Acest paragraf din eseul (provocator, dar captivant) al prof. Conor Gearty, "Against Judicial Enforcement" mi se pare ca sintetizeaza foarte bine atitudinea fata de drepturi in Romania de azi.
"[...] without a strong supporting framework of values and principles, embedded in society and understood and adhered to across a culture, there is every chance of the language of human rights being drained of its potency, of being turned into little more than a set of hoops that are jumped through by authorities but without yielding any tangible benefit for those for whom it should be a wonderful boon. Human rights talk can be useless if it is simply talk and worse than useless if all it does is rubber stamp unfairness and inequality with the seal of (human rights) legitimacy. Sadly this is a very real threat when human rights are sought to be introduced in a society where powerful actors are resolutely opposed to them, and disinclined to allow their individually minimal propensity to care to extend beyond their family or immediate circle. This is what I was referring to [...] when I talked about the need for the rights values and principles to be embedded in a culture before human rights can be guaranteed the kind of traction they need to succeed beyond the paper which they happen to be written".
Connor Gearty, Against Judicial Enforcement in Gearty, Mantovalou, Debating Social Rights, Hart Publishing, 2011, p. 21-22.
Showing posts with label drepturi (fara obligatii). Show all posts
Showing posts with label drepturi (fara obligatii). Show all posts
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Thursday, 2 October 2008
Greva foamei
Prietenul Istvan Haller a intrat astazi in greva foamei in semn de protest impotriva nerespectarii de catre Guvern a obligatiilor ce ii revin in baza a trei condamnari CEDO in legatura cu trei pogromuri impotriva romilor ce au avut loc la inceputul anilor 90, intre care si Hadareni. Pe langa motivatia legitima a grevei, actiunea lui Istvan este remarcabila, demonstrand ca inca mai exista oameni care cred in principii si pot sa-si riste sanatatea intru apararea lor. Trimiteti acest apel mai departe, as relevant.
***
Informare pentru presă
Greva foamei pentru nerespectarea hotărârilor CEDO
Prin soluţionarea amiabilă a cazurilor Moldovan şi alţii împotriva României (5 iulie 2005), Kalanyos şi alţii împotriva României (26 aprilie 2007) şi Gergely împotriva României (26 aprilie 2007) Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului a luat act de declaraţia Guvernului României prin care acesta s-a angajat să adopte măsuri generale în scopul combaterii discriminării romilor, urmând ca respectarea acestor angajamente să fie monitorizată de către Comitetul de Miniştri al Consiliul Europei.
În primul caz s-a elaborat un proiect la nivelul satului Hădăreni, care însă nu a fost finalizat, Guvernul blocând în mod repetat fondurile alocate (nefiind realizat până în momentul de faţă obiectul principal al proiectului, şi anume reconstrucţia caselor distruse şi crearea de locuri de muncă, Guvernul României), în cel de-al doilea şi treilea caz Guvernul României a renunţat la proiecte sub pretextul că primarul din comuna Plăieşii de Jos s-ar opune acestora.
Comitetul de Miniştri al Consiliul Europei, deşi informat de situaţie, nu a luat nici o măsură.
Fiind implicat în soluţionarea acestor cazuri, văzând că guvernele României din 1993 şi până azi au mnţit în mod repetat atât romii din Hădăreni cât şi opinia publică românească şi internaţională, am decis să declanşez greva foamei pentru a obţine respectarea hotărârilor date de CEDO. Acţiunea mea nu priveşte doar victimele acestor cazuri, ci toate persoanele aflate pe teritoriul României, care pot deveni victimele unor abuzuri ale autorităţilor, şi care au nevoie de protecţia oferită de Convenţia europeană a drepturilor omului. Dacă Consiliul Europei permite României să nu respecte hotărârile date de CEDO, drepturile noastre nu se bucură de o reală protecţie.
Voi opri greva foamei doar în situaţia în care
1. Guvernul României
a) alocă întreaga sumă rămasă necheltuită din proiectul Hădăreni pentru reconstrucţia caselor şi crearea locurilor de muncă pentru victime, cu promisiunea fermă că aceste fonduri nu vor mai fi blocate şi vor putea fi folosite până la mijlocul anului 2009 până la realizarea completă a proiectului;
b) alocă un fond de patru ori mai mare decât cel pentru proiectul Hădăreni celor două proiecte din comuna Plăieşii de Jos (Caşinul Nou şi Plăieşii de Sus),
sau
2. Comitetul de Miniştri al Consiliul Europei ia măsuri concrete de sancţionare a României pentru nerespectarea hotărârilor CEDO.
Precizez că pentru protejarea sănătăţii mele, voi consuma zilnic o tabletă de multivitamine şi 1/2 litru de iaurt, lapte bătut sau sana.
Precizez şi faptul că această acţiune, despre care voi informa presa şi unele ambasade în mod periodic, nu are legătură cu statutul meu actual de membru în Colegiul Director al Consiliului Naţional pentru Combaterea Discriminării, cu rang de secretar de stat.
Haller István
***
Informare pentru presă
Greva foamei pentru nerespectarea hotărârilor CEDO
Prin soluţionarea amiabilă a cazurilor Moldovan şi alţii împotriva României (5 iulie 2005), Kalanyos şi alţii împotriva României (26 aprilie 2007) şi Gergely împotriva României (26 aprilie 2007) Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului a luat act de declaraţia Guvernului României prin care acesta s-a angajat să adopte măsuri generale în scopul combaterii discriminării romilor, urmând ca respectarea acestor angajamente să fie monitorizată de către Comitetul de Miniştri al Consiliul Europei.
În primul caz s-a elaborat un proiect la nivelul satului Hădăreni, care însă nu a fost finalizat, Guvernul blocând în mod repetat fondurile alocate (nefiind realizat până în momentul de faţă obiectul principal al proiectului, şi anume reconstrucţia caselor distruse şi crearea de locuri de muncă, Guvernul României), în cel de-al doilea şi treilea caz Guvernul României a renunţat la proiecte sub pretextul că primarul din comuna Plăieşii de Jos s-ar opune acestora.
Comitetul de Miniştri al Consiliul Europei, deşi informat de situaţie, nu a luat nici o măsură.
Fiind implicat în soluţionarea acestor cazuri, văzând că guvernele României din 1993 şi până azi au mnţit în mod repetat atât romii din Hădăreni cât şi opinia publică românească şi internaţională, am decis să declanşez greva foamei pentru a obţine respectarea hotărârilor date de CEDO. Acţiunea mea nu priveşte doar victimele acestor cazuri, ci toate persoanele aflate pe teritoriul României, care pot deveni victimele unor abuzuri ale autorităţilor, şi care au nevoie de protecţia oferită de Convenţia europeană a drepturilor omului. Dacă Consiliul Europei permite României să nu respecte hotărârile date de CEDO, drepturile noastre nu se bucură de o reală protecţie.
