this regard. 

The  general  non-discrimination  article  in  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations92  encompasses 
selection  criteria,  recruitment  conditions,  treatment  at  work,  promotion,  professional 
training and other benefits, as well as ending employment. A specific ban on discrimination 
in  vacancy  announcements  is  prescribed  in  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations.93  However,  in 
relation  to  access,  both  in  that  provision  and  the  law  overall,  the  protection  against 
discrimination for persons 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.94 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.95 

92   Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 6. 
93   Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 24. 
94   Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 25. 
95   Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 8. 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Conditions for access to employment and criteria for various professional activities in the 
public  sector  are  mostly  determined  by  specialised  laws.96  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, the Law on Army Service 
and the Law on Administrative Servants.97 The  Law on Administrative  Servants sets out 
general  conditions  for  employment  as  a  civil  servant,  which  aside  from  general  health 
capacity, 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)).98  

The Anti-Discrimination Law does not distinguish between people who hold citizenship of 
Macedonia and others for the purposes of protection against discrimination. However, the 
above-stated citizenship criteria mean that migrants cannot access jobs in the public sector 
on an equal footing. Given that one of the current exceptions under the ADL is that special 
rights only for citizens are not deemed discriminatory, a national body is very unlikely to 
find this distinction on grounds of citizenship to be discrimination. No research exists that 
could  supplement  this  finding  with  information  as  to  how  these  conditions  operate  in 
practice. 

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  -  the  State  Labour  Inspectorate  (DIT).99  In  practice, 
however,  the  DIT  does  not  seem  to  process  discrimination  claims  or  to  identify 
discrimination elements in labour disputes where these are present, overall demonstrating 
that it does not see itself as an institution with competences in discrimination claims, as 
confirmed  by  the  questionnaire  responses  which  the  Network  against  Discrimination  (a 
network  of NGOs that  provide  free legal aid)  collected from DIT  employees as part  of a 
recent research project.100 

3.2.2  Employment  and  working  conditions,  including  pay  and  dismissals 

(Article 3(1)(c)) 

In  North  Macedonia,  national  legislation  prohibits  discrimination  in  working  conditions 
including  pay  and  dismissals,  for  all  five  grounds  and  for  both  private  and  public 
employment. 

Article  3(2)  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,101 
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 

96   Please note that when these laws do not regulate a matter in a specific way, the Law on Labour Relations 
applies, as lex generalis. This includes on matters of discrimination, since the two laws mentioned here do 
not contain provisions protecting against discrimination. 

97   Law on Administrative Servants (2014). 
98   Law on Administrative Servants (2014), Article 31(1). 
99   Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 256. 
100  Petkovska, N. (2022), ‘State Labour Inspectorate as a Protector of Workers against Discrimination’ 

(Државниот инспекторат за труд како заштитник на работниците од дискриминација), Network against 
Discrimination. 

101  Law on Labour Relations (2005), Article 108. 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

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 
salary is based: education level, level of working position, and years of experience.102 No 
case-law on this new law exists. 

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

In  North  Macedonia,  national  legislation  prohibits  discrimination  in  vocational  training 
outside  the  employment  relationship,  such  as  that  provided  by  technical  schools  or 
universities, or such as adult lifelong learning courses. 

Article  3(2)  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  Relations103  and  in  laws  on  different 
stages  of  education.  National  legislation  gives  everyone  equal  rights  to  acquire  higher 
education and equal rights to lifelong learning.104 

According  to  the  Law  on  Higher  Education,105  citizens  of  the  country  are  entitled  to 
education at higher educational institutions in the country  on equal terms. The approach 
to nationality is different and foreign nationals can use the principle of reciprocity (meaning 
that if Macedonian students are given the same treatment as nationals in a certain country, 
nationals  of  that  country  may  study  in  Macedonia  as  if  they  were  Macedonian  citizens). 
Other  foreign  nationals  who  cannot  avail  themselves  of  the  principle  of  reciprocity  can 
study under terms established by the higher education institution. Stateless persons enjoy 
the right to education on an equal footing with the citizens of the country. 

The selection of candidates by the university cannot be discriminatory on the grounds of 
race,  colour  of  skin,  sex,  gender,  language,  religion,  political  or  other  beliefs,  ethnic, 
national  or  social  origin,  property,  birth,  social  position,  disability,  sexual  orientation  or 
age.106 

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 meet the requirements 
of society and the labour market (Article 4).107 

102  Law on Administrative Servants (2014), Articles 85 to 97. 
103  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 7. 
104  Law on Higher Education, 2018. Full title: Law on Higher Education (Закон за високото образование), 

Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 82/2018, 154/2019. Article 3(5, 9). 

105  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 6. 
106  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 149 (3). 
107  Law on Adult Education, 2008. Full title: Law on Adult Education (Закон за образование на возрасните), 

Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 07/2008, 17/2011, 51/2011, 74/2012, 41/2014, 
144/2014, 146/2015, 30/2016, 64/2018; Constitutional Court Decision: U.no. 46/2008. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

3.2.4  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 North Macedonia, national legislation prohibits discrimination in relation to 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 3(2) of the Anti-
Discrimination  Law  covers  membership  of  and  activity  in  unions,  political  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 associations.108 There are no special 
anti-discrimination  provisions  related  to  the  grounds  of  the  directives;  the  general  anti-
discrimination provision  may apply (Article 6).  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.  

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

Directive 2000/43) 

In  North  Macedonia,  national  legislation  prohibits  discrimination  in  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  3(2)).  The 
provision  on  the  protected  grounds  is  open-ended  and  explicitly  lists  racial  and  ethnic 
origin, disability, belief, age and sexual orientation. 

The  Law  on  Social  Protection  includes  equal  treatment  and  non-discrimination  as  a 
founding principle for the provision of social protection (Article 16).109 The Law on Social 
Protection prescribes that social protection is realised through measures and activities in 
relation to ‘employment, stipends, housing, protection of the family, protection of children, 
health protection, education, and other areas established by law’ (Article 3(2)). All rights 
included  in  this  law  are  to  be  provided  based  on  equal  treatment.  All  discrimination  is 
prohibited in relation to an open-ended list of discrimination grounds. This list includes as 
explicitly mentioned discrimination grounds the list from the new Anti-Discrimination Law. 
Thus,  the  personal  scope  of  protection  contained  in  the  new  Law  on  Social  Protection 
includes  racial  and  ethnic  origin,  disability,  belief,  age  and  sexual  orientation 
(Article 16(2)).  According  to  the  Law  on  Social  Protection,  the  protection  against 
discrimination is provided in line with the provisions of the new Anti-Discrimination Law 
(Article 16(3)). This means that the protection applies in both the private and the public 
sectors, and for both natural and legal persons, as well as that all other provisions of the 
ADL apply. The fine for breaching the prohibition of discrimination under the Law on Social 
Protection  is  EUR 800  to  EUR 1 000  for  the  legal  person  providing  social  protection. 
EUR 200 to EUR 500 is the fine for the competent person, whereas the fine is EUR 150 to 
EUR 200 for the worker and for the line manager  from the legal person providing social 
protection.110 

108  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Articles 183, 184, 185, 198. 
109  Law on Social Protection, 2019, Article 16. 
110  Law on Social Protection, 2019, Article 350. 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

The  Law  on  Health  Protection  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 discrimination is prohibited in the 
provision  of  healthcare  on  grounds  of  race,  sex,  age,  nationality,  social  origin,  religion, 
political or other belief, property  status,  culture, language, type  of illness, ‘mental’111 or 
physical disability.112 It does not include sexual orientation as one of the protected grounds, 
but  it  could  be  included  depending  on  judicial  interpretation  (there  have  been  no  cases 
yet). This law will need to be aligned with the ADL in the next two years, which will remove 
the doubt as to the inclusion of sexual orientation as it will be clearly included within the 
scope of protection. 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’.113 

The Law on the Protection of Children also has articles on discrimination.114 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). 

a) 

Article 3(3) exception (Directive 2000/78) 

The national 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. 

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

In  North  Macedonia,  national  legislation  prohibits  discrimination  in  relation  to  social 
advantages as formulated in the Racial Equality Directive. 

The Constitution states that the Republic provides for social protection and social security 
for  citizens  in  accordance  with  the  principle  of  social  justice.  It  guarantees  the  right  to 
assistance to those who are infirm or unfit for work. It also provides for particular protection 
for  persons  with  disabilities  and  ensures  that  their  involvement  in  the  life  of  society  is 
possible.115 

Social  advantages  are  stipulated  under  the  Law  on  Social  Protection.  This  law  includes 
equal treatment and non-discrimination as a founding principle for the provision of social 
protection (Article 16).116 All rights included in this law are to be provided based on equal 
treatment. All discrimination is prohibited in relation to an open-ended list of discrimination 

111  Includes intellectual and psychosocial disability. 
112  Law on Health Protection, 2012. Full title: Law on Health Protection (Закон за здравствената заштита), 
Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 43/2012, 145/2012, 87/2013, 164/2013, 39/2014, 
43/2014, 132/2014, 188/2014, 10/2015, 61/2015, 154/2015, 192/2015, 17/2016, 37/2016, 20/2019 and 
Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, Nos. 101/2019, 153/2019, 180/2019, 275/2019, 
77/2021, 122/2021. Constitutional Court Decisions: U.no. 59/2012, U.no. 69/2012, U.no. 101/2014. 

113  Law on Health Insurance, 2000. Full title: Law on Health Insurance (Закон за здравственото 

осигурување), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 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, 
27/2016, 37/2016, 120/2016, 142/2016, 171/2017 and Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
Nos. 275/2019, 77/2021, 285/2021; Constitutional 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. 

114  Law on the Protection of Children, 2013. 
115  Constitution of the Republic of North Macedonia, 1991 and subsequent amendments, Article 35. 
116  Law on Social Protection, 2019, Article 16. 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

grounds. This list includes as explicitly mentioned discrimination grounds the list from the 
new Anti-Discrimination Law. Thus, the personal scope of protection contained in the new 
Law on Social Protection includes racial and ethnic origin, disability, belief, age and sexual 
orientation (Article 16(2)). According to the Law on Social Protection, the protection against 
discrimination is provided in line with the provisions of the new Anti-Discrimination Law 
(Article 16(3)). This means that the protection applies in both the private and the public 
sectors, and for both natural and legal persons, as well as that all other provisions of the 
ADL  apply.  Because  of  the  open  material  scope  of  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law 
(Article 3(2)), social advantages fall within this protection and no relevant exceptions are 
foreseen. 

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

In North Macedonia, national legislation prohibits discrimination in education as formulated 
in the Racial Equality Directive. 

Under the Anti-Discrimination Law, discrimination is prohibited in the educational process 
(Article 3), at all levels and in all forms, both private and public. All directive grounds are 
explicitly  listed  in  the  provision  on  protected  grounds  (Article  5).  Also  of  relevance  is 
Article 12 of the ADL which defines segregation as ‘the physical setting apart of a person 
or a group of persons on discriminatory grounds without a legitimate or objectively justified 
purpose’. 

Aside  from  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law  (Article  3),  laws  that  regulate  primary117  and 
secondary118  education  also  prohibit  discrimination.  Primary  and  secondary  education  is 
compulsory in the country. The Law on Primary Education includes disability as a ground 
for  discrimination  (Article  5(1)).  It  also  includes  an  article  on  inclusive  education  which 
foresees  that  inclusive  education  includes  ‘changes  and  adjustments  in  the  curriculum, 
access, structures and strategies for pupils with disabilities, with a common vision and a 
conviction  that  the  country  has  an  obligation  to  secure  education  for  all  children’ 
(Article 11(3)).  It  also  replicates  the  provisions  on  reasonable  accommodation  and  on 
adjustment of infrastructure and services from the Anti-Discrimination Law (Article 11(6 
and 7)). 

The Law on Higher Education foresees prohibition of discrimination in the student selection 
process on all of the grounds contained in the directives,119 including an explicit prohibition 
of  discrimination  on  the  ground  of  disability.120  No  single  general  provision  on  non-
discrimination is included in the law. In addition to this, there are articles establishing that 
special benefits for students with disabilities should be established within the statutes of 
the higher education institutions,121 that students with disabilities should be exempted from 
payment of tuition fees,122 and that they can be awarded other benefits by the university 
(without further stating what these might be).123 Any curriculum which is to be especially 

117  Law on Primary Education, 2019. Full title: Law on Primary Education (Закон за основното образование), 

Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, Nos. 161/2019, 229/2020. Article 5. 

118  Law on Secondary Education, 1995. Full title: Law on Secondary Education (Закон за средното 

образование), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, No. 44/1995, 24/1996, 34/1996, 35/1997, 
82/1999, 29/2002, 40/2003, 42/2003, 67/2004, 55/2005, 113/2005, 35/2006, 30/2007, 49/2007, 
81/2008, 92/2008, 33/2010, 116/2010, 156/2010, 18/2011, 42/2011, 51/2011, 6/2012, 100/2012, 
24/2013, 41/2014, 116/2014, 135/2014, 10/2015, 98/2015, 145/2015, 30/2016, 127/2016, 67/2017, 
64/2018 and Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, No. 229/2020, Constitutional Court 
Decisions: U.no. 355/1995, U.no. 210/2000, U.no. 83/2003, U.no. 31/2005, U.no. 102/2005, 
U.no. 226/2008, Article 3. 

119  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 149(3). 
120  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 149(3). 
121  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 27(4). 
122  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 128(1). 
123  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 150. 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

developed  for  students  with  disabilities  is  developed  by  the  Bureau  for  Development  of 
Education.124 

The  segregation  of  children  with  disabilities,  rather  than  their  inclusion  in  mainstream 
schools,  continues,  but  the  implementation  of  the  2019  Law  on  Primary  Education  is 
starting to show results. First, several bylaws needed to implement the law were adopted: 
the Decision on regional planning of cooperation among schools with a resource centre or 
centre for support; a Rulebook on the grading of pupils with disabilities; and a Rulebook 
on  the  procedure  for  application,  selection  and  appointment  of  an  educational/personal 
assistant. Secondly, the former ‘special schools’ are now in the process of being designated 
as ‘schools with resource centres’ (Articles 17, 179), and the former ‘special classes’ are 
being  transformed  into  schools  with  centres  for  support  of  pupils  with  disabilities 
(Articles 18, 179). The school year 2022/2023 should be the last year that ‘special primary 
schools’ for pupils with disabilities will exist as such. Thirdly, the Ministry of Education has 
signed  contracts  with  500  education  assistants.125  According  to  the  Law  on  Primary 
Education, pupils with disabilities are provided with personal and education assistants who 
are to support them in studying (Article 19). Fourthly, integration teams are already being 
formed. Training for inclusion teams in 40 schools was organised by the European Union-
funded project ‘Be IN, be inclusive, be included’ and implemented by the NGO Handimak 
together with the Ministry of Education.126 The State Education Inspectorate has prepared 
a checklist for the inspections regarding inclusion of pupils with disabilities.127 As per the 
Law  on  Primary  Education,  integration  teams  are  tasked  with  conceptualising  and 
implementing inclusion activities in school: one at the school level (school inclusion team) 
and one at the individual level (pupil inclusion team) (Article 16). The school inclusion team 
should  be  composed  of  two  teachers  from  among  the  employees  in  the  school,  two 
parents/guardians,  the  school’s  pedagogist  or  psychologist  or  social  worker,  the  special 
educator and  rehabilitator, and the school’s director.  The individual pupil inclusion team 
should  be  composed  of  two  teachers,  the  parent/guardian,  the  school’s  pedagogist  or 
psychologist or social worker,  and the  special  educator and  rehabilitator.  If needed, the 
pupil,  or  other  teachers  or  associates  can  also  participate  in  the  work  of  the  team.  In 
addition,  there  are  personal  assistants.  In  2021,  49  new  special  educators  and 
rehabilitators were employed to support pupils with disabilities and the teaching staff. 128 
Fifthly,  funds  of  MKD 2.5  million  (EUR 40 000)  have  been  allocated  for  adjustments  to 
infrastructure.129  In  addition,  with  support  from  the  EU  delegation  in  the  country,  four 
primary  schools,  four  secondary  schools  and  four  high  education  facilities  will  be 
refurbished in order to make them accessible for pupils and students with disabilities.130 
The Law on Primary Education envisaged adjustments of the infrastructure as part of the 
efforts which should be undertaken towards inclusive education (Article 11).  

The implementation is not without problems, however. These are noted in the 2021 annual 
report of the Ombudsperson. Namely, the institution notes that 266 requests for education 
assistants were not approved. Of the 26 requests for personal assistants filed, only nine 
were  approved.  The  reason  behind  the  denial  of  requests  for  personal  assistants,  the 

124  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 30. 
125  Ministry of Education and Science, Strategy Plan 2022-2024 (Стратешки план 2022-2024), 
https://mon.gov.mk/stored/document/Strateshki%20plan%20%202022-2024.pdf. 24. 

126  See Hendimak, https://www.stepbystep.org.mk/en/novosti-i-nastani/povik-za-angazhiranje-na-4-

obuchuvachi-za-uchilishni-inkluzivni-timovi.  

127  State Education Inspectorate, Checklist - Inclusivity (Листа за проверка – инклузивност), 

https://dip.gov.mk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/inkluzivnost-1.docx.  

128  Ministry of Education and Science, Strategy Plan 2022-2024 (Стратешки план 2022-2024) 
https://mon.gov.mk/stored/document/Strateshki%20plan%20%202022-2024.pdf, p. 24. 
129  Ministry of Education and Science, Strategy Plan 2022-2024 (Стратешки план 2022-2024) 
https://mon.gov.mk/stored/document/Strateshki%20plan%20%202022-2024.pdf, p. 24. 
130  Ministry of Education and Science, Strategy Plan 2022-2024 (Стратешки план 2022-2024) 
https://mon.gov.mk/stored/document/Strateshki%20plan%20%202022-2024.pdf, p. 10. 

