CEDH · PRESS;ADMISSIBILITYDECISIONS;ENG — 21 septembre 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sE202B2ED { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sE0D34C67 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s1F6AC3E7 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s11AD46B1 { font-family:Arial; font-size:7.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }   682 21.09.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   Decision   Naidin v. Romania (application no. 38162/07)   Court to rule on admissibility of application concerning denial of access to civil service for collaboration with former political police     The applicant, Petre Naidin, is a Romanian national who was born in 1954 and lives in Călăraşi. The case concerns a decision to deny Mr Naidin access to the civil service following an investigation opened against him in 2000 by the National Council for the study of the former political police archives [1] (the “CNSAS”), when he stood for the third time as candidate for election to parliament, under the law on access to the archives of the political police. Mr Naidin had been MP from 1993 to 2004 and had been subprefect for the province of Călăraşi between 1990 and 1991.   Following research and two interviews with Mr Naidin, the CNSAS concluded that he had collaborated with the political police, based on a statement written by the applicant in 1971 at the age of 17 according to which he undertook to collaborate with the Securitate . The investigation revealed that, at secondary school and again during his military service he had provided information on certain colleagues who listened to foreign radio stations, had family abroad, or who did not eat pork. The conclusions were published in the Official Gazette.   Mr Naidin’s challenge to that account was rejected by the Bucharest Court of Appeal. While the applicant claimed that his acts, which were innocent and without consequence, should be considered in the historical context of the time, the CNSAS took the view that the law made no distinction between the various degrees of collaboration. The Court of Appeal found that Mr Naidin had provided information that was capable of breaching the fundamental rights and freedoms of the people concerned, regardless of the actual repercussions on them.   In 2004, at the end of Mr Naidin’s third term of office as MP, the National Civil Service Agency refused to admit him to the reserve list of subprefects, relying on the Civil Service Regulations Act which prohibited former collaborators with the political police from becoming civil servants (section 50 of Law no. 188/1999).   The applicant challenged the constitutionality of that provision, which was confirmed on 24 January 2006 by the Constitutional Court, taking the view that the difference in treatment in access to the civil service had an objective and rational justification based on the requirement of loyalty to the democratic regime on the part of all civil servants. In addition, citing the European Court’s case-law, the Constitutional Court pointed out that access to the civil service was not a right guaranteed either by Romanian legislation or by the Convention.   The rejection of Mr Naidin’s request to be added to the reserve list of subprefects was confirmed in March 2007   Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court   Relying on Article   1 of Protocol No.   12 (general prohibition of discrimination) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the Convention, taken separately or in conjunction with Articles   8 (right to respect for private and family life) and 11 (freedom of assembly and association) and Articles   1   and 2 of Protocol No.   1, the applicant complains that he has been denied access to the civil service, which in his view is a restriction that also entails a violation of Article 10 (freedom of expression). Under Article   6 (right to a fair hearing), he complains about the judicial proceedings that confirmed the decision of the CNSAS. He lastly relies on Article   13 (right to an effective remedy), arguing that he did not have the possibility of complaining about the alleged violations.   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 24 August 2007.   The decision was given by a Chamber of seven judges, composed as follows:   Josep Casadevall (Andorra), President , Elisabet Fura (Sweden), Corneliu Bîrsan (Romania), Alvina Gyulumyan (Armania), Egbert Myjer (Netherlands), Ineta Ziemele (Latvia), Ann Power (Ireland), Judges ,   and also Santiago Quesada , Section Registrar .     Decision of the Court   In view of the similar nature of Mr Naidin’s complaints under Articles   8, 11 and 14 of the Convention, Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No.   1 and Article 1 of Protocol No.   12 – concerning alleged discrimination in denying him access to the civil service – the Court will examine all the applicant’s complaints under Article   8 taken together with Article   14.   The Court therefore decided to give notice to the Romanian Government of Mr Naidin’s application under those provisions, and to inform them that it would rule at a later date on the admissibility of his complaint.   The Court moreover rejected as out of time the applicant’s complaints under Articles 6, 10 and 13 that he submitted more than six months after the last decision of the Romanian courts.   ***   The decision is available only in French and can be found on the Court’s Internet site ( www.echr.coe.int ). This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court.   Press contacts Celine Menu-Lange (telephone: + 33 3 90 21 58 77) Emma Hellyer (telephone: +33 3 90 21 42 15) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone: + 33 3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone: + 33 3 88 41 35 70) Frédéric Dolt (telephone: + 33 3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: + 33 3 90 21 49 79)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   [1] Consiliul naţional pentru studierea arhivelor Securităţii