Voi opri greva foamei doar în situaţia în care
1. Guvernul României
a) alocă întreaga sumă rămasă necheltuită din proiectul Hădăreni pentru reconstrucţia caselor şi crearea locurilor de muncă pentru victime, cu promisiunea fermă că aceste fonduri nu vor mai fi blocate şi vor putea fi folosite până la mijlocul anului 2009 până la realizarea completă a proiectului;
b) alocă un fond de patru ori mai mare decât cel pentru proiectul Hădăreni celor două proiecte din comuna Plăieşii de Jos (Caşinul Nou şi Plăieşii de Sus),
sau
2. Comitetul de Miniştri al Consiliul Europei ia măsuri concrete de sancţionare a României pentru nerespectarea hotărârilor CEDO.
Precizez că pentru protejarea sănătăţii mele, voi consuma zilnic o tabletă de multivitamine şi 1/2 litru de iaurt, lapte bătut sau sana.
Precizez şi faptul că această acţiune, despre care voi informa presa şi unele ambasade în mod periodic, nu are legătură cu statutul meu actual de membru în Colegiul Director al Consiliului Naţional pentru Combaterea Discriminării, cu rang de secretar de stat.
Haller István
Wednesday, 1 October 2008
Link nou
Am adaugat un nou link in barul din dreapta la rubrica human rights - European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights. Prezenta unui nou outfit de drepturile omului cu deschidere spre exterior, care, prin exceptie, nu provine din lumea anglo-saxona este salutara in sine. Pe langa acest aspect, ei se ocupa cu seriozitate si aplicat de chestii interesante precum raspunderea corporatiilor transnationale pentru incalcarea drepturilor omului sau practica de 'extraordinary rendition' din pdv european. Happy reading.
Friday, 20 June 2008
Solutia finala a la Popricani
Conform editiei de azi a Ziarului de Iasi, la Centrul de integrare prin terapie ocupationala din Popricani (undeva la tzara) urmeaza a fi amenajat un padoc cu o capacitate de 50 de caini vagabonzi. Conform functionarilor Consiliului judetean astfel se impusca doi iepuri dintr-o lovitura - sccapam de cainii vagabonzi si in acelasi timp le asiguram terapie ocupationala rezidentilor de la Popricani.
Permiteti-mi sa fiu scandalizat. Ce fel de terapie ocupationala este ingrijirea cainilor vagabonzi? Ce fel de skilluri vor invata bietii rezidenti de la Popricani avand grija de caini pe care apoi sa le foloseasca in comunitate (acesta fiind scopul ultim al acestor terapii - reintegrarea in comunitate)? Si chiar, i-a intrebat cineva pe rezidenti daca vor sa se ocupe de cainii vagabonzi?
Culmea este ca functionarii de la Primarie, si cei de la Centrul din Popricani (si ziaristul) nu observa nerozia sugestiei, chiar poate se cred geniali si generosi. Ironia acestei propuneri e ca si persoanele cu handicap si cainii vagabonzi au chiar multe in comun (in Romania). Si daca tinem seama de trecutul nu prea indepartat, o data ce izolam cainii si nebunii la Popricani, ii lasam sa moara acolo, si apoi reproducem acest proiect la scara intregii tari. Si gata.
Permiteti-mi sa fiu scandalizat. Ce fel de terapie ocupationala este ingrijirea cainilor vagabonzi? Ce fel de skilluri vor invata bietii rezidenti de la Popricani avand grija de caini pe care apoi sa le foloseasca in comunitate (acesta fiind scopul ultim al acestor terapii - reintegrarea in comunitate)? Si chiar, i-a intrebat cineva pe rezidenti daca vor sa se ocupe de cainii vagabonzi?
Culmea este ca functionarii de la Primarie, si cei de la Centrul din Popricani (si ziaristul) nu observa nerozia sugestiei, chiar poate se cred geniali si generosi. Ironia acestei propuneri e ca si persoanele cu handicap si cainii vagabonzi au chiar multe in comun (in Romania). Si daca tinem seama de trecutul nu prea indepartat, o data ce izolam cainii si nebunii la Popricani, ii lasam sa moara acolo, si apoi reproducem acest proiect la scara intregii tari. Si gata.
Friday, 16 May 2008
Some of my work
Below a letter containing the latest news on a campaign I've been coordinating for a while now.
***
Re: Urgent action to improve the living conditions of Romani communities in Tulcea
Dear Mayor Hogea,
The European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) and the Association for the Defence of Human Rights in Romania – the Helsinki Committee (APADOR-CH) are today requesting your urgent intervention in order to improve the housing conditions of previously forcibly evicted Romani families in Tulcea, Romania. Such action is imperative particularly in light of the judgment dated 27 November 2007 and communicated to the ERRC and APADOR-CH at the end of February 2008, in which the Tulcea Court of First Instance ordered your office to undertake all necessary and urgent repair and maintenance work required to bring the buildings situated at 8-14 Portului Street (in the area locally known as “Pichet”) to a standard fit for human habitation.
We have drawn your attention to the plight of the 23 Romani families who had been forcibly evicted from their flats at 5 Alunisului Street in letters sent to your office on 27 October 2006 and 16 February 2007. Of these 23 families 17 were relocated to Pichet, and are covered by the above-mentioned judgment. The remaining six families were allocated cabins situated on a former garbage dump on Urzicii Street after having spent two months sleeping rough on the streets subsequent to the October 2006 eviction. Despite our appeals, the living conditions of the Roma concerned have became considerably worse, as attested by the court’s judgment.
In the above mentioned judgment, based on extensive fact-finding, including an on-site investigation, the Tulcea First Instance Court concluded that “presently, [the buildings on Portului Street] are clearly inadequate for human habitation.” The only positive development of last year was when the three buildings were belatedly hooked up to the electricity grid in April 2007. This notwithstanding, the buildings started showing considerable structural deficiencies due to the lack of maintenance/refurbishment over an extended period of time. The water from the rain and snow infiltrated large portions of the walls located immediately underneath the roof causing the flats to become damp. None of the buildings have a functioning sewage system, and in one building ground floor occupants are affected by periodic spills of raw sewage from common toilets located on the upper floor. The tenants are thus prevented from using the toilets. In addition, water provision has become increasingly erratic, being interrupted for days at a stretch. The lack of functional toilets in the three buildings, the interruption of garbage collection and chaotic water works in the settlement have created a health hazard, especially for the children. Finally, public transport linking the settlement to downtown Tulcea has been stopped, forcing children in the settlement to drop out of school, amongst other consequences.
