DiscriminationinMacedonia ontheGroundsofEthnic Origin

ResearchReport

AleksandarKralovski

March2011

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Publisher Macedonian Center for International Cooperation

For the Editors Sao Klekovski, First Executive Director Aleksandar Kralovski, Executive Director

Author Aleksandar Kralovski

Translation Marija Jovanovska

Prepared by Daniela Stojanova, MCIC

ISBN 978-608-4617-11-2

Opinions expressed herein are of the author and do not reflect the viewpoints of the Macedonian Center for International Cooperation. Macedonian Center for International Cooperation All rights reserved. Reproduction, copying, transmission or translation of any part of this publication may be made only with a prior permission by the publisher, or for the purpose of quotation. The copyright of this publication is protected, but the publication may be reproduced for educational purposes in any manner and without any compensation. For copying under other conditions, for usage in other publications or for translation or adaptation, prior permission by the publisher is to be provided.

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

CONTENTS

TERMS AND DEFINITIONS .......................................................................................................... 4 FOREWORD...................................................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................ 8 I. DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF ETHIC ORIGIN .................................................... 10 II. DISCRIMINATION IN INDIVIDUAL SECTORS ................................................................ 13
II.1. SECURITY AND POLICE ............................................................................................................................... 14 II.2. JUSTICE SYSTEM............................................................................................................................................ 15 II.3. FINANCES ......................................................................................................................................................... 15 II.4. AGRICULTURE ................................................................................................................................................ 16 II.5. EDUCATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 II.6. MEDIA ................................................................................................................................................................ 18 II.7. PLACE OF RESIDENCE, SPORTS, RECREATION ................................................................................... 18 II.8. AREAS OF EMPLOYMENT ........................................................................................................................... 18

III. POLITICAL LEADERSHIP ACCEPTABILITY ................................................................. 20 IV. FIGHT AGAINST DISCRIMINATION ................................................................................. 21 ANNEXES Annex 1: Questionnaire for Discrimination and Harassment on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin ......................................................................................................................................... 22 Annex 2: Sample of Surveyed Citizens .................................................................................. 25 Annex 3: Topic in Focus-Groups ............................................................................................ 27

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

The Report is using terms and definitions included in the Glossary of Expressions Related to Discrimination (MCIC, 2009). Discrimination means any distinction, exclusion, restriction or unequal treatment or non treatment, motivated by some past, present of future grounds which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by all people of all rights and freedoms on equal basis, respectively treating a person less favourably than another person in a comparable situation. Discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin means different treatment of a person for belonging to a specific ethnic community. Harassment means undesirable conduct related to some of the grounds of discrimination, irrespective whether it is manifested in a physical, verbal or any other manner with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a given person or of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment, access or practice. The public sector is part of the economic and administrative life dealing with distribution of goods and services from and to the state, i.e. which is under the supervision by the central, regional or local authorities. Public services (services and other services) means all services performed for the general interest and professionally offered by any private or state establishment, organizations, or institution, i.e. provided by a specific body or a state institution. Quota is a compulsory, fixes number of positions or vacancies that may be filled only with members of specific minority community. Stigma/stigmatization is undesirable or disreputable characteristic attributed to a person or group of persons aimed at devaluating, degrading the status of such person or group before the community. Tolerance is ability to accept and respect convictions and social values of other persons or groups of persons.

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

FOREWORD
The principles of equality and non-discrimination are the basic elements of the international legal framework with regards to human rights. These rights are especially aimed at protecting human rights of vulnerable, marginalized and underprivileged groups, as well as of socially excluded individuals or groups. Macedonia guarantees the basic human rights and fundamental freedoms with its Constitution and a range of laws, and also signed many international documents on human rights provided in the United Nations system of protection, as well as in the European regulations. The Macedonian Center for International Cooperation (MCIC) since the very beginning of its establishment has been promoting equality and tolerances, which, at the same are part of the principles on which its activity is based on. The acknowledged cultural diversity, inter-dependence and dialogue are among MCIC long term goals. The campaign Whole is When There is Everything and the programs: Pages on Mutual Understanding, Bridging Religions in Macedonia, Macedonia without Discrimination and Macedonia Model for Dialogue among Cultures are some of the MCIC recognized activities. In 2007, MCIC was one of the initiators for establishing the Macedonia without Discrimination Alliance. In 2004 MCIC, in cooperation with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) developed a Draft Law on Anti-Discrimination which was not accepted for deliberation by the competent institutions. Nonetheless, MCIC took active and essential participation in developing the Law for Prevention and Protection from Discrimination, adopted in 2010. As of 2004 MCIC is also measuring the tolerance in the Macedonian society, while in 2009 it also conducted the research Barometer of Equal Opportunities. Prior to that, it also published The Glossary of Expressions Related to Discrimination. Since MCIC believes in planning (and advocacy) based on facts, it conducted two more researches on the Macedonian societal values and one more specific on Discrimination on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin in 2010. This Report is giving an analysis of the findings from the survey conducted during the research on Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin. The Research is financially supported by OSCE, as part of their project on analysis of the situation with the discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin.

Sao Klekovski Aleksandar Kralovski Board of Directors

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

INTRODUCTION
This Report gives an analysis of the findings from the Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin Survey, conducted for the first time on a national representative sample of the citizens of the Republic of Macedonia. The aim of the research was to examine the perception that the citizens have on this issue, as a supplement to this Survey. MCIC entrusted this public opinion poll, on which this Report is also based, to the Institute for Democracy Societas Civilis from Skopje (IDSC), which was also responsible for the methodological correctness of the Survey. The IDSC conducted this research in the form of field survey interviews face-to-face with households in December 2010, on a representative sample of 1.074 respondents. In addition, two focus-groups were set-up to validate the findings.

Questionnaire
The questionnaire was prepared on the basis of questionnaires from similar surveys conducted by MCIC, as well as on the basis of the global research on values. The questions were developed by the MCIC Working Group as follows: Sao Klekovski, Aleksandar Kralovski and Daniela Stojanova. For the purpose of meeting the objectives of this Survey, the questionnaire covered the following topics: - Context; - Discrimination in six particular sectors: security and police; judiciary; finances; agriculture; education, media; and the field of employment; - Leading functions and combating discrimination; and, - Socio-demographic characteristics. The questionnaire is given in Annex 1 in its full format.

Sample
The survey was conducted in December 2010 on a representative sample of 1.074 respondents. The population frame of the sample included citizens older than 18 years of age, while the criteria for the representativity were: sex, ethnic origin, age, and regions. Out of 1.074 respondents, 47.1% were women, while 52.9% men. With regards to the ethnic representation, the Macedonians participated with 66.9%, the Albanians with 24.4%, while the other ethnic groups were represented with 8.8%. With regards to the place of residence, the rural population was represented with 28.4%, while the urban with 71.6% (the City of Skopje with 17.2%). A full overview of the sample is given in Annex 2. The socio-demographic characteristics also covered the religion, age, employment status, their perception on the social status, monthly income, their inclination to specific political parties and other. Comments on these parameters were given only in cases of significant (over 5%) deviations from the general results.