35 

 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Ombudsperson notes, is the lack of available certified personal assistants.131 There were 
also some negative reactions among the population, albeit very isolated ones.132 

As  for  secondary  education,  there  are  still  separate  schools  for  children  with  ‘special 
needs’,133 meaning that the segregation of students with disabilities is still institutionalised. 
Secondary school students with ‘special educational needs’ are educated under adjusted 
programmes for job training.134 There are no specific articles that regulate the education 
of children with disabilities in  ordinary  secondary schools. However, this  does not mean 
that  children  with  disabilities  are  integrated  into  the  education  (thus  the  lack  of  special 
provisions). In fact, it is the opposite. If the students fall within the category of students 
with  ‘special  educational  needs’,  they  cannot  enrol  in  mainstream  secondary  schools.  A 
new law on secondary education is being drafted, which should start a process of resolution 
of the segregation for pupils with disabilities at this level as well. 

In addition, discrimination in  education in the  national context is prohibited as a field in 
the private and public sectors, and on all grounds equally (see section 2.1.1.), which means 
that the scope of protection goes beyond that established in the directives. This has been 
very beneficial at the national level for triggering a public reform in removing discriminatory 
content  from  textbooks  at  all  levels  of  education  and  the  preparation  of  a  new  Law  on 
Textbooks and other Didactic Materials in Primary and Secondary Education. A draft was 
put forward for public discussion in 2021, after which it was submitted to the Parliament 
for adoption.135 The draft law includes an article banning any form of discrimination on any 
ground in all teaching, didactic and other materials in primary and secondary education. 
Part of the process leading up to this policy change involved a number of cases before the 
former equality body, the CPAD (albeit with no unified approach in practice136). The CPPD 
continues  to  receive  cases  relating  to  discrimination  in  textbooks  and  materials,  most 
recently on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity in a secondary education 
textbook on sociology.137 In 2021, the CPPD found harassment on the grounds of gender, 
sexual orientation, gender identity, social origin and belonging to a marginalised group. It 
identified the authors of the textbook, the authorised peer reviewers and the Ministry of 
Education and Science as the discriminators, as they all contributed to the textbook being 
approved and distributed for use.138 The CPPD recommended that the Ministry of Education 
and Science remove the textbook from use with a deadline of six months, within which the 
authors  should  revise  the  parts  of  the  textbook  where  discriminatory  content  was 
identified.  The  CPPD  also  recommended  that  the  Ministry  not  approve  textbooks  with 
content  which  harasses  on  the  grounds  of  gender,  sexual  orientation,  gender  identity, 

131  Ombudsperson of the Republic of North Macedonia (2022), Annual Report 2021 (Годишен извештај за 2021 

година), p. 16. 

132  While outside the cut-off date for this report, one of the cases which received significant media attention is a 

good example of this. This case was that of a pupil in the town of Gostivar who was told by the school 
director that she could no longer attend the classes with the other children after parents of children in her 
class complained about having a pupil with disabilities in the class. Following public outrage at the exclusion 
of the little girl and a reaction by the state institutions, the pupil returned to study with her class. The case 
was first reported through the media, by: TV Klan, ‘Embla in the City of Injustice and Absurdity’ (Eмбла во 
градот на неправдите и апсурдноста), 
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?ref=external&v=484434239967234 (original story in Albanian published 
at: http://klanmacedonia.mk/embla-ne-qytetin-e-padrejtesive-dhe-absurditetit-video/). The CPPD opened a 
case on its own initiative about this incident; at the time of writing this report, a resolution was still 
pending. 

133  Law on Secondary Education, 1995, Article 43. 
134  Law on Secondary Education, 1995, Article 50. 
135  The proposal was still in parliamentary procedure by the cut-off date for this report. The text of the draft 

law is available at the following link: https://www.sobranie.mk//materialdetails.nspx?materialId=dc53a25f-
bb1a-4b83-b0af-1311a6a5004d.  

136  One of the first cases dealt with by the CPAD concerned discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation 

in a textbook.. 

137  The textbook was approved for use by the Ministry of Education and Science in 2004 (decision 

no. 11-3865/1, dated 15.07.2004). 
138  CPPD, Case No.0801-172 (23.12.2021). 

36 

 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

social  origin  and  belonging  to  a  marginalised  group  in  the  future,  and  that  the  authors 
refrain from writing and the reviewers from approving textbooks with such content.139 

b) 

Trends and patterns regarding Roma pupils 

In  North  Macedonia,  there  are  specific  patterns  (whether  legal  or  societal)  in  education 
regarding  Roma  pupils,  such  as  lower  rates  of  enrolment  and  segregation.  Both  were 
identified  and  targeted  as  part  of  the  education  section  in  the  Strategy  on  Roma  2014-
2020. But this document expired in 2020. In 2021, Romalitico, a Roma rights NGO, worked 
with the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy on conducting an evaluation of the strategy 
and  drafting  the  new  strategy.  By  the  cut-off  date  for  this  report,  the  process  was  still 
ongoing.  A  new  National  Action  Plan  on  the  Protection,  Promotion  and  Fulfilment  of  the 
Human Rights of Roma Women and Girls for 2022-2024 was finalised in December 2021 
(and adopted by the Government after the cut-off date for this report, in March 2022). The 
overall goal of this NAP is advanced intersectional justice – equal and just access to rights, 
opportunities,  resources  and  power  in  society  –  for  Roma  women  and  girls.  One  of  the 
expected  results,  result  number  2,  is:  ‘secured  conditions  for  acquiring  and  completing 
formal  education  for  Roma  women  and  girls’.  The  following  activities  are  planned  for 
obtaining this result: financial support for Roma families as an incentive for lowering drop-
out  rates;  free  transport  to/from  school;  training  for  education  mediators  on  gender 
sensitivity, intersectional awareness and unconscious gender bias; introducing  minimum 
quotas for Roma women and girls in the scholarship programmes in place; an awareness-
raising  campaign  to  inform  parents  and  Roma  women  and  girls  of  scholarship 
opportunities; revision of the checklist of the State Education Inspectorate on pedagogical 
filing in order to include a category of marriages with minors; and an analysis of textbooks 
for  identifying  discriminatory  content  towards  Roma,  including  through  a  gender 
perspective.140 

Regardless of the mandatory character of primary and secondary education, low levels of 
enrolment persists as an issue. Of all Roma children aged six to 18, 75 % are involved in 
formal  education.141  For  comparison,  the  general  net  rate  of  enrolment  in  primary 
education  is  91 %.142  Low  rates  of  enrolment  have  also  been  noted  by  the 
Ombudsperson.143 

Segregation of Roma pupils continues to be a burning issue. According to the 2014-2020 
strategy, some parents of Roma origin intentionally enrol their children without disabilities 
in special schools for children with moderate 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.144 

Yet  many  studies  published  on  the  issue  of  Roma  education  in  the  country,  and  on 
segregation in particular, paint a  different picture compared to the one presented in the 
(now expired) strategy. Studies available so far, such as the Open Society Institute (OSI) 

139  CPPD, Case No.0801-172 (23.12.2021). 
140  National Action Plan on the Protection, Promotion and Fulfilment of the Human Rights of Roma Women and 

Girls for 2022-2024, available at: 
https://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/2022/NАP_za%20zastita%20promocija%20i%20ispolnuvanje%20%
20na%20cov.%20prava%20na%20zenite%20i%20devoj%20%20Romki%2015.03.2022.pdf.  

141  AECOM International Development Europe SL, Извештај за социјалното мапирање – финален нацрт 

(Report from the social mapping – final draft), July 2019, p. 27. 

142  Strategy on Education 2018-2025 and Action Plan, p. 10. 
143  Ombudsperson (2018), Инклузија на Ромите по завршувањето на Декадата на Ромите – Тековна 

состојба и предизвици (Roma inclusion following the Roma Decade – state of affairs and challenges), 
available at: http://ombudsman.mk/upload/documents/2018/Prezentacija-Inkluzija%20Romi-Vrabotuvanje-
07.11.2018.pdf. 

144  Strategy on Roma 2014-2020, 2014. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

report,145  Roma  Education  Fund  reports,146  Macedonian  Helsinki  Committee  and  ERRC 
report,147  a  UNICEF  2008  situation  analysis148  and  a  2009  segregation  in  education 
analysis,149  a  CPAD  2014  report,150  an  Institute  of  Human  Rights  REF-supported  2013 
study151 and a Foundation Open Society Macedonia 2015 analysis,152 have all reached 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.  Critical153  issues  include  low  enrolment,  poor  performance  and  a  high 
drop-out rate for Roma children, combined with in-school segregation and discrimination, 
referral to special schools, restricted access to preschool education and a lack of support 
for further education.154 The few cases that have been brought regarding segregation have 
all failed due to various reasons, such as blame shifting towards the parents because they 
enrol Roma children in classes for children with disabilities (CPAD case),155 personal choice 
(Ombudsperson  case),156  or  legal  standing  challenge  (court  case).157  Consequently,  no 
sanctions have been imposed in relation to segregation in schools thus far.158 

Most  recently,  the  ERRC  has  alerted  the  public  and  the  authorities  to  the  breach  of  the 
right  to  education  of  Roma  young  people  who  have  been  sent  to  juvenile  correctional 
institutions. Finding appalling conditions in general at the correctional facility in Ohrid, the 
ERRC team also found  that there  was no organised  educational  provision at  the facility. 
The ERRC filed lawsuits against the competent institutions for discrimination on grounds of 
ethnicity and youth-offender status, however the case failed at both the first and second 

145  Open Society Institute (2007), Equal access to quality education for Roma, Volume 2: Croatia, Macedonia, 

Montenegro and Slovakia, available at: 

  www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/equal_20071218.pdf. 
146  Roma Education Fund (2007), Advancing education of Roma in Macedonia, available at: 

https://www.romaeducationfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/macedonia_report.pdf. 

147  Referenced in this report: 

https://www.rcc.int/romaintegration2020/romadecadefold//decade%20implementation/4.%20civil%20socie
ty%20reports/Civil%20Society%20Monitoring%20Report%202012%20(Former%20Yugoslav%20Republic%
20of%20Macedonia,%20English%20language).pdf. 

148  UNICEF (2008), Children in FYR Macedonia – A situation analysis, available at: 
https://www.unicef.org/northmacedonia/reports/situation-analysis-children. 

149  UNICEF (2009), Мултикултурализмот и меѓуетничките односи во образованието (Multiculturalism and 

interethnic relations in education), available at: 
https://www.unicef.org/northmacedonia/reports/multiculturalism-and-interethnic-relations-education. 

150  CPAD (2014), Segregation of Roma children in education, available at: 

http://eprints.ugd.edu.mk/16407/1/Reserach%20on%20Roma%20segregation_MK%2BAL.pdf. 

151  Institute of Human Rights (2013), Кршење на ѕидот на одбивање и сегрегација (Breaking the wall of 

silence), https:/  /www.ihr.org.mk/storage/app/media/Publications/diskriminacijaromi.pdf. 

152  Foundation Open Society Macedonia (FOSM) (2015), Segregation of Roma in education in Macedonia, 

Skopje. 

153  Other important issues range from general living conditions to discrimination and clear examples of 

segregation (including making Roma children sit in the back rows in classes, complaints by parents of 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). Source: Institute on Human Rights (2013), Кршење на ѕидот на одбивање и сегрегација 
(Breaking the wall of silence), available at: 
https://www.ihr.org.mk/storage/app/media/Publications/diskriminacijaromi.pdf. 

154  Roma Education Fund (2007), Advancing education of Roma in Macedonia, available at: 

https://www.romaeducationfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/macedonia_report.pdf. 

155  Commission for Protection against Discrimination (Комисија за заштита од дискриминација), Opinion of 

the Commission for Protection against Discrimination, No. 07-80 (5 September 2014). 

156  IRIZ (2017), ‘ИРИЗ и Хелсиншки комитет со претставка до Народниот правобранител за сегрегација на 
ученици Роми’ (‘IRIZ and the Helsinki Committee file a case with the Ombudsperson on segregation of 
Roma students’), IRIZ website, https://mhc.org.mk/wp-
content/uploads/2019/05/Mesecen_IZVESTAJ_za_covekovi_prava-Fevruari_2017.pdf. 

157  CSO KHAM Delcevo, Open Society Foundation Macedonia (FOSM), Macedonian Helsinki Committee (MHK), 

Institute for Human Rights (IHR) and European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC); Court of First Instance Skopje, 
Case No. П4-932/17, Institute for Human Rights (IHR) and the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) vs 
Ministry of Education, Bitola Municipality, Gjorgji Sugarev Primary School and Todor Angelevski Primary 
School, 28 March 2018; Court of Second Instance Skopje, Case No. ГЖ-3165/18, Institute for Human Rights 
(IHR) and the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v Ministry of Education, Bitola Municipality, Gjorgji 
Sugarev Primary School and Todor Angelevski Primary School (13 July 2018). 

158  Strategy on Roma 2014-2020, 2014. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

instance.  The  judgments  from  both  courts  found  that  the  lack  of  education  was  general 
and could not be attributed to the fact that the boys were Roma, regardless of the fact that 
it was predominantly Roma young people who were sent to this facility. This clearly shows 
that the court did not identify the issue as one of indirect discrimination.159 The ERRC filed 
the  case  again,  on  behalf  of  all  children,  and  won  in  2021  on  account  of  the  children’s 
ethnicity and status as young offenders. 160 

An  encouraging  development  in  relation  to  segregation  is  that  the  ADL  now  explicitly 
defines  segregation  and  outlaws  it.  In  Article  12,  it  defines  segregation  as  ‘the  physical 
setting  apart  of  a  person  or  a  group  of  persons  on  grounds  of  discrimination  without  a 
legitimate or objectively justified purpose’. This Article was used in court in a case which 
the Macedonian Helsinki Committee (MHC) brought against the Government of the Republic 
of  North  Macedonia,  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Science,  the  Ministry  of  Labour  and 
Social Policy, the Ministry of Health, the State Education Inspectorate, the Municipality of 
Bitola and the Municipality of Stip, claiming segregation of Roma children in education. The 
MHC considers that these institutions are responsible for segregation as a result of inaction: 
(1) lack of activities that will enable that the planning of the regional organisation of the 
schools is conducted in a way that will not result in segregation; (2) lack of oversight over 
the process of adoption and implementation of the regional organisation of the schools and 
the way that Roma pupils are being enrolled in schools; (3) lack of actions that will ensure 
that the distribution of Roma pupils inside a class does not result in segregation, and lack 
of sanctions in cases of discrimination; and (4) lack of actions for adopting the necessary 
laws and bylaws that could ensure that Roma  children without disabilities are taken  out 
from the special schools. The CPPD requested from the court to support this claim as an 
amicus curiae. The case is pending.161 

The COVID-19 pandemic posed many challenges for the education of children in general. 
However,  it  particularly  affected  access  to  education  for  vulnerable  children,  and  in 
particular Roma children and children with disabilities. For Roma children, the main worry 
was the low rates of access to internet connections and possession of computers or other 
electronic  means  for  following  the  online  education  programmes,  as  well  as  general 
conditions for engaging with online education from the home,162 which the Government did 
not address, thereby leaving Roma children further exposed to exclusion if new waves of 
the pandemic ensue. For children with disabilities, no measures were undertaken to make 
the online and national television education accessible.163 There have been no reports of 
cases  being  filed  specifically  by  or  on  behalf  of  vulnerable  children  regarding  education 
during  the  pandemic  within  the  reporting  period.  The  Ombudsperson  did  receive  an 
increased number of cases in 2021 pertaining to child rights (254 cases, compared with 
148 in 2020, which is an increase of 71.6 %);164 however, the jump was not a result of 
cases  pertaining  to  vulnerable  children,  but  the  result  of  a  reaction  by  parents  to  an 
ongoing  educational  reform  whereby  textbooks  were  replaced/supplemented  by  e-
textbooks. 

159  ERRC (2020), ‘No education, no future for Romani youth offenders in North Macedonia’, 

http://www.errc.org/news/no-education-no-future-for-romani-youth-offenders-in-north-macedonia. 
160  ERRC (2021), ‘Court Rules in Favour of Roma & Non-Roma Youth Offenders Denied Education in North 

Macedonia’, http://www.errc.org/press-releases/court-rules-in-favour-of-roma--non-roma-youth-offenders-
denied-education-in-north-macedonia.  

161  CPPD, Request to join court proceedings (amicus curiae) (Барање за вклучување во судската постапка 

како пријател на судот) https://kszd.mk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Amicus-Curiae.pdf.  

162  Kamberi, I. (2020), Challenges facing Roma during the crisis caused by COVID-19, European Policy 

Institute, Skopje, https://epi.org.mk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/roma_kovid-19_eng.pdf. 

163  Kotevska, B. et al (2020), FRANET National contribution to the Fundamental Rights Report 2021 Republic of 

North Macedonia, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 
https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/frr2021_north_macedonia-frr2021_en.pdf, pp. 35-36. 

164  Ombudsperson of the Republic of North Macedonia (2022), Annual Report 2021, p. 31. 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

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

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

In North Macedonia, national legislation prohibits discrimination in access to and the 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  3(2)), and applies to all the grounds of the directives and more 
(Article 5). Unlike the old ADL, which included a separate article according to which failure 
to adapt goods or services to meet the needs of a person with disabilities was considered 
as  a  separate  form  of  discrimination,  the  new  ADL  does  not  include  such  an  article. 
However, in Article 6, where discrimination in general is defined, in a single paragraph the 
law  states  the  definition  and  continues  that:  ‘This  includes  all  forms  of  discrimination, 
including  not  enabling  reasonable  accommodation  and  not  enabling  accessibility  and 
availability  of  infrastructure,  goods  and  services’  (Article  6).  Thus,  although  the  law  no 
longer has a  separate article  on this, it keeps the approach  of  explicitly stating that not 
enabling reasonable accommodation is discrimination in all areas of life, which is arguably 
a wider scope than the provision under the old ADL. 

a)  Distinction between goods and services available publicly or privately 

In North Macedonia, national law does not distinguish between goods and services that are 
available  to  the  public  (e.g.  in  shops,  restaurants  and  banks)  and  those  that  are  only 
available privately (e.g. those restricted to members of a private association). 