ERRC and APADOR-CH however also believe that the aforementioned judgment is of relevance to the remaining Romani families left homeless after the October 2006 eviction who indeed live under even worse conditions than the community on Portului Street. More specifically, our two organisations are extremely concerned by the living conditions of the six families living in cabins located on a former garbage dump on the Urzicii Street. Although the measure of moving the Roma in these cabins was initially supposed to be a temporary one, the Municipality shows no signs of looking for an alternative, long term solution. The cabins on the garbage dump are lacking the most elementary facilities such as heating, water, sanitation. Moreover, these cabins deteriorated markedly: the bottom part in some of them fell in and the holes were covered with planks of wood; others tipped on a side, sinking in the thin soil layer covering the garbage dump. The whole area is very harmful for the health of its inhabitants and appears to be infested with rats.
Dear Mayor Hogea, the ERRC and APADOR have repeatedly called on your office to provide an adequate housing solution for the Romani families forcibly evicted from Alunisului Street in 2006. The judgment delivered by the Tulcea First Instance Court provides legal recognition of the deplorable living conditions of the Roma families living at Portului Street and renders it imperative that your office takes all the necessary measures in order to address this situation. To this effect, the ERRC and APADOR call on your office to implement, in the shortest time possible, the Tulcea First Instance Court’s order to undertake all necessary and urgent repair and maintenance work required to bring the buildings situated at 8-14 Portului Street to an adequate standard. We further request that you seize this opportunity to provide an adequate housing solution for the Romani families living on the garbage dump situated on Urzicii Street.
We believe that the above clearly point to the measures your municipality needs to adopt in order to meet the relevant international law provisions as well as conform with the Tulcea’s First Instance Court’s judgment of 27 November 2007. To this end, we would like to affirm that we are willing to work together with you in addressing what is a deplorable situation not benefiting your municipality.
We respectfully request to be informed of any and all actions undertaken by your office in this regard, and would welcome the opportunity to contribute to the implementation of the Tulcea First Instance Court’s decision.
Sincerely,
Diana-Olivia Hatneanu
Executive Director
Romanian Helsinki Committee
Vera Egenberger
Executive Director
European Roma Rights Centre
***
Re: Urgent action to improve the living conditions of Romani communities in Tulcea
Dear Mayor Hogea,
The European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) and the Association for the Defence of Human Rights in Romania – the Helsinki Committee (APADOR-CH) are today requesting your urgent intervention in order to improve the housing conditions of previously forcibly evicted Romani families in Tulcea, Romania. Such action is imperative particularly in light of the judgment dated 27 November 2007 and communicated to the ERRC and APADOR-CH at the end of February 2008, in which the Tulcea Court of First Instance ordered your office to undertake all necessary and urgent repair and maintenance work required to bring the buildings situated at 8-14 Portului Street (in the area locally known as “Pichet”) to a standard fit for human habitation.
We have drawn your attention to the plight of the 23 Romani families who had been forcibly evicted from their flats at 5 Alunisului Street in letters sent to your office on 27 October 2006 and 16 February 2007. Of these 23 families 17 were relocated to Pichet, and are covered by the above-mentioned judgment. The remaining six families were allocated cabins situated on a former garbage dump on Urzicii Street after having spent two months sleeping rough on the streets subsequent to the October 2006 eviction. Despite our appeals, the living conditions of the Roma concerned have became considerably worse, as attested by the court’s judgment.
In the above mentioned judgment, based on extensive fact-finding, including an on-site investigation, the Tulcea First Instance Court concluded that “presently, [the buildings on Portului Street] are clearly inadequate for human habitation.” The only positive development of last year was when the three buildings were belatedly hooked up to the electricity grid in April 2007. This notwithstanding, the buildings started showing considerable structural deficiencies due to the lack of maintenance/refurbishment over an extended period of time. The water from the rain and snow infiltrated large portions of the walls located immediately underneath the roof causing the flats to become damp. None of the buildings have a functioning sewage system, and in one building ground floor occupants are affected by periodic spills of raw sewage from common toilets located on the upper floor. The tenants are thus prevented from using the toilets. In addition, water provision has become increasingly erratic, being interrupted for days at a stretch. The lack of functional toilets in the three buildings, the interruption of garbage collection and chaotic water works in the settlement have created a health hazard, especially for the children. Finally, public transport linking the settlement to downtown Tulcea has been stopped, forcing children in the settlement to drop out of school, amongst other consequences.
ERRC and APADOR-CH however also believe that the aforementioned judgment is of relevance to the remaining Romani families left homeless after the October 2006 eviction who indeed live under even worse conditions than the community on Portului Street. More specifically, our two organisations are extremely concerned by the living conditions of the six families living in cabins located on a former garbage dump on the Urzicii Street. Although the measure of moving the Roma in these cabins was initially supposed to be a temporary one, the Municipality shows no signs of looking for an alternative, long term solution. The cabins on the garbage dump are lacking the most elementary facilities such as heating, water, sanitation. Moreover, these cabins deteriorated markedly: the bottom part in some of them fell in and the holes were covered with planks of wood; others tipped on a side, sinking in the thin soil layer covering the garbage dump. The whole area is very harmful for the health of its inhabitants and appears to be infested with rats.
Dear Mayor Hogea, the ERRC and APADOR have repeatedly called on your office to provide an adequate housing solution for the Romani families forcibly evicted from Alunisului Street in 2006. The judgment delivered by the Tulcea First Instance Court provides legal recognition of the deplorable living conditions of the Roma families living at Portului Street and renders it imperative that your office takes all the necessary measures in order to address this situation. To this effect, the ERRC and APADOR call on your office to implement, in the shortest time possible, the Tulcea First Instance Court’s order to undertake all necessary and urgent repair and maintenance work required to bring the buildings situated at 8-14 Portului Street to an adequate standard. We further request that you seize this opportunity to provide an adequate housing solution for the Romani families living on the garbage dump situated on Urzicii Street.
We believe that the above clearly point to the measures your municipality needs to adopt in order to meet the relevant international law provisions as well as conform with the Tulcea’s First Instance Court’s judgment of 27 November 2007. To this end, we would like to affirm that we are willing to work together with you in addressing what is a deplorable situation not benefiting your municipality.
We respectfully request to be informed of any and all actions undertaken by your office in this regard, and would welcome the opportunity to contribute to the implementation of the Tulcea First Instance Court’s decision.