Focus-Groups
After the Survey was completed, two focus-groups were set-up, one consisting of ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Roma, and the other one of ethnic Albanians, for the purpose of checking some of the results. Each group consisted of six participants. The subject of discussion in the groups was six topics where there were differences in the perceptions among the citizens from different ethnic origin. The overview of the topics is given in Annex 3.

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Data Processing and Presentation of Results

The collected data were processed depending on the frequency and proportion of answers. The probability of data exactness is 95% and an error of +/- 5%. The results are presented in the Figures at the level of the whole sample. Apart from the Figures, the data are also presented in figures. The Report gives no comments on socio-demographic analysis regarding the less numerous ethnic communities and other less numerous socio-demographic groups due to their insignificant participation in the national sample. Some tables and Figures of the Report, do not present the results regarding I dont know and No answer because the sum of all answers is not 100%. This is done for the purpose of simplifying the presentation of the results. Regarding questions where a comparison of two opposing statements is needed (with points from 1 10), the interpretation of the results was made in accordance with principle of matching the answers 1-5 with the first statement, and 6-10 with the second (opposing) statement. There were significant clustering towards some of the points exists (most frequently 1 or 10), an additional comment is given. The term insignificant minority is used for answers provided by less than 10% of the sample, small minority for 11% to 30%, a minority for 30% to 50%, a majority for 51% to 70%, and large majority for over 70%. In the Figures, the terms Macedonian and Albanian denote the ethnic origin of the respondents. Given that the questions were similar/identical, whenever possible, the findings of this research were compared with the results from a similar research conducted in 2009 (Beka-Petroska, V., Najevska, ., 2009). The reference to the data from that research was made by stating the year (2009).

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Report gives an analysis of the findings from the Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin survey, conducted as a part of MCIC project, financially supported by the OSCE. The public opinion poll itself, was conducted by the Institute for Democracy Societas Civilis Skopje (IDSCS), in December 2010, on a sample of 1.074 respondents, representative on the grounds of sex, ethnic origin and regions. The aim was to examine the perception that the citizens have on the discrimination on ethnic grounds, but also their personal experiences as victims or witnesses of discrimination, in general and in individual sectors and areas. A comparison with a similar research conducted in 2009 was made as well. The majority of citizens (53.3%) believe that there is discrimination in Macedonia, while the ground of ethnic discrimination, is the second most represented (subsequent to the political party affiliation). The registered perceived discrimination of 67.7% is more than double by its extent than the experienced discrimination (as a victim or witness) 31.9%. Nevertheless, it should be noted that this percentage speaks about relatively high level of discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin. Such differences, as well as pointing out to concrete examples, indicate that non-discrimination is still a developing concept in Macedonia, and that there are significant differences in how this concept and terms are understood, how the behaviour is interpreted and adequately reacted upon (reported cases). The opinion prevails that during the past five years, the discrimination was more frequent. According to the citizens personal experiences, the most usual areas of discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin are: working relations (employment), services in the public sector (public administration, and, in particular, police and health services), but also in private services (cafbars, discotheques, swimming-pools), as well as the education. Opinions prevail that there is discrimination in all surveyed individual sectors, while in four sectors (health, education, judiciary and security/police) those are majority opinions (over 50% of the respondents). In addition, the ethnic Albanians believe that, due to the ethnic origin there is more pronounced discrimination in the sectors of agriculture and culture. There are also differences on ethnic grounds to the questions regarding the perception on the operation of the police, the distribution of the budget, (non)payment of taxes, distribution of subsidies, the level of integration in schools. Most of the citizens (79%) believe that the discrimination in the area of employment is more frequent in the state sector, than in the private sector (54%). In general, there is still majority support (57.9%) for a member of other ethnic community to be elected for high-ranking political function, although such support has been reduced in comparison with 2009 (66%).

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonian on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

For the majority of citizens of Macedonia, it is acceptable for a member of other ethnic community to hold one of the following offices (according to the proportion of answers Yes and No from 1.3 to 1): Ministers for finance and justice, Public Prosecutor, Ombudsman, President of the Judiciary Council, Governor of the National Bank, President of the Parliament, President of the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court. There is minority support for a member of other ethnic community to be elected to hold an office of: Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of Defence and Minister of Interior, Chief of the General Staff of the Army of the Republic of Macedonia (ARM), while the least acceptable is for the office of President of the Government and President of the Republic of Macedonia. In all the cases there is minority support by ethnic Macedonians (from 24% to 45%) while by the ethnic Albanians there is a significant majority (from 70% to 78%). The significant majority of 72% citizens would report a case of discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin if it happened to them, or if they were witnesses. This is not in accordance with their answers to the questions about their personal experiences with cases of discrimination (victims or witnesses) of 31.9% and the practice (the number of cases reported to the institutions during the recent years, of approximately 20 cases annually all to the Ombudsman of the Republic of Macedonia). In contrast to its perceived discriminatory treatment, the Police is an institution to which most of the citizens would refer to in case of discrimination (for the ethnic Albanians, after the Ombudsman, next to turn to are the Police).

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

I. DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF ETHIC ORIGIN

In order to get an impression about the general level of discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin, several questions on perception are posed in relation to the other grounds of discrimination, and the present situation in relation to the one five years before, as well as the personal experiences (victims or witnesses), to an act/case of discrimination.

Perception on Discrimination on Different Grounds

Majority of citizens (53.5%, taking a median value from all answers with Yes on all grounds) believe that the discrimination is (very or rather) frequent phenomenon in Macedonia, opposite to 40.1% who believe that it is very or rather seldom or that it is completely non-existent. Convincingly the most frequent grounds for discrimination is the partisanship affiliation, for which 89.9% of the citizens believe that it is a frequent phenomenon. The majority of citizens also point out as frequent the following grounds: the ethnic origin (67.7%), the handicap (53.8%) and the sexual orientation 53.3%. More rare are the cases of discrimination (minority of respondents declared that it is frequent phenomenon) on the grounds on religion or conviction (45%), age (39.8%) and sex/gender (37.3%). The number of undecided citizens is the greatest when they are to recognize discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation over 10% of the citizens responded with I dont know or did not give any answer (with the others, this percentage is from 2 to 5). Figure 1: Perception of frequency of discrimination on different grounds in 2010
Party affiliation Ethnic origin Disability Sexual orientation Religious belief Age Sex/Gender
Frequent Rare 0 DK/NA 10

89.9 67.7 53.8 53.5 45.0 39.8 37.3

20 30 40 50 60

7.4 30.3 42.0 35.6 50.0 56.7 58.7

70 80 90 100

The discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin is perceived as second most frequent grounds (after party affiliation) in our society. This is believed by the greatest part of the ethnic Albanians (84.7%), but also by the majority of ethnic Macedonians (60.4%). Similar is also the distribution according to religion 60.7% of the Christians and 82.4% of the Muslims. Compared with 2009, the arrangement of the rate of frequency of different grounds of discrimination is the same, with the exception of the age, which at that time was the third most frequent grounds, and the grounds sex/gender - which came before the religion/conviction. What represents more remarkable change is that in all grounds there is a greater percentage of answers with frequent and rather frequent, in average for 9.5 percentage points, indicating a perception for frequent discrimination. On the grounds of ethnic origin, the increase is for 13 percentage points (67.7% in 2010 opposite to 54.6% in 2009). With regards to the reasons for discrimination, the participants in the focus-group stated the following: not being familiar with the other, especially (in person), the image that media create about the ethnic communities, respectively the power of more numerous communities, but also as an influence from wider social factors: unemployment, poverty, nationalism, the role of the family (traditional, patriarchal), and also indicate to the long lasting existence of the discrimination.

