There is a considerable upward trend in the recorded cases of public incitement to hatred, violence or intolerance. In 2010 the Advocate of the Principle of Equality dealt with 3 complaints concerning alleged ethnic discrimination, out of 33 in total but ethnic discrimination was not found in any of the three cases. In 2012 the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article 14 for the first time - In the case Kurić and others v. Slovenia (the "erased people" case) ECHR found Slovenia responsible for violation of Article 8, Article 13 in conjunction with Article 8 and Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Clear
  • Racist violence - Hate Speech Statistics

    There is a considerable upward trend in the recorded cases of public incitement to hatred, violence or intolerance. There was a very notable case in 2005, when two Roma women, a mother and her daughter, were killed in the Roma village Dobruška Vas. Courts do not keep any systemic records on basic criminal offences motivated by ethnic/racial or religious intolerance which does not provide coherent data.

    • Overall numbers of racist & hate crime

      52  cases of public incitement to hatred, violence or intolerance (Article 297 of the Criminal Code), handled by the police in 2011 and 37 cases in the first half of 2012.

      1 case of violation of right to equality (Article 131 of the Criminal Code), handled by the police in 2011.

      Numbers of cases 53 Official or estimates official

      Qualitative Info

      Number of cases of public incitement to hatred, violence or intolerance (Article 297 of the Criminal Code), handled by the police in

       

      2008 – 19

      2009 – 16

      2010 – 52

      2011 - 52

      2012 (first half) - 37

       

      There is a considerable upward trend in the recorded cases due to 1) the legal development (the 2008 Criminal Code extended the prohibition of incitement to racially motivated hatred to the ground of sexual orientation and disability) and 2) a good cooperation between the police and Spletno-Oko.si, an internet-based contact point, established in 2007, where the concerned individuals may anonymously report, among other things, instances of hate speech.

      Number of cases of violation of right to equality (Article 131 of the Criminal Code), handled by the police in

       

      2008 – 9

      2009 – 9

      2010 – 11

      2011 - 1


       

      Source: General Police Directorate, information provided upon request

      Type (R/D)

      • Extremism - organised Racist Violence
      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • Deaths/killings

      No data available.

      Qualitative Info

      No data available, although there was a very notable case in 2005, when two Roma women, a mother and her daughter, were killed in the Roma village Dobruška Vas. Two perpetrators arrived by a car and dropped a bomb through the window into their bedroom.  One of the perpetrators had been involved in a similar bomb attack in the nearby Roma village Brezje a month earlier, when the bomb had missed the window, but still had wounded a Roma woman. After four successive trials, in March 2011 the three perpetrators (one of them being involved in both attacks), all ethnic Slovenians, were convicted to 30, 20 and 8 years of imprisonment.


      Source: http://www.dolenjskilist.si/2011/03/17/39682/novice/clanek/Bombasem_tokrat_zapor_pritozbe_na_Vrhovno_sodisce/; http://www.slovenskenovice.si/clanek/144453

      Groups affected/interested

      • Roma & Travelers

      Type (R/D)

      • Extremism - organised Racist Violence
      • Anti-roma/zinghanophobia
      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • Court cases on racist - hate crime

      Courts do not keep any systemic records on basic criminal offences motivated by ethnic/racial or religious intolerance which does not provide coherent data.

      Qualitative Info

      Jurisprudence of Slovenian courts regarding Articles of the Criminal Code, specifically targeting hate crimes (Article 131 -violation of right to equality, Article 297- public incitement to hatred, violence or intolerance) is very scarce.

      There were no convictions regarding the criminal offence of violation of right to equality (Article 131 of the Criminal Code) in years 2010, 2009 and 2008. In 2007 one person was convicted, the court in this case did not pass a sentence, it only issued a safety measure (a specific type of criminal sanction). 

      There was also one conviction regarding the criminal offence of public incitement to hatred, violence or intolerance (Article 297 of the Criminal Code) in 2010. The available data shows that in this case the sentence from 3 to 6 months of imprisonment was passed (statistical category of the Statistical Office).


      Source: http://www.stat.si/

      Type (R/D)

      • Extremism - organised Racist Violence
      See other countriesSee indicator history
  • Discrimination Statistics

    In 2010 the Advocate of the Principle of Equality dealt with 3 complaints concerning alleged ethnic discrimination, out of 33 in total but ethnic discrimination was not found in any of the three cases. In one case ethnic discrimination was established by Social Inspectorate in which a monetary fine in the amount of 41,73 EUR was imposed.

    • Complaints regarding ethnic discrimination received by Equality Body/Agency/Court

      In the first six months of 2012 the police dealth with 37 offences motivated by personal characteristics, under the Article 297 of the Penal Code, prohibiting incitement to racial, ethnic and religious hatred and intolerance. Further, in the first six months of 2012 the police investigated 22 offences committed with intolerance motives.