Sincerely,
Diana-Olivia Hatneanu
Executive Director
Romanian Helsinki Committee
Vera Egenberger
Executive Director
European Roma Rights Centre
Saturday, 29 March 2008
How to get locked up in a psychiatric hospital in three easy steps
The recent judgment from the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Shtkaturov v Russia is groundbeaking for a number of reasons. For the time being, I thought it would be interesting to flag out the reasons why Mr. Shtukaturov lost his legal capacity (for good), was placed under guardianship (for good), and was institutionalised in a psychiatric hospital (indefinitely). Here is the relevant quotation from the medical report that was the basis for the decision to deprive him of all his rights
On 12 November 2004 an expert team from [Sankt Petersburg] Hospital no. 6 examined the applicant and his medical records. The report prepared by the expert team may be summarised as follows. After graduating from the school the applicant worked for a short time as an interpreter. However, some time later he became aggressive, unsympathetic and secluded, and prone to empty philosophizing. He abandoned his job, started attending religious meetings and visiting Buddhist shrines, lost most of his friends, neglected his personal hygiene and became very negative towards his relatives. He suffered from anorexia and was hospitalised in this respect.
The lessons from poor Mr.Shtukaturov's case are obvious - always act happy, wash your teeth every morning, go to church, get a boring job, and you're safe.
On 12 November 2004 an expert team from [Sankt Petersburg] Hospital no. 6 examined the applicant and his medical records. The report prepared by the expert team may be summarised as follows. After graduating from the school the applicant worked for a short time as an interpreter. However, some time later he became aggressive, unsympathetic and secluded, and prone to empty philosophizing. He abandoned his job, started attending religious meetings and visiting Buddhist shrines, lost most of his friends, neglected his personal hygiene and became very negative towards his relatives. He suffered from anorexia and was hospitalised in this respect.
The lessons from poor Mr.Shtukaturov's case are obvious - always act happy, wash your teeth every morning, go to church, get a boring job, and you're safe.
Monday, 3 March 2008
Way to Go (Casus belli part II)
And there is actually something you can do about it.
Take for example Solidaritatea pentru Constiinta (Solidarity for Conscience), a wonderful non-governmental organisation which is taking on the Church + the Government with limited manpower and very limited funding. They are basically doing it out of and based on exclusively their conviction. Their actions include initiating legal proceedings, organising public protests, engaging the bad guys in public debate etc. Their most important achievements so far are the successful litigation campaign aiming to eliminate religious icons from schools and stalling the megalomaniac People's Cathedral project for more years. They are a great example of public engagement (others would say 'exagerated activism:)that turns a previously discrete issue on its head into a major issue of public contention.
Second, you can follow the example of my friend Theo Alexandridis, a lawyer who is confronting an even more entrenched adversary in Greece. Recently he won a case against Greece at the European Court of Human Rights concerning the obligation in that country to take a religious oath upon admission into the Bar Association. The Court held that Greece was in breach of Article 9 of the Convention concerning freedom of religion on account of the fact that by taking the oath, Theo was obliged to reveal his religious conviction. As a result, Greece will most likely have to cancel the religious oath altogether.
The tenor of this message is that as long as you give a damn about the world you live in it is worth/possible to put up a fight.
Take for example Solidaritatea pentru Constiinta (Solidarity for Conscience), a wonderful non-governmental organisation which is taking on the Church + the Government with limited manpower and very limited funding. They are basically doing it out of and based on exclusively their conviction. Their actions include initiating legal proceedings, organising public protests, engaging the bad guys in public debate etc. Their most important achievements so far are the successful litigation campaign aiming to eliminate religious icons from schools and stalling the megalomaniac People's Cathedral project for more years. They are a great example of public engagement (others would say 'exagerated activism:)that turns a previously discrete issue on its head into a major issue of public contention.
Second, you can follow the example of my friend Theo Alexandridis, a lawyer who is confronting an even more entrenched adversary in Greece. Recently he won a case against Greece at the European Court of Human Rights concerning the obligation in that country to take a religious oath upon admission into the Bar Association. The Court held that Greece was in breach of Article 9 of the Convention concerning freedom of religion on account of the fact that by taking the oath, Theo was obliged to reveal his religious conviction. As a result, Greece will most likely have to cancel the religious oath altogether.
The tenor of this message is that as long as you give a damn about the world you live in it is worth/possible to put up a fight.
Friday, 29 February 2008
Casus belli
In case you did not notice it already, the recently-appointed head of the Romanian Orthodox Church is taking an increasingly agressive and assertive stance in relation to what it regards as its rightful monopoly over Romanian souls and (also) minds. The following are just a few worrisome developments of late that indicate such approach.
1. The project for the People’s Cathedral was given the go ahead by the Government and will probably proceed despite widespread protest. The proposed location alone – behind the horrendous pile of the People’s House – proves we have learned nothing from the past;
2. The audio-visual watchdog (CNA) is recommending private cable operators to include in their offer the Orthodox Church-owned TV station Trinitas;
3. Evolutionism was quietly removed from school curricula;
4. There is widespread resistance from all segments of society, as well as from sections of the Government to implementing in good faith the court decisions mandating the elimination of religious symbols from schools;
5. Most recently following negotiations between the recognized religions and the Government the teaching of religion in school became mandatory for kids up to 16 years of age;
6. The main public radio station is ignoring calls to eliminate the prayer broadcast at the beginning and end of its daily programme together with the national anthem
The most frequently cited reason used by the State to justify cozying up with the Church is the good influence that this institution supposedly has on the morals of the country and education of youth. It would be - the argument goes - a counterbalance to violence, drugs etc. There are at least three problems with this argument. First, Orthodox clergy at all levels are compromised by strong suspicions of having collaborated with the Communist Securitate which they managed to dodge so far. Second, the Church is an inherently intolerant teacher; moreover, their teachings may contradict some of the present policies of the State. Third,by allowing the Church to permeate all fields of life,populist politicians and arguments (ie Becali) are given an unexpected lease of life. And we don't want that.
1. The project for the People’s Cathedral was given the go ahead by the Government and will probably proceed despite widespread protest. The proposed location alone – behind the horrendous pile of the People’s House – proves we have learned nothing from the past;
2. The audio-visual watchdog (CNA) is recommending private cable operators to include in their offer the Orthodox Church-owned TV station Trinitas;
3. Evolutionism was quietly removed from school curricula;
4. There is widespread resistance from all segments of society, as well as from sections of the Government to implementing in good faith the court decisions mandating the elimination of religious symbols from schools;
5. Most recently following negotiations between the recognized religions and the Government the teaching of religion in school became mandatory for kids up to 16 years of age;
6. The main public radio station is ignoring calls to eliminate the prayer broadcast at the beginning and end of its daily programme together with the national anthem
The most frequently cited reason used by the State to justify cozying up with the Church is the good influence that this institution supposedly has on the morals of the country and education of youth. It would be - the argument goes - a counterbalance to violence, drugs etc. There are at least three problems with this argument. First, Orthodox clergy at all levels are compromised by strong suspicions of having collaborated with the Communist Securitate which they managed to dodge so far. Second, the Church is an inherently intolerant teacher; moreover, their teachings may contradict some of the present policies of the State. Third,by allowing the Church to permeate all fields of life,populist politicians and arguments (ie Becali) are given an unexpected lease of life. And we don't want that.