10

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Comparison of Perceptions on Discrimination Now and Five Years Ago

Figure 2: If you compare the present situation with the one five years before, would you say that discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin is more frequent or more seldom?
More frequent 38.3% 35.2% 34.5% 34.3% 33.6% 20.9% 23.3%

51.5%

The same

More seldom 11.5% N/N / N/A 0% 6.4% 7.2% 3.4% 10% Total

20%

30%

40% Albanian

50%

60%

Macedonian

With regards to the perception on increase/decrease of the level of discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin1, for the purpose of making a comparison between the situation presently and five years before, the greater part of the citizens (38.3%) believe that it is more frequent, a similar percentage that it remained the same (34.5%), while smaller part of them, that it is more seldom (20.9%).

These opinions are of similar proportion as it was during the research made in 2009, when 37% believed that the discrimination was more frequent, 33% that it is the same, while the percentage of those who said that it is more seldom declined (21% in 2010, opposite to 26% in 2009). The majority of ethnic Albanians (51.5%) believe that the situation was aggravated (more frequent) in these five years, while 11.5% that it was improved. For 35.2% ethnic Macedonians, the discrimination is more frequent, while for 23.3% the situation has improved, respectively the discrimination is more seldom.

Personal Experiences (Victims or Witnesses) with Discrimination

Figure 3: Whether during the past 12 months you felt discriminated/harassed because of the ethnic origin? Opposite to the perception regarding wide dispersion of ethnic discrimination (67.7%), whenever the citizens were asked about their personal experience 4.7 % in case of such discrimination during the previous 19.1 % year, 1 out of 5 citizens (19.1%) stated that they personally felt (were a victim of) discriminated or harassed, while every fourth (23.4%) was a witness. It should be pointed out here that the answers partially overlap, i.e. that the same persons were either victims or witnesses of discrimination. All the participants in the focus-groups stated that they were 76.2 % victims or witnesses of discrimination. Compared with 2009, when 33.5% of the respondents stated that they were a victim of discrimination on some of the grounds, among which 12.9% on the grounds of ethnic origin, there is an increase of 6.2 percentage points (19.1% in 2010). The percentage of testimonies for cases of discrimination is also increased (23.4%, opposite to 15.2% in 2009). With regards to the ethnic origin of respondents, there is a significant difference on the question about personal discrimination (victims), where 39.3% of the respondents - ethnic Albanians and 9.9% from the ethnic Macedonians answered with Yes. To the question whether they were witnesses of discrimination, there is no significant difference (the percentage of answers on ethnic grounds is smaller than +/-5% of the total percentage of 23.9%). It is interesting to note that out of those answering that they were personally discriminated, double in amount were men (65%, opposite to 35% women), while the proportion to the question of

Further on all the questions will be about discrimination on this grounds, and there where it is not otherwise stated, the use of the term discrimination will imply as referring to discrimination on ethnic ground.

11

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

witnesses of discrimination is somewhat smaller (58%, opposite to 42%). This is one of the rare questions in the research where there is statistically significant difference (over 5%) with regard to the sex. Since all of them stated that they were victims or witnesses of discrimination, the focus-groups believe that these perceptions are even better than it is the case in the reality. As arguments, they pointed out to: the fear of testifying about an observed discrimination, keep it unspoken, and even efforts for forgetting such events. The group with ethnic Albanians believes that every Albanian was a victim of discrimination at least once. The respondents were also asked, as part of this question, to give an example from their personal experience (as discriminated persons or witnesses of discrimination against other persons). Emphasis should given to the higher level of answers (19.5%) than the usual level during the previous surveys, and the way in which they corresponded to their personal experiences in cases of discrimination, but again, most of the answers were rather general (for example, at work or during employment, in a caf-bar, at the university, towards Roma and other). In addition, the answers contain a mixture of personal experiences as victims and witnessing, than the grounds (although the question was only about the ethnic origin), and areas (for example, labour relations, health, education), pointing out specific organizations/institutions (as for example MoI or EVN), but not what the discrimination was about (in particular, whether it was because of the ethnic origin), as well as formulations referring to unequal treatments, but are not considered as discrimination (for example, quotas at the faculty). Also, According to the examples that were given by the focus-groups, one could see even inclusion of situations which are not considered as discrimination (verbal quarrels, offences, stereotypes). In addition, personal stories heard from friends have an impact on disseminating the perception, as also are recently the social networks where stereotypes and prejudices are getting stronger thus stimulating discrimination.

Conclusions
Majority of citizens (53.3%) believe that there is discrimination in Macedonia, and on the grounds of ethnic discrimination, it is the second most represented (subsequent to the political affiliation). The registered perceived discrimination of 67.7% is more than double by its extent than the experienced (as a victim or witness) - 31.9%. However, it should be concluded that this percentage also speaks about relatively high level of discrimination on the grounds on ethnic origin. These differences, the same like pointing out concrete examples, indicate that non-discrimination is still developing concept in Macedonia, and that there are significant differences in understanding the notions and terms, the interpretation of behaviour and adequate reaction (reporting cases). The opinion prevails that the discrimination is more frequent during the last 5 years. The most frequent areas of discrimination on the grounds of ethnic discrimination, according to the personal experiences of the citizens are: labour relations (employment), services in the public sector (public administration, and in particular the police and health services), but also in the private services (caf-bars, discotheques, swimming pools), as well as education.

