I correctly predicted that there's no violation of human rights in ELMAZOVA AND OTHERS v. NORTH MACEDONIA and 1 other application.
Information
- Judgment date: 2023-01-31
- Communication date: 2021-08-30
- Application number(s): 11811/20;13550/20
- Country: MKD
- Relevant ECHR article(s): 6, 6-1, 14, P1-2, P12-1
- Conclusion:
No violation of Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 - Positive obligations
Article 8-1 - Respect for private life) - Result: No violation SEE FINAL JUDGMENT
JURI Prediction
- Probability: 0.826897
- Prediction: No violation
Consistent
Legend
Communication text used for prediction
Published on 20 September 2021 Applications nos.
11811/20 and 13550/20Seriha ELMAZOVA and Others against North Macedoniaand Divan JASHAROV and Others against North Macedonialodged on 28 February 2020 and 6 March 2020 respectivelycommunicated on 30 August 2021(see list appended) The applicants are primary school Roma pupils, born between 2006 and 2013, and their parents, all living in Bitola.
They complain about alleged segregation of Roma pupils in the public primary school “G.S.” in Bitola in that, allegedly, they were not allowed to enrol in the nearby public primary school “T.A.”, unlike non-Roma pupils whose requests for transfer between the same schools were granted.
Such a practice allegedly resulted in 83,5% of pupils placed in “G.S.” being of Roma origin and 95,1% of pupils placed in “T.A.” being non-Roma.
The applicants’ constitutional complaint that the described situation had been discriminatory and led to Roma pupils obtaining poorer education was dismissed by the Constitutional Court, which held that, inter alia, it was beyond its competence to assess the overall social context and that the applicants had not presented direct evidence (such as requests for transfer or related decisions) in support of the alleged impossibility to enrol in the primary school “T.A.” (У.бр.132/2018).
The applicants are primary school Roma pupils, born between 2010 and 2012, and their parents, all living in Shtip.
They complain about placement of the applicant pupils in Roma-only classes in primary school “G.D.” in Shtip, which allegedly resulted in segregation and discrimination.
The applicants’ constitutional complaint that the described situation had been discriminatory and led to Roma pupils obtaining poorer education was dismissed by the Constitutional Court, which held that, inter alia, they had failed to prove the alleged difference in treatment and that the reason for the placement of most Roma pupils in separate classes was the increased number of such pupils enrolled in the school compared to pupils of other ethnic origin (У.бр.131/2018).
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.
Have the applicants been treated differently in the enjoyment of their Convention right to have education free of discrimination, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No.
1?
If so, did that difference in treatment pursue a legitimate aim and have an objective reasonable justification?
(see D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic [GC], no.
57325/00, §§ 175-181, ECHR 2007‐IV, Oršuš and Others v. Croatia [GC], no.
15766/03, §§ 143-148, ECHR 2010, Sampani and Others v. Greece, no.
59608/09, § 75-78, 11 December 2012 and Lavida and Others v. Greece, no.
7973/10, §§ 60-63, 30 May 2013) 2.
Have the applicants suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of the right to education, contrary to Article 1 of Protocol No.
12 to the Convention?
APPENDIX A.
Application no.
.11811/20 No.
Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality Place of residence 1.
Seriha ELMAZOVA 1975 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia Shuto Orizari 2.
Ferdit ARSLANOSKI 1983 Bitola 3.
U.
A.
2011 Bitola 4.
Bajram ARSLANOVSKI 1983 Bitola 5.
D. A.
2010 Bitola 6.
Elvedina ASANOVSKA 1982 Bitola 7.
Mukerem BAJRAMOVA 1975 Bitola 8.
SH.
D. 2007 Bitola 9.
F. E. 2010 Bitola 10.
R. E. 2007 Bitola 11.
Nurije ELMAZOVA 1984 Bitola 12.
F. G. 2009 Bitola 13.
A. K. 2012 Bitola 14.
DJ.
K. 2012 Bitola 15.
Denis KANANOVSKI 1985 Bitola 16.
Ergjun KANANOVSKI 1984 Bitola 17.
Ujar KERIM 1993 Bitola 18.
V. K. 2012 Bitola 19.
Muslina KERIMOVSKA 1982 Bitola 20.
B. K. 2013 Bitola 21.
DZ.
L. 2009 Bitola 22.
A. M. 2007 Bitola 23.
Ferdi MEMEDOV 1983 Bitola 24.
Alen MUSA 1989 Bitola 25.
D. M. 2011 Bitola 26.
Ferdi MUSA 1984 Bitola 27.
M. M. 2012 Bitola 28.
S. M. 2011 Bitola 29.
S. M. 2013 Bitola 30.
S. M. 2006 Bitola 31.
T. M. 2007 Bitola 32.
Djulieta MUSOVSKA 1991 Bitola 33.
