اللجنة المعنية بالحقوق الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والثقافية تختتم النظر في تقرير رومانيا

Committee on Economic, Social
  and Cultural Rights

21 November 2014

The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights today concluded its consideration of the combined third to fifth periodic report of Romania on how it implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Maria Ciobanu, Permanent Representative of Romania to the United Nations Office at Geneva, presenting the report, said that there was awareness that Romania was resuming dialogue with the Committee after two decades of absence.  This was not due to lack of political will but rather to a transition that encompassed all the sectors of Romania society and had a profound impact on all its components.  The Committee was thanked for understanding the change in the composition of the delegation.  Romania had always considered human rights as a set of rights that should be enjoyed by every human being and it had always tried to fight the false dichotomy that opposed certain categories of rights.  There were no rights that were more or less important than others.  

During the interactive dialogue Committee Experts raised and enquired about issues relating to, among others, Romania’s anti-corruption strategy; unemployment, particularly youth unemployment; discrimination, including discrimination against persons with disabilities, the Roma, and on the grounds of sexual orientation; independence of the judiciary; gender equality; access to healthcare; and the impact of austerity measures, especially on the most marginalised and vulnerable groups.

In concluding remarks, Ms. Ciobanu said Romania was thankful for the opportunity of this interactive dialogue which was of great help in understanding the domains that should be taken more into consideration by Romania, to ensure that all economic, social and cultural rights in Romania were fully respected, protected and promoted.  Romania had taken note of each and every question addressed and would continue to do its utmost for the Committee to have all necessary information to draw conclusions, especially statistical data.

Nicolaas Schrijver, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur for the report of Romania, also in concluding remarks, was very grateful to the delegation of Romania for its cooperation this week.  The unusual circumstances had made it far from easy for the delegation and the Committee.  However, the Committee had been impressed by the enormous efforts to provide replies and fill in gaps this week.  It was clear that considerable challenges were faced by the country as a result of austerity measures taken due to the economic and financial crisis. 

Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, Committee Vice-Chairperson, in his concluding remarks, thanked the delegation of Romania for its maximum effort and readiness, despite certain handicaps, in making this dialogue a constructive and useful one.  The Committee looked forward to receiving data promised, in order for the Committee to finalise concluding observations. 
The delegation of Romania  included several representatives of the Permanent Mission of Romania to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights will resume its public meeting on Friday, 28 of November 2014, at noon, for a briefing for States.  Later that afternoon, it will conclude its fifty-third session.
 
The Report
 
The Committee is considering the combined third to fifth periodic report of Romania (E/C.12/ROU/3-5).

Presentation of the Report

MARIA CIOBANU, Permanent Representative of Romania to the United Nations Office at Geneva, presenting the report, said there was awareness that Romania was resuming dialogue with the Committee after two decades of absence.  This was not due to lack of political will but rather to a transition that encompassed all the sectors of Romanian society and had a profound impact on all its components.  The Committee was thanked for understanding the change in the composition of the delegation.  The Romanian delegation was online with the capital and would remain in constant contact with all relevant colleagues and experts in order to provide extensive replies to the questions.  Romania had signed and ratified most of the core universal instruments on human rights.  The fact that all international instruments ratified by Romania had direct applicability in domestic law was emphasized.

The Constitution of Romania clearly stipulated that it was the common and indivisible homeland of all its citizens, without any discrimination on account of race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, religion, sex, opinion, political adherence, property or social origin.  In order to fulfil that lofty goal as well as the obligations incurring from the international instruments to which it was a contracting party, Romania had adopted a comprehensive legislative and institutional framework to combat discrimination.  During the last decade, Romania had adopted two new fundamental Codes, namely the Criminal Code and the Civil Code, which addressed the issue of combating discrimination.