The  Law  on  Consumer  Protection165  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.166 There are no specific 
grounds for discrimination mentioned. 

After the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC), an NGO working on Roma rights including 
by  providing  free  legal  aid,  received  information  that  Roma  people  were  being  denied 
access  to  the  open-air  swimming  pool,  Dovledzik,  in  the  town  of  Bitola  they  organised 
situation testing in order to investigate and secure evidence of the reported discriminatory 
practice.  After  the  First  Instance  Court  ruling  (dated  13  November  2018)  the  Second 
Instance Court also confirmed that there was discrimination on grounds of ethnicity and 
skin colour in the area of access to goods and services against the individual  claimants, 
and that damages should be awarded. The situation testing evidence was submitted and 
was considered sufficient for shifting the burden of proof. The defendant, the Court found, 
did  not  prove  that  it  did  not  discriminate  against  the  claimants  or  that  there  was  any 
justification  for  the  unequal  treatment.  It  examined  whether  the  defendant  actually 
considered any rules in place at the pool for how (potential) guests should behave in order 
to  decide  whether  the  claimants  acted  in  line  with  this.  However,  it  found  that  no  such 
rules  were  broken  and  that  the  claimants  were  denied  access  solely  because  they  were 
Roma. All the claimants were awarded EUR 1 000 (MKD 60 000) each for the distress and 
emotional  pain  they  suffered.  The  discriminator  was  prohibited  from  treating  people 
unequally in access to the pool or from applying unequal treatment in similar situations in 
the future.167 

The former equality body – the CPAD – has dealt with a similar case. It related to a claim 
by Bairska Svetlina, an NGO dealing with Roma rights, filed on behalf of F. J., who claimed 

165  Law on Consumer Protection (Закон за заштита на потрошувачите), 2004. Full text: Law on Consumer 

Protection (Закон за заштита на потрошувачите), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, 
Nos. 38/2004, 77/2007, 103/2008, 24/2011, 164/2013, 97/2015, 152/2015, 140/2018. 

166  Law on Consumer Protection, 2004, Article 119. 
167  Second Instance Court Bitola, ТСЖ-42/19 J.K., R.E., A.E., D.A., O.A., R.A. and ERRC v Megagrup DOOEL 

and JP Strezhevo (18.07.2019). 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

to  have  been  discriminated  against  on  the  ground  of  ethnic  affiliation  and  skin  colour 
(Article 3, ADL) in access to goods and services (Article 4, ADL) because he was not allowed 
to enter another pool in the same town, Bitola. The CPAD decided in favour of the claimant. 
This case is different, however, because of the steps the equality body took after the postal 
delivery  of  the  communication  sent  to  the  potential  discriminator  was  twice  returned  as 
failed (on grounds of incomplete address). Namely, the claimant and the NGO presented 
their statements which showed it was probable that discrimination had occurred. This also 
included documentation of other instances where Roma people were not allowed to enter 
this particular pool. On this basis, the CPAD shifted the burden of proof and asked the legal 
person managing the pool to respond. After the communication from the CPAD twice failed 
to  be  delivered,  the  CPAD  went  on  to  conclude  that  there  had  been  discrimination.  It 
recommended to the legal person to apply equal treatment and reminded them of the laws 
in force which prohibit direct and indirect discrimination on a number of grounds (here the 
CPAD repeated Article 3).168 The new equality body – the CPPD – acted similarly in a case 
of discrimination in access to services when a group of Roma people were refused entry in 
a  café  in  Prilep.  The  café  bar  did  not  respond,  and  the  CPPD  found  that  there  was 
discrimination  and  requested  that  the  café  bar  issued  a  public  apology  and  refrain  from 
discriminatory actions.169 However, the bar never published the  apology, so the CPPD is 
pursuing this case further before the court for misdemeanours.170 The outcome of this case 
is  pending.  Another  case  of  discrimination  against  Roma  in  access  to  services  was 
processed  by  the  CPPD,  in  which  it  found  intersectional  discrimination.  As  discussed  in 
more  detail  in  section  2.1.2  of  this  report,  the  CPPD  found  direct  intersectional 
discrimination in a case in which a Roma woman, a mother, was expelled violently from a 
bus  by  the  driver  in  Skopje  with  her  two  minor  children,  one  of  whom  was  a  child  with 
disabilities (used a wheelchair). The driver of the bus – a public bus operated by the public 
enterprise JSP - yelled at them while throwing them out, including using a racial slur to 
address them. The CPPD found intersectional discrimination.171 

There are already cases of discrimination in the field of health protection in both the private 
and the public sectors. The CEDAW committee found discrimination against Roma in access 
to health services in North Macedonia. In the case of S.B. and M.B. v North Macedonia, the 
Committee  found  intersectional  discrimination  against  Roma  women  in  the  denial  of 
gynaecological  services  to  Roma  women  and  the  fact  that  the  state  did  not  provide 
protection  for  the  women  discriminated  against.172  As  for  the  private  sector,  the  CPPD 
found direct discrimination on the grounds of gender identity against a trans woman by a 
private pharmacy. The trans woman went to the pharmacy to purchase hormonal therapy, 
for  which  she  had  with  her  a  prescription  form.  However,  the  pharmacist  asked  for  an 
additional document – a report from a specialist, regardless of the fact that a prescription 
form should be the only document needed. Although the victim was aware that this was 
not a requirement and pointed that  out to the pharmacist, in the end  she did share the 
specialist report with the pharmacist, but was met with even more hostile tone and with a 
violation of privacy (the pharmacist started reading out loud private information from the 
specialist report in front of the other persons present in the pharmacy). In the end, the 
pharmacist provided the woman with only three boxes of the prescribed therapy, although 
the prescription was for five boxes. The discriminator never responded to the application. 
The CPPD found direct discrimination and recommended that the pharmacy provide access 
to  goods  and  services  for  trans  persons,  and  conduct  a  training  for  its  employees  on 
discrimination  on  the  grounds  of  gender  identity.173  No  follow-up  on  the  case  has  been 
reported by the CPPD. 

168  Case No. 08/259 - Bairska Svetlina. v Pool ‘Srce Dovledzik’, CPAD (case on file with author; opinion not 

dated). 

169  CPPD, No.0801-19 (26.07.2021). 
170  CPPD (2022), Annual Report for 2021, p. 44. 
171  CPPD, No.0801-136 (01.09.2021). 
172  CEDAW, S.B. and M.B. v North Macedonia, Comm. No.143/2019 (01.12.2020). 
173  CPPD, Case No.0801-247 (13.07.2021). 

41 

 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

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

In North Macedonia, national legislation prohibits discrimination in the area of housing as 
formulated in the Racial Equality Directive. The Anti-Discrimination Law clearly states that 
housing  is  an  area  to  which  the  law  applies  (Article  3(2));  it  explicitly  includes  all  the 
grounds of the directives (Article 5). However, a prohibition of 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,174 a regulatory commission was established with 
a  mandate,  inter  alia,  to  prevent  discrimination  in  the  field  of  housing.175  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  a  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 
taken as imposing an obligation on her/him to initiate court procedures against the builders 
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 incapacitated 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 people (Article 7(3)). However, it does not go beyond 
providing for the possibility of establishing such a unit and there is further clarification of 
the issue. No assessment on the implementation of or compliance with this provision has 
yet been conducted. 

3.2.9.1  Trends and patterns regarding housing segregation for Roma 

In North Macedonia, there are patterns of housing segregation and discrimination against 
Roma people. According to a 2019  social mapping  report, the  conditions in which Roma 
live  are,  in  general,  extremely  poor.  While  only  10 %  of  Roma  do  not  own  the  housing 
where they live, only 49 % of the property is legalised. Overcrowding is present, with one 
household comprising on average five people and 44 % of Roma living in housing smaller 
than 50m2. In all, 1 % report living in improvised housing and 6 % report that their housing 
is not built from appropriate building materials. 53 % have reported damp in their homes, 
15 % do not have sufficient lighting, 3 % do not have access to electricity, 18 % do not 
have sewerage services, 30 % do not have toilets and 10 % have no  access to drinking 
water inside their homes.176 

In  general,  while  many  Macedonians  were  found  to  live  in  privately-owned  apartments 
(former state-owned public housing that was made available for sale), some 15 % to 25 % 
of the population lived in about 100 informal urban settlements.177 According to the same 
source, ‘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, 

174  Law on Housing (Закон за домување), 2009. Full title: Law on Housing (Закон за домување), Official 
Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 99/2009, 57/2010, 36/2011, 54/2011, 13/2012, 55/2013, 
163/2013, 42/2014, 199/2014, 146/2015, 31/2016, 64/2018 and Official Gazette of the Republic of North 
Macedonia, No. 302/2020; Constitutional Court Decisions: U.no. 246/2009, U.no. 14/2010. 

175  Law on Housing, 2009, Article 104. 
176  AECOM International Development Europe SL, Report from the Social Mapping – Final Draft (Извештај за 

социјалното мапирање – финален нацрт), July 2019. 

177  UNICEF (2008), Children in FYR Macedonia – A situation analysis, available at: 
https://www.unicef.org/northmacedonia/reports/situation-analysis-children. 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

crime, illiteracy, juvenile delinquency, drug abuse and other social problems, all of which 
can negatively affect children’s social development.’178 

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  assault 
against  Roma,179  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.180 In 2021, there were media reports of a 
wall being built around a Roma settlement in Gjorce Petrov in Skopje. The CPPD processed 
the case ex officio181 and found that the information was incorrect. The municipality was 
building a very low protective fence which served to direct traffic and protect the nearby 
houses. 

In  2016,  the  ERRC  initiated  a  case  against  the  country  before  the  ECtHR  on  Article  3, 
Article 8 and Article 14 in conjunction with Articles 3, 8 and 10, and Article 13 in conjunction 
with Articles 3 and 8.182 This case183 concerns the eviction of over 120 Roma people from 
the  Poligon  settlement  in  Skopje.  They  are  very  poor  people,  living  in  an  informal 
settlement and some of them have been there for many years. Their houses have been 
torn down many times before being repeatedly rebuilt. The Government destroyed their 
homes  and  the  local  water  pump.  In  a  month  that  was  full  of  storms  and  floods,  these 
people were left in the open air without a roof over the heads. The ERRC reports that they 
were offered accommodation in a shelter centre, but that there was not enough space (and 
it was already notorious for its cramped, degrading conditions and inter-ethnic violence). 
The ERRC did not succeed in securing interim measures, and the ECtHR later also found 
the applicants did not exhaust domestic remedies regarding the demolition of their homes, 
and  regarding  all  other  claims  that  the  applicants  ‘have  not  presented  any  convincing 
arguments that ex post facto general tort law proceedings could not have provided them 
with appropriate and sufficient relief  for their  grievances’ under the national Obligations 
Law; in addition, the Article 13 claims were found to be manifestly ill-founded.184 However, 
the ERRC brought a successful case on behalf of six pregnant Roma women from this same 
community in relation to these same events before the UN Committee on the Elimination 
of  Discrimination  against  Women  (CEDAW).  The  Committee  found  intersectional 
discrimination and located a clear obligation  on the part of the state to provide suitable, 
secure accommodation and reparations to the Roma women.185 

178  UNICEF (2008), Children in FYR Macedonia – A situation analysis, available at: 
https://www.unicef.org/northmacedonia/reports/situation-analysis-children. 

179  Национален ромски центар (National Roma Centrum) Извештај до комитетот за економски, социјални и 
културни права на Обединетите нации (Report to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 
of the United Nations), available at: 
http://www.nationalromacentrum.org/mk/publikacii/istrazuvanja/izvestaj-do-komitetot-za-ekonomski/; 
Kanal 5, ‘Во дискотеката Калипсо во Берово е забранет влезот за Ромите’, (‘Discoteque Kalipso prohibits 
entrance to Roma’) (Cache); A1, ‘Забранет влез за Роми во новиот Аква парк’ (‘Entrance banned for Roma 
at the New Aqua Park’), 31 July 2013. 

180  Helsinki Committee for Human Rights of the Republic of Macedonia (2014), Проценка на напредокот на 

декадата на ромите (Assessment of the progress of the Roma Decade), available at: 
www.mhc.org.mk/?ItemID=3DE4E8C7F50F194281021DB76FAD9E1E. 

181  CPPD, Case No.0801-128 (21.06.2021). 
182  ERRC in the case of Bekir and others v. Macedonia, 8 November 2016, available at: 

www.errc.org/cms/upload/file/application-eviction-bekir-and-others-v-macedonia-november-2016.pdf. 

183  The status of the case still remains as ‘communicated’ only: Bekir and Others v Macedonia, HUDOC, 

available at: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-167970. 

184 ECtHR, Erdjan Bekir and others v North Macedonia, No. 46889/16, 24 June 2021, 

https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-211327, paras. 6, 51, 54. 

185  CEDAW, S.N. and E.R. v North Macedonia, Comm. No.107/2016 (19.03.2020). 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

4 

EXCEPTIONS 

4.1  Genuine and determining occupational requirements (Article 4) 

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

Article  7  of  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law,  entitled  ‘Measures  and  actions  which  are  not 
discrimination’ contains the following formulation for genuine and determining occupational 
requirements:  

‘Different  treatment  of  persons  upon  any  of  the  discrimination  grounds  due  to  the 
nature of their occupation or activity or due to the context in which such occupation 
is performed, which constitute a genuine and determining requirement, the purpose 
of which is legitimate, while such conditions do not breach the required level in the 
course of their fulfilment.’ (Article 7(3(2))) 

This is in line with the directives. 

Article 8 of the Law on Labour Relations186 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,  when  the  nature  of  the  work  is  such  or  the  work  is  performed  in  such 
conditions that the characteristics contained in 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.’187  

Although a careful consideration of the requirement (одмерен) is not the same as being 
proportionate (пропорционален), there is room to interpret it as such. However, from the 
publicly  available  data  it  cannot  be  concluded  whether  such  an  interpretation  has  been 
applied in practice. 

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.188 

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

Directive 2000/78) 

In North Macedonia, national law does not provide for an exception for employers with an 
ethos based on religion or belief.  

The Law on the Legal Position of Churches, Religious Communities and Religious Groups189 
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 
belief. However, in the exemptions from prohibition of discrimination in the Law on Labour 

186  Law on Labour Relations, 2005.  
187  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 8. 
188  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. 

189  Law on Churches, 2007. Full title: Law on the Legal Position of the Church, 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, Constitutional Court Decision, U.br.104/2009. 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

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 North Macedonia, there are specific provisions relating to conflicts between the rights of 
organisations  with  an  ethos  based  on  religion  or  belief  and  other  rights  to  non-
discrimination. 

However, these provisions are not in the Anti-Discrimination Law. The laws that regulate 
the  founding  and  eligible  activities  of  associations  (civil  society  organisations  and 
foundations,190 as well as religious communities and religious groups) regulate this issue, 
stating that an association will cease to exist if it engages in such actions contrary to the 
Constitution and laws and violates other people’s rights, which includes the right to non-
discrimination. The Anti-Discrimination Law contains no such anti-conflict provision. 

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  Community 
very clearly expressed their opinions that sexual orientation should not be mentioned in 
the anti-discrimination legislation during the debate for the 2010 ADL.191 In addition, 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 marriage is the union 
of one woman and one man, as well as inserting 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 the union of one man 
and  one  woman,  as  well  as  the  mandatory  registration  of  unmarried  couples  (‘out-of-
wedlock partnerships’) defined in the same manner, were not adopted by the Parliament. 
Thus, this issue is, for now, closed. 

Both these religious communities, joined by others, opposed the draft of the ADL that is 
currently  in  force,  again  because  of  sexual  orientation,  managing  to  delay  its  adoption 
significantly.192 Activists and allies193 spoke out against this block in Parliament, claiming 
that  the  reason  why  the  law  was  being  blocked  in  Parliament  was  the  letter  from  the 
religious  communities.  MPs  also  raised  personal  religious  beliefs  in  the  parliamentary 
procedure  as  grounds  for  their  refusal  to  allow  the  law  to  pass  to  the  next  stage  in 
Parliament. This letter was not released to the public. 

190  Law on CSOs, 2010. Full title: Law on Associations and Foundations (Закон за здруженија и фондации), 

2010, Article 4, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 52/2010, 135/2011, 55/2016.  

191  Dnevnik newspaper, ‘Ориентирани кон сексуална дискриминација’ (‘Oriented towards sexual 

discrimination’) (only available in print). 

192  Flash Report, ‘Public Debate on a Proposal for a New Law on Anti-discrimination’, 31 January 2019, 

https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/4814-fyr-macedonia-the-proposed-new-law-on-anti-discrimination-
blocked-in-parliament-pdf-134-kb.  

193  Civil Media, ‘Андоновски: Блокадата на ВМРО-ДПМНЕ и ДУИ на законот против дискриминација е 
скандалозна’ (‘Andonovski: The VMRO-DPMNE and DUI blockage of the Anti-Discrimination Law is 
scandalous’), 2019, available at: https://civilmedia.mk/andonovski-blokadata-na-vmro-dpmne-i-dui-na-
zakonot-protiv-diskriminatsija-e-skandalozna/?fbclid=IwAR1f36ebbDTPV-64a_5WVUPTVLqzh8Fp-
tgXmHlTgwmv-QyQqCb8IRFUJCM; Prizma, ‘Орвеловска држава на дискриминацијата’ (‘Orwellian state of 
discrimination’), 2018, available at: https://prizma.mk/kolumni/orvelovska-drzhava-na-diskriminatsijata/. 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

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

and 19 Directive 2000/78) 

In North Macedonia, national legislation provides for an exception for the armed forces in 
relation to age (Article 3(4), Directive 2000/78). There is no specific disability exception, 
but there is a general health and physical condition requirement. 
In North Macedonia, the scope of the exception is not limited to safeguarding the combat 
effectiveness of the armed forces and it does extend to other non-combat staff, such as 
civilians employed in administrative positions in the army. 

