The right to non-discrimination

Participants noted that there were generally not many issues regarding how CSOs working against discrimination could operate in Estonia. Participants in this session also welcomed the strategic partnerships that existed between ministries and CSOs, as participants had done in other sessions. Participants referred to research showing that the legislative procedure had been positively impacted by these partnerships. Nevertheless, according to participants, the consultation of anti-discrimination CSOs by the authorities during the policy-drafting process remained inconsistent. It was considered problematic that the processes seemed to vary depending on the minister and their cabinet. Participants explained that some politicians in power chose not to consult CSOs in drafting laws, despite the existence of best practice documents that indicated the need for consultation. Participants asked for more meaningful and longer consultation periods. Participants believed that there was a lack of funding available for CSOs working against discrimination in Estonia. They also considered problematic that access to social services was inconsistent, both regionally and within target groups. It was explained that social entrepreneurship was growing in Estonia, but a participant lamented that CSOs were not eligible for the funding available for that sector due to their non-profit status. Participants complained that the equal treatment act did not adequately consider the rights of people with disabilities. They asserted that the relevant CSOs had not been consulted when the act was drafted. According to a participant, the rural population faced indirect discrimination by being ignored in policy-making. It was added that the regional pay gap was increasing and that the elderly were disproportionately impacted by this. Participants believed that there had been a decrease in general support for Ukrainian refugees amongst the Estonian population. It was explained that some Estonians did not want to see refugees moving into their neighbourhood and therefore discriminated against them when renting out housing. Participants believed that the exact number of Ukrainian refugees was not known, which complicated the provision of adequate services. A lack of understanding of their rights amongst asylum-seekers was an issue, as was a long waiting time for the issuing of passports. Access to healthcare was also considered to be complicated for asylum-seekers in Estonia.

Participants expressed concern over the amendments to the State Borders Act, and the impact on migrants seeking temporary protection. Participants explained that same-sex marriage and adoption by same-sex couples would be legal as of 2024 in Estonia. A participant however called for further efforts by the authorities to tackle the prejudice against same-sex couples and their children that continued to exist in society. The lack of a national action plan on gender inequality was considered problematic by participants. They called a plan to be developed through consultations with CSOs and with due consideration of the regional differences as well as the prevailing gender segregation in certain professions in Estonia.