N. M. 2012 Bitola 34.
Nailj MUSOVSKI 1990 Bitola 35.
S. M. 2009 Bitola 36.
O. R. 2006 Bitola 37.
Barije RAMOVA 1974 Bitola 38.
M. R. 2009 Bitola 39.
Memet RUSHIDOV 1976 Bitola 40.
Semavi RUSTEMOV 1979 Bitola 41.
S. R. 2010 Bitola 42.
A. R. 2013 Bitola 43.
E. R. 2013 Bitola 44.
Nevzat RUSTEMOVSKI 1968 Bitola 45.
Nerguze VESELOVA 1974 Bitola B.
Application no.
13550/20 No.
Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality Place of residence 1.
Divan JASHAROV 1990 Macedonian/ citizen of the Republic of North Macedonia Shtip 2.
Deira BAJRAM 1988 Shtip 3.
Z.
B.
2011 Shtip 4.
Ahmed DEMIROV 1966 Shtip 5.
A. D. 2012 Shtip 6.
Sedatin DEMIROV 1986 Shtip 7.
T. D. 2010 Shtip 8.
Esma DEMIROVA 1988 Shtip 9.
S. D. 2011 Shtip 10.
Kjemal DESTANOV 1961 Shtip 11.
S. D. 2011 Shtip 12.
Ali Djevat DJELADINOV 1992 Shtip 13.
I. DJ.
2011 Shtip 14.
Bilent DURMISHEV 1977 Shtip 15.
Djengiz DURMISHEV 1993 Shtip 16.
E. D 2010 Shtip 17.
E. D. 2010 Shtip 18.
CH.
H. 2012 Shtip 19.
G. I.
2011 Shtip 20.
Mehridjan IDRIZOVA 1981 Shtip 21.
Semihan JASHAROV 1992 Shtip 22.
GJ.
J.
2011 Shtip 23.
A. M. 2012 Shtip 24.
A. M. 2011 Shtip 25.
DJ.
M. 2012 Shtip 26.
M. M. 2012 Shtip 27.
Adile MEMEDOVA 1958 Shtip 28.
R. M. 2011 Shtip 29.
Senada MEMEDOVA 1997 Shtip 30.
R. O.
2011 Shtip 31.
Bahara OSMANOVA 1990 Shtip 32.
Meri PARLAPANOVA 1985 Shtip 33.
F. SH.
2011 Shtip 34.
Redjep SHAKIROV 1988 Shtip 35.
A. S. 2011 Shtip 36.
B. V. 2011 Shtip 37.
Elsijan VELIEVA 1994 Shtip 38.
Gjuljsan VELIEVA 1987 Shtip 39.
F. V. 2011 Shtip 40.
L. V. 2011 Shtip 41.
Mustafa VELIOV 1961 Shtip 42.
Shejnus VELIOV 1981 Shtip Published on 20 September 2021 Applications nos.
11811/20 and 13550/20Seriha ELMAZOVA and Others against North Macedoniaand Divan JASHAROV and Others against North Macedonialodged on 28 February 2020 and 6 March 2020 respectivelycommunicated on 30 August 2021(see list appended) The applicants are primary school Roma pupils, born between 2006 and 2013, and their parents, all living in Bitola.
They complain about alleged segregation of Roma pupils in the public primary school “G.S.” in Bitola in that, allegedly, they were not allowed to enrol in the nearby public primary school “T.A.”, unlike non-Roma pupils whose requests for transfer between the same schools were granted.
Such a practice allegedly resulted in 83,5% of pupils placed in “G.S.” being of Roma origin and 95,1% of pupils placed in “T.A.” being non-Roma.
The applicants’ constitutional complaint that the described situation had been discriminatory and led to Roma pupils obtaining poorer education was dismissed by the Constitutional Court, which held that, inter alia, it was beyond its competence to assess the overall social context and that the applicants had not presented direct evidence (such as requests for transfer or related decisions) in support of the alleged impossibility to enrol in the primary school “T.A.” (У.бр.132/2018).
The applicants are primary school Roma pupils, born between 2010 and 2012, and their parents, all living in Shtip.
They complain about placement of the applicant pupils in Roma-only classes in primary school “G.D.” in Shtip, which allegedly resulted in segregation and discrimination.
The applicants’ constitutional complaint that the described situation had been discriminatory and led to Roma pupils obtaining poorer education was dismissed by the Constitutional Court, which held that, inter alia, they had failed to prove the alleged difference in treatment and that the reason for the placement of most Roma pupils in separate classes was the increased number of such pupils enrolled in the school compared to pupils of other ethnic origin (У.бр.131/2018).