Romania guaranteed the freedom of association.  The right to form and to join trade unions was guaranteed by the Constitution, national laws as well as by the instruments to which Romania was party to.  There were virtually no restrictions in this respect with the exception of the military staff, with exceptions fully in accordance with the provisions of human rights instruments and standards.  Trade unions were essential partners in the social dialogue, together with the government and the employers.  The right to strike was guaranteed by the Constitution and further protected by the Code of Labour and the Act on Social Dialogue.  The Act on Social Dialogue provided severe sanctions for persons that tried to stop employees from participating in a strike or forced them to work during a strike.

According to Eurostat the unemployment rate in Romania in 2013 was 7.1 per cent of the labour force;  6.3 per cent of women and 7.7 per cent of men were unemployed.  The right to education was guaranteed by the Constitution and by legislation.  In accordance with the last changes to the Act on Education, education in Romania was compulsory for 11 years.  Respect for the autonomy of universities was guaranteed.  Considering the risks and pressure of the economic crisis and at the same time to further support economic growth, the Government had adopted and implemented a series of measures likely to ensure a climate of social protection and to reduce the effect of the crisis.

Romania had always been a place where people of different ethnicities lived together with the Romanian majority.  After the fall of the dictatorship, persons belonging to national minorities had regained their freedom.  One of the first measures had been to ensure the Parliamentary representation of persons belonging to national minorities.  There was a Department for Interethnic Relations, always led by representatives of national minorities.  Romanian legislation guaranteed the rights of persons belonging to national minorities to be educated in their maternal language.  The situation of Roma required special attention due to a complex history that included marginalization, discrimination and poverty.  Freedom of expression of religion or belief was one of the first and most visible achievements after the fall of the dictatorship.

Romania had always considered human rights as a set of rights that should be enjoyed by every human being and it had always tried to fight the false dichotomy that opposed certain categories of rights.  There were no rights that were more or less important than others.   Romania was aware that its application of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had seen its share of success as well as problems.
 
Questions by Experts

NICOLAAS SCHRIJVER, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur for the report of Romania, said that there was a rather small delegation but it was no doubt up to the job.  The report and replies were informative but not without problems.  Romania had taken a very long time to submit the report.  Could some explanation be provided for this?  Romania had made enormous efforts in the sphere of legislation and standard-setting.  The main problem seemed to be that laws were not always enforced.  There was also the serious impact of austerity measures, particularly on the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, especially by vulnerable and marginalized groups. 

On the national human rights institution, there seemed to be a variety of such institutions but only one could be registered with the United Nations under the Paris Principles.  What would Romania like to do to provide it with greater internationally recognized status?  On corruption, how effective was Romania’s anti-corruption strategy? Why was Romania not using the full potential of funds put at its disposal, particularly the European Social Fund, and the European Regional Development Fund?  There was deep concern about unemployment and youth unemployment rates.  What results had the National Plan for Youth Employment yielded?  What was wrong with measures being taken to address this issue?  An Expert was interested in the functioning of the Office of the Advocate of the People.  It appeared there were serious constraints and staff and resources, which limited and restricted its mandate. 

It seemed that in practice, protection against discriminated groups was not as good as it should be.  There was growing intolerance against Roma.  Why, in spite of so many instruments and measures taken, what could justify this public perception and intolerance increase? 

Judges were sometimes subject to pressure in doing their job, and this was sometimes true of the Bar Council.  Could more information be provided on this problem?

Another Expert enquired about official development assistance.  After Romania joined the European Union, it undertook to make contributions, reaching up ultimately to the 0.7 per cent target.  However, Romania had not been listed in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s statistics.  Could light be shed on the extent of contributions and progress in attaining the target 0.7 per cent? 

It had been reported that the permissible age for men and women to claim pension benefits was not the same.  It was also reported that there was a bill in parliament to rectify this inequality.  What was the current situation and how soon could this wrong be righted? 

Regarding non-discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, there had been allegations of abuse by the police and discrimination in the area of health and in the education system.  In additional to legal prohibitions, were there any specific programmes to combat homophobia, for example?  Romania seemed to have one of the lowest numbers of representation of women in the political system in Europe?  Why was this so?  There was no clear information as to what happened to the National Agency for Equal Opportunities Between Men and Women, said an Expert.  Which agency or department within the Government was responsible for the task of gender equality? 

