Amnesty Urges Changes in Macedonia Anti-Discrimination Law

The organisation urged that the Anti-Discrimination Law be returned to parliament without further delay, so that amendments guaranteeing protection from discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and sexual identity could be immediately adopted, it said in a statement.

"The letter, addressed to Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski, noted that a comprehensive anti-discrimination law was a requirement of the aquis with the European Union, and the adoption of the law without provisions for the protection of LGBT people was inconsistent with the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.

"Protection from such discrimination is also an obligation under international human rights treaties to which Macedonia is a state party."

Amnesty International considered the suggestions by the Macedonian minister for labour and social policy, Xhelal Bajrami, that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals could request protection under “other grounds”, to be inadequate.

According to the human rights group, any such legislation should expressly include all those whose rights should be protected under the law, and specifically include sexual orientation among the list of grounds of prohibited discrimination.

Amnesty International also noted that the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, of which Macedonia is due to assume the Presidency in May 2010, had in March issued a Recommendation to Council of Europe member states, to ensure that they protect the rights of LGBT people, including through the adoption of anti-discrimination legislation.

Macedonia adopted the anti-discrimination law last week with the backing of the main ruling centre-right VMRO DPMNE party. The country has since been criticised for failing to pass a law that is completely harmonised with European norms and standards.

Explicit protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation is a crucial missing element, local human rights experts commented after the country’s parliament adopted the law.

The opposition left the session in protest, claiming that the majority remained deaf to their recommendations to include such provisions.