’WPC> 1L 2|{ń¢Ū@÷8 ++$]ęN±H€³)Ŗ©‚Ņe‚ćŲōź‚‘°EęR~Ēø=ĄCÜNKDĮ=‰Ņ*ŽĒī nÄIWŸŒ`nŗe«Ŗ]7ßXA īņÜņˆvŗ×b&V>±ŲXRĢzŪUŚÅ!­“ ā'są« =åŽb8o¢ hāU÷(˜kŚvgš#ĮąUN” %ļ 0:õ^ /w;4?Sb md 1‡{ 72 1u4 72© 0cŪ˜HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - StandardČŠššČŠ0(ČhH  Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(ūœ$””ŌUKUS.,Ōpq), tQ+ä ¢3|x’U‹’ĄĄĄ(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. 1.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) i)(;óæ$““Ō25hŌŚ  Ś0Ś  Ś.Ō3  Ōą0  ąŻ ƒūœ!ŻŌUKUS.,ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌÓ  Óņ ņCOMMITTEE€ON€THE€ELIMINATION€OF€RACIAL€DISCRIMINATIONŠ ° ŠĢD.€S.€€V.€SwedenŠ ą ŠĢCommunication€No.€14/1998Š pĄ ŠĢ10€August€2001Š P   ŠĢŌ_ŌCERDŌ_Ō/C/59/D/14/1998€Š 0 € ŠĢĢADMISSIBILITYŠ P  Šó óĢĢĢņņņņSubmitted€byóó:€€D.€S.€(name€deleted)Š Ą ŠĢņņAlleged€victimóó:€€The€petitioner€Š  š ŠĢņņState€party€concernedóó:€€Sweden€Š €Š ŠĢņņDate€of€communicationóó:€€24€December€1998€Š `° ŠóóĢĢĢą  ąņņThe€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discriminationóó,€established€under€article€8€ofŠ  p Šthe€International€Convention€on€the€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€Racial€Discrimination,€Š ` ŠĢą  ąņņMeeting€onóó€10€August€2001,€Š š@ ŠĢą  ąņņAdoptsóó€the€following:Š Š  ŠĢĢÓ=ÓÓ  ÓņņDecision€on€Admissibility€óóŠ  #š! ŠÓÓÓÓĢ1.€€The€petitioner€(initial€submission€dated€24€December€1998)€is€D.€S.,€a€Swedish€citizen€ofŠ €%Š # ŠCzechoslovak€origin,€born€in€1947,€currently€residing€in€Solna,€Sweden.€She€claims€to€be€a€victimŠ p&Ą!$ Šof€violations€by€Sweden€of€articles€2,€paragraph€2,€5€(e)€(Ō_ŌiŌ_Ō)€and€6€of€the€International€Convention€onŠ `'°"% Šthe€Elimination€of€All€Forms€of€Racial€Discrimination.€The€petitioner€is€not€represented€by€counsel.€Š P( #& ŠĢņ ņThe€facts€as€submitted€by€the€petitioner:ó óŠ 0*€%( ŠĢ2.1€€In€May€1998,€the€National€Council€for€Cultural€Affairs€(Ō_ŌStatensŌ_Ō€Ō_ŌkulturrdŌ_Ō)€advertised€a€vacancyŠ ,`'* Šfor€a€post€as€a€statistician€within€its€organisation.€In€the€vacancy€announcement,€the€Council€lookedŠ -P(+ Šfor€applicants€who,€in€co-operation€with€the€different€divisions€of€the€Council,€would€work€on€theŠ š-@), Šproduction€of€statistics,€investigate€studies€and€method€support€and€take€part€in€developing€statisticalŠ ° Šwork.€The€National€Council€for€Cultural€Affairs€required€that€applicants€should€preferably€have€aŠ  š Šuniversity€degree€in€statistics€supplemented€by€e.g.€sociology€or€economics€and€experience€ofŠ ą Šstatistical€research.€Other€requirements€included€ease€of€oral€and€written€expression€and€knowledgeŠ €Š Šof€cultural€life€and€policy€in€Sweden.€The€advertisement€finally€stated€that€it€was€desirable€thatŠ pĄ Šapplicants€were€service€minded,€good€pedagogues€and€able€to€work€both€independently€and€in€aŠ ` ° Šteam.€Š P   ŠĢ2.2€€A€total€of€89€individuals€applied€for€the€vacancy,€including€the€petitioner€and€L.€J..€On€30€JuneŠ 0 € Š1998,€the€National€Council€for€Cultural€Affairs€decided€to€appoint€Ō_ŌL.J.Ō_Ō€as€an€official€(statistician)Š  p  Što€the€Council.€The€petitioner€appealed€the€decision€to€the€Government€and€claimed€damages€dueŠ `  Što€discrimination.