University of Szeged

Szegedi Tudományegyetem

Faculty of Law and Political Sciences

Course: Protection of Human rights in Europe

Professor: Dr. Cheesman Samantha Joy

“Case: C. v. Romania”

(Workplace Sexual Harassment)

(Case No. 47358/20, 30 August 2022)

Prepared by Sam Siekleng

Username: U2XGQA

31 June 2023
 Contents

I. Introduction ..............................................................................................................3

II. Case Study of C. v. Romania: Facts of the case .....................................................3

III. Legal questions .......................................................................................................... 5

IV. Rule of law ................................................................................................................ 6

4.1 Legal framework of Domestic law ..................................................................... 6

4.2 Council of Europe material ................................................................................ 7

4.3 European Union Material ................................................................................... 8

4.4 International material ......................................................................................... 9

V. Application: analyze the facts in light of the law .................................................. 9

VI. Judgment .................................................................................................................. 11

VII. The effect of judgement: National level & constitution system ............................ 11

VIII. Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 12

Bibliography .........................................................................................................................13

Page | 2
 I. Introduction

In twenty-first century, men-women have equal rights in terms of work, opportunity,

education, opinion, decision-making, and leadership. Gender equality is not only a fundamental
human right, but it is also essential for a peaceful, prosperous, and sustainable world. Unfortunately,
until today there are still many people who have been victims of sexual harassment in public, in
education, at work, or by relatives. According to International labour organization, globally, 17.9%
of employed women and men reported having encountered psychological abuse and harassment at
work, while 8.5 percent had dealt with physical abuse and harassment1. It means that one in five
people was being harassment. It was also confirmed that most of victim is women.

On other hand, freedom from sexual harassment has been effectively protected by article 8
of European Court of human rights convention, “right to respect for private and family life” 2. This
convention was bonded by the member governments of the council of Europe toward peace and
unity based of human rights and vital of freedoms, implementation to member state. If someone
violate any article will face with the judgement of the court. As one of important case related to
workplace sexual harassment violation “C. v. Romania” which known as a significant flaw in
criminal investigation concerning.

This research paper aims to analyze and discuss about the case of C. v. Romania. We will
emphasis on IRAC rule of analysis, stands for issue, rule, application, and conclusion structure of
legal analysis. There are three important research questions (1) what is this case about? (2) what
is the judgment of the case? And how does this case influence to national level and constitution
system?

II. Case Study of C. v. Romania: Facts of the case

The applicant was born in 1970, and lives in Fibiş, Timiş County. She was represented by
Ms B.I. Radu, a lawyer practicing in Timişoara. On the other hand, the Government were
represented by their Agent, Ms O.F. Ezer, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

1
ILO, “ Violence and harassment at work has affected more than one in five people”. A first global survey. Press
release 05 Dec 2022. Retrieved from http://ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_863177/lang--
en/index.htm
2
ECtHR, “Guide on Article 8 of ECHR”. Prepared by the registry, updated on 31 Aug 2022.

Page | 3
 The applicant, C., was employed as a cleaner at the state-owned railway company's
Timişoara East station. She was suffer from sexual harassment from her station maganer (C.P) has
been 2 year period. She made the decision to report the station manager (C.P.) to her own boss
after allegedly dealing with his aggressive behavior and sexual advances. She relied on article 223
of criminal code, and proposed with several witness and summit recording (discussion with C.P of
sexual nature). This was described by applicants as following:

“[The applicant] has performed her duties for the past 5 years, but about 2 years ago,
[C.P.] changed his initial attitude (which had been appropriate), requesting that [the
applicant] have sexual intercourse with him.
As she consistently refused [his advances], he undertook a series of acts designed to create
discomfort in the workplace for the victim, terrorising her.
He repeatedly tried to undress [the applicant] when he found her alone or in secluded
places; he unbuttoned her jacket on several occasions and asked her to stay put because
he would do something ‘beautiful’ to her.
He was very insistent and, over time, became increasingly aggressive ... when [the
applicant] refused [his advances] – and she always refused.
In order not to jeopardise her job, [the applicant] avoided the perpetrator, but the latter
followed her when she was alone or in places where he could carry out his harmful acts.
He also altered his behaviour when met with her opposition, in that he refused to give her
the cleaning products she needed for her job and would then accuse her of not doing her
job properly.
He also claimed on several occasions that he would ‘kick her butt’ and always emphasised
his position as a boss, as opposed to her being a mere cleaning lady, and his degrading
and insulting behaviour towards [the applicant] was notorious.”3
C.P. had apologized when questioned by the management, and it appears that the train
company did not pursue the matter further. The prosecutor's office closed the case after conducting
an inquiry on the basis that the acts done did not match the criteria set forth by the penal code to
qualify as sexual harassment. This decision was upheld by the chief prosecutor of the same office
and then by a District Court.4