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 age194 at 
the  day  of  the  closing  of  the  recruitment  advert.  The  contract  is  renewable  every  three 
years up to a maximum age of 45.195 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),196 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).197 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, 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).198 

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.199 

As noted above, there is no specific disability exception, but there is a general health and 
physical condition requirement. As they stand, the Army’s specific requirements in relation 
to health and good physical condition are substantial barriers for persons with disabilities 
to enter the Army.200 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  of 
fulfilment of these criteria includes  checking the nervous system and ‘mental condition’, 
‘mental disorders’ in the family (including epilepsy), eyesight and hearing, 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 discriminatory 
criterion,  meaning  that  this  criterion  is  a  cross-cutting  discriminatory  issue,  preventing 
access to public service.201 

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  a  member  of  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).202 An extra three days of vacation 

194  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 36. Full title: Law on Army Service (Закон за служба во армијата), 
Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 36/2010, 23/2011, 47/2011, 148/2011, 55/2012, 
29/2014, 33/2015, 193/2015, 71/2016, Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, No. 14/2020; 
Constitutional Court, Decision: U.no.60/2010, 22 September 2010.  

195  Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 40, 42, 43.  
196  Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 34 and 35.  
197  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 32. 
198  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 220 (para. 2).  
199  Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 40-а, 40-в. 
200  Law on Army Service, 2010, Articles 31 and 202-210. 
201  See Table 3 in: Kotevska B. (2016), Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-

discrimination legislation, Skopje, OSCE and CPAD. 

202  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 78. 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

are  provided  for  personnel  with  a  disability  or  someone  taking  care  of  a  child  with  a 
disability.203 

Ethnicity  is  dealt  with  in  law  in  several  respects,  all  of  which  rest  on  the  constitutional 
principle  of  equitable  and  just  representation  which,  simply  put,  means  that  the 
representation of each ethnic group needs to be equal to the percentage of the population 
found  in  the  census.  People  belonging  to  minorities  should  be  adequately  and  fairly 
represented in the Army, providing that they are duly trained and competent.204 Public job 
advertisements  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.205  With  regard  to  the 
oath,  the  document  to  be  signed  is  in  both  Macedonian  and  the  language  of  that 
individual.206 

4.4  Nationality discrimination (Article 3(2)) 

a)  Discrimination on the ground of nationality 

In North 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: 

‘The citizens of the Republic of North Macedonia have citizenship of the Republic of 
North  Macedonia  [and  it  declares]  the  free  expression  of  national  identity  [as]  a 
fundamental value.’207 

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 enjoys 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  North  Macedonia,  nationality  as  a  term  can  be  interpreted  to  have  two  meanings. 
Nationality understood as citizenship208 (a legal tie with a state) is explicitly mentioned as 
a  protected  ground  in  national  Anti-Discrimination  Law  (Article  5).209  Nationality 
understood as origin from another country is not covered by the Anti-Discrimination Law. 
An example of an ‘origin from another country’ would be ‘national minorities’ as per the 
Framework Convention on National Minorities of the Council of Europe. 

b) 

Relationship between nationality and ‘racial or ethnic origin’ 

Nationality210  understood  as  origin  from  another  country  is  not  covered  by  the  Anti-
Discrimination Law. However, nationality understood as citizenship, that is as the legal link 
of a person with a certain country, is part of the grounds covered by the Anti-Discrimination 

203  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 98 (para. 2). 
204  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 30 (para. 5). 
205  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 39 (para. 2). 
206  Law on Army Service, 2010, Article 7 (para. 2). 
207  Constitution of the Republic of North Macedonia, 1991 and subsequent amendments, Articles 4 and 6. 
208  The ground of citizenship can be used to protect stateless persons. 
209  However, please see the exceptions in relation to nationality mentioned in Section 4.4 (b). 
210  On the dilemma as to the possible issues which may arise in practice from this, please see this article by 
Christopher McCrudden on the Bulgarian case of Chez which is relevant since Bulgaria also has these 
nuances in the meaning of ‘nationality’: www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/3867-european-equality-law-
review-1-2016.  

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Law (Article 5).211 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.212 No definition is provided, which also adds to the confusion of 
the  terms,  since  in  some  laws  the  term  ‘national  belonging’  is  used.213  The  courts 
consistently use the terms ‘foreigner’ and 'foreign' when referring to nationals of another 
country. 

Motivated  by  this  lack  of  clarity,  an  Albanian  political  party,  which  is  represented  in  the 
Parliament  and  in  the  Government,  put  forward  a  proposal  for  amending  the  Law  on 
Personal Identification Documents, requiring that a graph denoting ethnicity be added to 
ID cards. This was followed by a public reaction by NGOs, which raised an alert regarding 
the potential negative effect that such a change could have for marginalised groups, and 
noted that it could lead to an increase in discrimination.214 The CPPD published an expert 
opinion  following  a  request  from  one  of  the  parliamentary  groups  that  opposed  the 
proposal. In its opinion, the CPPD stated that:  

‘(1)  international  practice  shows  that  such  policies  lead  to  additional  isolation, 
segregation  and  discrimination  of  the  most  marginalised  groups,  (2)  introducing 
ethnic  belonging  in  the  IDs  can  potential  increase  discrimination  on  grounds  of 
ethnicity, (3) it is expected that discrimination will increase the most against persons 
where ethnicity is inextricably tied to another discrimination ground, and (4) it will 
enable the practice of racial and ethnic profiling.’215 

The proposal was not progressed further. 

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

a) 

Exceptions in relation to disability and health/safety 

In North 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, when the nature of the work is such or work is performed in such conditions 
that the characteristics  contained in 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.’216  

211  However, please see the exceptions in relation to nationality mentioned below. 
212  For example, Article 3 of the Law on Voluntary Fully Funded Pension Insurance. 
213  Article 6 of the Law on Primary Education and Article 6 of the Law on Labour Relations. 
214  Helsinki Committee of the Republic of Macedonia (2021), Legal Review and Opinion on the Proposal for 

Adding a Graph on Ethnic Belonging to the Personal Identification Documents for Citizens (Правен осврт и 
мислење во однос на предлогот за додавање на графа за етничка припадност во личните карти на 
граѓаните), https://mhc.org.mk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/praven-osvrt-i-mislenje-vo-odnos-na-
predlogot-za-dodavanje-na-grafa-za-etnichka-pripadnost.pdf.  

215  CPPD, Expert Opinion on the Proposal for Introducing the Category of Ethnic Belonging in IDs as per the 
Draft-Law on Amendments and Additions to the Law on Personal Identification Documents (Стручно 
мислење по предлогот за воведување на категоријата етничка припадност во личните карти содржан 
во предлог законот за измени и дополнувања на Законот за лични карти) No.03-70/1 (14.04.2021). 

216  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 8. 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

However, aside from this, issues of dress or personal appearance (turbans, hair, beards, 
jewellery,  etc.)  are  not  subject  to  special  regulations  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 employees217 (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 prohibition of overtime work and night 
shifts  (for  older  workers),  as  well  as  other  special  measures  provided  in  this  and  other 
laws.218  There  are  also  exceptions  for  protective  measures  related  to  pregnancy  and 
parenting.219 

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

Directive 2000/78) 

4.6.1  Direct discrimination 

a) 

Exceptions to the prohibition of direct discrimination on grounds of age 

In  North  Macedonia,  national  law  does  not  provide  for  specific  exception(s)  for  direct 
discrimination on the ground of age. 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 the contract the applicant is obliged to submit evidence to the employer of 
capability to fulfil the terms of the contract (Article 26). This provision applies regardless 
of the age of the applicant. The health condition criteria have been challenged as possibly 
discriminatory on grounds of disability as well, in the context of public employment.220 

b) 

Justification of direct discrimination on the ground of age 

In North Macedonia, national law does not provide for justifications for direct discrimination 
on the ground of age. There are no relevant and/or recent cases in this respect.  

c) 

Permitted differences of treatment based on age 

In North Macedonia, national law permits differences of treatment based on age for any 
activities  within  the  material  scope  of  Directive  2000/78.  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 prohibition of overtime work and night 
shifts  (for  older  workers),  as  well  as  other  special  measures  provided  by  this  and  other 
laws.221 

217  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Chapter XV. 
218  See Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Chapter XIII: Protection of workers under 18 years, and Chapter XV: 

Special protection of older workers. 

219  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 161. 
220  Kotevska, B. (2016), Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation, 

Skopje, OSCE and CPAD. 

221  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Chapter XIII: Protection of workers under 18 years, and Chapter XV: 

Special protection of older workers.  

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

d) 

Fixing of ages for admission to occupational pension schemes 

In  North  Macedonia,  national  law  allows  occupational  pension  schemes  to  fix  ages  for 
admission to the scheme, taking up the possibility provided for by Article 6(2).  

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 Insurance222 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). The law does 
not prohibit the use of age criteria in actuarial calculations. 

4.6.2  Special conditions for younger or older workers  

In  North  Macedonia,  there  are  no  special  conditions  set  by  law  for  older  and  younger 
workers in order to promote their vocational integration. 

4.6.3  Minimum and maximum age requirements 

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

The  Law  on  Labour  Relations  establishes  15  years  of  age  as  the  minimum  age  for 
employment (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,  sporting  and  advertising  activities).  A  special 
procedure and approval is required for this. There are also special provisions for work by 
students (as practical work experience) and by apprentices.223 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 night shifts (Article 180). This measure is applicable to workers over 
the age of 57 for women and 59 for men (Article 179). 

4.6.4  Retirement  

a) 

State pension age 

In North Macedonia, there is a state pension age at which individuals must begin to collect 
their state pensions. The 2021 amendments to the Law on Labour Relations removed the 
provisions which allowed for deferral of the pension up to the age of 67, which effectively 
means that all persons should retire at the age of 64, unless stated otherwise in another 
law.  The  transitory  provisions  allowed  for  one  final  deferral  agreement  between  the 
employer and the employee, which must expire by mid-2022. The person cannot hold an 
employment contract after this time. After this amendment was passed, the laws on higher 
education,  scientific  and  research  activity,  and  on  health  protection  were  amended, 

222  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, Nos. 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, 27/2016, 120/2016, 132/2016, 27/2018, 
35/2018, 220/2018, 245/2018, and Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, Nos. 180/2019, 
275/2019, 31/2020, 267/2020, 67/2022. 
223  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 251. 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

allowing  the  possibility  for  deferring  the  retirement  age  up  to  the  age  of  67,224  thus 
introducing an exception to the general rule. This change was introduced after little to no 
public debate and with the intention of speeding up the retirement of persons in the public 
administration as a way of opening up space for the reform of the public administration 
process. 

The Law on Pension and Disability Insurance225 has still not been amended. The Law on 
Pension  and  Disability  Insurance  provides  for  different  criteria  for  the  calculation  of 
pensions in special cases.226 According to this law, pension and disability insurance rights 
depend on wages earned and the total length of contributions. The amount of the pension 
awarded 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. An individual cannot collect a pension and continue to work. 

b)  Occupational pension schemes 

In North Macedonia, there is a standard age when people can begin to receive payments 
from occupational pension schemes and other employer-funded pension arrangements. An 
individual cannot collect a pension and still work. 

c) 

State imposed mandatory retirement ages 

In  North  Macedonia,  there  is  a  state-imposed  retirement  age.  The  state-imposed 
retirement  age  is  mandatory.  Under  the  Law  on  Labour  Relations,  Article  104,  when  an 
employee reaches the age of 64.227There 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.228  

d) 

Retirement ages imposed by employers 

In  North  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 contracts or 
collective  agreements  may  determine  rights  for  workers  that  are  more  favourable  than 
those determined by law (Article 12).229 The same article stipulates that employers cannot 
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. 

224  Law on Higher Education, 2018, Article 187; Law on Health Protection, 2012, Articles 204, 204a; Law on 

Scientific and Research Activity, 2008. Full title: Law on Health Protection (Закон за здравствена заштита), 
Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 103/2008; 24/2011; 80/2012; 24/2013; 147/2013; 
41/2014; 145/2015; 154/2015; 30/2016; 53/2016; and Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
Nos. 257/2020, 163/2021. Article 45-e. 

225  Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012. 
226  The standard calculation system is given in Articles 18 and 18-a of the Law on Pension and Disability 

Insurance; Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012. 

227  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 104. Please note that the Article used to set different limits for men 
(67) and women (65). However, on the basis of a CSO-led initiative, in 2016 a Constitutional Court decision 
annulled this part and equalised the limit for men and women. Source: Constitutional Court, Decision 
No. 114/2014-0-1 (29 June 2016), available at: http://ustavensud.mk/?p=11545. Later, an almost identical 
case was filed and was successful in challenging Article 98(5-6) of the Law on Administrative Servants (a 
provision mirroring the annulled provision from the Law on Labour Relations). However, in 2021 the 
possibility of deferring the pension up to the age of 67 was removed, making 64 effectively the mandatory 
retirement age. 

228  Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, 2012, Article 18. 
229  Law on Labour Relations, 2005. 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

e) 

Employment rights applicable to all workers irrespective of age 

The law on protection against dismissal and other laws protecting employment rights apply 
to  all  workers  irrespective  of  age,  even  if  they  remain  in  employment  after  attaining 
pensionable age or any other age. General anti-discrimination articles do not include any 
provisions on different treatment in relation to protection against dismissal on grounds of 
age. The protection in the Law on Labour Relations against dismissal applies to all workers 
irrespective  of  age.  If  the  employee  has  reached  the  standard  pensionable  age  and  has 
made  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 North Macedonia, national legislation is in line with the CJEU case law on age regarding 
mandatory retirement. However, the issue of mandatory retirement ages has not been a 
subject of wider discussion, regardless of the fact the legislation was changed in 2021 to 
effectively introduce 64 as a mandatory age. There was little to no discussion on the matter 
and it was passed very quietly with little to no opposition. No case law exists in relation to 
the new provisions yet. The proposal was based on the idea of stimulating turnover in the 
public administration, but the law is in fact applicable to both the public and the private 
sectors,  which  will  make  it  an  interesting  subject  of  discrimination  claims  in  terms  of 
legitimate aim and proportional means. The allowing of a very few selected professions to 
defer pensions has also not been disputed yet. It is expected that cases might start coming 
before the institutions once the possibility for a final deferral expires (mid-2022). 

4.6.5  Redundancy 

a) 

Age and seniority taken into account for redundancy selection 

In North 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 North Macedonia, national law provides 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. 

4.7  Public  security,  public  order,  criminal  offences,  protection  of  health, 
freedoms  of  others  (Article  2(5), 

protection  of  the  rights  and 
Directive 2000/78) 

In  North  Macedonia,  national  law  does  not  include  exceptions  that  seek  to  rely  on 
Article 2(5) of the Employment Equality Directive. 

4.8  Any other exceptions 

In North Macedonia, there are no other exceptions to the prohibition of discrimination (on 
any ground) provided in national law. 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

5 

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

a) 

Scope for positive action measures 

In North Macedonia, positive action is permitted in national law in respect of all grounds 
protected by law, including all grounds contained in the directives. In addition, 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 
positive  action  measures  currently  in  force  do  not  target  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 action pertaining to gender equality.  

Article  7  of  the  Anti-Discrimination  Law,  entitled  ‘Measures  and  actions  which  are  not 
discrimination’  includes  positive  action  measures.  Its  first  two  paragraphs  include  the 
following: 

‘Measures  and  actions  taken  for  the  sole  purpose  of  eliminating  any  unequal 
enjoyment  of  human  rights  and  freedoms  until  equality  in  fact  is  achieved  for  all 
persons and groups shall not be deemed discrimination, provided that the distinction 
is  justified  and  objective  and  the  means  for  the  achievement  of  the  objective  are 
proportionate, that is adequate and necessary.’ (paragraph 1) 

‘The  measures  and  actions  referred  to  in  paragraph  (1)  of  this  Article  shall  be  of 
limited time duration and applicable until equality in fact is achieved for persons or a 
group in terms of the enjoyment of their rights.’ (paragraph 2) 

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 with ensuring the proper implementation of these measures, 
the main ones being the Ministry for the Political System and Inter-community Relations 
(formerly  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 
resolution. It can also  propose positive action  measures to Parliament, which decides in 
plenary  on  such  matters.  Parliament  is  obliged  to  take  into  consideration  the  appraisals 
and proposals of the committee and to make decisions regarding them. In the event of a 
dispute among Members of 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 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. 

On  disability,  the  main  instrument  for  positive  action  measures  related  to  persons  with 
disabilities is the Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities.230 Its main goals are the 
integration of persons with disabilities in the working environment and their safety in the 
workplace. A new draft law was initiated by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy almost 
five  years  ago,  but  it  has  still  not  entered  parliamentary  procedure,  although  the 
Government’s  policies  in  relation  to  the  employment  of  persons  with  disabilities  have 
continued to be implemented. 

230  Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities, 2000, Article 2. 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

On age, actions in relation to young people are undertaken based on Cabinet decrees. In 
relation to older people, there is a National Strategy for Elderly People 2010-2020, which 
has expired. No evaluation of its implementation, or the drafting of a new strategy, has 
been announced by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy.231 Within the framework of a 
European  Union-funded  project,  the  NGOs  Humanost  and  Ecologic  assessed  the 
implementation of this strategy. They found only partial implementation, but also unequal 
implementation  throughout  the  country.  They  did  not  identify  reasons  behind  this 
piecemeal  approach  but  did  recommend  that  the  new  strategy  maintains  a  sharper 
focus,232  i.e.  that  it  is  more  focused  than  its  predecessor.  No  new  strategy  has  been 
adopted yet. 

b)  Quotas in employment for persons with disabilities 

In North Macedonia, national law does not provide for a quota/quotas for the employment 
of persons with disabilities. 

