Speech of V.M.Lytvyn, Chairman of The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, at the European Conference of the Presidents of Parliaments (Limassol, Republic of Cyprus)

Speech of V.M.Lytvyn, Chairman of The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, at the European Conference of the Presidents of Parliaments (Limassol, Republic of Cyprus).

Since the issue on "persecution and discrimination" was first raised at the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization on 2 November 1946, the international community has gone a long way of detection and prohibition of this crime of international nature. The first resolution did not define the concept of "discrimination", as the members of the General Committee of the Assembly failed to reach a consensus as to which infringements to include into it. They confined themselves with the phrase: "To put an end to religious and so-called racial persecution and discrimination."

To some extent, this situation happened again during the conclusion of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights of 1948, which declares "equality", "equality before the law", "entitlement to all the rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind." Only Article 7 mentions "discrimination" or "incitement to discrimination", but only concerning equal protection against any discrimination, while Article 23 prohibits discrimination in the right to equal pay for equal work.

By the 60s of ХХ century, the concept of "discrimination" was restricted to two criteria of application: either to the region (first of all, southern part of Africa, non-self-governing and trust territories), or to certain domains (education, employment and political rights). On adoption of the European Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in 1950, the importance of preventing discrimination was discussed in the global context. The coming international agreements both at the universal and the regional levels defined the principle of non-discrimination as an imperative regulation of the modern international law applicable to all the subjects and a wide range of objects of legal regulation. 

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the efficient ban on discrimination would have been impossible without support of national legislation. Ukraine also has made a contribution to the approval of a principle of non-discrimination. Firstly, we have ratified almost all key international agreements on the issue and incorporated international standards of the non-discrimination principle into our law.

Secondly, we adopted a package of additional laws and subordinate legislation for the sake of efficient implementation of international agreements. 

The national legislation was supplemented with the provisions prohibiting discrimination taken from plenty of other international agreements of universal and regional nature.

Thirdly, the provisions on non-discrimination were included into the fundamental legislative acts determining the public order in the State.    

Fourthly, to prevent adoption of legislative provisions that can create discriminatory conditions, the following procedure was introduced in conformity to the Law of Ukraine "On Standing Orders of The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine": all the registered bills are referred to the scientific and legal expert review, and if it detects the provisions non-complying with the non-discrimination principle, then the corresponding parliamentary committee carries out a negative conclusion on the merits.

Ukraine has rather efficient mechanisms for protecting the citizens´ rights on the principle of non-discrimination on extrajudicial and judicial basis. The following fact confirms the efficiency of such mechanisms. Since Ukraine assumed the commitments under the Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the European Court of Human Rights has received more than 20,000 applications from the citizens of Ukraine. However, these applications have never concerned Article 14 and Protocol 12.

Discrimination is the evil capable of imitation. It can manifest in the abuse of rights, denial of justice, judicial errors, voluntary resolutions, etc. Let us confess that it is too early to declare that discrimination was eradicated at the international and national levels. Its manifestation does not necessarily have to include an intention, as it is by denial of a visa.

Discriminatory motives are often concealed in the inconspicuous actions: in the refusal of marriage on the religious or racial grounds; in the introduction of selective tax privileges; refusal of employment due to AIDS; lack of knowledge of the language, party membership; in the inequality in licensing; in the privileges due to official status.  

Almost all judicial systems of the world consider punishment of the infringer as the main target in the struggle with crimes. However, the international community and the state have thoroughly elaborated the standards for treatment of criminals to ensure that the punishment is effected in strict compliance with the fundamental human rights. The standards take into account everything the dimensions of the prison cell, availability of the TV set, newspapers, libraries, fresh air, bright light and everyday menu.  

By no means do I doubt such a treatment. A person shall not be humiliated in the conditions of imprisonment. However, when shall we pay more attention to the conditions of the victim of the crime?

It seems that the victim should be satisfied only with the fact that the criminal was punished. Many victims of the crime need long-lasting physical and psychological rehabilitation. A few are concerned with the fact that the victim of the crime is devoid even of those standards and goods provided to the criminals. Is it not discrimination? We should reconsider our approaches to the struggle with criminals, so that restoration of rights of the victim is not reduced to the punishment of the criminal.  

We can not but worry about the fact that sometimes realization of requirements and new approaches to the human rights (the limits of which have been extended), are performed contrary to the moral principles of the society. Settlement of the situations that provoke controversial response in the society (civil partnership, the rights of transsexuals, drug addiction, euthanasia, etc) is apparently biased towards discrimination.

Definitely, any society will have differential appeals during the social interaction. It is important that they comply with the principle of equality of treatment in its international legal interpretation. The European Court of Human Rights has carried out the following conclusion in Jacobs case (in connection with Article 14 "Prohibition of Discrimination"): "the principle of equality of treatment is violated, if the differences have no objective and reasonable justification. Any appeal in the exercise of right envisaged by the Convention should not only pursue a legitimate aim: Article 14 is equally violated, if it has been clearly ascertained that there is no reasonable connection of proportionality between the means used and the aim pursued."

The sole conclusion can be made: strict observance of human rights and freedoms in conformity to the universally recognized principles and standards of the international law, in compliance with the national legislation is a pledge of implementation of the non-discrimination principle.