Monday, 25 February 2008
Romania sinks deeper in illegal flights scandal
The Washington Post presented new evidence of the use by the US of the military basis in Mihail Kogalniceanu for illegal transfers of terrorism suspects. The Post cites a top Romanian military official with access to the basis who witnessed a number of suspicious happenings on the airport. According to the article, only very few high-level Romanian politicians such as the former and the present presidents are aware of these operations. The findings in the article were presented in a number of Romanian media outlets, such as HERE. It is also interesting to note that recently the UK admitted that the US had used one of its military basis in the Indian Ocean for transferring terror suspects, despite having previously denied it.
So far the prevailing view in Romania on such allegations has been as follows: a) politicians are denying such incidents ever took place (I remember former Romanian foreign affairs minister Ungureanu during a lecture at Chatham House in London aggressively responding to such allegations raised by members of the audience); b) same politicians and media are taking these accusations lightly (such as otherwise sensible weekly 22, or as manifest in the weakness of the official investigatory mechanisms set up by the Romanian Parliament on this occasion) and c) civil society (with some exceptions) are complacent and indifferent.
Without doubt, Romania is complicit in the serious breach by the US of human rights of terror suspects by allowing the Americans to use its territory for operations such as those described in the Post article. The question is when the huge lie perpetrated by the politicians will be exposed. Hopefully sooner rather than later.
So far the prevailing view in Romania on such allegations has been as follows: a) politicians are denying such incidents ever took place (I remember former Romanian foreign affairs minister Ungureanu during a lecture at Chatham House in London aggressively responding to such allegations raised by members of the audience); b) same politicians and media are taking these accusations lightly (such as otherwise sensible weekly 22, or as manifest in the weakness of the official investigatory mechanisms set up by the Romanian Parliament on this occasion) and c) civil society (with some exceptions) are complacent and indifferent.
Without doubt, Romania is complicit in the serious breach by the US of human rights of terror suspects by allowing the Americans to use its territory for operations such as those described in the Post article. The question is when the huge lie perpetrated by the politicians will be exposed. Hopefully sooner rather than later.
Saturday, 19 January 2008
Semnal
Noua publicatie online Roma World arata bine, este actualizata permanent, contine stiri si articole scrise de profesionisti referitoare la situatia romilor in Romania dar si din alte parti. Am si eu o rubrica acolo - Drepturile omului - pe care ma voi stradui sa o alimentez periodic cu articole. Primul articol prezinta hotararea CEDO Cobzaru v. Romania - situatia de fapt, explicarea motivarii instantei, si semnificatia hotararii.
Thursday, 17 January 2008
Argument against institutionalisation
I thought this was a nice summation of arguments against keeping disabled people locked up in institutions
The Community Imperative
1979
A Refutation of All Arguments
in Support of Institutionalizing Anybody
Because of Mental Retardation
In the domain of Human Rights:
- All people have fundamental moral and constitutional rights;
- These rights must not be abrogated merely because a person has a mental or physical disability.
- Among these fundamental rights is the right to community living.
In the domain of Educational Programming and Human Services:
- All people, as human beings, are inherently valuable;
- All people can grow and develop;
- All people are entitled to conditions which foster their development;
Such conditions are optimally provided in community settings.
Therefore:
In fulfillment of fundamental human rights and in securing optimum developmental opportunities, all people, regardless of the severity of their disabilities, are entitled to community living.
(The Community Imperative declaration, the Center on Human Policy, Syracuse University, 1979)
The Community Imperative
1979
A Refutation of All Arguments
in Support of Institutionalizing Anybody
Because of Mental Retardation
In the domain of Human Rights:
- All people have fundamental moral and constitutional rights;
- These rights must not be abrogated merely because a person has a mental or physical disability.
- Among these fundamental rights is the right to community living.
In the domain of Educational Programming and Human Services:
- All people, as human beings, are inherently valuable;
- All people can grow and develop;
- All people are entitled to conditions which foster their development;
Such conditions are optimally provided in community settings.
Therefore:
In fulfillment of fundamental human rights and in securing optimum developmental opportunities, all people, regardless of the severity of their disabilities, are entitled to community living.
(The Community Imperative declaration, the Center on Human Policy, Syracuse University, 1979)
Tuesday, 4 December 2007
And the Beat Goes On
The movie below was taken with a mobile phone and shows the beating of a Romani man in a Police station in Suceava, Romania. The Roma had been held for having caused some nuisance in a bar. The policeman swinging the rubber truncheon had reportedly been promoted a number of times for exemplary conduct. You can hear people laughing in the background, most likely colleagues of the aggressor. In fact the beating was filmed by a policeman, just for fun apparently. The movie was leaked to the press recently and it has triggered an official investigation. For some reason its upside down - sorry.
Saturday, 1 December 2007
The Beginning, and the End
Yesterday I attended a conference on 'The Right to Privacy in Iran and in Europe from a Comparative Perspective' at the British Institute for International and Comparative Law' in Russell Square.
It was interesting seeing the Iranian academics at the meeting reciting the provisions protecting privacy available in Iranian law, only to invariably close their speeches with more or less the same disclaimer - 'of course, this is all in theory, practice is another matter altogether', at once dismissing their entire discourse. I felt an undercurrent of dissatisfaction with the official line in Iran, not yet articulate or courageous enough to be expressed in the open. More like an intuition that things are going wrong. The discussions reflected the existence of an underground debate in Iran on issues such as human rights, a sign showing that the fundamentalism of the clerics has not managed to entirely paralyse independent thinking.
I thought the discussions about the intersection between Shariah and positive law were captivating as a theoretical proposition. Shariah might work as a source of law, one of many, but not the one source that trumps all others as is currently the case around the Muslim world. One of the many reasons is that its ancient dicta is prone to many interpretations, and as such, can be read to mean different things by a terrorist or by a human rights lawyer.
You might be aware of the scandal in Sudan these days in relation to the British aid worker sentenced to 15 days imprisonment and deportation for having named a teddy bear 'Mohammad'. Angry mobs waving swords rallied in Khartoum asking for her execution for having insulted the Prophet. In this regard, article 20 of the Iranian Constitution says it all about the distinction between theory and practice, and about the difficulty of preaching the human rights cause in Shariah Land:
Article 20
All citizens of the country, both men and women, equally enjoy the protection of the law and enjoy all human, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, in conformity with Islamic criteria.