12

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

II. DISCRIMINATION IN INDIVIDUAL SECTORS

Comparison of Sectors
As an introduction to the analysis on discrimination on grounds on ethnic origin in some individual sectors, the respondents were asked to give a general assessment about the presence of this type of discrimination in each of these sectors. Figure 4: Perception on Discrimination in Different Areas, According to the Proportion of Answers
Health Education Justice System Security and Police Urbanism Public Finances Economy Social Services Agriculture Culture
Yes No DK/NA
60.4 59.3 54.2 55.7 49.0 47.3 47.1 48.7 40.7 42.3 33.5 38.4 32.9 30.7 30.8 33.8 28.0 34.4 30.1 31.5

20

40

60

80

100

For all above mentioned sectors, opinions prevail that there is discrimination (in a proportion of 1.0 to 2.0 to the opinions that there is no discrimination), where for four sectors (health, education, judiciary and security/police) these are majority opinions (over 50% of the respondents believe that there is discrimination in that sector). Relatively large percentage of citizens (from 9 to 26%) had no opinions on this question. In most of the sectors there is no difference, or the difference in the answers between ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians is insignificant (< 5%). Agriculture and culture are an exception. Regarding the sector of agriculture, 53.1% of surveyed ethnic Albanians stated that there is discrimination in the provision of services, while among ethnic Macedonians this percentage is 37.3%. In the area of culture this proportion is 53.8% (among Albanians), opposite to 38.7% (Macedonians). Figure 5: Perception on Discrimination by Sectors According to Ethnic Origin ) Agriculture b) Culture
40.7% 37.3% 53.1% 33.5% 35.7% 27.5% 25.8% 27.0% 19.5% 0% Total 20% Macedonian 40% Albanian 60%

Yes

Yes

42.3% 38.7% 53.8% 38.4% 39.7% 31.3% 19.4% 21.6% 14.9% 0% Total 20% 40% 60% Macedonian Albanian

No

No

DK/NA

DK/NA

Below follow the analyzed answers of some of the selected sectors.

13

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

II.1. SECURITY AND POLICE

Regarding the sector Security/Police the citizens were asked about services, such as protection, intervention, but also issuance of licenses, certificates, travel documents, identity cards, citizenship and other. In total, 55.7% of the respondents believe that in this sector there is discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin, while, 34.4% believe that there is no discrimination (the proportion is 1.62). There is no significant difference between the answers given by ethnic Macedonians (54.4% said Yes) and ethnic Albanians (58.0%). The discrimination on ethnic grounds in the area of security, respectively police was examined with two questions (on a scale from 1 to 10): the Police is (not) protecting the public order and security irrespective of the ethnic structure of the community; the Police is prosecuting criminals (irrespective of)/ (depending on) their ethnic origin. ble 1: Views on Discrimination in Provision of Services by the Police
The police is protecting the public order and security irrespective of the ethnic structure of the community (1-5) The Police is prosecuting criminals irrespective of their ethnic origin (1-5) 57.3% 59.9% The Police is not protecting the public 42.4% order and security in my community because of ethnic structure (6-10) 39.5% The Police is prosecuting criminals depending on their ethnic origin (6-10)

With regard to the first question, the majority of citizens (57.3%) believe that the ethnic structure of the community has no influence on the behaviour of the police toward them. However, if one sees the answers according to ethnic communities, one comes to a conclusion that it is mainly the view of the ethnic Macedonians (61.3% according to the first statement) that has an impact on such general opinion, while, among ethnic Albanians it is a minority opinion (43.1%). Figure 6: Differences in Views about Police between Macedonian and Albanian Ethnic Community
The Police are procesuting criminals irrespective of their ethnic affiliation 57.3% 61.3% 43.1% 59.9% 64.1% 44.7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

The police is protecting the public order and security

Total

Macedonian

Albanian

The assessment on whether the police are discriminating when prosecuting criminals is almost identical (somewhat better), where 59.9% believe that there is no discrimination, i.e. the criminals are prosecuted irrespective of their ethnic origin. Here, also the distribution of respondents is the same like above - while 64.1% ethnic Macedonians agree with the first statement, the majority of ethnic Albanians (55.3%) incline to the opposed statement - that the police is prosecuting criminals depending on their ethnic origin. In the focus-groups it was pointed out that a part of the discrimination was related to the pressure, coming from the ethnic community to which the police officers belong, to pronounce smaller punishment (or non punishment) when a violation is made. They believe that here there is no difference on ethnic grounds, i.e. such cases exist in every ethnic community. An emphasis should also be given to the opinion that when the ethnic balance is improved (especially with increasing the number of the police officers ethnic Albanians) there would be much more correct behaviour towards the citizens. The exception from this are still the Roma, who continue to be less represented in the police, while the stereotypes about their community are still present, and the cases of perceived discriminatory behaviour toward them are most frequent.

14

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

II.2. JUSTICE SYSTEM

Within the justice system, the citizens were asked about the services of the Prosecutor Office, courts, and institution for enforcing sanctions. A total of 54.2% of the respondents believe that there is discrimination on ethnic origin in this sector, while 28.0% that there is no discrimination. The proportion is 1.93 and by this it is perceived to be the third sector with regards to discrimination. Somewhat higher is the number of ethnic Albanians (59.9%) who believe in this, as compared to the ethnic Macedonians (51.0%). Similar like in the security, there were two questions put to examine the discrimination in the area of judiciary, but the division in the answers is much greater. Again, the majority of citizens (55.4%) are positive regarding the courts (they believe that they carry out proceedings irrespective of their ethnic origin), but most of the citizens (17.2% respectively 17.8%) stand on extreme positions (scores from 1, respectively 10). Table 2: Views on Discrimination in Provision of Services by Judiciary
The rule of law and enforcement of laws is implemented equally on the entire territory of the country, irrespective of the ethnic structure. Courts carry out proceedings and define sanctions, irrespective of the ethnic origin 39.1 60.5 The rule of law and enforcement of laws is not implemented equally on the entire territory of the country, depending on the ethnic structure. Courts carry out proceedings and define sanctions depending on the ethnic origin

55.4

43.9

On the other hand, the majority of citizens (60.5%) believe that the rule of law and enforcement of laws is not equally implemented on the entire territory of the country. There is no significant deviation on ethnic grounds, i.e. both the ethnic Macedonians (66%) and ethnic Albanians (75%) have the same opinion. With regard to the regional distribution, most of the persons having such an opinion are from the Polog, and partially from the Skopje region.

II.3. FINANCES
In the sector of finances (public) the citizens were asked about the custom fees, taxes, and the process of denationalization. A total of 47.2% of the respondents believe that in this sector there is discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin, and 30.7% that there is no discrimination (the proportion is 1.54). There is no significant difference in the answers of ethnic Macedonians (46.7%) and ethnic Albanians (50.4%). The question on finances was discussed from the budgetary aspect (distribution according to ethnic communities), payment of taxes (respectively, sanctioning non-payment), as well as the access to credits for different ethnic communities. Table 3: Views on Discrimination in the Sector of Finances (Public and Business)
The Budget of the Republic of Macedonia is distributed on the basis of objective criteria, irrespective of ethnic origin Non-payers of taxes are sanctioned irrespective of their ethnic origin Access to credits in bank is provided irrespective of the ethnic origin 51.4% 33.5% 79.8% The Budget of the Republic of Macedonia 47.5% is distributed give preference to other (not my)ethnic communities 65.0% 19.9% Members of some ethnic communities do not pay taxes, and this is not sanctioned In the access to credits, the banks are favouring other (not my) ethnic community

The opinion on the distribution of the budget is completely divided (51.4% believe that it is distributed irrespective of the ethnic origin, while 47.5% believe that they favour other communities. This (the second) is believed by 75.6% of ethnic Albanians. This focus-group pointed out examples about insufficient (or non-proportional) investments in infrastructure (roads, parks, sewage, lightning, sports halls).

