Bodies for the promotion of equal treatment (article 13 Directive 2000/43)

• Author: Biljana Kotevska
• Pages: 60-67

60

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

2000/43)

a)Body/bodies designated for the promotion of equal treatment irrespective of

racial/ethnic origin according to Article 13 of the Racial Equality Directive

The 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).239 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.240 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 is today’s CPAD. However, while the CPAD is the designated

body as per the directives, since both the CPAD and the Ombudsperson have a mandate

to promote equal treatment, they are both discussed in this and in the following

subsections of Section 7 of this report.

With the new Anti-Discrimination Law a new body is to be established. It is 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, its

competences are much wider than required by the directive, including a wide personal and

material scope. However, the process of appointment of the new members of the body, as

well as other processes needed for its establishment, have all been extended. With the

mandate of the CPAD ending in August 2019 and the new body (CPPD) not being

established yet, North Macedonia has been without a functioning equality body for six

months and this situation still applied at the cut-off date for this report.

b)Political, economic and social context of the designated body

Both designated bodies (the CPAD at the time and the Ombudsperson) operated 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 operated in a context of state capture – the European Commission, in its last

three progress reports, has assessed the situation in the country as a ‘state capture’.241

This ties into the backsliding in terms of fulfilment of political criteria for membership of

the EU, especially with regard to questions about the independence of the judiciary already

reported over several successive years. The endemic proportions of the rule of law issues

239 Law on Prevention and Protection against Discrimination, 2010, Articles 16 to 33.

240 Law on the Ombudsperson, 2003, Articles 6, 11. Full title: Republic of North Macedonia, Law on the

Ombudsperson (   ), 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.

241The concept of ‘state capture’ is mentioned here in terms of the Transparency International conceptз that is:

‘a situation where powerful individuals, institutions, companies or groups within or outside a country use

corruption to shape a nation’s policiesз 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.