It was interesting seeing the Iranian academics at the meeting reciting the provisions protecting privacy available in Iranian law, only to invariably close their speeches with more or less the same disclaimer - 'of course, this is all in theory, practice is another matter altogether', at once dismissing their entire discourse. I felt an undercurrent of dissatisfaction with the official line in Iran, not yet articulate or courageous enough to be expressed in the open. More like an intuition that things are going wrong. The discussions reflected the existence of an underground debate in Iran on issues such as human rights, a sign showing that the fundamentalism of the clerics has not managed to entirely paralyse independent thinking.
I thought the discussions about the intersection between Shariah and positive law were captivating as a theoretical proposition. Shariah might work as a source of law, one of many, but not the one source that trumps all others as is currently the case around the Muslim world. One of the many reasons is that its ancient dicta is prone to many interpretations, and as such, can be read to mean different things by a terrorist or by a human rights lawyer.
You might be aware of the scandal in Sudan these days in relation to the British aid worker sentenced to 15 days imprisonment and deportation for having named a teddy bear 'Mohammad'. Angry mobs waving swords rallied in Khartoum asking for her execution for having insulted the Prophet. In this regard, article 20 of the Iranian Constitution says it all about the distinction between theory and practice, and about the difficulty of preaching the human rights cause in Shariah Land:
Article 20
All citizens of the country, both men and women, equally enjoy the protection of the law and enjoy all human, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, in conformity with Islamic criteria.
Tuesday, 27 November 2007
Doua articole
Semnalez pe scurt doua articole pe care le-am publicat recent.
1. Racial Discrimination against Roma Children in Schools: Recent Developments from Courts in Bulgaria and Hungary, disponibil aici . In acest articol analizez succint doua hotarari favorabile privind discriminarea elevilor romi in educatie pronuntate de instante din Bulgaria si Ungaria. Argumentez propozitia ca gradul de succes al plangerilor avand acest obiect depinde de calitatea legislatiei antidiscriminare din tara respectiva.
2. Postive Duties to Combat Violent Hate Crimes after Secic v. Croatia, disponibil aici. In acest articol analizez decizia CEDO in cazul Secic v. Croatia, in care de altfel am lucrat, si importanta sa. In primul rand Secic extinde protectia acordata de Conventie asupra victimelor atacurilor rasiste savarsite de persoane private; in al doilea rand Secic deschide calea pentru plangeri vizand calitatea legislatiei in materie, si modul in care este implementata in practica.
1. Racial Discrimination against Roma Children in Schools: Recent Developments from Courts in Bulgaria and Hungary, disponibil aici . In acest articol analizez succint doua hotarari favorabile privind discriminarea elevilor romi in educatie pronuntate de instante din Bulgaria si Ungaria. Argumentez propozitia ca gradul de succes al plangerilor avand acest obiect depinde de calitatea legislatiei antidiscriminare din tara respectiva.
2. Postive Duties to Combat Violent Hate Crimes after Secic v. Croatia, disponibil aici. In acest articol analizez decizia CEDO in cazul Secic v. Croatia, in care de altfel am lucrat, si importanta sa. In primul rand Secic extinde protectia acordata de Conventie asupra victimelor atacurilor rasiste savarsite de persoane private; in al doilea rand Secic deschide calea pentru plangeri vizand calitatea legislatiei in materie, si modul in care este implementata in practica.
Thursday, 27 September 2007
All Eyes on Burma
The foreign diplomat described an amazing scene on Wednesday as a column of 8,000 to 10,000 people flooded past his embassy following a group of about 800 monks. They were trailed by four truckloads of military men, watching but not taking action.According to news reports and telephone interviews from Myanmar, which is sealed off to foreign reporters, the day’s activities began with a confrontation at the giant gold-spired Shwedagon Pagoda, which has been one of the focal points of the demonstrations. In the first reported violence in nine days of demonstrations by monks in Yangon, police officers with riot shields dispersed up to 100 monks who were trying to enter the temple, firing tear gas and warning shots and knocking some monks to the ground. As many as 200 monks were reported to have been arrested at the pagoda.
Several hundred monks then walked through downtown Yangon to the Sule Pagoda, another site of the demonstrations, where truckloads of soldiers were seen arriving Tuesday. A violent confrontation was reported there; more shots were fired and a number of arrests were made.
On a broad avenue near the temple, hundreds of people sat facing a row of soldiers, calling out to them, “The people’s armed forces, our armed forces!” and “The armed forces should not kill their own people!”
On a broad avenue near the temple, hundreds of people sat facing a row of soldiers, calling out to them, “The people’s armed forces, our armed forces!” and “The armed forces should not kill their own people!”
Sunday, 16 September 2007
Inca o noutate, intr-un caz cu transexuali
Cazul L. v. Lituania a fost decis martea trecuta de catre Curtea Europeana pentru Drepturile Omului, avand ca obiect imposibilitatea efectuarii unei operatii de schimbare de sex in Lituania. Nu voi intra in amanunte, suficient sa spun ca Lituania a fost condamnata pentru incalcarea Articolului 8 din Conventie referitor la dreptul la viata privata. Acest dosar mi-a atras atentia datorita remediului ales de Curte pentru prejudiciul suferit de petent.
In jurisprudenta sa, Curtea s-a declarat limitata de textul Conventiei in a oferi pentru victimele incalcarii unui drept in cel mai bun caz o despagubire de natura pecuniara. Ramanea astfel la latitudinea statului condamnat sa gaseasca cele mai bune metode de a implementa hotararea in dreptul intern, sub suprevegherea Consiliului de Ministri a Consiliului Europei un mecanism nu foarte puternic. Datorita acestui fapt, deciziile Curtii isi pierd foarte mult din eficenta.
Intorcandu-ma la prietenul L., in cazul sau Curtea a ordonat autoritatilor din Lituania sa adopte legea care ii permite sa aiba operatia de schimbare de sex. Doar in doua genuri de cazuri Curtea a mai adoptat astfel de ordine - in unele cazuri impotriva Romaniei privind imobilele nationalizate, in care a dispus restituirea imobileor, si in dosarele in care unele persoane erau detinute ilegal de genul Ilascu v. Moldova & Rusia sau Assanidze v. Georgia in care dispunea eliberarea de urgenta a acestor persoane.
In jurisprudenta sa, Curtea s-a declarat limitata de textul Conventiei in a oferi pentru victimele incalcarii unui drept in cel mai bun caz o despagubire de natura pecuniara. Ramanea astfel la latitudinea statului condamnat sa gaseasca cele mai bune metode de a implementa hotararea in dreptul intern, sub suprevegherea Consiliului de Ministri a Consiliului Europei un mecanism nu foarte puternic. Datorita acestui fapt, deciziile Curtii isi pierd foarte mult din eficenta.