The Court noted that the railway company was owned by the State and thus represented a
public authority. However, it appeared that the train firm did not take many actions in response to
one of its employees' claims of sexual harassment. The head of passenger safety had declined to

3
ECtHR, “CASE OF C. v. ROMANIA”. Strasbourg, Fourth section, 30 August 2022.
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-218933
4
ECtHR, “C. v. Romania”. Case No. 47358/20, Judgment 30.8.2022. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=002-13755

Page | 4
look into C.'s case and had urged her to go to the police if she felt it was necessary, despite the fact
that there was an internal policy that discouraged any behavior that violated a person's dignity and
prohibited it. The Court did point out that C.'s major concern was about the way the courts and
prosecutors handled her claims of sexual harassment.

It consequently considered whether the State had adequately upheld C.'s right to respect for
her private life, particularly her personal integrity, in the criminal procedures involving the
allegations. The Court noted that C. had filed a criminal complaint against C.P. for sexual
harassment, that the investigation had begun right away, and that both the District Court and the
prosecutor's office had acknowledged that C.P. had acted in the manner C. had claimed, but they
believed that this had not constituted the criminal offence of sexual harassment. In the decisions
made in the case, it was either determined that C.P.5

III. Legal questions

The primary focus of the applicant's complaint was the inadequate response that the
prosecutors and courts provided to her complaints. The Court looked at the procedures that the
State authorities had set up and that the applicant had been able to employ to get her complaints
addressed.

On the other hand, sexual harassment was regarded the most serious form of harassment
under domestic law and was punished more severely than other types of forbidden harassment.
However, in reality; the police and prosecutor had considered that a criminal investigation had
been required. The applicant had no cause to mistrust the effectiveness or ability of the criminal
investigation to result in remedy.

The applicant could not be required to have tried other remedies, such as a civil action, that
had also been available but were probably no more likely to be successful given the prosecutor's
office and court's determination that she had not been humiliated by C.P. as she had claimed.
Therefore, the issue was whether the State had adequately upheld the applicant's right to
respect for her private life, particularly her personal integrity, during the criminal procedures
involving the charges of sexual harassment.

5
Ibid,.

Page | 5
 Consequently, the legal question here; ECtHR found that the Romanian State had
violated its positive obligations under Article 8 ECHR, because of the significant flaws in the
investigation of applicant’s case. The Court emphasized that it was unable to determine how the
domestic authorities arrived at their decision. It was determined that the prosecution had failed to
contextualize the applicant's assertions, that the power disparity between C. and C.P. had not been
evaluated. 6

Moreover, the Court expressed its concern regarding the secondary victimisation faced by
C., both because of the detailed account the national courts had given in their judgments of C.P.’s
statements about C.’s private life and because of her confrontation with her former manager during
the criminal investigation.

IV. Rule of law

According to ECtHR, this case is strongly based on article 8 of convention – Right to

respect for private and family life. The content as following:

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his
correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except
such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the
interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the country, for
the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the
protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

As stated in this article 8's guidelines, this freedom also covered the idea of a private
existence that protected one's bodily, psychological, or moral integrity. In particular, the Court has
long held that the State has an affirmative duty to protect people from violence committed by
others and to safeguard people's physical and moral integrity from other people, including
harassment and bullying at work and online by a person's intimate partner. In order to achieve this,

6
Nikolakopoulou, Danai. "C v. Romania (ECtHR, 47358/20)–Workplace sexual harassment: the extent of protection
under the European Convention on Human Rights." (2022).

Page | 6
they must uphold and effectively implement a legislative framework that provides protection from
individual acts of violence. 7

4.1 Legal framework of Domestic law

A. The Criminal Code prohibits sexual harassment in the following terms:

Article 208 – Harassment: “(1) Repeatedly following someone, without right or a legitimate
interest, or watching his or her home, workplace or other places frequented by
[him or her], thus causing him or her fear, shall be punishable by imprisonment
of three to six months or a fine. (2) Making telephone calls or remote
communications, which, by their frequency or content, cause a person fear,
shall be punished by one to three months’ imprisonment or a fine, if the act
does not constitute a more serious offence. (3) Criminal proceedings shall be
initiated upon a complaint from the victim.”