How was Romania tackling the problems facing marginalized groups, especially the Roma, asked an Expert?

There was almost no mention of persons with disabilities in the report.  Had a special law been adopted that would provide an adequate legal framework for the implementation of the provisions of the Convention on Persons with Disabilities? On social security, the Government had amended regressive measures taken in 2009 and 2010 on this issue.  This was positive, but related only to some benefits.  Were austerity measures considered as temporary?  If so, was there a time frame or bench mark as to when they would be cancelled? 
 
Response by the Delegation

On why it had taken so long to present the report, the delegation said that the problem was one of administrative and institutional capacity in the context of joining the European Union, and the number of reports and legislation Romania had had to adopt.  The authorities were considering all the conditions that had to be met in order to ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.  Unfortunately, timing for future ratification could not be given at this moment.

The level of participation in political life was really very low.  It was thought to be very much a matter of mentality.  Political life was quite tough in the country and required a lot of tenacity and some skills that they were perhaps not prepared for.

On independence of the judiciary, the Constitution was the guarantor of the independence of the judiciary.  If judges’ independence was impeded in any way, the Bar Council could step in and do something about it.  If judges felt that their independence was being encroached upon, they could turn to the Council.  The Council fixed its own budget after an opinion by the Ministry of Finance.  The independence of the judiciary was thought to be guaranteed and had been strengthened over the past years. 

Regarding corruption, the  national anti-corruption strategy was not just something on paper but was discussed each year.  The main authority involved was a specialized unit of the Internal Affairs Ministry, the National Anti-Corruption Directorate, created on the basis of a model that existed in Spain.  Between 1 January and 1 November 2014, the Directorate had started criminal proceedings against 834 individuals in 225 individual legal proceedings.

So far, there had been no example of direct application of the Courts with regards to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.  There had been one case when domestic legislation had gone further than international provisions.  There had been a verdict from the Constitutional Court on freedom of association that Romanian law should be applied because it was more favourable than international provisions.  It was an odd case, but it was still in the books.  Yes, there were three national human rights institutions and it would be better to consolidate them, but each of them had their own history and had been created in a special set of circumstances.  The Institute of the Advocate of the People was created by the first Constitution and had taken a little bit of time to get up and running.  It was thought however that it was discharging its functions properly.   

On fighting homophobia, there were cases of sanctions handed out, including on Romania’s national airline with regards to a job opening discriminating against a same-sex couple.  The new Penal Code had provisions that provided for punishment for incitement to discrimination by a fine and up to six months in prison. 

The Government had taken the commitment to increase the level of official development assistance up to 0.33 per cent of Gross Development Product up to 2015. 

After ratification of the Convention on Persons with Disabilities, no special law had been adopted as a law from 2006 was already in place.  In 2010, there was an emergency ordinance that introduced the term “disability”, as Romanian legislation had spoken about the “handicapped”.  Some 13.76 per cent of persons with disabilities were employed.  There was a quota for employment to address the high unemployment of persons with disabilities. 

Regarding asylum legislation, in 2014 there had been a Government Ordinance amending and supplementing the Law on Asylum.  Persons that benefitted from international protection could access the labour market in the same conditions as Romanian citizens.  Asylum seekers who after one year from their asylum application had still not obtained a form of protection had access to the labour market as foreseen for Romanian citizens. 

Follow-up Questions

Information was requested on efforts to ensure supplies of medicine, medical equipment and technical and medical staff in hospitals?  The maternal mortality rate was one of the highest among the European Union countries.  What steps were being taken to address and eliminate obstetrical risks and other factors contributing to maternal deaths?  Could information be provided on efforts relating to access to sexual and reproductive health services for women with HIV/AIDS and to end discrimination against them?  There was an alarming rate of teenage pregnancies.  What efforts were there to curb this?

An Expert enquired as to whether an assessment of austerity measures and their impact on poverty had been carried out, as well as their impact on the most vulnerable and marginalized groups.  What measures were put in place to address such marginalized and disadvantaged groups? 