231  No such information is included in the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy’s annual report for 2021. 
232  CSO Humanost (2020), GAP Analysis of the National Strategy on Elderly 2010-2020 (Гап анализа на 
националната стратегија за стари лица 2010-2020), available at: http://humanost.org.mk/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/ГАП-анализа-на-стратегијата-за-стари-лица_со-корици.pdf.  

54 

 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

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  North  Macedonia,  the  following  procedures  exist  for  enforcing  the  principle  of  equal 
treatment: judicial, administrative and 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  initiated  before  the  Commission  for  Prevention  and 
Protection  against  Discrimination  (Chapter  IV,  Anti-Discrimination  Law),  and  the  Labour 
and Education inspectorates. The procedure before the CPPD is free of charge. The entire 
duration of the procedure is set to last no more than 60 days (including five days for the 
CPPD to forward the complaint to the respondent and 15 days for the respondent to reply). 
This may result in the CPPD giving an opinion and recommendation. If the recommendation 
is not acted upon, the CPPD must initiate a court misdemeanour procedure (Article 27(4)). 

Litigation proceedings can be initiated before ordinary courts, based on the provisions of 
the  Anti-Discrimination  Law  (Chapter  V,  Articles  32-40).  The  court  proceedings  have 
priority in the event of simultaneous procedures (Article 27(5)).  

Under the Anti-Discrimination Law, the outcome of a claim depends on the procedure one 
chooses to pursue. The administrative procedure envisages a recommendation  to rectify 
the violation (i.e. the discrimination) 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 EUR 5 000. 

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 different. In the public 
sector,  the  Law  on  State  Administration  sets  out  a  detailed  procedure,  which  must  be 
conducted  in  accordance  with  the  law  and  with  very  strict  criteria,  while  in  the  private 
sector, according to the 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  a rather costly procedure, as hiring a lawyer is an 
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.233 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. 

Although non-binding, if the CPPD finds discrimination, it issues an opinion accompanied 
by recommendations. The person to whom the recommendation is directed must act on it 

233  The State Defender is an institution financed by the state budget. However, its practice is to request 

litigation costs like a private solicitor. When combined with court costs, this is a serious burden on the 
claimant. 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

and notify the CPPD within a deadline of 30 days (Article 27(3)). If the person does not act 
on  the  recommendation,  the  CPPD  must  open  a  misdemeanour  court  procedure  against 
that person (Article 27(4)). The CPPD has brought some cases before the misdemeanour 
court.234  However,  these  are  only  a  few  cases  out  of  over  40  in  which  the  CPPD  found 
discrimination,  which  suggests  that  the  CPPD  has  not  yet  systematically  organised  its 
follow-up of cases and processing them before the misdemeanour court. In fact, there is 
no systematic follow-up in the cases in which discrimination was found, which then spills 
over into a lack of systematic processing before the misdemeanour court. This has been 
so due to lack of resources, and is one of the points on which the CPPD plans to work on 
in 2022.235 

In addition, under the ADL, the CPPD can issue a ‘general recommendation’. According to 
Article 28,  ‘the Commission can on its  own initiative issue a general  recommendation in 
cases where a larger number of persons have been discriminated against’. The CPPD issued 
four such recommendations in 2021 – one on equal access to vaccination for all, one on 
persons with disabilities in penitentiary institutions, and two on the exercise of the passive 
electoral rights (right to stand for election) for persons with disabilities.236 

Although this is a very welcome expansion of competence, the wording of the article raises 
concerns  on  at  least  three  points.  First,  it  does  not  state  whether  the  general 
recommendation can be issued in cases filed by individual claimants, those pursued by the 
CPPD itself or both. Secondly, if such recommendations can arise from individual cases, it 
is  not  clear  what  kind  of  relationship  the  individual  case  will  have  with  the  ‘general 
recommendation’.  Several  questions  arise,  such  as  whether  the  individual  case  will  be 
pursued and,  following  resolution, a general recommendation be issued,  or whether the 
two will run separately or in parallel and, if so, what the implications are. Thirdly, it is not 
clear  how  these  general  recommendations  are  actually  meant  to  be  followed  through  – 
how they will be communicated and to whom, how they will be monitored and what the 
implications are, if any, for those who do not follow them.  

At present, this provision is not tied to any of the sanctions prescribed under Articles 41-
43 of the Anti-Discrimination Law. Furthermore, there is the question of what will happen 
to cases that are filed with the CPAD after such a general recommendation has been issued, 
if they fall within the realm of the recommendation; whether such cases will be accepted, 
and the general recommendation merely reiterated and whether the case will be escalated 
in any way and how. The ADL does not offer an answer to these questions. 

b) 

Barriers and other deterrents faced by litigants seeking redress. 

The procedure before the Commission for Prevention and Protection against Discrimination 
(CPPD) is free of charge. No legal representative is needed for this procedure. The CPPD 
can be accessed online, in person and by post. Its offices, however, are not fully accessible 
for  persons  with  disabilities.  The  annual  budget  for  2022  did  not  contain  funds  for 
adjustments to the infrastructure of the offices, making it unlikely that the situation will 
change any time soon. 

In relation to the courts, the obstacles can be even greater.237 The new ADL brings a much-
welcomed  change  in  relation  to  administrative  taxes.  Article  39  provides  that  the  court 

234  These are mentioned in its 2021 annual report, making the absence of a systematic approach further 

evident. 

235  Information shared at the press conference for publication of the annual report, which took place on 15 

March 2022 in Skopje (in person and online). 

236  The general recommendations are available in the Macedonian language via the following link: 

https://kszd.mk/одлуки/.  

237  On the challenges regarding the availability of discrimination court cases in general: Cvetanovska, A., 

Availability of Cases from the Field of Protection from Discrimination in the Republic of North Macedonia 

56 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

procedure for those pursuing discrimination cases will be free of charge and that the burden 
for the expenses of these procedures will fall on the state budget. However, court cases 
can still take much longer. The time limits are strict.  In addition, they raise the issue of 
the obligation to engage a lawyer. While representation is not mandatory for civil law cases 
(Article 80), considering that discrimination case law in front of the regular courts under 
the  first  comprehensive  ADL  started  rather  recently  (since  2010)  and  considering  the 
difficulty of proving discrimination cases, the alleged victim of discrimination can hope for 
little if they approach the courts with no legal representation (a jurist or lawyer costs up 
to EUR 16 260 (MKD 1 000 000), or a jurist or lawyer who has passed the bar exam – a 
higher sum). 

The  Law  on  Free  Legal  Aid  includes  discrimination  cases.  Its  fully  revised  criteria  for 
qualifying for free legal aid allow any person,  regardless  of citizenship, to apply for free 
legal aid if they are not in a material position to cover the expenses of the process. The 
person requesting free legal aid must have a personal monthly income which is less than 
the national minimum wage and if another member of their family has income too, their 
income must be lower than 20 %  of the minimum wage (Articles 17-20). The minimum 
(gross) wage in December 2021 was EUR 360 (MKD 22 146). 

c) 

Number of discrimination cases brought to justice 

In North Macedonia, statistics on the number of discrimination cases brought to justice are 
partially  available.  There  is  a  significant  improvement  in  the  availability  of  numbers  of 
cases since the establishment of the new equality body – the CPPD. As discussed in section 
2.3.1 of this report, the CPPD publishes information on its website for cases classified by 
date, type of opinion (which is basically the form of discrimination and whether the CPPD 
found or did not find discrimination), field of discrimination and ground of discrimination. 238 
The CPPD has also so far complied with its responsibility to publish quarterly and annual 
reports  on  its  work.  In  all  reports,  it  has  included  the  numbers  of  cases  categorised  by 
grounds, forms, and fields of discrimination. 

In 2021, the CPPD reported processing 167 cases, of which 77 were part of the backlog 
from  the  former  equality  body,  the  CPAD  –  some  of  which  date  back  to  2016  –  and  90 
were received by the CPPD in 2021. The majority of the cases – 60.48 % - were filed by 
natural persons, 32.93 % by legal persons, 5.39 % by a group of citizens, and 1.2 % ex 
officio by the CPPD itself. The majority of the cases were filed by persons living or residing 
in Skopje (92 cases), and in urban areas (138 cases, or 93.88 %), which is a worryingly 
high concentration in the capital and in urban areas.239 The CPPD expressed its intent to 
act in 2022 in order to encourage reporting from outside the capital and from rural areas.240 
The majority of applicants did not state an ethnic affiliation (42), followed by Macedonians 
(41),  Roma  (7),  Albanians  (6),  Bosniaks  (1),  Vlachs  (1),  Serbian  (1),  Turkish  (1)  and 
Bulgarian  (1).  Applications  by  natural  persons  came  more  from  men  (60  applications, 
59.41 %) than women (41 cases, 40.59 %). Within the ethnic groups, among Macedonians 
the majority  of the applicants were men (25 men and 16 women); among Albanians all 
were  men  (6  men);  and  among  Roma  a  very  slight  majority  was  tilted  towards  women 
(4 women and 3 men). Out of the other ethnic groups, all applicants, except for the Vlach 
applicant, were men.241 

Of the 167 cases processed by the CPPD in 2021, in 84 cases (50.30 %) applicants listed 
one discrimination ground, in 55 cases (32.93 %) applicants listed more than one ground, 

(Пристапноста на судските одлуки од областа на заштита од дискриминација во Република Северна 
Македонија) (Mreza bez diskriminacija, 2020). 

238  CPPD website: https://kszd.mk/аналитика/број-на-мислења/.  
239  CPPD (2022), Annual report for 2021, pp. 15-19. 
240  Information shared at the press conference for publication of the annual report, which took place on 

15 March 2022 in Skopje (in person and online). 
241  CPPD (2022), Annual report for 2021, pp. 19-20. 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

and in 28 (16.77 %) they did not list any ground. The highest number  of cases was  on 
grounds of personal or other social status (43), followed by national or ethnic belonging 
(38), sex (23), political belief (20), belonging to a marginalised group (19), education (17), 
colour of skin (16), race (15), social origin (14), sexual orientation (14), gender identity 
(14), property status (11), disability (7), age (7), gender (6), family or marital status (5), 
health status (3), citizenship (3), religion or religious belief (2), language (2), other belief 
(2), origin (1), and other ground (20). According to the CPPD’s report, women reported 
discrimination mainly on grounds of education (followed by personal or other social status, 
political belief, national or ethnic belonging, family and marital status and only  4 on the 
basis  of  sex),  whereas  men  reported  discrimination  on  grounds  of  national  or  ethnic 
belonging and political affiliation, followed by personal or other social status, sex (8 cases, 
more than women), belonging to a marginalised group, and education.242 

The case law of the CPPD usually does not engage in a discussion on how different grounds 
are distinguished between themselves. This is not very problematic in the national context, 
since the national law has open lists of discrimination grounds, which results in less interest 
in the definitions of the individual grounds. Having said that, there is one distinction arising 
in  practice  when  it  comes  to  ethnicity  and  race.  It  seems  that  these  two  grounds  are 
frequently raised together only in cases of Roma discrimination, whereas all other ethnic 
groups (Macedonians, Albanians, Serbs, Vlachs, Turks, etc) use ethnicity. 

The CPPD found discrimination in 40 cases and no discrimination in 39 cases; it decided 
not to act in 10 applications (the applicant withdraw the application – 5 cases, a judicial 
proceeding was already ongoing – 2 cases, lack of statement of any facts by the applicant 
– 1 case, lack of grounds based in the new law  – 1 case, the equality body has already 
acted  in  the  same  case  and  no  new  elements  were  put  forward  –  1  case)  and  rejected 
41 applications (lack of competence in 26 cases, lack of formal element in 12 cases, expired 
deadlines in 2 cases and lack of legal ground in 1); and 37 cases are still being processed. 
In  the  40  cases  in  which  it  did  find  discrimination,  the  discriminator  was  predominantly 
from the public sector (24), followed by the private sector (10), natural person (4), sports 
federation or sports club (1), and a civil society organisation (1).243 Of the public entities, 
the  majority  of  cases  in  which  discrimination  was  found  were  filed  against  the  State 
Electoral Commission (5), the Public Transport Enterprise Skopje (JSP) (4), the Agency for 
Employment  of  the  Republic  of  North  Macedonia  (and  its  local  divisions)  (4),  and  the 
Ministry of Education and Science (3). In the other instances, discrimination was found in 
the  cases  against  courts,  public  primary  and  secondary  schools,  other  ministries, 
penitentiary institutions and public enterprises. 

In terms of fields, the majority of cases were in employment (15) and access to goods and 
services (11), with  fewer cases involving access to information, media and social media 
(7), judiciary, elections and administration (4), education (2), and sports (1).  244 Of the 
forms  of  discrimination,  discrimination  was  established  in  13  cases,  harassment  in  10, 
direct and extended discrimination in 5, direct and indirect discrimination in 4, direct and 
intersectional discrimination in 3, indirect discrimination in 2, extended discrimination in 1, 
incitement and instruction to discriminate in 1, and direct discrimination and harassment 
in 1 case. Overall, direct discrimination is the most prevalent form, being present in 26 of 
the  cases  (48.15 %).  In  55  cases  (32.93 %  of  the  CPPD’s  annual  case  load)  claimants 
claimed  discrimination  on  two  or  more  grounds,  and  the  CPPD  found  discrimination  on 
more  than  two  grounds  in  16  of  these  cases,245  of  which  three  were  on  intersectional 
discrimination; in all three, the persons discriminated against were Roma (for more, see 
section 2.1.2.). 

242  CPPD (2022), Annual report for 2021, pp. 20-22. 
243  CPPD (2022), Annual report for 2021, pp 22-24. 
244  CPPD (2022), Annual report for 2021, pp. 24. 
245  CPPD (2022), Annual Report for 2021, pp. 20, 26. 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

The  Ombudsperson  is  another  possible  forum  for  public  sector  discrimination  cases.  In 
2021, 43 cases were filed as non-discrimination and equitable representation cases, which 
represents 1.6 % of the total number of cases filed with this institution in 2021, which was 
2 686 cases. This is a slight increase in the overall number of cases compared with 2020, 
when the number of cases was 2 448 but it is a decrease of  one third in the number of 
discrimination cases compared with 2020 (62 cases). Compared with previous years, the 
numbers for 2021 are still much lower than for 2018, which remains the year in which the 
most cases were received - 3 458, and which was also the year with the highest number 
of  discrimination  cases  thus  far  –  77,  compared  with  60  cases,  or  1.74 %,  in  2019; 
70 cases, or 2.17 %, in 2017; 69 cases, or 1.83 %, in 2016; and 53 cases, or 1.2 %, in 
2015. 

As of 2020, the Ombudsperson started publishing statistics per field of discrimination, citing 
Article  3(4)  of  the  ADL  as  the  ground  for  the  change  in  its  approach.  Of  the  43  cases, 
22 were in the area of employment and labour relations, 6 in access to goods and services, 
4 in the judiciary and administration, 4 in housing, 3 in education, science and sports, 1 in 
social protection, 1 in public information and media, and 2 in other unspecified fields. In 
11 cases the discrimination ground was national or ethnic origin, in 6 it was education, in 
3 health status, in 2 language, and the rest remain unspecified in the report.246 

In 2021, the Constitutional Court received 14 cases regarding protection of fundamental 
rights and freedoms (out of 174), of which 8 were discrimination cases. The Court did not 
find  violation  in  any  of  the  cases  regarding  protection  of  fundamental  rights  and 
freedoms.247  

d) 

Registration of national court decisions on discrimination 

In North Macedonia, discrimination cases are not registered as such by national courts.248 

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

Directive 2000/78) 

a) 

Engaging in proceedings on behalf of victims of discrimination (representing them) 

In  North  Macedonia,  associations,  organisations  and  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, unions and other civil society organisations) 
can  represent  a  person  who  considers  themselves  to  have  been  discriminated  against, 
provided that the person grants consent (Article 23(2)). 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 consent of the complainant (Article 93). 

b) 

Engaging  in  proceedings  in  support  of  victims  of  discrimination  (joining  existing 
proceedings) 

In  North  Macedonia,  associations,  organisations  and  trade  unions  are  entitled  to  act  in 
support of victims of discrimination (Article 40 of the ADL) and they can join in existing 

246  Ombudsperson (2022), Годишен извештај за степенот на обезбедувањето почитување, унапредување и 

заштита на човековите слободи и права 2021 (Annual report on the degree of ensuring, respecting, 
advancing and protecting human rights and freedoms 2021), pp. 84-85. 

247  Constitutional Court (2022), Преглед на работата на Уставниот Суд за 2021 година (Overview of the work 

of the Constitutional Court in 2021), February 2021, pp. 8, 10. 

248  On the way forward to registering the cases as such (by including a category in the current IT system for 
automatic case management - ACMIS), see policy brief: Cvetanovska, A., Availability of Cases from the 
Field of Protection from Discrimination in the Republic of North Macedonia (Пристапноста на судските 
одлуки од областа на заштита од дискриминација во Република Северна Македонија) (Mreza bez 
diskriminacija, 2020). 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

proceedings. However, it should be noted that it is up to the court to allow this. The court 
will be looking into whether the associations/organisations/trade unions have an equality 
mandate (most likely on the basis of their founding articles) and then decide whether or 
not it will allow for this (as specified by Article 40 of the Anti-Discrimination Law). 

c) 

Actio popularis 

In  North  Macedonia,  national  law  allows  associations,  organisations  and  trade  unions  to 
act  in  the  public  interest  on  their  own  behalf,  without  a  specific  victim  to  support  or 
represent  (actio  popularis).  This  is  a  novelty  introduced  by  the  2020  ADL,  which  in 
Article 35(1) defines this as: 

‘Associations, foundations, trade unions or other organisations from civil society and 
informal  groups  with  a  justified  interest  in  protecting  the  interests  of  a  particular 
group  or  that  work  on  protection  against  discrimination  may  file  a  lawsuit  if  they 
present  facts  indicating  the  probability  that  the  defendant’s  actions  have 
discriminated against a larger number of persons.’ 