      Numbers of cases 59

      Qualitative Info

      With regard to criminal offences under Article 297 of the Penal Code (prohibiting incitement to racial, ethnic or religious hatred and intolerance), in the first six months of 2012 the police dealth with 37 offences motivated by personal characteristics (the data is not segregated by grounds). In 2011, the police investigated 52 such offences, the same as in 2010, while the number of recorded offences in 2009 was 16.

       

      Further, the data kept by the police show an increase in the number of criminal offences including racial, ethnic or religious intolerance as a motive in the recent period. In the first six months of 2012 the police investigated almost as many such offences as in previous three years. Until the end of June 2012, police dealt with 22 such offences, compared to nine in 2011, 10 in 2010 and 10 in 2009. In 2012, in the mentioned six-month period, the police lodged 20 criminal complaints and submitted two reports with the responsible state prosecutor.

       

      The information on the cases dealt by the Advocate of the Principle of Equality for 2012 is not available yet.

       

      The Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia does not keep specific data on cases dealt with by the courts due to discrimination, meaning that these statistics are not available.

       

      Source:
      Information was provided by the General Police Directorate (Generalna policijska uprava) upon request.

       


       

      Groups affected/interested

      • Migrants
      • Refugees
      • Roma & Travelers
      • Muslims
      • Ethnic minorities
      • Religious minorities
      • Linguistic minorities
      • Asylum seekers
      • Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender
      • Persons with disability
      • Africans/black people
      • National minorities

      Type (R/D)

      • Extremism - organised Racist Violence
      • Anti-migrant/xenophobia
      • Anti-semitism
      • Islamophobia
      • Afrophobia
      • Arabophobia
      • Anti-roma/zinghanophobia
      • Religious intolerance
      • Inter-ethnic
      • Intra-ethnic
      • Nationalism
      • Homophobia
      • On grounds of disability
      • On grounds of other belief
      • Anti-roma/ romaphobia
      • Xenophobia

      Key socio-economic / Institutional Areas

      • Policing - law enforcement
      • Employment - labour market
      • Housing
      • Health and social protection
      • Education
      • Culture
      • Media
      • Internet
      • Sport
      • Political discourse -parties - orgs
      • Political participation
      • Anti-discrimination
      • Anti-racism
      • Integration - social cohesion
      • Daily life
      • Religion
      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • Number of cases where ethnic discrimination was found/established by Equality Body/Agency/Court

      In 2010 ethnic discrimination was not found in any of the three cases dealt with by the Advocate of the Principle of Equality. In one case ethnic discrimination was established by Social Inspectorate.
       

      Numbers of cases 1

      Qualitative Info

      In 2010 ethnic discrimination was not found in any of the three cases dealt with by the Advocate of the Principle of Equality. 

       

      The Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia does not keep specific data on cases dealt with by the courts due to discrimination, meaning that these statistics are not available. From the data base of the Supreme Court it does not derive that in 2010 the courts found ethnic discrimination in any of the cases.

       

      In 2010 ethnic discrimination was found in one case decided by the Social Inspectorate at the Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs. The case concerned a Roma couple who inquired about a possibility to acquire municipal financial assistance at the Centre for Social Work. When they inquired about this possibility, the social worker at the Centre responded that this financial assistance is not for Roma. A volunteer of a local association verified by phone whether Roma may apply for this assistance and she also received a negative response: the social worker confirmed that Roma may not apply for this financial assistance.  The social inspectorate found that such treatment constitutes discrimination, as there is no provision in the law that would allow a denial of a certain right on the basis of race or ethnicity. Municipal assistance is available for all people who meet the conditions, regardless of their ethnicity. In the procedure it was established that if the couple applied for this assistance it would have been granted to them, as they met all the conditions. The Social Inspectorate issued two decisions, one addressed at the social worker who committed an act of discrimination (she was ordered to pay a fine) and one addressed to the Director of the Centre for Social Work. In the latter decision systemic measures were ordered, such as the duty to provide information in writing for people to check the conditions for obtaining various types of social assistance; the duty to organize a meeting where the conditions for accessing social assistance would be discussed; the duty of the director to inform the employees about the unlawfulness of discrimination; the duty of the social worker to provide a written apology to the couple; the duty of the director to report to the Social Inspectorate about the measures ordered.

       

      Source:

      Annual report of the Advocate of the Principle of Equality 2010, available at: http://www.zagovornik.net/si/informacije/letna-porocila/lp-2010/index.html.  

      Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs; Social Inspectorate, decision no. 06185-148/2010 of 30 September 2010.  
       