Would funds be allocated in order to implement the social housing programme for Roma communities?  What steps had been taken to guarantee access to all forms of affordable and adequate housing, including social housing, without discrimination, to the most disadvantaged groups?  Forced evictions were a very serious matter.  Would Romania adopt, as soon as possible, legislation regarding forced evictions that complied with international standards? 

Information obtained said victims of trafficking had difficulty accessing the justice system and obtaining reparations for injustice suffered.  Could information be provided on this, asked an Expert?  How effective were measures to combat prostitution? Could cases of prosecutions be cited and what punishments were meted out? 

NICOLAAS SCHRIJVER, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur for the report of Romania, said persons in urban areas to a large extent had direct access to public water supply systems, but this was often not the case in rural areas.  The high incidence of drugs, tobacco, alcohol and other substance use among children was also raised. 

An Expert noted there was quite a high rate of school drop-outs, especially in rural and remote areas, and among Roma children.  Was there a national strategy on early school-leaving?  An Expert had the impression that  a law on education had been adopted in 2011 that brought in major reforms to improve the quality of education, but it did not yet seem to be in operation.  Why was this so?  Was there really segregation of Roma children in education and, if so, how did Romania intend to address this?  Was there a problem of bullying, enquired another Expert?  

The Constitution recognized the right of individuals to participate in cultural life, noted an Expert.  What was being done in practical terms to ensure that minorities could participate in cultural life in their own but also wider community?  Was there any agreement with neighbouring States to deal with possible problems of Romanians living in neighbouring countries, or to deal with minorities of the surrounding countries living in Romania, asked another Expert?

NICOLAAS SCHRIJVER, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur for the report of Romania, was a little disappointed about the brief information provided on the enjoyment of cultural rights.  Was there not a lot of respect for cultural rights as an integral element of the whole body of human rights?  Was there no ministry of culture than could assist in reporting on the enjoyment of cultural rights?  It was noted that there were very few publications in minority languages and hardly any television shows in minority languages.

ZDZISLAW KEDZIA, Committee Chairperson, said that the anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child today should be commemorated.  It now  had 193 ratifications.  The guidance that it provided to the protection of the rights of the child should be appreciated.  There was full awareness of the shortcoming of implementation gaps and structural challenges.  Appreciation was expressed for the Committee on the Rights of the Child, which had done an enormous job in monitoring and promoting the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.  The United Nations Children’s Fund had picked up this Convention as a normative framework for its action, and this was the first time in the United Nations that an autonomous organization had decided to apply the rights-based approach in its activities. 
 
Response by the Delegation

Regarding growing intolerance against minorities in Romania, it was highlighted that the President of Romania was a member of an ethnic minority.  Support for him had been overwhelming and was proof of the democratic and tolerant spirit in Romania, as well as of the unimpeded access of people representing minorities to decision making posts affecting the whole society.  Not everything was perfect in Romania, but still this was pointed out.

Complete statistics on unemployment in Romania would be circulated this afternoon.  The Constitution provided that women were entitled to equal pay as men for equal work.  Maternity could not be a reason for discrimination or firing during pregnancy or maternal leave.  On youth unemployment, in the second trimester of this year, the rate was at 23.9 per cent, showing a decreased trend from 25.7 per cent in the first trimester.  A significant drop had also been registered for young women’s unemployment, which was now lower than young men’s unemployment.  The right to social security was guaranteed by the State.  Starting in October 2009, the level of social allowance for retired persons was an equivalent of 80 Euros per month, paid to all retired persons.  This social allowance was not a social assistance measure but a right to pensioners residing in Romania. The minimum gross wage, approximately 200 Euros, was calculated taking into account macro-economic indicators and productivity, and established through Governmental decision in consultation with trade unions and employers’ organisations. 