Intorcandu-ma la prietenul L., in cazul sau Curtea a ordonat autoritatilor din Lituania sa adopte legea care ii permite sa aiba operatia de schimbare de sex. Doar in doua genuri de cazuri Curtea a mai adoptat astfel de ordine - in unele cazuri impotriva Romaniei privind imobilele nationalizate, in care a dispus restituirea imobileor, si in dosarele in care unele persoane erau detinute ilegal de genul Ilascu v. Moldova & Rusia sau Assanidze v. Georgia in care dispunea eliberarea de urgenta a acestor persoane.
Un caz de urmarit la CJE
Am aflat recent despre un caz potential important aflat pe rolul Curtii Europene de Justitie. Curtea a fost sesizata de o instanta din Muchen pentru a raspunde la cinci intrebari referitoare la interpretarea directivei 2000/78/CE privind crearea unui cadru favorabil in favoarea egalitatii de tratament in materia muncii. Intrebarile au fost prilejuite de plangerea unui homosexual cu privire la faptul ca dupa moartea partenrului cu care traise mai multi ani intr-un parteneriat recunoscut de legea germana, i-a fost refuzat de catre un fond de pensii plata pensiei de sot supravietuitor, un drept recunoscut sotului supravietuitor unei casatorii incheiate potrivit dreptului comun (heterosexuale).
Pe data de 6 septembrie avocatul general Damaso a publicat opinia sa in legatura cu acest caz, in sine foarte interesanta pentru elucidarea in amanunt a unor chestiuni prcum jurisdictia materiala si temporala a Curtii in acest caz, natura dreptului litigios, discriminarea pe criteriul orientarii sexuale in jurisprudenta Curtii, si aplicarea acesteia la faptele acestui caz. Nu voi intra in amanunte, ii invit pe cei interesati sa citeasca aceasta opinia, este o lectura pasionanta. Suficient in acest moment este sa spun ca opinia Avocatului General ii da dreptate petentului in aceasta cauza. Urmeaza ca Curtea sa se pronunte asupra acestei cauze in curand
De ce este importanta acest caz? Pentru ca este unul dintre putinele cazuri referitoare la interpretarea Directivei mai sus amintite. Aceasta Directiva, impreuna cu Directiva privind egalitatea rasiala (Race Directive) au creat asteptari foarte mari de la activistii care se lupta impotriva diverselor discriminari (rasa, dizabilitati, orientare sexuala) atunci cand au fost adoptate acum mai multi ani. Cu toate acestea foarte putine cazuri, si alea nesemnificative, au ajuns pe rolul CJE. De aceea acest caz este o premiera, si poate un nou inceput.
Pe data de 6 septembrie avocatul general Damaso a publicat opinia sa in legatura cu acest caz, in sine foarte interesanta pentru elucidarea in amanunt a unor chestiuni prcum jurisdictia materiala si temporala a Curtii in acest caz, natura dreptului litigios, discriminarea pe criteriul orientarii sexuale in jurisprudenta Curtii, si aplicarea acesteia la faptele acestui caz. Nu voi intra in amanunte, ii invit pe cei interesati sa citeasca aceasta opinia, este o lectura pasionanta. Suficient in acest moment este sa spun ca opinia Avocatului General ii da dreptate petentului in aceasta cauza. Urmeaza ca Curtea sa se pronunte asupra acestei cauze in curand
De ce este importanta acest caz? Pentru ca este unul dintre putinele cazuri referitoare la interpretarea Directivei mai sus amintite. Aceasta Directiva, impreuna cu Directiva privind egalitatea rasiala (Race Directive) au creat asteptari foarte mari de la activistii care se lupta impotriva diverselor discriminari (rasa, dizabilitati, orientare sexuala) atunci cand au fost adoptate acum mai multi ani. Cu toate acestea foarte putine cazuri, si alea nesemnificative, au ajuns pe rolul CJE. De aceea acest caz este o premiera, si poate un nou inceput.
Thursday, 26 July 2007
Cobzaru v. Romania
Curtea Europeana pentru Drepturile Omului a dat astazi o noua hotarare intr-o cauza in care statul roman a incalcat drepturile unui etnic rom, un dosar la care am lucrat in ultimii ani. Petent in acest caz a fost Belmondo Cobzaru, un rom din Mangalia.
Dupa o cearta cu prietena sa, si o altercatie cu cumnatul prietenei, Belmondo s-a prezentat la sectia de politie solicitand ajutor. La Politie, doi ofiteri l-au inchis intr-un birou si l-au batut TARE, eliberandu-l dupa doua ore. Acest incident a avut loc pe 4 iulie 1997. A urmat o ancheta superficiala a Parchetului, care a rezultat, normal, intr-o solutie de neincepere a urmarii penala. Mai mult decat atat, politistii si procurorii implicati in ancheta si-au bazat deciziile pe rationamente de genul “e tigan, deci minte, ca asa sunt tiganii’.
Ei bine, Curtea a condamnat Romania in termeni duri pentru incalcarea prohibitiei relelor tratamente, pentru lipsa unui remediu eficient pe plan intern pentru genul de probleme pe care le-a avut Belmondo, si pentru incalcarea prohibitiei discriminarii, ordonand guvernului roman sa plateasca daune petentului si costuri avocatilor acestora.
Sau, in termeni mai puti seci, Romania si romanii (nu de alta dar autoritatile din Romania sunt o sublimare fidela a poporului roman as a whole) au fost facuti din nou de cacao la Strasbourg pentru rasism institutionalizat. Urmeaza ca atoritatile sa redeschida dosarul lui Belmondo, sa-i trimita pe politistii batatusi la puscarie, sa-i traga la raspundere pe procurorii care au inchis ochii la aceasta combinatie, inclusiv prin condamnarea lor la plata despagubirilor care sunt in ultima instanta suportate de fiecare dintre noi, si sa imbunatateasca legislatia privind urmarirea si sanctionarea abuzurilor de natura rasista, fie ca sunt comise de politisti, fie de persoane particulare. (thats me daydreaming).
Thursday, 28 June 2007
CeNeCeDefobie
Un mesaj care l-am scris astazi, despre o tema care ma preocupa la ora actuala
*********
As dori sa previn [...] asupra a ceea ce percep ca fiind un pericol major – acela ca CNCD sa devina o institutie care isi tradeaza misiunea. Si mai mult decat atat, multe persoane care lupta impotriva discriminarii [...] contribuie decisiv (fara sa-si dea seama poate) la aceasta pervertire.