      Groups affected/interested

      • Roma & Travelers

      Type (R/D)

      • Anti-roma/zinghanophobia

      Key socio-economic / Institutional Areas

      • Health and social protection

      External Url http://www.zagovornik.net/si/informacije/letna-porocila/lp-2010/index.html

      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • Cases solved / corrected / settled

      In 2010 ethnic discrimination was not found in any of the three cases dealt with by the Advocate of the Principle of Equality. Therefore cases were not settled or solved. 

      Qualitative Info

      In 2010 ethnic discrimination was not found in any of the three cases dealt with by the Advocate of the Principle of Equality. Therefore cases were not settled or solved. 

       

      Source:

      Annual report of the Advocate of the Principle of Equality 2010, available at: http://www.zagovornik.net/si/informacije/letna-porocila/lp-2010/index.html.  

       

      External Url http://www.zagovornik.net/si/informacije/letna-porocila/lp-2010/index.html

      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • Sanctions imposed / compensations / awards attributed-received

      In 2010 sanctions for ethnic discrimination were imposed in one case by Social inspectorate. Data for 2011 are not availabe yet.

      Numbers of cases 1

      Qualitative Info

      The Equality Body in Slovenia does not have the power to impose sanctions. It can only issue non-binding opinion and recommendations. If the perpetrator does not respect the recommendations the case is forwarded to the competent inspectorate to carry out the inspection procedure and the procedure for a misdemeanour. In 2010 no ethnic discrimination case was forwarded to the inspectorates.

       

      In 2010 one case was decided by the Social Inspectorate at the Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs, in which a monetary fine in the amount of 41,73 EUR was imposed. The case concerned a Roma couple who inquired about a possibility to acquire municipal financial assistance at the Centre for Social Work. When they inquired about this possibility, the social worker at the Centre responded that this financial assistance is not for Roma. A volunteer of a local association verified by phone whether Roma may apply for this assistance and she also received a negative response: the social worker confirmed that Roma may not apply for this financial assistance.  The social inspectorate found that such treatment constitutes discrimination, as there is no provision in the law that would allow a denial of a certain right on the basis of race or ethnicity. Municipal assistance is available for all people who meet the conditions, regardless of their ethnicity. In the procedure it was established that if the couple had applied for this assistance it would have been granted to them, as they met all the conditions. 

       

      According to the available information there were no court sanctions imposed for ethnic discrimination in 2010.

       

      Source:

      Annual report of the Advocate of the Principle of Equality 2010, available at: http://www.zagovornik.net/si/informacije/letna-porocila/lp-2010/index.html. 

      Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs; Social Inspectorate, decision no. 06185-148/2010 of 30 September 2010. 

      Groups affected/interested

      • Roma & Travelers

      Type (R/D)

      • Anti-roma/zinghanophobia

      Key socio-economic / Institutional Areas

      • Health and social protection

      External Url http://www.zagovornik.net/si/informacije/letna-porocila/lp-2010/index.html

      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • ECtHR cases - decisions art.14 etc.

      In the case Kurić and others v. Slovenia (the "erased people" case) ECHR found Slovenia responsible for violation of Article 8, Article 13 in conjunction with Article 8 and Article 14 in conjunction with Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

      Numbers of cases 1 Exemplary cases 1

      Qualitative Info

      In 1992 the Slovenian Ministry of Interior deprived 25.671 individuals of their permanent residence status. This was a group that consisted of nationals of former Yugoslavia who were permanently residing in Slovenia but did not obtain Slovenia nationality after the country declared its independence. The group later became known as “the erased people”. The Slovenian Constitutional Court found with two rulings adopted in a constitutional review procedure that this status deprivation had no legal basis and that the Aliens Act which the Ministry of Interior invoked as a legal basis was in fact unconstitutional due to the fact that it contained no provisions on the regulation of legal status of this group of people. In spite of the Constitutional Court decisions which contained instructions on how to regulate the issue and regularize the legal status of affected people, the authorities failed to do adopt comprehensive legislation that would enable regularization of all erased people. On 4 July 2006 eleven erased people who were unable to regularize their legal status lodged a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights.

       