15

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Figure 7: Ethnic differences in Perception of Financial Services

The budget of the Republic of Macedonia is distributed based on objective criteria Members of some ethnic communities do not pay taxes, and this is not sanctioned Access to credits in banks is provided irrespective of the ethnic affiliation Total Macedonian Albanian 0% 20% 40% 60% 51.4% 61.6% 23.7% 65.0% 69.2% 60.7% 79.8% 82.5% 72.9% 80% 100%

The mistrust of citizens that tax non-payers are sanctioned equally (65%) is greater, where a high percentage of them (34.4%) is convinced that this is the case. Here, the ethnic Macedonians are slightly more represented (69.2%, opposite to 60.7% of ethnic Albanians). The focus-groups with ethnic Albanians, agreed that they pay less tax, explaining this as a result of the unemployment. Also, the Roma in the focus-group pointed out that contrary to the stereotype for non-taxation on the Shuto Orizari market place, this is not true. Opposite to this, great majority (79.8%) of respondents believe that there is equal access to the banks (credits and other financial services) for all ethnic communities. The assessment is similar (82.5%, opposite to 72.9%) among both biggest ethnic communities.

II.4. AGRICULTURE
In the agriculture sector, the interest was particularly focused on the questions of subsidies, different types of licenses (concessions and other), as well as the access to IPARD2 funds. Figure 8: Views on discrimination in agriculture (including subsidies) A total of 40.7% of the respondents believe that in this sector there is discrimination on the grounds on ethnic origin, while 33.5% 40.7% that there is no discrimination. The Agriculture 37.3% proportion is 1.21, and consequently it is 53.1% perceived as one of the less discriminatory sector. However, there is greater 39.4% difference in the views between the ethnic Subsidies 30.2% Macedonians (37.7% believe that there is 67.2% Total discrimination, while 25.7% that there is no Macedonian discrimination) and the ethnic Albanians 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Albanian (53.1% say that there is discrimination, opposite to 27.9%). The majority of citizens (59.3%) believe that subsidies in agriculture are granted on the basis of objective criteria, irrespective of the ethnic origin. However, there are deviations on the grounds of respondents ethnic origin because the minority of the ethnic Albanians (32.8%) agree with this statement, while 67.2% disagree with this statement, where 38.9% say that they fully disagree. With regards to the regional representation, the opinion on adequate distribution is dominant in most of the regions. There is a deviation from the sample in the Polog region (for 10 percentage points), in the Pelagonia region (for 5) and to some extent in the Southeast region.

II.5. EDUCATION
With regards to the sector of education, the citizens were asked about services such as: enrolment in state schools, granting fellowships, accreditations, diploma nostrification.

Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance for Rural Development

16

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

A total of 59.3% of the respondents believe that there is discrimination in this sector on the grounds of ethnic origin, while 31.5% that there is no discrimination (the proportion is 1.88. and therefore the education is perceived as a second sector according to the frequency of discrimination). Interestingly, the percentage of answers given by ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians are similar about 59% said Yes, and 32% No. Such a perception, but also the cases of ethnic divisions, intolerance and violence in the schools, generate from several stereotypes about which the citizens were asked in this survey. Table 4. Views on instruction-teaching related to ethnic origin
Pupils from the same ethnic community should study in integrated schools Pupils from different communities in the same school, should study in the same shift Pupils from different ethnic communities studying in the same language should study in ethically mixed classes Roma should study grouped in ethnically mixed classes 50.1% Pupils from the same ethnic community 49.0% should study in the same school in a separate building 41.9%
Pupils from different ethnic communities in a same school should study in a different shift Pupils from different ethnic communities grouped in ethnically divided classes

57.7%

59.4%

40.0% studying in the same language should study

63.6%

36.1% Roma should study grouped in Roma classes

The first dilemma was whether pupils from the same ethnic community in one school, should study in a separate building or in the same building (integrated/mixed environment). The citizens are completely divided on this question (49.0%, opposite to 50.1%), but however, the answers were the most numerous (33.6% or every third citizens) regarding the integrated education, and the division also was not on ethnic grounds (47% of Macedonians and 51% of Albanians). Both focusgroups pointed out to the advantages of integrated schools, but the majority of the participants stated that they would not send their children to such schools, mainly justifying this with their perception on reduced security in the schools, but also the potential of conflict. The second dilemma is whether pupils from different ethnic communities should study in a same or different shift. Here there is a grater consent on integration (57.7%), but the view of the ethnic Albanians is different, who, approximately in the same percentage, agree on studying in different shifts. The citizens were also asked whether pupils from different ethnic communities studying in the same language, should study grouped in ethnically divided classes or in the same (ethnically mixed) classes. The tendency towards greater integration is continuing (59.4%) where 40.6% are supporting the idea that the pupils of different ethnic communities should study in the same classes. However, even in this case, the majority of ethnic Albanians (57.3%) prefer ethnically divided classes. Figure 9: Views on Discrimination/Integration in Education on The Grounds of Ethnic Affiliation
50.1% 47.1% 50.8% 57.7% 61.7% 42.4% Mixed classes 42.7% 63.6% Roma Total Macedonian Albanian 40.8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 70.5% 59.4% 63.6%

Integrated school

Same shift

17

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Finally, there was a separate question on the attitude towards Roma whether they should study in separate (Roma) classes or in ethnically mixed classes. On this question the consent on integration is the greatest 63.6% (including 45.2% with maximum consent). Again, the support to this among the ethnic Albanians is minority (40.8% are for Yes, while 59.2% Against).

II.6. MEDIA
With regards to the media, it was of relevance for the research to examine whether the media depict the multi-cultural reality in Macedonia sufficiently well, and whether in fact the media themselves are instigating discrimination, stigmatization, or harassment of some ethnic community. Figure 10: Views on Discrimination, Stigmatization or Harassment in Media On the first question, 42.6% of the citizens believe that the ethnic 42.6% communities are sufficiently well Diversity 45.4% presented in the media, respectively 40.1% that the diversity in the Macedonian society is well depicted in the media, while 32.6% that they are not. 62.3% Stigmatization 60.3% Opposite to this, as far as 62.3% belie72.9% ve that the media behave in a discriTotal minatory manner, i.e. they stigmatize Macedonian when reporting on some ethnic 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Albanian communities. There is a relative ethnic balance regarding these questions, with small deviation regarding the second one, where 13% more ethnic Albanians than ethnic Macedonians believe that there is discrimination in the media presentation of ethnic communities.

