Regarding use of personal data of people who spread intolerance on the Internet, the Ombudsman believes that an individual who decides to have a public profile can no longer claim privacy and anonymity in relation to certain content. One cannot be anonymous only when this is convenient. We also explained that publishing personal information on flyers in public or posting them on utility poles may be defined legally as a form of ‘self-help’ which is usually unacceptable, since unacceptable conduct in regulated states governed by the rule of law must be sanctioned by state authorities. With such conduct, individuals actually assume a role which is supposed to be taken by the state. But as stated above, the state almost never sanctions cases of hate speech and does not indicate that it is unacceptable or may even be dangerous in the current conditions, such ‘selfhelp’ of civil society must also be looked upon from this perspective. 3 INFORMATION ABOUT THE OMBUDSMAN’S WORK Attempt to burn the Quran We received questions relating to an attempt to burn the Quran in front of the National Assembly. We assessed it as an obvious attempt at provocation which was stopped on time. The action was entirely inappropriate, because such disrespectful treatment of religious symbols offends the religious sensibilities of certain groups of citizens. Such acts prompt and maintain hateful and intolerant feelings, which may escalate into physical violence and disturbances of public order and peace. We stressed that politicians should assess for themselves whether to respond to such provocations or not. If they respond, they should emphasise the inappropriateness of inciting hatred and intolerance, which abuses religious feelings and symbols. When publishing information on such provocations, the media should also act with due responsibility. They should report on such acts responsibly; merely informing on such provocations with no suitable comment or context may only contribute to further hatred and intolerance. Wearing of burqas With the arrival of refugees, a wave of intolerance towards them began to spread, which was also displayed in a completely legitimate manner: one of the opposition parties presented a bill in Parliament on whether it was permissible to wear a burqa. The Ombudsman was requested to give an opinion. The Ombudsman explained to journalists that manner of dress and visual presentation depend on individual choice if this does not interfere with the rights of others or endanger oneself and others. The wearing of the burqa is an expression of a (religious) belief, which is protected constitutionally at least with the general freedom of action guaranteed in Article 35 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia, and a general prohibition on wearing the burqa in public could be an infringement on this human right. Human rights may be limited by law only if this protects other constitutional and human rights or values (e.g. protection of people and property, public order etc.). Legislators must thus carefully consider constitutionally protected values before passing an act that imposes a possible prohibition or limitation on wearing burqas in public. The migration crisis also led to protests against the razor-wire fence and the amendments to the Defence Act, which in Article 37a gives the armed forces the same powers as those held by the police, to which a part of the public objected. At the request of Radio Študent, the Ombudsman also filed a request for a constitutional review of this Article. The media also inquired about the restrictions on the movement of refugees and the treatment of refugees by police officers. More on this can be found in Chapter 2.3.7 Aliens and applicants for international protection. Problems affecting the Roma people In 2015, we received only a few questions relating to the Roma, all of which referred to concrete cases. A journalist at Delo newspaper discovered that the Government wrote in the documents being discussed that the issue of drinking water in Goriča vas was not problematic. He inquired about our opinion. We replied that 188 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA FOR 2015 the Government had obviously not acted on either of the two Ombudsman’s proposals, and we regretted their decision. Residents also confirmed that a (temporary) water supply had not been provided. Although the Government stated in 2011 that the observance of the right to drinking water, which derives from the national and international legislation, means the provision of public access or access to a public connection, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the Government ‘took a step back’ in 2015 relating to already established human rights protection. It was impossible to discover the reasons from the letter received from the Government as to why the established policy had not been implemented. Discrimination against the blind and visually impaired We received an inquiry from journalists as to whether the blind and visually impaired were really discriminated against in the education process. We agreed with the assertions of parents who passed on information to the media on the situation of this group of children. We also stated that we would again remind the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport and the Ministry of Health of the issues concerning the needs of comprehensive and systemic early treatment of pre-school blind and visually impaired children: just provision of additional expert assistance relating to a heterogeneous group; provision of equal opportunities for education and thus related financing of additional services or equipment; the provision of textbooks; the right of primary school pupils and secondary school students to participate in all parts of the educational process; training of expert staff and the rights of blind children to an additional teacher or a coordinator upon inclusive education. We asked the competent authorities to submit information on whether they were dealing with the issue and the deadlines on when and how the situation in each segment would be addressed. More on this issue may be found in Chapter 2.2.7 Equal opportunities relating to physical or mental disabilities (invalidity). Did applicants have the same opportunities when accessing the call for shortage occupation scholarships? In the field of social activities, the call for shortage occupation scholarships caused quite a controversy. We received inquiries about whether applicants had had equal opportunities upon the repeated call. The Ombudsman did not receive any complaints claiming that someone did not have equal opportunities relating to access or filing the application. Nevertheless, the Ombudsman assessed that the criterion for considering of applications according to the order of the arrival of complete applications as per the date and time of filing an individual application was unsuitable. The Ombudsman also assessed that this legal criterion does not enable the scholarships to achieve their purpose. The time when the call was implemented was in itself problematic. It is impossible to promote enrolment in programmes for shortage occupations in mid-September, since the enrolment had already closed. The Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities planned to amend the legislation, and the Ombudsman thus decided to monitor further developments. On that note, the Ombudsman also highlighted that the issue discussed reveals the importance of drafting high-quality regulations and particularly the assessment of all the consequences arising from new legal arrangements. More on this issue may be found in Chapter 2.2.7 Equal opportunities relating to physical or mental disabilities (invalidity). Various questions on the invasion of privacy Every year, we also receive a few questions on the invasion of privacy. Journalists inquired again on how to protect children from invasion of privacy on social networks. We emphasised the responsibility of administrators and the need to assess the risk of the consequences. If a child is at risk, the state must intervene with its apparatus to protect the child. We were asked about how to avoid video surveillance and if the introduction of certified cash registers interferes with consumers’ privacy. The invasion of privacy was also relevant in the case of an incident regarding arbitration when it was discovered by means of phone tapping that the two parties involved in arbitration were negotiating possible solutions. More on this can be found below. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA FOR 2015 189 3 INFORMATION ABOUT THE OMBUDSMAN’S WORK intolerance publicly may be subject to certain sanctions; which sanctions these should be must be determined by the competent authorities.