€Š P  ŠĢ2.3€€On€1€October€1998,€the€Government€rejected€the€petitioner's€appeal.€The€Government€did€notŠ ą0  Šgive€reasons€for€the€decision.€The€petitioner€appealed€against€this€decision€as€well.€In€DecemberŠ Š  Š1998,€this€appeal€was€dismissed,€on€the€ground€that€the€Government's€decision€of€1€October€couldŠ Ą Šnot€be€appealed€and€that€there€was€no€other€reason€to€re-examine€the€petitioner's€appeal.€Š ° ŠĢ2.4€€The€petitioner€also€filed€a€complaint€with€the€Ombudsman€against€Ethnic€Discrimination€whoŠ ą Šrefused€to€take€any€action€in€her€case,€as€he€claimed€that€it€had€no€merits.€In€addition,€the€petitioner'sŠ €Š Štrade€union€refused€to€represent€her€for€the€same€reason.€The€Ombudsman€informed€the€petitionerŠ pĄ Šof€the€possibility€of€making€an€application€to€the€District€Court€if€she€did€not€agree€with€the€opinionŠ `° Šof€the€trade€union€and€the€Ombudsman.€The€petitioner€claims€that€she€has€exhausted€domesticŠ P  Šremedies,€as€it€would€have€been€futile€to€seek€redress€in€the€District€Court€in€light€of€theŠ @ ŠOmbudsman's€refusal€to€take€up€her€case€because€of€lack€of€merit.€Š 0€ ŠĢņ ņThe€complaint:€ó óŠ ` ŠĢ3.1€€The€petitioner€claims€that€she€has€been€discriminated€against€by€Sweden€on€the€basis€of€herŠ š@ Šnational€origin€and€her€status€as€an€immigrant,€in€the€refusal€by€the€National€Council€for€CulturalŠ ą0 ŠAffairs€to€offer€her€a€job.€In€this€context,€she€objects€to€the€decision€of€the€National€Council€forŠ Š  ŠCultural€Affairs€to€offer€the€job€in€question€to€L.€J.,€who€she€claims€is€less€qualified€than€she€for€theŠ Ą! Špost.€Š °"  ŠĢ3.2€€The€petitioner€complains€generally€about€the€small€number€of€immigrants€employed€in€SwedenŠ $ą" Šand€claims€that€this€is€due€to€discrimination€against€non-Swedes.€She€claims€that€the€government€hasŠ €%Š # Šnot€adopted€any€measures€to€improve€the€situation€for€immigrants€in€the€workforce€in€Sweden€andŠ p&Ą!$ Šstates€that€it€should€take€measures€of€affirmative€action,€such€as€establishing€quotas€for€immigrantsŠ `'°"% Šfor€high-level€posts,€so€that€immigrants€with€higher€education€may€obtain€the€possibility€to€work.€Š P( #& ŠĢņ ņState€party's€observations€on€admissibility€and€the€petitioner's€comments€thereonó ó:€Š 0*€%( ŠĢ4.1€€In€its€submission€under€rule€92€of€the€Committee's€rules€of€procedure€the€State€party€challengesŠ ,`'* Šthe€admissibility€Ō_ŌofŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_Ō€the€communication.€Š -P(+ ŠŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŠ š-@), Ї4.2€€The€State€party€notes€that€the€relevant€sources€of€legal€protection€against€ethnic€discriminationŠ ° Šin€Sweden€are€the€Instrument€of€Government,€the€Act€of€Public€Employment€and€the€Act€againstŠ  š ŠEthnic€Discrimination.€The€Instrument€of€Government€lays€down€the€basic€principle€that€publicŠ ą Špower€shall€be€exercised€with€respect€for€the€equal€worth€of€all€(chapter€one,€section€2).€Courts,Š €Š Špublic€authorities€and€others€performing€functions€within€the€public€administration€shall€observe,Š pĄ Šin€their€work,€the€equality€of€all€before€the€law€and€maintain€objectivity€and€impartiality.