The  Constitutional  Court  has  the  ability  to  look  into  actio  popularis  cases  in  relation  to 
human rights cases, including discrimination cases. 

There were actio popularis cases even under the old ADL. For example, in a 2016 case, 
five NGOs,249 supported by the OSCE Mission to Skopje, submitted an actio popularis claim 
on Roma segregation in education against the Government. They claimed an interest on 
the  grounds  of  long-term  work  in  the  area  and  findings  from  studies  that  they  have 
published, all of which they claim show beyond doubt the segregation of Roma children in 
education. The first instance court accepted that they had a legitimate interest to present 
such a case, but the court went on to dismiss the case on the basis that the NGOs did not 
have the express consent from an individual who believed they had been discriminated. As 
discussed below in this report, this is a criterion in the ADL under Article 41(4), for class 
action,  and  yet  the  court  applied  it  to  an  actio  popularis  case.  As  discussed  elsewhere, 
requesting  such  consent  defies  the  very  purpose  of  actio  popularis.  The  court  also 
requested that such consent be provided in writing without calling upon any legal provision 
to support this claim. The case also failed at the higher instance court.250 

d) 

Class action 

In  North  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. Associations of citizens (as well as institutions, foundations, unions and 
other  civil  society  organisations)  with  ‘a  legitimate  interest  to  protect  the  interests  of  a 
group  or  within  the  frame  of  their  work  deal  with  protection  against  discrimination’  are 
explicitly allowed to raise a discrimination case ‘if they make a likely case that the actions 
of a natural or a legal person resulted in discrimination against a larger number of persons’ 
(Article 23(3) of the ADL).  

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

In  North  Macedonia,  national  law  requires  a  shift  of  the  burden  of  proof  from  the 
complainant to the respondent (except in criminal and misdemeanour proceedings). 

The Anti-Discrimination Law states that the claimant must produce ‘facts from which it may 
be presumed’ that discrimination has taken place. The rule is explicitly prescribed both for 

249  The five CSOs were: CSO KHAM Delcevo, FOSM, MHK, IHR and ERRC. 
250  Details of the case are not publicly available. Information has been acquired by the author of this report 

from people involved in the preparation of the legal documents related to the process. 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

the procedure before the equality body (Article 26) and for court proceedings (but not for 
misdemeanour and criminal proceedings) (Article 37). 

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), as does 
the Law on Psychological and Sexual Harassment (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 the Protection 
of  Children  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 North 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  or  people  who  participated  in  another  way  in  a 
discrimination procedure (Article 11). So far, this has not been interpreted as  excluding 
groups  from  the  protection.  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 
victimisation251 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  Law  on  Psychological  and  Sexual  Harassment 
(Article 30). 

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

Directive 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 400 to EUR 5 000, to be 
paid  in  the  national  currency  (Articles  41  to  44).  The  ADL  does  not  foresee  payment  of 
compensation. 

In labour cases as well as other civil court litigation, only compensation for pecuniary and 
non-pecuniary damages can be claimed.252 In cases of child and social protection, sanctions 
are  fines  imposed  in  a  misdemeanour  procedure.  These  can  amount  to  EUR 500  to 
EUR 1 000 in child protection cases and EUR 3 000 to EUR 5 000 in cases concerning social 
protection.253 

b) 

Compensation – maximum and average amounts 

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. 

251  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Article 11(3). 
252  Law on Labour Relations, 2005, Articles 264-266. 
253  It should be noted that the average gross monthly salary in the country is approximately EUR 400. 

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

c) 

Assessment of the sanctions 

The Anti-Discrimination Law was only adopted in October 2020. It is thus still too early to 
draw  any  conclusions  regarding  the  effectiveness,  proportionality  and  dissuasiveness  of 
the sanctions, as required by the directives. However, considering that the prescribed fines 
are higher, they can be said to hold larger potential to fulfil this criterion. Thus, this could 
be seen as a step towards more effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions. 

62 

 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

7 

a) 

BODIES  FOR  THE  PROMOTION  OF  EQUAL  TREATMENT  (Article  13 
Directive 2000/43) 

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

With the new Anti-Discrimination Law, a new body was established on 25 January 2021: 
the  Commission  on  Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination  (CPPD).  This  body 
also has competences for the promotion of equal treatment irrespective of racial or ethnic 
origin,  according  to  Article  13  of  the  Racial  Equality  Directive.  Like  its  predecessor,  the 
CPAD, the CPPD competences are much wider than required by the directive, including a 
wide personal and material scope. The mandate of the CPAD ended in August 2019, leaving 
the country without an equality body from then until the end of January 2021. There was 
no  staff  in  the  previous  body,  which  was  one  of  its  key  issues,  thus  there  was  no  staff 
transfer  or  other  such  issues  to  take  care  of.  There  was  only  one  person,  who  was 
‘borrowed’ from the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy and who supported the old body; 
she is now part of the staff of the new equality body. The cases that were received after 
the  old  body  stopped  functioning  were  transferred  to  the  new  body.  The  rest  of  the 
documents produced as part of its work should have been archived by the state archive, 
but  they  have  not  been,  which  creates  issues  for  the  new  body  around  access  to  any 
document from the previous body that it might wish to consult. 

The old Anti-Discrimination Law, which was the first comprehensive anti-discrimination law 
adopted  in  2010  in  the  course  of  harmonising  the  national  legislation  with  the  acquis 
(including  with  the  Racial  Equality  Directive,  and  its  Article  13),  provided  for  the 
establishment for the first time of an equality body in the country – the Commission for 
Protection against Discrimination (CPAD).254 This commission was tasked with dealing with 
both the public and private sectors. It was the first specialised body for equal treatment. 

Before this, the Ombudsperson was the only institution that had duties in 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.255 Some of the earlier versions of the ADL 
prepared in the drafting process (in 2009) foresaw the Ombudsperson as the designated 
body as per the directives. At this time, the Ombudsperson formed a special unit focused 
on non-discrimination and equitable and just representation. In the later drafts, and in the 
text that was adopted in 2010, it was decided that the designated body would be a new, 
special equality body, which was the CPAD. However, while the CPAD was the designated 
body as per the directives, the Ombudsperson has a mandate to promote equal treatment, 
so it is also discussed in this section of the report. 

b) 

Political, economic and social context of the designated body 

Both bodies operate in a country which struggles with finances and where there are very 
high rates of poverty among the population (according to the World Bank, a quarter of the 
population lives in poverty).  

Both bodies operate in the context of an unstable political climate, marked by (recovery 
from) ‘state capture’256 and instability caused by a hung Parliament,257 further complicated 

254  Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination, 2010, Articles 16 to 33. 
255  Law on the Ombudsperson, 2003, Articles 6, 11. Full title: Law on the Ombudsperson (Закон за народниот 

правобранител), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 60/2003, 114/2009, 181/2016, 
189/2016, 35/2018; Constitutional Court Decisions: U.no. 111/2007.  

256  The concept of ‘state capture’ is mentioned here in terms of the Transparency International concept, 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’. This is also how the European Commission has used it in its report on the country’s progress. 

257  No political party or a coalition holds an absolute majority of Parliament seats. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

by the persistent stalling of the EU enlargement process.258 The overall elements lacking 
in terms of the rule of law have already been well documented259 and are at the centre of 
the major reform efforts at the national level, as is the reform of the judiciary. 

The context was also shaped by other factors, such as the  COVID-19 pandemic-induced 
crisis, which severely hit the economy and left many people without a job (of which the 
majority were women). In addition, there is still a lack of political will to allow not only the 
CPPD  and  the  Ombudsperson,  but  also  the  other  independent  national  bodies,  financial 
independence and independence in recruitment. This then spills over into an inability for 
these institutions to practise their mandate in full, as is raised several times throughout 
this report. Other issues which shape the context include the general lack of trust towards 
state institutions in general. This also affects the courts, which, in a recent survey by the 
Republican Institute – IRI, were found to enjoy trust among only 8 % of the population. 

Moreover, the overall climate in the country for advancing equality and providing protection 
against discrimination is getting increasingly difficult, since actors with regressive agendas 
are pulling backwards the policy developments regarding gender equality and equality for 
all regardless of  sexual orientation and gender identity.  These are primarily actors from 
the  anti-gender  movement,260  which  is  regaining  traction;  it  is  at  the  stage  of  formally 
seeking entrance to state institutions and is already succeeding in pushing equality issues 
off the agenda.261 

c) 

Institutional architecture  

In North Macedonia, the CPPD does not have multiple mandates (neither did the former 
equality body - the CPAD), whereas the Ombudsperson does. The CPPD is only an equality 
body, whereas the Ombudsperson is a national human rights institution. In the case of the 
Ombudsperson, the equality and non-discrimination mandate falls within the competence 
of  a  Deputy-Ombudsperson  charged  with  these  issues  and  is  the  subject  of  work  by  a 
special division within the institution. 

d) 

Status of the designated body – general independence 

i) 

Status of the body 

Under the law, the CPPD is a separate legal person, established with the Law on Prevention 
and Protection against Discrimination. The Ombudsperson is also a separate legal person, 
but it is established under the Constitution and the Law on the Ombudsperson.262 

258  All developments relating to the EU enlargement process have a significant effect at the national level, most 
recently the Bulgarian veto on setting a date for start of the negotiation process with North Macedonia. 
259  European Commission (2015), The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Recommendations of the Senior 

Experts' Group on systemic Rule of Law issues relating to the communications interception revealed in 
Spring 2015, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-
enlargement/sites/near/files/news_corner/news/news-
files/20150619_recommendations_of_the_senior_experts_group.pdf. 

260  On the anti-gender movement in North Macedonia, see: Gagovska, E., ‘Who is Afraid of Transgender 

Persons? (Кој се „плаши“ од трансродовите лица?) Meduza, 16 March 2022); Kotevska B. and Spasovska, 
E., ‘Feminist Activism against the Restriction of Reproductive Rights in the Republic of Macedonia: The 
Campaign against the New Law on Abortion’, 2019, Women’s Studies International Forum, 77; Miškovska 
Kajevska, A., ‘Suspending Democracy, Harming Gender Equality’ in Verloo, M. (ed.) (2018), Varieties of 
opposition to gender equality in Europe (Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group). On the anti-gender movement 
in general, see: Kuhar, R. and Paternotte, D. (eds.) (2017), Anti-Gender Campaigns in Europe: Mobilizing 
Against Equality (Rowman & Littlefield International); Verloo, M. (ed.) (2018), Varieties of Opposition to 
Gender Equality in Europe (Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group). 

261  Although outside the scope of this report, it is worth mentioning that there has been a mobilisation against 
legislative changes which were to serve as implementation of the X v North Macedonia ECtHR decision 
according to which trans persons suffer discrimination due to the lack of a foreseeable, available and fast 
procedure for legal gender recognition. Source: https://hera.org.mk/nashite-poddrzhuvachi-vo-sobranieto-
zamolknaa-pred-svoite-kolegi-reakcija-na-nmht-po-povlekuvaneto-na-zakonot-za-matichna-evidencija/.  

262  Law on the Ombudsperson, 2003. 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

The  CPPD  is  composed  of  seven  members  appointed  by  the  Parliament  with  five-year 
mandates. In the first composition, four members were elected with a five-year mandate, 
and  three  with  a  three-year  mandate  (Article  16(3)).  The  subsequent  compositions  are 
selected  for  five-year  mandates  on  a  rolling  basis.  Macedonian  citizens,  with  university 
degrees and seven years of experience in human rights (five of which in equality and non-
discrimination), and who have no criminal convictions and hold no positions in a political 
party,  are  eligible  for  membership.  Applications  are  collected  through  a  public  call  for 
applications. 

In practice, the appointment of both compositions of the  previous equality body (CPAD) 
(the first in 2011 and the second in December 2015) raised serious concerns among civil 
society  organisations  and  the  (then)  parliamentary  opposition.  However,  the  practice  of 
contested  appointments  has  not  stopped.  While  the  steps  of  the  procedure  as  formally 
prescribed in the law were observed, two significant concerns remains. First, at no point 
did the Commission on Elections and Appointments check whether the applicants fulfilled 
the  criteria  for  membership  established  under  Article  17.  The  opposition  persistently 
demanded that the applications be looked at in detail against Article 17, both at the public 
session and at the later session where the list of seven candidates was adopted, but to no 
avail. The majority MPs proposed a list of seven persons. Following a very brief (less than 
10 minutes) discussion, which included a rejection of the  opposition’s  proposal to check 
the  biographies  of  the  seven  candidates  against  the  criteria  set  out  in  Article  17,  the 
proposed list was adopted.263 This revealed that, in the absence of a strict delegation of 
competence  explicitly  mentioned  under  the  law,  as  to  who  is  to  assess  whether  the 
candidates fulfil the minimal criteria and at which stage, the process was completed without 
this  assessment.  Secondly,  the  law  prescribes  that  the  composition  should  reflect  the 
composition  of  the  society  at  large,  in  particular  with  regard  to  ethnicity  and  gender 
(Article 16(5)). However, the gender aspect was not observed, as only two of the seven 
members are women and five are men. This left the representation of women well below 
its  share  in  ‘society  at  large’.  It  also  completely  leaves  out  all  others  who  do  not  self-
identify as either women or men. In addition, there was no regard for the other categories, 
such  as  disability.  Although  there  were  three  excellent  candidates  who  self-identified  as 
persons  with  disabilities  and  who  clearly  fulfilled  the  criteria  and  are  well-known  public 
figures, none was appointed as a commissioner. 

Following the appointment process, there have been several setbacks for the start of the 
work of the body in its first year of operation. First, the members were to complete a set 
of  administrative  tasks  in  order  to  get  the  body  formally  registered  under  the  law.  This 
included registration in the Central Register of Legal Persons, which the members had to 
pay  for  out  of  their  own  pockets.  They  received  no  administrative  support  on  this  from 
anyone.  Secondly,  during  the  process  of  registering  the  body,  they  were  not  officially 
employed,  as  the  law  requires.  Their  insurance  status  started  only  two  months  later. 
Thirdly,  only  three  weeks  after  the  official  appointment,  one  member  –  Neda  Čalovska 
Dimovska – resigned for personal reasons.264 Almost a year later, and by the cut-off date 
for this report, the Parliament has not appointed the seventh member. With this, there is 
now only one woman and five men members, further disturbing the gender balance in the 
body. Fourthly, the premises officially allocated for the CPPD in 2020 were reallocated for 

263  Parliament of the Republic of North Macedonia, Предлог на одлука за избор на членови на Комисијата за 

спречување и заштита од дискриминација (Proposal for a Decision for Election of Members of the 
Commission on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination), 
https://www.sobranie.mk//materialdetails.nspx?materialId=4cea4c0c-fc15-4ec4-986d-73d997226ade.  
264  Parliament of the Republic of North Macedonia, Оставка на Неда Чаловска Димовска од функцијата член 
на Комисијата за спречување и заштита од дискриминација (Resignation by Neda Čalovska – Dimovska 
From the Function Member of the Commission on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination), 
https://www.sobranie.mk//materialdetails.nspx?materialId=c0645f4a-1fac-4a3e-9d4c-32b29a94697b.  

65 

 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

another purpose, which left the CPPD without official premises for several months, during 
which its members resorted to working from home and from the Club of Parliamentarians 
(a  socialising  and  events  venue  which  is  public  property),  all  the  while  using  their  own 
resources (laptops, mobile phones, transport). The CPPD was allocated offices in March, 
although it could only start using them in May. This space is mainly, although not wholly, 
inaccessible for persons with disabilities. In addition, the CPPD did not receive any budget 
for  maintenance  of  the  space  in  its  annual  budget.  This  left  the  members  having  to 
practically fund the starting up of the new institution with money from their own pockets, 
and  they  still  maintain  the  building  with  their  own  resources  (resorting  to  performing 
maintenance  tasks  including  everyday  cleaning,  during  an  ongoing  pandemic,  by 
themselves).  Fifthly,  the  issue  of  equipment  and  basic  conditions  for  work  at  this  space 
was  not  settled  when  the  CPPD  received  the  space.  The  offices  were  equipped  using 
donations from external donors. 

As for the Ombudsperson, in practice, her/his265 election very much depends on the votes 
of the governing political parties. The possibility of exerting political pressure regarding the 
appointment of the Ombudsperson was clearly visible during the selection and appointment 
process in 2020. Namely, the Parliament undertook a series of actions which led NGOs to 
believe that it was effectively trying to hide the vacancy announcement for the appointment 
of  a  new  Ombudsperson.  This  was  further  supported  by  the  fact  that  the  vacancy 
announcement  was  not  visibly  advertised  on  the  Parliament’s  website,  unlike  for  other 
positions. It was only published in the minimum number of papers, including the Official 
Gazette, as per the law. NGOs were rightfully doubtful about this process. Significantly, a 
post-election announcement was made by one of the ruling parties that their candidate for 
Prime Minister (Naser Ziberi, who ultimately did not win the elections but was politically 
advertised  as  the  ‘first  Albanian  Prime  Minister’  of  North  Macedonia)  would  be  the  next 
Ombudsperson. When the vacancy announcement closed there were only four applications, 
one  of  which  was  from  Naser  Ziberi,  who  was  appointed  as  Ombudsperson  on 
25 January 2021. 

Furthermore, given that the funding of both institutions comes from the state budget, they 
could  also  be  seen  as  financially  dependent  (as  there  is  no  annual  budget  set  as  a 
percentage of the overall state annual budget for these institutions). 