II.7. PLACE OF RESIDENCE, SPORTS, RECREATION

The overwhelming majority of citizens, 74.7% believe that the citizen should live in ethnically mixed environments. Also, 85.8% believe that the access to facilities for sports, recreation, entertainment, catering should be equal for all citizens. In both cases there are no deviations with regards to the ethnic origin.

II.8. AREAS OF EMPLOYMENT

Employment, irrespective of the sector, is perceived as the most frequent area of discrimination (both on the grounds of ethnic origin but also on all other grounds) in this research also, as was in the most other researches in the European Union. Figure 11: Other Ethnic Communities Take Jobs from My Ethnic Community Every second citizen of Macedonia (47.4%) believes that the other ethnic communities take the jobs from their community I disagree: (while 23.8% disagree with this), and that there is no 23.8% difference depending on the ethnic origin of the respondents. According to the focus-groups, the ethnic Albanians believe I agree: that the problem is in the long-lasting previous discrimination 47.4% in the state institutions and large private companies, where DK/NA: there are still predominantly ethnic Macedonians holding 28.8% positions for decision making during employment, while the other ethnic communities point out the Framework Agreement which gives preference to the ethnic Albanians. The opinion prevails (66.9% in total and 48.5% with mark 10) that in a situation when there are no possibilities for employment, the selection should be based on objective criteria, irrespective of the ethnic origin. The majority (70.9%) of ethnic Macedonians give support to this, but also 54.6% of the ethnic Albanians.

18

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

When making comparison between the state and private sector, the same like with the finances (budget, opposite to the banks), the citizens believe that there is more discrimination in the state sector (79.3%, nd 11% that there is no discrimination), contrary to the private sector, for which 54% believe that there is discrimination, and 31.7% that there is no discrimination. This was also confirmed by the focus-groups. Figure 12: Discrimination during Employment in State And Private Sector ) Perception on Discrimination b) Consent on Affirmative Measures
79.3% 75.5% 89.3% 73.2% 72.0% 73.7%

State

State

Private

54.0% 55.0% 49.2% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Macedonian Albanian

Private

67.4% 66.5% 66.0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Macedonian Albanian

0% Total

0% Total

As shown on the Figure 9. there are ethnic differences when assessing the discrimination in employment, where the ethnic Albanians believe, in greater percentage, that it is present in the state sector (89.3%, opposite to 75.5% of the ethnic Macedonians), while more of the Macedonians (55%) than the ethnic Albanians (49.2%) believe the same, but this time for the private sector. However, they all agree that specific measures should be introduced for securing equal possibilities for employment of persons from non-majority ethnic communities (for example, special training programs, employment quotas, tax stimulations, introduction of standards on social responsibility and other), almost equally both in the state (73.2%) and in the private sector (67.4%), and this is similar (66%) to the support given in 2009.

Conclusions on Discrimination in Individual Sectors and Areas

Opinions prevail that there is discrimination in all surveyed individual sectors, while four sectors (health, education, judiciary and security/police) those are majority opinions (over 50% of the respondents). In addition, the ethnic Albanians believe that, due to the ethnic origin there is more pronounced discrimination in the sectors of agriculture and culture. There are also differences on ethnic grounds to the questions regarding the perception on the operation of the police, the distribution of the budget, (non) payment of tax, distribution of subsidies, the level of integration in schools. Most of the citizens (79%) believe that the discrimination in the area of employment is more frequent in the state sector, than in the private sector (54%).

19

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

III. POLITICAL LEADERSHIP ACCEPTABILITY

This part of the research is about the accessibility for performing high-ranking state functions by members of other ethnic communities, as well as the mechanisms for protection against discrimination. Figure 13: Acceptability of Other Ethnic Community for High-Ranking State Office For the majority of citizens 57.9% (57.9%) it is acceptable that a Other 47.8% community member of other ethnic community 77.5% is elected for high-ranking political 54.3% office (opposite to 34.9% for whom Albanian 38.4% 98.9% it is unacceptable). While for all minority ethnic communities this is 56.2% acceptable almost without any Turkish 45.4% 81.7% exception acceptable, among the ethnic Macedonians there is a 45.8% complete division on this question Roma 38.0% 57.3% (47.8% it is acceptable, but for Total 43.6% it is unacceptable). AccorMacedonian 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ding to the focus-group with the Albanian ethnic Macedonians, such support depends on the professional execution of the function, and not giving preference to its own ethnic community (as, according to them, is the case with most of the present experiences). For the ethnic Albanians, if such an office is performed by a member of other ethnic communities, than it is about the level of carrying about their problems, but nonetheless they are prepared for such a situation. Compared with 2009. the general level of support for performing high-ranking state offices by members of other ethnic communities is reduced from 66%, to 58%. The support to such possibility is similar when the ethnic Albanians (54.3%), Turks (56.2%) are concerned, while it is a minority support when Roma (45.8%) are concerned. With regards to the specific state functions, the Table below shows that there is general acceptability for a member from other ethnic community to be found each of such functions, rather than a member from the community of the surveyed citizen, as well as the division according to the two largest communities. Table 5: Acceptability for a Member of Other Ethnic Community to be Elected for (in %) Yes No DK/NA Mac.* Alb.*
President of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Republic Judiciary Council Public Prosecutor of the Republic of Macedonia Ombudsman of the Republic of Macedonia Minister of Foreign Affairs Minister of Defence Minister of Interior Minister of Justice Minister of Finance Governor of the National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia Chief of General Staff of ARM 39.5% 50.7% 41.5% 49.3% 48.8% 53.6% 54.5% 54.4% 48.0% 45.2% 44.6% 50.6% 54.9% 52.5% 42.8% 57.7% 46.0% 54.5% 46.6% 46.8% 42.5% 41,9% 42.0% 49.4% 51,6% 51,6% 46.0% 41,3% 42.6% 53.0% 2.8% 3.4% 4.1% 4.1% 4.4% 3.9% 3.6% 3.6% 2.6% 3.3% 3.8% 3.4% 3.7% 4.9% 4.2% 24.7% 40.0% 28.1% 37.0% 35.7% 42.8% 44.3% 44.7% 35.9% 31,6% 30.9% 39.3% 45.5% 41,6% 28.0% 74.4% 70.0% 71.0% 75.6% 78.2% 77.5% 76.0% 72.9% 76.0% 77.5% 76.3% 73.7% 76.3% 77.9% 77.1%

* The last two columns (Macedonian and Albanian ethnic origin) give percentage for answers with Yes

20

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Conclusions and Acceptability of Political Leadership from other Ethnic Community

Generally speaking, there is still a majority support (57.9%) for a member of other ethnic community to be elected to a high-ranking political function, but such support is in decline with regard to the one in 2009 (66%). For the majority citizens of Macedonia, it is acceptable for a member of other ethnic community to assume one of the following offices (according to the proportion of answers with Yes and No, from 1.3. to 1): Minister of Finance and Justice, Public Prosecutor, Ombudsman, President of the Republic Judiciary Council, Governor of the National Bank, President of the Parliament, President of the Constitutional and Supreme Court. The support for a member of other ethnic communities to be elected for the office of: Minister of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Interior, Chief of General Staff of ARM is minority, and less acceptable is for the office of: President of the Government and President of the Republic of Macedonia. In all the cases the support by the ethnic Macedonians (from 24% to 45%) is minority, while among the ethnic Albanians (from 70% to 78%) there is greater majority.