€WhenŠ ` ° Šdeciding€on€appointments€within€the€State€administration,€only€objective€factors€such€as€experienceŠ P   Šand€competence€shall€be€taken€into€account.€Š @  ŠĢ4.3€€The€Act€of€Public€Employment€reiterates€the€principles€laid€down€in€the€Instrument€ofŠ  p  ŠGovernment€to€the€extent€that€when€making€appointments€to€administrative€positions,€the€guidingŠ `  Šfactors€shall€be€experience€and€competence.€As€a€general€rule,€competence€is€valued€higher€thanŠ P  Šexperience.€Authorities€must€also€consider€objective€factors€that€correspond€to€objectives€of€theŠ š@  Šoverall€labour€market,€equal€opportunities€and€social€and€employment€policies.€Decisions€concerningŠ ą0  Šthe€filling€of€vacant€posts€are€excluded€from€the€normal€requirement€that€administrative€authoritiesŠ Š  Šmust€provide€reasons€for€their€decisions.€The€rationale€for€this€exception€is€concern€for€theŠ Ą Šunsuccessful€applicant(s),€sparing€him/her/them€the€negative€evaluation€such€reasons€might€imply.Š ° ŠUnder€section€35€of€the€Government€Agencies€and€Institutions€Ordinance,€appeals€against€theŠ  š Šauthorities'€decisions€may€be€filed€with€the€Government.€An€appeal€against€a€decision€by€theŠ ą ŠNational€Council€for€Cultural€Affairs€can€also€be€filed€with€the€Government,€under€section€5€of€theŠ €Š Š1988€Ordinance€relating€to€the€National€Council€for€Cultural€Affairs.€Š pĄ ŠĢ4.4€€Labour€disputes€may€also€be€tried€under€the€Act€against€Ethnic€Discrimination,€which€aims€atŠ P  Šprohibiting€discrimination€in€working€life.€Under€the€Act,€ethnic€discrimination€takes€place€whenŠ @ Ša€person€or€group€of€persons€is/are€treated€unfairly€in€relation€to€others,€or€are€in€any€way€subjectedŠ 0€ Što€unjust€or€insulting€treatment€on€the€grounds€of€race,€colour,€national€or€ethnic€origin€or€religiousŠ  p Šbelief.€Š ` ŠĢ4.5€€Pursuant€to€the€terms€of€the€Act,€the€Government€has€appointed€an€Ombudsman€against€EthnicŠ š@ ŠDiscrimination€whose€mandate€is€to€ensure€that€ethnic€discrimination€does€not€occur€in€the€labourŠ ą0 Šmarket€or€other€areas€of€society.€The€Ombudsman€should€assist€anyone€subjected€to€ethnicŠ Š  Šdiscrimination€and€help€safeguard€the€applicant's€rights.€He€must€also€make€sure€that€job€applicantsŠ Ą! Šare€not€subjected€to€ethnic€discrimination.€Š °"  ŠĢ4.6€€This€legislation,€which€applies€to€the€overall€labour€market,€has€two€major€thrusts.€The€first€isŠ $ą" Šthe€prohibition€of€discrimination€in€relation€to€applicants€for€vacancies,€which€is€relevant€to€theŠ €%Š # Špresent€case.€The€other€prohibition€of€discrimination€covers€the€treatment€of€employees.€TheŠ p&Ą!$ Šprovision€which€covers€the€treatment€of€job€applicants€provides€that€any€employer€must€treat€allŠ `'°"% Šapplicants€for€a€post€equally€and€that,€when€appointing€an€applicant,€he€may€not€subject€otherŠ P( #& Šapplicants€to€unfair€treatment€on€account€of€their€race,€colour,€national€or€ethnic€origin€or€religiousŠ @)$' Šbelief€(sect.€8)€i.e.€only€objective€factors€shall€be€considered.€Any€employer€who€violates€theŠ 0*€%( Šprohibition€of€discrimination€is€liable€to€pay€damages€to€the€discriminated€job€applicant.