      On 13 July 2010 ECHR issued a chamber judgment finding Slovenia responsible for violation of Article 8 (the right to protection of private and family life) and Article 13 (the right to effective remedy). The chamber found that by failing to fully implement the Constitutional Court decisions Slovenia also failed to provide effective domestic remedies which would enable the erased people to regularize their legal status, by which it also interfered with their right to protection of private and family life. The chamber however did not find violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol 1 (property rights). Also, it only found violation with regard to eight applicants, while the remaining two were considered to have lost their victim status as they received a permanent residence permit in the course of the procedure (the eleventh applicant died). The case was appealed by both the Slovenian government and the applicants. On 26 June 2012 the Grand Chamber again found in favour of the applicants, convicting Republic of Slovenia not only for violation of Article 8 and 13, but also Article 14 – prohibition of discrimination. Namely, the Grand Chamber found that while the Aliens Act did not include provisions on status regularization for nationals of former Yugoslavia who resided permanently in Slovenia but did not obtain Slovenian nationality after the independence, but it did include provisions on regularization of legal status for those people who were legally residing in Slovenia as foreigners (from other non-Yugoslav countries) when the country was still part of Yugoslavia. While the latter did not have to do anything to retain their legal status, the former group was left without any kind of status. It decided that this constituted discrimination between the two groups based on ethnic grounds. The Grand Chamber recalled that the same finding has already been established by the Slovenian Constitutional Court and stated that it saw no reason to depart from this finding. The Grand Chamber found violation of convention grounds for six applicants (who in the meantime applied for and received permanent residence permits), while two who have not yet applied for their permanent residence permit were deemed to have lost their victim status as well. The six applicants were also awarded compensation in amount of 20.000 EUR for non-pecuniary damages, while the court reserved a decision on pecuniary damages for a later stage. The judgment is also a pilot judgment by nature as the Grand Chamber ordered the state to adopt an ad hoc domestic compensation scheme for the erased persons within one year since the delivery of the judgment.


      Source:

      ECHR, Kurić and others v. Slovenia, application no. 26828/06, available at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx?i=001-111634#{"itemid":["001-111634"]}

        

       

      Groups affected/interested

      • National minorities

      Type (R/D)

      • Nationalism

      Key socio-economic / Institutional Areas

      • Employment - labour market
      • Housing
      • Health and social protection
      • Education
      • Daily life

      External Url http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra-press/pages/search.aspx?i=001-111634#{"itemid":["001-111634"]}

      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • Cases - investigations before other EU and international bodies (European Committee for Social Rights - UN HRC - CAT etc.)

      The European Committee on Social Rights found that Slovenia does not provide for adequate and affordable housing for Roma.

      Numbers of cases 1

      Qualitative Info

      The European Committee on Social Rights, in its conclusions on the situation regarding implementation of the European Social Charter (revised) in Slovenia, published in early 2012, established that the situation in Slovenia does not meet the requirements of the Charter with regard to:

      - the right of Roma to adequate housing - the criteria for adequate housing concerning size do not apply to housing available for rent on the free market resulting in substandard housing conditions for some migrant workers; insufficient measures were taken by public authorities to improve the substandard housing conditions of a considerable number of Roma in Slovenia,

      - the right to affordable housing - nationals of other States Parties to the Charter and to the 1961 Charter lawfully residing or working regularly in Slovenia are not entitled to equal treatment regarding eligibility for non-profit housing.


      Source:

      Groups affected/interested

      • Roma & Travelers

      Type (R/D)

      • Anti-roma/zinghanophobia

      Key socio-economic / Institutional Areas

      • Housing

      External Url www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/socialcharter/Conclusions/State/Slovenia2011_en.pdf

      See other countriesSee indicator history
    • Decisions-Infringment procedures initiated before the European Court of Justice

      There were no infringement procedures initiated at the European Court of Justice in the field of non-discrimination legislation against Slovenia. 

      Qualitative Info

      There were no infringement procedures initiated at the European Court of Justice in the field of non-discrimination legislation against Slovenia. Some activity took place in the pre-litigation procedure. In 2006 the European Commission issued a reasoned opinion pointing at several problems with the implementation of the Council Directive 2000/43/EC in the Act Implementing the Principle of Equal Treatment. The Republic of Slovenia issued a response explaining the meaning of certain provisions in the stated Act. However, the European Commission was not satisfied with the response and issues a second reasoned opinion. The Republic of Slovenia then amended the stated act as required by the European Commission and the procedure was discontinued.


       

      Source:

      European Commission, Reasoned opinion No. 2006/2448 of 20 December 2006.
       

      Groups affected/interested

      • Migrants
      • Refugees
      • Roma & Travelers
      • Muslims
      • Ethnic minorities
      • Religious minorities
      • Linguistic minorities
      • Majority
      • Asylum seekers
      • Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender
      • Persons with disability
      • Africans/black people
      • National minorities

      Type (R/D)

      • Extremism - organised Racist Violence
      • Anti-migrant/xenophobia
      • Anti-semitism
      • Islamophobia
      • Afrophobia
      • Arabophobia
      • Anti-roma/zinghanophobia
      • Religious intolerance
      • Nationalism
      • Homophobia
      • On grounds of disability
      • On grounds of other belief
      • Anti-roma/ romaphobia
      • Xenophobia

      Key socio-economic / Institutional Areas

      • Policing - law enforcement
      • Employment - labour market
      • Housing
      • Health and social protection
      • Education
      • Culture
      • Media
      • Internet
      • Sport
      • Political discourse -parties - orgs
      • Political participation
      • Anti-discrimination
      • Anti-racism
      • Integration - social cohesion
      • Daily life
      • Religion
      See other countriesSee indicator history