Ombudswoman and ENNHRI Chair Lora Vidović participated at the high level international panel discussion on reframing communication on human rights, held on 6th March 2018 in UN Geneva Office.

Kate Gilmore, United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Nils Muižnieks, Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, Michael O’Flaherty, Director of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency, Florence Simbiri-Jaoko, Special Envoy of GANHRI and Human Rights Watch Deputy Executive Directore for Advocacy Bruno Stagno Ugarte took part in the conference.

Along with the discussion on current trends regarding human rights perception among general public as well as challenges and good practices in human rights promotion, the conference resulted in the joint statement signed by OHCHR, Council of Europe's Commissioner for Human Rights, FRA, ENNHRI and GANHRI.

The document points out that with the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 70 years ago, governments around the globe were committed to making peace, democracy and justice a reality for all. Despite some achievements, however, many today still live in poverty, oppression, inequality and discrimination, exposed to the armed conflicts. For improvements, better laws and policies are necessary but also a clear understanding among the citizens what human rights are as well as their broader support for human rights protection. The signatories therefore have pledged, among other, to work harder together in order to promote values of human rights around the globe.

Full statement you may find in the attachment and the video at: https://youtu.be/_5pM3h1jejQ
 

A complainant, retired because of PTSD, was prevented from performing the job of a controller of judging in football matches within the First and Second Croatian Football League, based on the Rules on conditions, ways and procedure of appointment of football judges, controller and delegats-controllers. Since the Rules do not enlist any other diagnosis, which would prevent exercising the duty of a controller of judging, Ombudswoman Lora Vidović has concluded it discriminates based on health status and has warned the Croatian Football Association (HNS) thereof. HNS has announced the amendments to the disputed part of the Rules.

Namely, HNS viewed that a person retired because of PTSD could not perform his/her regular job, consequently he/she could neither perform duties of a controller of judging, but it did not support such opinion with an expertise. On the other hand, physicians who provided their opinion on this case, emphasise that all PTSD diagnosis are not equal, they may appear in different intensities, whereby there is no justification for generalised assessment of those affected. Each candidate, likewise in case of other illness, should be individually examined and with respect of their individual characteristics, their fitness for performing duties of a controller of judging in football matches should be assessed.

Along with the warning to HNS, the Ombudswoman requested from the Central State Office for Sports to conduct an administrative oversight on the legality of the HNS work and regulations in order to ensure conformity with the Croatian legal order and prevent discrimination in football based on any grounds.
 

Depriving the rights on liberty does not automatically lead to the loss of other civil, political, economic, cultural and social rights. Amongst them is the right to correspondence, which was denied to a prisoner who wanted to complain against the quality of service and price of the business providing services in prison.

Direct correspondence was estimated as a security risk by the prison authorities with reference that he should have sent his complaint to the prison governor who, if deemed justified, would forwarded it to the business owner. But, such judgement on a security risk was not argumented.

The Constitution guarantees freedom and secrecy of correspondence, which may only be restricted by law. Hence, according to the European Convention for Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms anyone has the right to respect (his/her) private and family life and correspondence, except when it is necessary to restrict them in a democratic society for the purpose prescribed by the law. And the European Court of Human Rights in numerous decisions took the stand that the restriction, in order to be legitimate, must be objective, necessary and not excessive. It should also bear in mind that the prisoner's letter in this case represents a written claim every person is entitled to according to the Consumers Act.

The Ministry of Justice accepted the Ombudswoman's recommendation and instructed all criminal bodies to prevent such situations in the future. According to the instruction, decisions on deprivation of prisoners’ rights must be argumented in detail, that is, they must contain all facts and circumstances on which they are based, especially if referring to the constitutional, conventional and legal rights, like the right to correspondence.