Am observat acest trend in ultimele luni, cand CNCD a sanctionat cu promptitudine derapajele verbale ale lui Basescu, ale lui Dancu (parca), si acum, iata e gata sa-l condamne si pe nefericitul X. Ca avocat cu experienta in domeniul discriminarii mi se pare ca CNCD-ul si OG 137/2000 nu sunt mecanismele cele mai potrivite pentru a corecta aceste iesiri in décor ale unor persoane publice (sau private).
Nu vreau sa scuz incidentele amintite, dimpotriva. Mi se pare insa ca alte mecanisme sunt mult mai potrivite decat OG 137/2000 pentru sanctionarea lor. E vorba de CNA, in cazul afirmatiilor cu caracter rasist pronuntate la tv/radio, legislatia europeana/domestica prin care se condamna rasismul/propagarea urei de rase/negarea holocaustului etc., in cazul afirmatiilor din presa organizatiile media de genul Clubul Roman de Presa, oprobriul public, izolarea individului deviant – in situatia data de pe rom link etc. Este adevarat ca unele din aceste mecanisme nu functioneaza, dar asta nu este o scuza pentru a preverti esenta CNCD-ului, si a-l transforma intr-un vehicul bun pentru toate relele.
Ce face CNCD-ul acum, impulsionat fiind de unii membri exaltati ai societatii civile, este sa puna carul in fata boilor, transformandu-se intr-o institutie militanta, ideologizanta. Cu alte cuvinte, CNCD-ul, ascuzandu-se in spatele lozincii discriminarii (lozinca pentru ca mare parte din membrii CNCD si mare parte din publicul larg nu inteleg ce e aia disciminare), se transforma in instanta morala si se baga orbeste in scandaluri publice aplicand automat, programatic ideologia nediscriminarii in spiritul mult hulitei (in alte parti) corectiudini politice. CNCD-ul inceteaza astfel sa aplice legea, si in loc creaza norme noi, fara legatura cu misiunea sa.
Este ignorata pe parcurs cea mai importanta componenta a misiunii CNCD-ului – sa educe publicul despre ce inseamna discriminare. Cum face acest lucru ? - demonstrand (dovedind, proband) cu consecventa si profesionalism, in cazul fiecarei plangeri in parte existenta/inexistenta discriminarii. Eu cel putin marturisesc ca pana acum nu am vazut o astfel de decizie, si am citit foarte multe.
Care sunt consecintele unei atari realitati – CNCD-ul se discrediteaza, devine vulnerabil (pe multiple planuri); notiunea de discriminare, transformata in ‘panaceu universal’ (TOTUL ESTE DISCRIMINARE), este golita de continut, si inceteaza a folosi obiectivelor pentru care a fost introdusa. Mai mult decat atat, avand in vedere ca scandalurile de genul ‘tiganca imputita’ monopolizeaza atentia si fantezia CNCD-ului discriminarea reala, consolidata, impamantenita, cea greu de dovedit, precum in domeniul locuintelor, sau al educatiei, sau al ajutoarelor sociale etc etc (vezi litera d Articolul 2 , alin 2 din OG nr. 137) este ignorata. Iata cum CNCD-ul isi tradeaza misiunea.
*********
As dori sa previn [...] asupra a ceea ce percep ca fiind un pericol major – acela ca CNCD sa devina o institutie care isi tradeaza misiunea. Si mai mult decat atat, multe persoane care lupta impotriva discriminarii [...] contribuie decisiv (fara sa-si dea seama poate) la aceasta pervertire.
Am observat acest trend in ultimele luni, cand CNCD a sanctionat cu promptitudine derapajele verbale ale lui Basescu, ale lui Dancu (parca), si acum, iata e gata sa-l condamne si pe nefericitul X. Ca avocat cu experienta in domeniul discriminarii mi se pare ca CNCD-ul si OG 137/2000 nu sunt mecanismele cele mai potrivite pentru a corecta aceste iesiri in décor ale unor persoane publice (sau private).
Nu vreau sa scuz incidentele amintite, dimpotriva. Mi se pare insa ca alte mecanisme sunt mult mai potrivite decat OG 137/2000 pentru sanctionarea lor. E vorba de CNA, in cazul afirmatiilor cu caracter rasist pronuntate la tv/radio, legislatia europeana/domestica prin care se condamna rasismul/propagarea urei de rase/negarea holocaustului etc., in cazul afirmatiilor din presa organizatiile media de genul Clubul Roman de Presa, oprobriul public, izolarea individului deviant – in situatia data de pe rom link etc. Este adevarat ca unele din aceste mecanisme nu functioneaza, dar asta nu este o scuza pentru a preverti esenta CNCD-ului, si a-l transforma intr-un vehicul bun pentru toate relele.
Ce face CNCD-ul acum, impulsionat fiind de unii membri exaltati ai societatii civile, este sa puna carul in fata boilor, transformandu-se intr-o institutie militanta, ideologizanta. Cu alte cuvinte, CNCD-ul, ascuzandu-se in spatele lozincii discriminarii (lozinca pentru ca mare parte din membrii CNCD si mare parte din publicul larg nu inteleg ce e aia disciminare), se transforma in instanta morala si se baga orbeste in scandaluri publice aplicand automat, programatic ideologia nediscriminarii in spiritul mult hulitei (in alte parti) corectiudini politice. CNCD-ul inceteaza astfel sa aplice legea, si in loc creaza norme noi, fara legatura cu misiunea sa.
Este ignorata pe parcurs cea mai importanta componenta a misiunii CNCD-ului – sa educe publicul despre ce inseamna discriminare. Cum face acest lucru ? - demonstrand (dovedind, proband) cu consecventa si profesionalism, in cazul fiecarei plangeri in parte existenta/inexistenta discriminarii. Eu cel putin marturisesc ca pana acum nu am vazut o astfel de decizie, si am citit foarte multe.
Care sunt consecintele unei atari realitati – CNCD-ul se discrediteaza, devine vulnerabil (pe multiple planuri); notiunea de discriminare, transformata in ‘panaceu universal’ (TOTUL ESTE DISCRIMINARE), este golita de continut, si inceteaza a folosi obiectivelor pentru care a fost introdusa. Mai mult decat atat, avand in vedere ca scandalurile de genul ‘tiganca imputita’ monopolizeaza atentia si fantezia CNCD-ului discriminarea reala, consolidata, impamantenita, cea greu de dovedit, precum in domeniul locuintelor, sau al educatiei, sau al ajutoarelor sociale etc etc (vezi litera d Articolul 2 , alin 2 din OG nr. 137) este ignorata. Iata cum CNCD-ul isi tradeaza misiunea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)