IV. FIGHT AGAINST DISCRIMINATION

Figure 14: I You are a Victim of Discrimination or Harassment Would You Request Protection from Relevant Institutions/Organizations? Overwhelming majority of citizens (72.3%) stated that in case they were a victim of discrimination or harassment, they would report the case. No: 14.9% However, this is not in line with the reality, when only 47 cases Yes: were reported (solely to the Ombudsman) during the past three DK/NA,: 72.3% 12.8% years, as well as the statements on some of the previous questions presented above (about 19.1% victims and 23.4% witnesses of discrimination). Figure 15: To whom would you refer to protection against discrimination? In such a case, the citizens would be Police 26.4 primarily referring to the police (36.5%), the Ombudsman (21.5%), and than the Ombudsman 15.5 Court (11.9%) or a Lawyer (11.2%), Lawyer 8.6 while smaller part of them would refer Court 8.1 to some civil society organization Civil Society Organisation 5.5 (7.6%) or other institution. This is the Labour Union 0.5 preferred order among all ethnic communities, with small exception among Other 0.4 the ethnic Albanians, who would primaDK/NA 7.4 rily refer to the Ombudsman, than to the Police, while they would prefer courts 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 % and civil society organizations first and than the lawyers. This outcome (trust in Police) is also partially contradictory to the perception of significant discrimination (55.7%) exactly in the police (the third of all mentioned institutions).

Conclusion on Institutions for Fight against Discrimination

Overwhelming majority, 72% of citizens would report a case of discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin if it would happen to them or if they were witnesses. This is not in accordance with the answers to the questions on their personal experiences with cases of discrimination (victims or witnesses) of 31.9% and the practice (the number of reported cases in the institution during the recent years, of about 20 cases annually all to the Ombudsman of the Republic of Macedonia). In contrast to the perception of discriminatory treatment by the police, the police is an institution to which the greatest part of citizens would firstly address in case of discrimination (the ethnic Albanians would refer first only to the Ombudsman and than to the police).

21

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Annex 1: Questionnaire for Discrimination and Harassment on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin
I. GENERAL CONTEXT Q1. Could you tell me what you think, how frequent is each of the given forms of discrimination in the Republic of Macedonia? Discrimination on the grounds of...
Very Frequently
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ethnic Origin Sex/Gender Sexual Orientation Age Religion or Religious Belief Disability Party Affiliation

Rather Frequently

Rather Rare

Very Rare

None Exist. (spontan.)

DK

NA

Q2. (8) If you compare the present situation with the one five years before, would you say that discrimination on ethnic grounds is more frequent or rarer?
1 More frequent 2 Rather frequent 3 Neither more frequent, nor rarer (the same) 4 Rather more rare 5 Very much more rare -1 I dont know (spontaneously) / -2 No answer (spontaneously)

Q3. Whether during the past 12 months:

No 9 You personally felt discriminated/harassed due to you ethnic origin? 10 You were a witness of discrimination or harassment due to ethnic origin? 11 Give examples Yes DK

NA

Q4. According to you, is there discrimination on ethnic grounds in provision of services by:
No 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Security and police (protection/interventions, issuance of licenses, certificates, travel documents, identity cards, citizenship and other). Judiciary (prosecutor office, judiciary, institutions for sanctions enforcement and other) Public finances (customs, taxes, denationalization) Economy (import/export licenses, concessions, licenses) Agriculture (subsidies, licenses, access to IPARD funds) Health (health insurance, health services-examinations, treatment, prescriptions, orthopedic aids, child delivery) Education (enrolment in state schools, fellowship granting, accreditations, diplomas nostrification) Social services (social welfare, adoption, other compensations) Culture (financial support to artists, institutions and projects: books, films, theatre performances, and other) Urbanism (construction licenses, apartments buy-out, construction land alienation, urban plans and other) Yes DK NA

II. SECURITY AND POLICE Q5. With which of the following statements you agree, using a scale from 1 to 10
The police is protecting the public order 22 and security irrespective of the ethnic structure of the community The policies prosecuting criminals 23 irrespective of their ethnic origin The police is not protecting the public order 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 and security in my community because of the ethnic structure The police is prosecuting criminals 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 depending on their ethnic origin

III. JUSTICE SYSTEM Q6. With which of the following statements you agree, using a scale from 1 to 10

Please tell me which of the following statements is closer to your viewpoint

The rule of law and enforcement of law is carried out equally on the entire territory of 24 the country, irrespective of the ethnic structure Courts carry put proceedings and define 25 sanctions, irrespective of the ethnic origin The rule of law and enforcement of laws are not carried out equally on the entire territory 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 of the country, depending on the ethnic structure Courts carry out proceedings and define 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 sanctions depending on the ethnic origin

22

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

IV. FINANCES Q7. With which of the following statements you agree, using a scale from 1 to 10
The budget of the Republic of Macedonia is The budget of the Republic of Macedonia is 26 distributed based on objective criteria, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 distributed by giving preference to other irrespective of the ethnic origin (not my) ethnic communities Members of some ethnic communities do Non-payer of taxes are sanctioned, 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 not pay taxes, and this is not sanctioned irrespective of the ethnic origin In the access to credits, banks give Access to credits in banks is provided, 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 preference to the other (not my) ethnic irrespective of the ethnic origin communities

V. EMPLOYMENT Q8. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement

I agree e30 Other ethnic communities take jobs from my community 1 I disagree 2 Neither I agree nor N/N disagree (spontaneous) 3 -1 N/A -2

Q9. With which of the following statements you agree, using a scale from 1 to 10
Whenever there is a lack of possibilities for employment, employers should give 31 advantage to members of their ethnic community Even when there is a lack of possibilities for employment, the selection should be on 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 objective criteria, irrespective of the ethnic origin

Q10. According to you, is there discrimination during employment in?