The situation of Roma derived from the historical past marked by discrimination and marginalization.  A lot of Romanian Roma found themselves in a situation of poverty perpetuated from generation to generation.  To try and resolve this problem, in 2002 the Government adopted the first strategy to improve their situation.  Goals were set out relating to the labour market, education, and access to social services such as healthcare, and to housing.   The National Roma Office had been set up, which reported to the Prime Minister.  In 2012, an appraisal of the situation was carried out and areas where efforts had to be stepped up were flagged.  Roma women faced further difficulties in accessing the labour market, also because of persistent attitudes within their own communities.  Since 2006, there was a programme of Roma media health mediators, which liaised with the Roma community to ensure access to healthcare.  On education, steps had been taken, including establishment of educational mediators that encouraged Roma families to send their children to primary school and pressed home the benefits of education.

Concerning evictions, there had been occasions when not only Roma had been obliged to leave buildings and had not been able to receive alternate accommodation on an immediate basis.  There had been frequent problems in liaising between central and local authorities, as local authorities were refusing to address issues relating to persons that were not registered in these communities.  There were no regulations on these forced evictions yet, but criminal law provided for eviction without consideration of ethnic grounds.

Follow-up Questions by Experts

What was the assessment of the Roma situation, asked an Expert?  What were the obstacles?  Could an appraisal be provided of how measures to reconcile professional and family life had been successful? 

Tables indicated a steep growth in the number of persons with disabilities in Romania, noted an Expert.  Why was this so?

Response by the Delegation

With regards to the Roma obstacles, they came from two angles, of mentality of the Roma and the rest of the population, as well as the socio-economic situation of Roma persons.  Education should be the main venue to address the social integration of Roma, and to learn to live together and respect diversity.  Roma by nature were nomadic, so there was also a need to cooperate with other European countries to find a European solution to the situation.

On empowerment of women, the Directorate for Equal Opportunities had organized during the period of 2010-2012 an awareness raising campaign for the public on reconciliation of professional and family life, during which discussions were held.  A guidebook had been developed, with information on national legislation that supported both parents.  A recently adopted strategy also foresaw awareness-raising, and also targeted men and how they should increase their involvement in the education and care of children. 

Main priority on social housing was given to families evicted from properties returned to former owners, persons with disabilities, and retired persons, among others.  Special priority was given to persons persecuted by the former dictatorial regime.  Problems occurred in areas where virtually no social housing existed.  Often, there were long waiting lists.  Social housing was now being built. 

The Government was working on a strategy on social inclusion and combatting poverty, which would be ready between February and March next year, and would include provisions on support for families. 

On trafficking in persons, a multidisciplinary and inter-institutional approach was adopted to address the situation.  A National Programme for Coordination for Victims of Trafficking During Criminal Proceedings had been developed, providing victims with knowledge on judicial and administrative procedures, and facilitating their access to support services. 

The Law on Domestic Violence had been amended, with the introduction of the restriction order, a measure of protection for the victim that could be issued by the court.  It also improved the efficiency of authorities to support and advise victims. 

When a child was abandoned in a medical unit, the police and the community public services needed to decide on a person that would be responsible to follow-up on the situation of the child and register it, after the medical unit had notified the General Directorate of Social Assistance and Child Protection, and the Police, within a deadline of 24 hours. 

The Constitution recognized every person’s right to health.  The Sickness Insurance Law provided for a system whereby each Romanian citizen could draw upon the public health system and have access to free medical assistance.  Every month, a percentage of every Romanian citizen’s salary was paid to the social insurance fund which enabled this access to healthcare.  Persons that were unemployed or did not pay taxes did have access to the system with a number of restrictions that did not essentially undermine the right of every citizen to be provided with medical care in the public healthcare system.  Some persons would prefer a private system and the debate had hit the headlines in Romania, though this was rejected by most persons in Romania.  One of the most difficult problems faced regarded hidden costs.  Sometimes certain courses of treatment required the payment of a sum of money demanded by certain healthcare officials.  There had been efforts by the Health Ministry to introduce an integrity structure, to tackle fraud and corruption in the healthcare system. 

On child prostitution, sanctions were provided for under the law when persons exploited juveniles and forced them into prostitution and there was an age limit of 14, under which consent could not be assumed.