€Š  +p&) ŠĢ4.7€€Under€section€16€of€the€Act€against€Ethnic€Discrimination,€cases€of€discrimination€inŠ -P(+ Šemployment€will€be€examined€pursuant€to€the€Act€on€Litigation€in€Labour€Disputes.€Disputes€shallŠ š-@), Šbe€handled€before€the€Labour€Court,€as€a€court€of€first€and€last€instance,€if€they€are€brought€by€anŠ ° Šemployer's€organization,€an€employees'€organization,€or€by€the€Ombudsman.€If€the€dispute€is€broughtŠ  š Šby€an€individual€employer€or€a€job€applicant€it€shall€be€heard€and€adjudicated€by€a€District€Court.Š ą ŠAppeals€may€be€lodged€with€the€Labour€Court,€which€is€the€final€instance.€Š €Š ŠĢ4.8€€The€State€party€submits€that€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€exhaust€available€domestic€remedies,Š ` ° Šas€required€by€article14,€paragraph€7(a),€of€the€Convention.€The€State€party€argues€that,€although€theŠ P   Špetitioner€lodged€a€complaint€with€the€Ombudsman€against€Ethnic€Discrimination€she€did€notŠ @  Šchallenge€the€decision€not€to€appoint€her€to€the€vacant€post€in€a€District€Court€(with€a€possibility€ofŠ 0 € Šappeal€to€the€Labour€Court).€The€State€party€contends€that€the€petitioner€was€aware€of€the€possibilityŠ  p  Šof€challenging€this€decision€in€a€District€Court€but€considered€it€futile€on€the€ground€that€the€lawŠ `  Šagainst€ethnic€discrimination€in€the€labour€market€is€not€applicable€in€practice€in€cases€when€anŠ P  Šimmigrant€did€not€get€a€job,€despite€he/she€was€better€qualified,€and€at€the€same€time€has€no€directŠ š@  Ševidence€about€the€discrimination.€In€this€regard,€the€State€party€claims€that€there€is€nothing€toŠ ą0  Šindicate€that€this€case€would€not€have€been€properly€examined€by€the€District€Court€and€that€mereŠ Š  Šdoubts€about€the€effectiveness€of€such€a€remedy€does€not€absolve€a€petitioner€from€pursuing€it.€Š Ą ŠĢ5.1€€In€response€to€the€State€party's€comments,€the€petitioner€reiterates€that€she€has€exhausted€allŠ  š Šavailable€and€effective€domestic€remedies.€She€argues€that€she€did€not€issue€proceedings€in€theŠ ą ŠDistrict€Court€because€of€the€Trade€Union's€and€Ombudsman's€decision€not€to€do€so€on€her€behalfŠ €Š Šclaiming€that€there€were€no€merits€in€the€case.€In€addition,€the€petitioner€states€that€under€the€ActŠ pĄ Šagainst€Racial€Discrimination€of€1994€the€Ombudsman€has€only€initiated€three€cases€in€court€andŠ `° Šlost€all€three.€For€this€reason€the€petitioner€claims€that€an€application€to€court€in€this€instance€wouldŠ P  Šbe€ineffective.€She€also€states€that€this€act€itself€has€since€been€amended€as€it€was€consideredŠ @ Šineffective.€The€petitioner€also€states€that,€although€she€would€receive€legal€aid€for€some€of€the€costsŠ 0€ Šof€an€application€to€the€District€Court,€she€would€be€unable€to€pay€the€balance€due€to€her€financialŠ  p Šsituation.€(1)€Š ` ŠĢ5.2€€The€petitioner€also€compares€her€education€and€experience€to€the€person€that€got€the€job€inŠ š@ Šquestion€attempting€to€demonstrate€that€she€was€the€better€person€for€the€job€and€that€the€reason€sheŠ ą0 Šfailed€to€secure€the€post€was€because€of€her€Czechoslovak€origin.