Both  the  CPPD  and  the  Ombudsperson  are  financed  through  the  state  budget,  but  their 
activities can also be funded through other sources. They have their own budget line which 
the  Parliament  votes  on  separately.  This  is  intended  to  ensure  financial  independence. 
However, the CPPD and the Ombudsperson receive sufficient budget funds only for part of 
their mandate and not their whole mandate.266 This was also the case for the first year of 
operation of the CPPD (2021) and for the budget for 2022. In 2021, the CPPD had a budget 
of MKD 15 100 000 (EUR 245 000). It has 12 employees. In 2021, the Ombudsperson had 
MKD 77.738.000 (about EUR 1 250 000), a decrease of 5 % compared with 2020. It has 
85 employees. 

Both bodies have issues with recruiting and managing staff. All hiring that is paid for from 
the state budget needs to be approved by the Ministry of Finance, which causes issues in 
the planning of the human resources for both institutions. 

Both bodies need to file a report to the Parliament and to the public annually. They do not 
need to defend this report, just submit it. However, at present, the lack of an obligation of 
the Parliament to discuss this report (not to approve it, but to discuss it) meant that some 
of the annual reports were just filed to Parliament and were never put on the agenda for 

265  Although all ombudspersons thus far have been men. 
266  Kotevska, B. (2020), ‘North Macedonia’, in Effectiveness of national human rights institutions in the Western 

Balkans, Civil Rights Defenders. 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

discussion.  It  was  only  in  2019  that,  for  the  first  time,  after  several  years,  there  was  a 
plenary discussion of the 2018 reports of the two institutions. 

ii) 

Independence of the body 

The independence of both the CPPD and the Ombudsperson is stipulated in their respective 
founding  legal  acts.  While  the  worries  over  the  way  the  members  of  the  CPPD  were 
appointed  (discussed  in  section  i,  above)  remain,  the  first  year  of  the  CPPD’s  operation 
shows that it does work independently regardless of all the obstacles to its doing so. 

The Ombudsperson is tasked with protecting the constitutional and legal rights of citizens 
when these are violated by state bodies and other authorities and organisations with public 
powers. This quasi-judicial institution has a mandate to safeguard inter alia the principles 
of  non-discrimination  and  adequate  and  equitable  representation  of  communities  in  the 
bodies of state power, local government and public institutions and services (Article 77).267 
Worries  over  the  independence  of  the  Ombudsperson  (discussed  in  section  i,  above) 
remain,  but  it  is  yet  to  see  if  they  will  also  translate  into  a  change  in  the  work  of  the 
institution. 

e)  Grounds covered by the designated body 

The  CPPD  deals  with  the  following  grounds:  race,  skin  colour,  origin,  nationality  or 
ethnicity,  sex,  gender,  sexual  orientation,  gender  identity,  belonging  to  a  marginalised 
group, language, citizenship, social origin, education, religion or religious belief,  political 
conviction,  other  convictions,  disability,  age,  family  or  marital  status,  property  status, 
health condition, personal capacity and social status (open-ended clause) (Article 5). The 
Ombudsperson  can  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.  The  open-endedness  can  include  grounds  not  explicitly 
mentioned, such as sexual orientation and age. 

No systematic approach to dealing the grounds or for ensuring that they are all properly 
dealt  with  can  be  identified.  The  Ombudsperson  seems  to  invest  more  in  planning  of 
activities, however, it is not very clear from the information available in the public domain 
as to how they undertake this planning. 

f) 

Competences of the designated body – and their independent exercise 

i) 

Independent assistance to victims 

Both  bodies  can  provide  independent  assistance  to  victims.268  This  is  largely  done  by 
assisting them in navigating the laws and procedures on matters which do not fall within 
their  competence.  In  practice,  from  the  information  provided  in  the  annual  reports,  it 
seems  that  both  the  Ombudsperson  and  the  CPPD  fulfil  this  part  of  their  respective 
mandates. 

ii) 

Independent surveys and reports 

Both  the  CPPD  and  the  Ombudsperson  can  conduct  independent  surveys  and  publish 
independent reports, and can undertake special investigative activities.269 Both bodies can 
conduct various types of research on specific issues and publish these as they see fit. The 

267  Constitution of the Republic of North Macedonia, 1991 and subsequent amendments, Article 77. 
268  For the CPPD - Article 21(1(16, 18, 19)) of the ADL, and for the Ombudsperson - Articles 11, 11б, 11в, 12, 

13, 17, 24, 32, and 33. 

269  For the CPPD - Article 21(1(5, 24)) of the ADL, and for the Ombudsperson - Articles 11, 11а, 12, 13, 17, 24, 

32, and 33. 

67 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Ombudsperson seems to be exercising this part of its mandate (more so with regards to 
the  reports),  although  not  regularly  when  it  comes  to  equality  and  non-discrimination 
issues. The CPPD did not use this competence in its first year (on hurdles with the founding 
of the CPPD and the insufficient budget, see section (d) above). 

iii)  Recommendations 

The  Commission  for  Prevention  and  Protection  Against  Discrimination  can  issue  ‘general 
recommendations’ on its own initiative in cases of discrimination against multiple people 
(Article 21(1(6)) of the ADL). It issued four such recommendations in 2021 – one on equal 
access to vaccination for all, one on persons with disabilities in penitentiary institutions, 
and two on the exercise of the passive electoral rights for persons with disabilities.270 

The  Ombudsperson  can  make  recommendations  and  submit  independent  reports  to  the 
media  and  the  Parliament  (Articles  28,  32,  34  and  35).  The  institutions  have  to  act  in 
accordance with the Ombudsperson’s recommendation. 

iv)  Other competences 

The CPPD can collect statistics and other data and can conduct surveys and  research on 
discrimination. It can undertake promotional activities, including awareness-raising. It can 
propose legislative changes on matters which fall within its scope of work. It can establish 
advisory  expert  bodies  on  specific  matters  related  to  the  promotion,  prevention  of  and 
protection against discrimination. The CPPD did not use this competence in its first year 
(on  hurdles  with  the  founding  of  the  CPPD  and  the  insufficient  budget,  see  section  (d) 
above). It did, however, undertake promotional activities – a video campaign for promoting 
the work of the body with the support of the Centre for Change Management, a local NGO. 
It  also  undertook  a  promotional  campaign,  together  with  the  Football  Federation  of 
Macedonia, against discrimination and hate speech. 

The Ombudsperson can submit independent reports to the media and the Parliament. It 
can undertake promotional activities, including awareness raising and promotion of good 
practices. It can propose legislative changes on matters which fall within its scope of work. 

g) 

Legal standing of the designated bodies 

In North Macedonia, according to Article 21 of the ADL, the CPPD has legal standing to: 

• 
• 
• 

bring discrimination complaints on behalf of identified victims to court; 
bring discrimination complaints on behalf of non-identified victims to court; 
intervene  in  legal  cases  concerning  discrimination,  for  example,  as  an  amicus 
curiae.271 

In  2021,  the  CPPD  did  intervene  in  one  court  case,  at  the  request  of  the  Macedonian 
Helsinki  Committee  for  Human  Rights.  It  was  a  case  involving  the  segregation  of  Roma 
pupils in Štip (for details, see section 3.2.7. above). 

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 about 
how  to  act  upon  detected  violations;  propose  a  retrial  (reopening  of  the  case);  initiate 
disciplinary  proceedings  against  officials  or  persons  responsible;  and  apply  to  the 
competent public prosecutor for initiating criminal procedures. 

270  The general recommendations are available in Macedonian language on the following link: 

https://kszd.mk/одлуки/.  

271  Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination, 2020, Article 21. 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

h)  Quasi-judicial competences 

In North Macedonia, the CPPD is a quasi-judicial institution. However, it does not have the 
power to 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. Complaints are filed free of charge but need to contain facts and proofs to 
support the claims. 

Once the CPPD receives a complaint, it forwards it to the respondent within  five days of 
receipt. The respondent has 15 days to reply to the complaint. Altogether, the CPPD must 
deliver an opinion in 60 days from the date of receipt of the complaint. The respondent to 
whom a recommendation has been directed must act in accordance with it within 30 days 
of the notification it has received from the CPPD. The CPPD’s opinion is not legally binding 
and there is no appeal procedure. If a person does not act upon the recommendation, the 
CPPD can initiate a court misdemeanour procedure. Due to lack of resources, the CPPD is 
still  not  in  a  position  to  fully  exercise  its  competence  for  initiating  court  misdemeanour 
procedures. 

The Ombudsperson also has elements of a quasi-judicial institution. Under law, state bodies 
should  implement  its  recommendations  (Article  32).  However,  as  with  the  CPPD,  the 
Ombudsperson’s  opinions  are  not  legally  binding  and  there  is  no  forced  compliance 
mechanism  which  can  be  activated.  However,  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. 

i) 

Registration by the bodies of complaints and decisions 

In North Macedonia, the CPPD and the Ombudsperson registered the number of complaints 
and decisions (by ground, field, type of discrimination, etc.). The data from the CPPD and 
the Ombudsperson are available to the public through the annual reports,272 with the data 
by the CPPD being available in real time, as the status of all cases can be easily checked 
on its website.273 In addition, the CPPD has made all opinions in individual cases accessible 
online (anonymised). It also includes a section on ‘Analytics’ where data can be obtained 
on a number of categories, such as the sex of the applicant, grounds raised in the case, 
fields where the discrimination occurred, type of discrimination cases, status of the case 
and so on.274 

Access to data on individual cases is much more difficult with the Ombudsperson. Apart 
from  the  annual  report,  the  Ombudsperson  grants  access  only  to  the  statistics  upon 
request, but it does not give access to other case documentation, including its own opinions 
in  individual  cases.  In  addition,  the  number  of  non-discrimination  cases  in  its  annual 
reports  refer  to  ‘non-discrimination  and  equitable  representation’  category,  so  from  the 
text of the annual reports it is not possible to ascertain the distribution between these two. 
Thus, the information provided in the annual reports is of little practical use, especially for 
research purposes. 

j) 

Roma and Travellers 

The Ombudsperson institution has not shown through its actions thus far that it considers 
the situation of Roma as a priority issue. While it is still too early to come to conclusions 
regarding the CPPD from its actions in its first year of operation, it cannot be concluded 
that Roma issues are a priority. This does not mean that both institutions remained silent 

272  The most recent available data is discussed in Section 6.1 (c). 
273  This function was added after the cut-off date for this report. 
274  The ‘Analytics’ section is available on the website in the Macedonian language: https://kszd.mk/аналитика/.  

69 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

or did not act in relation to discrimination against Roma or other violations of rights against 
Roma (such actions are discussed throughout this report, mainly in section 3). 

70 

 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

8 

IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

8.1  Dissemination  of  information,  dialogue  with  NGOs  and  between  social 

partners 

a)  Dissemination of information about legal protection against discrimination (Article 10 

Directive 2000/43 and Article 12 Directive 2000/78)  

The  main  activities  in  relation  to  the  dissemination  of  information,  including  capacity 
building for institutions, continued to be  organised  and implemented by  NGOs (with the 
Network against Discrimination and its members leading most of the initiatives and court 
cases)  and  by  the  OSCE  Mission  to  Skopje  (OSCE).  The  activities  regularly  include  the 
Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Policy  (MLSP)  and  the  Commission  for  Prevention  and 
Protection  against  Discrimination  (and  formerly  did  include  the  CPAD)  as  partners/co-
implementers  together  with  other  entities  (such  as  the  Academy  for  Judges  and  Public 
Prosecutors and law schools from across the country). The Council of Europe and European 
Union’s Horizontal Facility II project, which also has a non-discrimination component, was 
also active at the national level in 2021. It designed and implemented a  nationwide ‘No 
Hate’ campaign against hate crime and hate speech, which was promoted in 2021 and will 
continue  to  be  implemented  in  2022.  Otherwise,  the  focus  remains  on  beneficiaries  at 
national level (institutions) through capacity-building and local NGOs through grants. An 
UK  Embassy-funded  project  implemented  by  the  Centre  for  Change  Management  (CUP) 
has been a large supporter of the CPPD since its establishment, including in designing and 
sharing  the  first  online  information  campaign  presenting  the  CPPD.  Two  more  European 
Union-funded projects – the ‘EU for Rule of Law’ IPA project and an EIDHR project by the 
Macedonian  Centre  for  International  Cooperation  –  started  implementation  during  the 
reporting period and are expected to produce results in 2022, including on dissemination 
of information about legal protection against discrimination, the latter focusing on the CPPD 
and the former on both the CPPD and the Ombudsperson. 

b)  Measures to encourage dialogue with NGOs with a view to promoting the principle of 

equal treatment (Article 12 Directive 2000/43 and Article 14 Directive 2000/78)  

The  climate  for  dialogue  with  NGOs  has  improved  in  recent  years.  Several  NGOs  were 
invited to participate in the work of the national coordinating body on equality and  non-
discrimination,  by  nominating  representatives.  Although  the  procedure  for  appointment 
was not done through a public call, the representatives on the body are members of some 
of the most active NGOs in the country. 

However, some issues remain. The position and role of NGOs was eroded in 2021 with the 
adoption  of  the  2022  state  budget,  which  decreased  the  already  very  small  amount  of 
support for NGOs and moreover moved the central competent institution for this support 
from  the  Government  general  secretariat  to  the  Ministry  of  the  Political  System  and 
Intercommunity  Relations,  which  is  basically  a  transformed  former  Secretariat  for 
Implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement. NGOs objected to this, but to no avail. 
Inclusion of NGOs in the policy process remains good, but random nonetheless. There is 
still  no  established  process  for  the  inclusion  of  NGOs  in  policy  processes,  public 
consultations, working groups, etc. More specific to the subject of this report, there has 
still  been  no  proper  investigation  and  prosecution  of  the  attacks  on  the  LGBTI  Support 
Centre. In operation since 2012, the centre provides support to LGBTI people and to their 
family and friends. It has been subject to attacks ever since it 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.275 No proper investigation and prosecution of the attackers of the LGBTI centre has 

275  For more on this, please see this flash report: www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2177-mk-29-lgbti-centre-

attacks-no-reactions. 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

happened yet and no charges have been made, despite numerous calls by NGOs, organised 
protests demanding action, the existence of video recordings in which the attackers can 
easily be identified (available on YouTube) and calls by the European Commission itself. 276 
More  recently,  NGOs  that  work  on  promoting  the  principle  of  equal  treatment  found 
themselves  coming  under  attack  from  anti-gender  organisations  and  activists,  primarily 
with fake news, although there was also one case involving a physical attack on an activist 
in a service support centre. One NGO – H.E.R.A. – brought a civil case for slander to court 
against one formal anti-gender organisation and won, as the court found spreading of false 
information which resulted in damage to the reputation of H.E.R.A.277 

c)  Measures to promote dialogue between social partners to give effect to the principle 
of  equal  treatment  within  workplace  practices,  codes  of  practice  and  workforce 
monitoring (Article 11 Directive 2000/43 and Article 13 Directive 2000/78) 

The  mechanism  for  social  dialogue  between  social  partners  is  the  Economic  and  Social 
Council  (ESC).  It  consists  of  representatives  from  the  Government,  unions  and  the 
Associations of Employers.278 The ESC seems to have focused on implementing actions set 
out  in  the  Government  strategic  documents,  which  includes  the  setting  up  of  an 
infrastructure for the peaceful resolution of disputes. 

d) 

Addressing the situation of Roma and Travellers  

The  Government  continues  to  run  the  Roma  Information  Centres  (RICs).  The  national 
Strategy on Roma for 2014-2020 has expired.279 In 2021, Romalitico, a Roma rights NGO, 
worked with the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy on conducting an evaluation of the 
strategy and drafting the new strategy. By the cut-off date for this report, this process was 
still ongoing.280 A new National Action Plan on the Protection, Promotion and Fulfilment of 
the  Human  Rights  of  Roma  Woman  and  Girls  for  2022-2024  was  finalised  in  December 
2021 with the overall goal being to ‘advance intersectional justice – equal and just access 
to rights, opportunities, resources and power in society – for Roma women and girls’.281 

8.2  Measures  to  ensure  compliance  with  the  principle  of  equal  treatment 

(Article 14 Directive 2000/43, Article 16 Directive 2000/78) 

a) 

Compliance of national legislation (Articles 14(a) and 16(a)) 

The  ADL  contains  a  transitional  provision  according  to  which  all  national  regulations 
(including laws) should be brought in line with the ADL within a period of two years. Yet, 
at the time of drafting of this report, with very few exceptions, no significant efforts had 

276  Network against Discrimination (2014), ‘Absence of reaction to series of attacks on the LGBTI Support 

Centre’, available at: https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2177-mk-29-lgbti-centre-attacks-no-reactions. 
277  See: https://hera.org.mk/osnovniot-graganski-sud-presudi-od-nas-za-nas-e-odgovorna-za-kleveta-storena-

protiv-hera/.  

278  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (Министерство за труд и социјална политика) Economic and Social 

Council www.mtsp.gov.mk/socijalno-partnerstvo-ns_article-ekonomsko-socijalen-sovet.nspx. 

279  See Стратегија за Ромите (Strategy on Roma 2014-2020), available at: 

http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/strategii/Strategija%20za%20Romite%20vo%20RM%202014-
2020.pdf. 

280  After the cut-off date for this report, the text of the new strategy was published and adopted by the 

Government: Strategy on Inclusion of Roma 2022-2030 (Стратегија за инклузија на Ромите 2022-2030), 
2022, available at: 
https://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/2022/Strategija%20za%20inkluzija%20na%20Romite%202022-
2030%2003-02-2022%20finalna%20verzija.pdf.  

281  This NAP was adopted by the Government after the cut-off date for this report, in March 2022: National 

Action Plan on the Protection, Promotion and Fulfilment of the Human Rights of Roma Woman and Girls for 
2022-2024 (Национален акциски план за заштита, промоција и исполнување на човековите права на 
жените и девојчињата Ромки 2022-2024), 2022, available at: 
https://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/2022/N%D0%90P_za%20zastita%20promocija%20i%20ispolnuvanj
e%20%20na%20cov.%20prava%20na%20zenite%20i%20devoj%20%20Romki%2015.03.2022.pdf.  