Legislation to combat discrimination outlawed any form of discrimination on grounds of ethnicity and race, including segregation of Roma children.  Evidence had been found of attempts to segregate Roma children by placing them in separate classes.  The practice of placing Roma children in separate schools did not exist, or this would be illegal.  The risk did exist that there may be an emergence of separate classes in schools for Roma children.

Programmes had been implemented to encourage minorities to participate in cultural life and there were television programmes broadcasting in minority languages.  There were also private stations broadcasting in 100 per cent Hungarian or German, but these were not subsidized.   A shrinking in print media for minorities had been noted.  The Government was continuing to fund three national publications in Hungarian and German.  The Hungarian minority, according to a census in 2011, was made up of 1,227,000 people.  The Hungarian minority had been part of Government coalitions governing Romania.  There were bilateral treaties between Romania and all its neighbours, with provisions dealing with minorities.  There should be bilateral mixed commissions which analysed the situations faced by minorities could carry out field visits and seek to resolve problems on the ground as and when they were raised by representatives of minorities themselves. 

On school drop-out rates, there was a discrepancy between ministry studies and those undertaken by the United Nations Children’s Fund, as a result of a different methodology.  This data would be provided later today.  It was underlined that the Education Ministry had already prepared a number of measures to encourage children that had dropped out of school to go back to school.  There was also an ongoing training for adults who wished to complete their studies. 

Follow-up Questions by Experts

Why was it that some teachers were requiring that parents pay money, enquired an Expert?  Were they insufficiently paid? 

Response by the Delegation

This phenomenon did exist and went back a long way in history.  As in the area of healthcare, this was a result of the fact that for at least 30 years, the public education system had been systematically underfunded.  This was particularly true of primary and secondary schools.  The chronic underfunding led to local authorities funding a couple of schools in each departments, but other schools were far behind those.  On teachers’ salaries, for historical reasons they were some of the worst paid civil servants, a matter which had never been properly tackled.  These hidden costs were more of a nuisance than a scourge.  Parents could lodge complaints with the Education Ministry and these complaints could be taken up and prosecuted.

The mandate of the Directorate for Equal Opportunities covered domestic violence and everything related to the empowerment of women.   There had been a debate to have quotas for women to be represented in Parliament, but so far that initiative had not led to a successful initiative but it was thought that the debate would continue. 

Concluding Remarks
 
MARIA CIOBANU, Permanent Representative of Romania to the United Nations Office at Geneva, in concluding remarks, was thankful for the opportunity of this interactive dialogue which was of great help in understanding the domains that should be taken more into consideration by Romania, to ensure that all economic, social and cultural rights in Romania were fully respected, protected and promoted.  Romania was convinced that all rights were equally important and they were given equal consideration.  Romania had taken note of each and every question addressed and would continue to do its utmost for the Committee to have all necessary information to draw conclusions, especially statistical data.  Deep gratitude was expressed for the Committee’s understanding and constructive approach in letting it go through this extremely useful and enriching exercise.  

NICOLAAS SCHRIJVER, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur for the report of Romania, also in concluding remarks, was very grateful to the delegation of Romania for its cooperation this week.  The unusual circumstances had made it far from easy for the delegation and the Committee.  It was regrettable that various ministries were not represented and that written replies to the list of issues failed to address many points raised.  However, the Committee had been impressed by enormous efforts to provide replies and fill in gaps this week.  The Committee had benefitted from the high quality of work and commitment of non-governmental organizations from Romania, of which Romania could be proud.  It was clear that considerable challenges were faced by the country as a result of austerity measures taken due to the economic and financial crisis. 

CHANDRASHEKHAR DASGUPTA, Committee Vice-Chairperson, in concluding remarks, thanked the delegation of Romania for its maximum efforts and readiness, despite certain handicaps, in making this dialogue a constructive and useful one.  The Committee looked forward to received data promised, in order for the Committee to finalise concluding observations. 
_________

For use of the information media; not an official record