€This€discrimination,€she€claims,Š Š  Šis€also€reflected€in€the€fact€that€her€prospective€employer€did€not€take€into€account€the€experienceŠ Ą! Šshe€had€acquired€in€her€homeland.€Š °"  ŠĢ6.1€€Before€considering€any€claim€contained€in€a€communication,€the€Committee€on€the€EliminationŠ $ą" Šof€all€Forms€of€Racial€Discrimination€must€decide,€pursuant€to€article€14,€paragraph€7(a),€of€theŠ €%Š # ŠConvention,€whether€or€not€the€current€communication€is€admissible.€Š p&Ą!$ ŠĢ6.2€The€Committee€notes€the€State€party's€contention€that€the€petitioner's€claims€are€inadmissible€forŠ P( #& Šfailure€to€exhaust€domestic€remedies€because€she€did€not€challenge€the€decision€in€the€District€CourtŠ @)$' Šnot€to€appoint€her€to€the€vacant€post.€The€petitioner€replied€that€she€did€not€take€such€an€action€asŠ 0*€%( Šher€trade€union€refused€to€represent€her€and€both€her€trade€union€and€the€Ombudsman€found€thatŠ  +p&) Šthere€were€no€merits€in€her€claim.€The€petitioner€also€stated€subsequently€that,€although€she€wouldŠ ,`'* Šreceive€legal€aid€to€pay€some€of€the€costs€involved€in€such€an€action,€she€could€not€afford€to€pay€the€Š -P(+ Šbalance.€In€any€event,€she€claims€that€such€an€appeal€would€have€failed,€as€the€applicable€legislationŠ š-@), Šis€deficient.€Š ° ŠĢ6.3€€The€Committee€concludes€that,€notwithstanding€the€reservations€that€the€petitioner€might€haveŠ ą Šregarding€the€effectiveness€of€the€current€legislation€to€prevent€racial€discrimination€in€the€labourŠ €Š Šmarket,€it€was€incumbent€upon€her€to€pursue€the€remedies€available,€including€a€complaint€beforeŠ pĄ Šthe€District€Court.€The€Committee€recalls€that€doubts€about€the€effectiveness€of€such€remedies€doŠ ` ° Šnot€absolve€a€petitioner€from€pursuing€them.€With€respect€to€the€petitioner's€claim€that€she€could€notŠ P   Šissue€proceedings€in€the€District€Court€due€to€lack€of€funds,€the€Committee€notes€that€the€petitionerŠ @  Šwould€have€received€legal€aid€to€assist€her€in€making€her€application,€and€therefore€cannot€concludeŠ 0 € Šthat€the€expenses€involved€would€have€been€a€grave€impediment€that€would€excuse€the€petitionerŠ  p  Šfrom€the€obligation€to€exhaust€domestic€remedies.€Š `  ŠĢ6.4€€In€light€of€the€above,€the€Committee€considers€that€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€meet€theŠ š@  Šrequirements€of€article€14,€paragraph€7€(a),€of€the€Convention.€Š ą0  ŠĢ7.€€The€Committee€on€the€Elimination€of€Racial€Discrimination€therefore€decides:€Š Ą ŠĢą  ą(a)€That€the€communication€is€inadmissible;€Š  š ŠĢą  ą(b)€That€this€decision€shall€be€communicated€to€the€State€party€and€the€petitioner.€Š €Š ŠĢ__________________Š `° ŠĢņņNotesóóŠ @ ŠĢӁ€ (5h83 Ó1.€€€€€In€this€context,€the€petitioner€claims€that€such€an€application€would€cost€at€least€100.000€kronaŠ  p Šand€that€if€she€were€to€lose€the€case€she€would€have€to€pay€the€other€party's€barrister€the€sameŠ ` Šamount.€She€claims€that€she€receives€100.000€krona€of€unemployment€assistance€a€year€net€out€ofŠ P Šwhich€she€pays€34.600€krona€for€accommodation€and€has€65.400€krona€remaining€to€live€on.€SheŠ š@ Šclaims€that€she€would€receive€60.000€in€legal€aid€and€does€not€have€the€balance.€Š ą0 ŠĢÓUÓ