No e32 State sector e33 Private sector 0 0 Yes N/N N/A 1 1 -1 -1 -2 -2

Q11. Would you agree or be against introduction of specific affirmative measures for providing equal possibilities for employing persons from non-majority ethnic communities? For example, such measures are: special training programs, employment quotas, tax stimulations, introduction of standards on social responsibility and other.
I fully agree e34 In the state sector e36 In the private sector 1 1 I partially agree 2 2 I partially disagree 3 3 I fully disagree 4 4 N/N -1 -1 N/A -2 -2

VI. AGRICULTURE Q12. With which of the following statements you agree, using a scale from 1 to 10. Please tell me which of the following statements is closer to your viewpoint
37 Subsidies in agriculture are not allocated Subsidies in agriculture are approved based on objective criteria, and based on objective criteria, irrespective of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 advantage is given to other ethnic the ethnic origin communities

VII. EDUCATION Q13. With which of the following statements you agree, using a scale from 1 to 10. Please tell me which of the following statements is closer to your viewpoint
Pupils from same ethnic community 38 should study in the same school in 1 separate building Pupils from different ethnic 39 communities in a same school 1 should study in the same shift Pupils from different ethnic communities studying in the same 40 1 language should study grouped in ethnically divided classes Roma should study grouped in 41 1 Roma classes 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 Pupils from same ethnic community should study in integrated/mixed schools Pupils from different ethnic communities in a same school should study in a different shift Pupils from different ethnic communities studying in the same language should study in ethnically mixed classes Roma should study grouped in ethnically mixed classes

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

8 8

9 9

10 10

VIII. MEDIA Q14. (42) Do you believe that diversity on the grounds of ethnic origin is sufficiently depicted in the media?
0 No 1 Yes -1 Dont know (spontaneously) / -2 No answer (spontaneously)

23

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Q15. (43) Do you believe that media instigate discrimination, stigmatization or harassment of some ethnic community?
0 No 1 Yes -1 Dont know (spontaneously) / -2 No answer (spontaneously)

Q16. (44) According to you, which media in Macedonia instigates the most discrimination, stigmatization or harassment of some ethnic community? (spontaneous answers) IX. MISCELLANEOUS Q17. Please, tell me which of the following statements is closer to your viewpoint
Access to sports , recreation, 45 entertainment, catering facilities should be equal for all citizens 46 People should live in ethnically mixed settlements Sports , recreation, entertainment, catering facilities could be of club type to allow access only to members of particular ethnic group All should live in settlements with their own 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ethnic groups 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

X. LEADING FUNCTIONS AND FIGHTING AGAINST DISCRIMINATION Q18. () Is it acceptable for you that for high ranking political function is elected a:
47 48 49 50 Member of other ethnic community Ethnic Albanian/he/she Ethnic Turk/he/she Ethnic Roma/he/she No 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 President of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Macedonia President of the Republic Judiciary Council Public Prosecutor of the Republic of Macedonia Ombudsman of the Republic of Macedonia Minister of Foreign Affairs Minister of Defence Minister of Interior Minister of Justice Minister of Finance Governor of the National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia Chief of General Staff of ARM No 0 0 0 0 Yes Yes 1 1 1 1 DK -1 -1 -1 -1 NA -2 -2 -2 -2 NA

Q19. Is it acceptable for you, a member from other ethnic community to be elected for?
DK

Q20. (66) If you were a victim of discrimination or harassment, would you ask for protection from relevant institutions, organizations?
0 No 1 Yes -1 Dont know (spontaneously) / -2 No answer (spontaneously)

Q21. (67) Where would you refer to ask for protection (choose one answer):
1 Court 2 Police 3 Ombudsman 4 Lawyer 5 Trade Union 6 Civil Society Organization 7 Miscellaneous -1 Dont know / -2 No answer

24

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Annex 2: Sample of Surveyed Citizens (1.074)

N1 (e68). Sex
1 Man (52.9%) 2 Woman (47.1%)

N2. Age
1 From 30 years old (37.9%) 2 From 31 to 40 years old (23.3%) 3 From 41 to 50 years old (18.2%) 4 From 51 to 60 years old (13.4%) 5 Over 60 years old (7.2%)

N3 (e69). Ethnic Origin

1 Macedonian (66.9%) 2 Albanian (24.4%) 3 Turk (2.0%) 4 Roma (4.5%) 5 Serbian (2.0%) 6 Vlah (0.1%) 8 Other (0.2%)

N4 (e70). Do you belong to a specific religion?

1 Orthodox (66.1%) 2 Islamic (30.7%) 3 Catholic (0.3%) 4 Other (0.7%)

N5 (71). Irrespective whether you belong to a specific religion, do you believe that you are: Religious person (76.5%)
2 Non-religious person (15.1%) 3 Atheist (2.0%)

N6 (e72). Employment Status

1 Employed in public sector (18.0%) 2 Employed in private sector (33.3%) 3 Farmer (2.8%) 4 Student (13.6%) 5 Housewife (4.4%) 6 Unemployed (20.8%) 7 Pensioner (7.2%)

N7 (e73). Would you describe yourself as belonging to the:

1 Upper class (4.1%) 2 Upper middle class (22.0%) 3 Lower middle class (38.0%) 4 Working class (23.2%) 5 Lower class (7.2%)

N8 (74). Education
1 Uncompleted primary (2.6%) 2 Primary (11.3%) 3 Secondary (48.9%) 4 College, University (37.2%)

N9 (e75). Place of Residence

1 Rural (village) (28.4%) 2 Urban (city) (54.4%) 3 Skopje (17.2%)

25

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

N10 (e76). To which group your family belongs? Please define the relevant amount of monthly income per member of the household, including all income of the family in
To 1.500 Den 1 5.0% 1.500 3.000 Den 2 7.4% 3.000 4.000 Den 3 6.9% 4.000 5.000 Den 4 7.5% 5.000 6.500 Den 5 9.5% 6.500 8.000 Den 6 9.4% 8.001 11.000 Den 7 13.4% 11.001 15.000 Den 8 12.3% 15.001 24.000 Den 9 12.4% Over 24.000 Den 10 11.8%

N11 (e77). In political sense, people speak about left and right orientation (rightist/leftist). With your convictions and views, where would you find yourself on the following scale?
from 1 to 5 left (22.6%) from 6 to 10 right (23.1%) -1 I dont know -2 No answer

N12 (e78). To which party are you a follower?

VMRO-DPMNE (15.2%) SDSM (10.8%) DUI (7.5%) DPA (3.2%) ND (1.5%)

N13 (e79). Region

1 Skopje (24.2%) 2 South-East (7.1%) 3 Eastern (11.2%) 4 North-East (9.3%) 5 Vardar (6.5%) 6 South-West (10.6%) 7 Polog (16.3%) 8 Pelagonia (14.8%)

26

MCIC

Discrimination in Macedonia on the Grounds of Ethnic Origin

Annex 3: Topic in Focus-Groups

1. Understanding, reasons and awareness about the dissemination of ethnic discrimination

2. Why you believe that there is difference between you experience and the opinion that the ethnic discrimination is disseminated?

3. Why the Police would behave differently depending on the ethnic community?

4. Ethnic preference during distribution of the budget and non-payment of taxes

5. Ethnic preference during employment in state and private sector

6. Acceptability of ethnically mixed schools

7. Acceptability of persons from other ethnic community for public offices

27