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

been  made.  The  Council  of  Europe  and  European  Union’s  Horizontal  Facility  II  project 
supported the preparation of an analysis of the need for harmonisation of the rest of the 
national legislation with the ADL, with a focus on 12 laws. The analysis was prepared for 
the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy as a beneficiary.282 

General mechanisms for compliance 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. 

b) 

Compliance of other rules/clauses (Articles 14(b) and 16(b)) 

No  mechanisms  exist  that  ensure  all  contracts,  collective  agreements,  internal  rules  of 
undertakings and rules governing independent occupations are not in conflict with (solely) 
the principle of  equal treatment. However, general mechanisms  for  compliance 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. 

If  challenged,  collective  agreements,  internal  rules  of  undertakings  and  rules  governing 
independent occupations 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.283 Compliance of contracts, collective 
agreements, internal company rules and rules governing independent occupations can be 
challenged if brought to court, where parts or full 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.284 Furthermore, 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  specialis  derogat  legi  generali  including  changes  made  on  the  principle  of  lex 
posterior derogat legi priori. 

282  The text has not been published yet, but is available to the author: Scullion G. and Kotevska, B., 

Harmonization of the national legislation in North Macedonia with the Law on the Prevention and Protection 
against Discrimination (2021, MLSP and CoE HFII), pp. 6-7. 

283  Law on Obligations, 2001, Article 95, paragraph 1. Full title: Law on Obligations (Закон за облигациони 
односи), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia, Nos. 18/2001, 78/2001, 04/2002, 59/2002, 
05/2003, 84/2008, 81/2009, 116/2009, 123/2013, Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia, 
No. 215/2021. 

284  Law on Courts, 2006. 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

9 

COORDINATION AT NATIONAL LEVEL 

The National Coordinating Body on Non-discrimination, established by the Government285 
in 2018, did not operate in 2021 since its operation is related to the National Strategy on 
Equality  and  Non-discrimination  (2016-2020)  and  that  document  has  expired.  The 
functioning of this body will be continued after a new strategy is adopted.286 This body was 
established for the purposes of monitoring the situation with non-discrimination and the 
implementation of all the relevant laws and policies in this area. The main coordinator in 
this body was the Minister of Labour and Social Policy (MLSP). 

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.287 There is a 
department  on  equal  opportunities.288  Aside  from  this  ministry,  several  other  executive 
departments of Government also have duties that touch upon anti-discrimination on the 
grounds covered in this report. The inter-ministerial body on human rights, based within 
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is tasked with, inter alia, strengthening coordination of all 
the activities of the ministries and other Government bodies with competences in human 
rights.  

In 2021, the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, with support from the OSCE, worked on 
an evaluation of the expired National Strategy on Equality and Non-discrimination (2016-
2020)289 and on the drafting of a new strategy. The general goals of this strategy were: 
advancing  the  legal  framework  for  equality  and  non-discrimination;  strengthening  the 
capacities  and  advancing  the  work  and  cooperation  of  the  institutional  mechanisms  for 
prevention and protection against discrimination and promotion of equal treatment; raising 
awareness  in  recognising  forms  of  discrimination;  and  promoting  the  concepts  of  non-
discrimination  and  equal  opportunities.290  The  evaluation  of  the  strategy  has  not  been 
published,  but  the  annual  report  of  the  Ministry  of  Labour  and  Social  Policy  for  2021 
includes some of the findings. According to this document, the general goals gave good or 
satisfactory  results,  with  between  26-48 %  of  the  stakeholders  interviewed  giving  a 
negative assessment for each of the general goals.291 At the time of writing of this report, 
the new strategy was being drafted.292 Its adoption is expected in 2022. 

In 2021, the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy prepared (and in 2022 the Government 
adopted) the new Strategy on the Integration of Roma 2022-2030 and the new National 
Action  Plan  on  the  Protection,  Promotion  and  Fulfilment  of  the  Human  Rights  of  Roma 
Women and Girls for 2022-2024. By December 2021, the process for drafting the NAP was 
completed  and  the  draft  was  discussed  in  the  public.  The  overall  goal  of  this  NAP  is 
‘advanced intersectional justice – equal and just access to rights, opportunities, resources 

285  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2018), Формирано национално координативно тело за 

недискриминација (National Coordinating Body on Non-discrimination established), available at: 
www.mtsp.gov.mk/april-2018-ns_article-formirano-nacionalno-koordinativno-telo-za-nediskriminacija.nspx.  

286  Information unofficially acquired by the author of this report. 
287  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy: www.mtsp.gov.mk/?ItemID=21E7AB9648BFC441AFD588BA0183B4A3. 
288  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy: www.mtsp.gov.mk/?ItemID=380B6B1D444D5047B575F402122ED94A. 
289  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2016), Национална стратегија за еднаквост и недискриминација 

2016-2020 (National Strategy on Equality and Non-discrimination (2016-2020), available at: 
http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/dokumenti/7.7_Strategija%20za%20ednakvost%20i%20nediskrimin
acija.pdf. 

290  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2016), National Strategy on Equality and Non-discrimination (2016-

2020). 

291  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2022), Report of the Implementation of the Annual Workplan of the 
Ministry of Labour and Social Policy for the period 1-12 2021 (Извештај за спроведување на годишниот 
план за работа на Министерството за труд и социјална политика за периодот 1-12.2021 година). 
292  Outside the cut-off date for this report, in February 2022, the first public debate on the strategy was held. 

Following this, the strategy was being adjusted according to the feedback gathered. It has been announced 
that it will be adopted in the first half of 2022. 

74 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

and power in society – for Roma women and girls’.293 The NAP foresees the establishing of 
a coordination body that will oversee its implementation. 

293  National Action Plan on the Protection, Promotion and Fulfilment of the Human Rights of Roma Woman and 

Girls for 2022-2024, available at: 
https://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/2022/NАP_za%20zastita%20promocija%20i%20ispolnuvanje%20%
20na%20cov.%20prava%20na%20zenite%20i%20devoj%20%20Romki%2015.03.2022.pdf.  

75 

 
  
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

10  CURRENT BEST PRACTICES 

The  CPPD  has  established  an  official  website  and  made  all  opinions  in  individual  cases 
accessible (anonymised). From this website, the section on ‘Analytics’ can be singled out 
as an example of good practice. It is a section where data on the cases can be obtained 
on several categories, such as the sex of the applicant, grounds raised in the case, fields 
where the discrimination occurred, type of discrimination cases, status of the case, and so 
on. It also includes a section on opinions which allows users to get an overview of the cases 
which the CPPD has received, but also to obtain an information on the status of each case 
in  live,  as  the  case  progresses  through  the  CPPD.  Each  result  is  linked  with  the  CPPD’s 
decision or opinion once this becomes available, which makes it easy to access and read 
opinions as soon as they are adopted, but also to sift through the cases for those in which 
one might be particularly interested.294 

There are no good practices in relation to the use of artificial intelligence for improving the 
effective implementation of the national legislation transposing the directives. 

11  SENSITIVE OR CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES 

11.1 Potential breaches of the directives at the national level 

The Anti-Discrimination Law removed all of the breaches of the directives as per the  old 
ADL. Thus, there are no breaches of the directives. 

11.2 Other issues of concern  

The main issue of concern is the lack of internal harmonisation of the national legislation, 
identified in the previous reports and in a 2016295 and a 2021296 analysis. Article 51 of the 
new ADL also prescribes an obligation for all other national laws to be aligned with the ADL 
within  two  years  from  the  date  of  entry  into  force  of  this  law.  In  order  to  support  the 
harmonisation  process,  an  analysis  was  prepared  looking  at  possible  models  and 
approaches  for  conducting  harmonisation.297  Harmonisation  was  also  identified  as  a 
general  strategic  goal  of  both  the  National  Strategy  on  Equal  Opportunities  and  Non-
Discrimination  on  Grounds  of  Ethnicity,  Age,  Mental  and  Physical  Disability  and  Gender 
2012-2015 and the National Strategy on Equality and Non-discrimination (2016-2020)298 
and is also at the core of the first strategic goal, ‘Advancing the legal framework on equality 
and non-discrimination’ in the draft  for the new National Strategy on Equality and  Non-
discrimination 2022-2026.299 In its Strategic Plan, the CPPD set out the intention to achieve 
‘Prepared  and  published  list  of  priority  laws  which  need  to  be  aligned  with  the  Law  on 
Prevention  and  Protection  against  Discrimination’  within  its  strategic  goal  3.1,  on 
‘Preventing structural inequalities and promotion of values overcoming discrimination’.300  

Some steps have been taken to improve access to justice in cases of discrimination, such 
as the ADL envisaging that there should be no court fees for these cases and the Law on 
Free  Legal  Aid  including  discrimination  cases.  These  are  recent  changes,  so  the  actual 
effects from these changes are yet to be seen. 

294  The ‘Analytics’ section is available on the website in the Macedonian language: https://kszd.mk/аналитика/.  
295  Kotevska, B. (2016), Analysis of the harmonization of national equality and non-discrimination legislation, 

Skopje, OSCE and CPAD. 

296  The text of this analysis is not published yet. Text on file with author: Scullion, G. and Kotevska, B., 

Harmonization of the national legislation in North Macedonia with the Law on the Prevention and Protection 
against Discrimination (2021, MLSP and CoE HFII), pp. 6-7. 

297  Najchevska, M. (2019), Analysis of the harmonization of the legislation in the area of anti-discrimination, 

OSCE. 

298  Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (2016), National Strategy on Equality and Non-discrimination (2016-

2020). 

299  Text of the draft strategy is on file with the author.  
300  CPPD, Strategic Plan 2021-2026 (Стратешки план 2021-2026), 2021. 

76 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

No issues of concern can be identified regarding the use of artificial intelligence in relation 
to the implementation of the national legislation transposing the directives, or regarding 
the  regulation  of  artificial  intelligence.  The  use  of  AI  at  the  national  level  remains 
underdeveloped, and there is thus very little interest or regulation of this area. 

77 

 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

12  LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN 2021 

12.1 Legislative amendments 

Law on Labour Relations – amendment of Article 104 removing the possibility for deferral 
of the retirement from the pensionable age of 64 until 67 years of age, effectively making 
64 the mandatory retirement age (discussed in section 4.6.4.). 

12.2 Case law 

Relevant  discrimination  ground:  race,  colour  of  skin,  social  origin,  ethnicity,  and 
belonging to a marginalised group 
Name of the body: Commission for Prevention and Protection against Discrimination 
Date of decision: 1 September 2021 
Name of the parties: / 
Reference number: No.0801-136 
Address of the webpage: N/A 
Brief  summary:  A  Roma  woman,  a  mother,  was  expelled  violently  from  a  bus  by  the 
driver  in  Skopje  with  her  two  minor  children,  one  of  whom  was  a  child  with  disabilities 
(used  a  wheelchair).301  The  driver  of  the  bus  –  a  public  bus  operated  by  the  public 
enterprise JSP - yelled at them while throwing them out, including using a racial slur to 
address them. The CPPD found intersectional discrimination because of the fact one of the 
children was using a wheelchair regardless of the fact that in its main finding it did not list 
disability as one of the grounds on which it found discrimination and gender was also not 
one  of  the  grounds.  Regrettably,  however,  the  CPPD  did  not  comment  on  the  particular 
way in which a synergistic effect had arisen in the case of the Roma child with a disability 
in this specific instance nor on what the wider social implications of the case were. It also 
did not expressly identify an intersectional aspect in the position of the Roma mother. In 
fact, neither gender nor sex were listed in one of the grounds on which the CPPD found 
discrimination. This would have been interpreted as an early signal that, while the CPPD 
was not prepared to support the claims, it can point out the grounds which may be at play, 
regardless of whether the applicants have listed these or not. However, it is evident from 
this case that it considered disability even though it does not seem to have been claimed 
by the applicants.  In addition, in the opinion and the accompanying  recommendation to 
the  discriminator,  there  was  no  engagement  with  the  fact  that  the  driver’s  action  was 
actually a reaction to the fact that other passengers were pushing the Roma mother and 
her  two  children  around  the  bus.  The  key  recommendation  was  for  the  enterprise  to 
conduct training for its staff, something which the enterprise accepted, and it invited the 
CPPD to provide this training. 

301  The CPPD opinion states that one of the children was using a wheelchair, but the information of the author 

acquired from the CSO which brought the case to the CPPD states that it was a child in a stroller. 

78 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

ANNEX 1: MAIN TRANSPOSITION AND ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LEGISLATION 

Country:    
Date:  

North Macedonia 
01 January 2022 

Title of the Law: Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination 
Abbreviation: Anti-Discrimination Law 
Date of adoption: 30 October 2020 
Entry into force: 30 October 2020 
Latest relevant amendment: N/A 
Weblink: https://www.slvesnik.com.mk/Issues/d1cad95799fb48d19825ab843deefe09.
pdf Grounds covered by the article: race, skin colour, origin, nationality or ethnicity, sex, 
gender,  sexual  orientation,  gender  identity,  belonging  to  a  marginalised  group, 
language,  citizenship,  social  origin,  education,  religion  or  religious  belief,  political 
conviction, other convictions, disability, age, family or marital status,  property  status, 
health condition, personal capacity and social status or any other grounds. 
Civil law 
Material  scope:  All  areas  (draws  specific  attention  to:  labour  and  employment; 
education,  science  and  sport;  social  security,  including  social  protection,  pension  and 
disability insurance, health insurance and health protection; judiciary and governance; 
housing; public information and media; access to goods and services; membership  of 
and  activity  in  political  parties,  associations,  foundations,  trade  unions  and  other 
membership organisations; culture) 
Principal  content:  Prohibition  of  direct  and  indirect  discrimination,  harassment, 
instruction to discriminate, reasonable accommodation, multiple discrimination, creation 
of a specialised body 

Title of the Law: Law on Labour Relations 
Abbreviation: Labour Law  
Date of adoption: 28 July 2005 
Entry into force: 5 August 2005 
Latest relevant amendment: 29 June 2018 
Weblink: http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/zakoni/ZRO%20Precisten%2074-
15.pdf 
Grounds  covered:  Race,  colour,  sex,  age,  health  condition,  disability,  religious, 
political 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 
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: 21 May 2019 
Entry into force: 23 May 2019 
Latest relevant amendment: N/A 
Weblink: http://www.mtsp.gov.mk/content/pdf/zakoni/2019/28.5_zakon_SZ.pdf 
Grounds covered by the article: Race, skin colour, origin, nationality or ethnicity, sex, 
gender,  sexual  orientation,  gender  identity,  belonging  to  a  marginalised  group, 
language,  citizenship,  social  origin,  education,  religion  or  religious  belief,  political 
conviction, other convictions, disability, age, family  or marital status,  property  status, 
health condition, personal capacity and social status or any other grounds 
Civil law 
Material scope: Social protection, social advantages 
Principal content: Social protection. Of relevance here: prohibition of discrimination 

79 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Title of the law: Law on Employment of Persons with Disabilities 
Abbreviation: LEPD 
Date of adoption: 2 June 2000 
Entry into force: 10 June 2000 
Latest relevant amendment: 29 May 2018 
Weblink: www.slvesnik.com.mk/Issues/CE827065C11B4A1ABA5546F974EFDA94.pdf 
Grounds covered: Disability 
Civil law 
Material scope: Public employment, private employment 
Principal content: Employment of persons with disabilities, including shelter companies 

80 

 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

ANNEX 2: INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS 

Country:    
Date: 

North Macedonia 
01 January 2022 

Instrument 

Date of 
signature  

Date of 
ratificat
ion  

Derogations
/ 
reservations 
relevant to 
equality and 
non-
discriminatio
n 
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 
Convention on 
the 
Elimination of 

09.11.1995 

10.04.19
97 

04.11.2000 

27.05.2009 

(succession)302 

13.07.20
04 

21.10.20
11 

No 

No 

18.01.19
94 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

25.07.1996 

10.04.19
97 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

(succession) 

18.01.19
94 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

(succession) 

18.01.19
94 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

(succession) 

18.01.19
94 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

302  Under the Constitutional Law adopted for implementing the (then) Constitution of the Republic of 

Macedonia, 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 North Macedonia (Уставен 
закон за спроведување на Уставот на Република Македонија), Official Gazette of the Republic of 
Macedonia, No. 52/91. 

81 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country report - Non-discrimination – North Macedonia – 2022 

Instrument 

Date of 
signature  

Date of 
ratificat
ion  

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? 

Discrimina-
tion Against 
Women 
ILO 
Convention 
No. 111 on 
Discrimination 
Convention on 
the Rights of 
the Child 
Convention on 
the Rights of 
Persons with 
Disabilities  

n/a 

17.11.19
91 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

(succession) 

30.03.2007 

02.12.19
93 

No 

14.12.20
11 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

82 

 
 
 
 
GETTING IN TOUCH WITH THE EU 

In person 

All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct information centres. 
You can find the address of the centre nearest you at:  
https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en.  

On the phone or by email 

Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union.  
You can contact this service: – by freephone: 
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls), –  
at the following standard number: +32 22999696, or – by email via: 
https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en. 

FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EU 

Online 

Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available 
on the Europa website at: https://europa.eu/european- union/index_en.  

EU publications 

You can download or order free and priced EU publications from: 
https://publications.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of free publications may 
be obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre  
(see https://europa. eu/european-union/contact_en). 

EU law and related documents 

For access to legal information from the EU, including all EU law since 1951 in all the 
official language versions, go to EUR-Lex at: http://eur- lex.europa.eu. 

Open data from the EU 

The EU Open Data Portal (http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en) provides access to datasets 
from the EU. Data can be downloaded and reused for free, for both commercial and non-
commercial purposes. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

PDF  

ISBN:  doi: 

PDF 

ISBN: 978-92-76-49077-7 doi: 10.2838/415189