Article 223 – Sexual harassment: (1) Repeatedly claiming sexual favours in a work
relationship or other similar relationship, if the victim has been intimidated or
humiliated, shall be punished by three months to one year’s imprisonment or
a fine. (2) Criminal proceedings shall be initiated upon a complaint from the
victim.

B. Definition of Harassment

• “Harassment refers to unwanted behaviour related to the sex of the person [in question]
aimed at or causing an affront to the dignity of the person in question and the creation
of an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment;”

• “Sexual harassment refers to unwanted physical, verbal or non-verbal behaviour with

a sexual connotation aimed at or causing an affront to the dignity of the person [in
question] and, in particular, the creation of an intimidating, hostile, degrading,
humiliating or offensive environment;”

• “Psychological harassment means any inappropriate behaviour that occurs over a

period of time, is repetitive or systematic, and consists of physical acts, oral or written

7
ECtHR, “Guide on Article 8 of ECHR”. Prepared by the registry, updated on 31 Aug 2022.

Page | 7
 language, gestures or other intentional acts which may affect a person’s personality,
dignity, or physical or psychological integrity.”

4.2 Council of Europe material

• European Social Charter (Revised) provides that the Parties accept as the aim of their policy,
to be pursued by all appropriate means both national and international in character
• Council of Europe adopted the Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against
Women and Domestic Violence. Article 40 – sexual harassment, and article 45- sanctions
and measures. These sanctions shall include, where appropriate, sentences involving the
deprivation of liberty which can give rise to extradition

Within this legal framework also mentioned about sanctions and measures in article 45,
“Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to ensure that the offences
established in accordance with this Convention are punishable by effective, proportionate and
dissuasive sanctions, taking into account their seriousness. These sanctions shall include, where
appropriate, sentences involving the deprivation of liberty which can give rise to extradition”.

4.3 European Union Material

According to relevant parts of Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal
treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast), the definition of
harassment was defined.

“Harassment: where unwanted conduct related to the sex of a person occurs with the
purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person, and of creating an intimidating,
hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment;”

“Sexual harassment: where any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct
of a sexual nature occurs, with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person,
in particular when creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive
environment;”

“Zero tolerance and the fight against sexual harassment and sexual abuse in the EU”

Page | 8
 4.4 International material

On 21 June 2019 the United Nations International Labour Organization (ILO) adopted the
Violence and Harassment Convention (no. 190), which is aimed at protecting workers from
violence and harassment in the world of work, defined as “a range of unacceptable behaviors and
practices, or threats thereof, whether a single occurrence or repeated, that aim at, result in, or are
likely to result in physical, psychological, sexual or economic harm, and includes gender-based
violence and harassment”8

V. Application: analyze the facts in light of the law

A: The applicant

In her initial submissions, the applicant spoke of the humiliation she had experienced at
the hands of C.P. throughout the time he had harassed her at work, claiming that she had gone
through emotional abuse that had ended in her being sacked. She went on to say that C.P. had lied
when he claimed that they had engaged in sexual activity. Additionally, he had insulted her in front
of the prosecutor, perhaps as payback for her complaint and to cover up his woefully insufficient
actions at work. In her further submissions in reply to those of the Government, the applicant
pointed out that the domestic courts had not taken into account the evidence she had presented
about the sexual harassment she had suffered. She reiterated that C.P. had sexually harassed her in
her workplace and caused her humiliation, fear and low self-esteem.

B: Governments

The Government asserted that the authorities had taken all necessary steps to uphold their
positive obligation. The applicant, in particular, had the opportunity to voice her concerns to the
authorities and had benefited from adversarial proceedings because she was able to refute C.P.'s
assertions and offer her own arguments and supporting evidence. She also enjoyed special
protection throughout the domestic processes since she was a purported victim of sexual
harassment; she was not required to attend a confrontation with C.P. or provide evidence of her
mistreatment at his hands.

8
ILO, “Violence and harassment convention”. 2019.
https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C190

Page | 9
 The Government argued that “the criminal investigation and ensuing court proceedings had
been effective, even if they had not ended as the applicant had expected, that is, with C.P.’s
conviction. On this point, they reiterated that while the victim’s statements were essential in
proceedings concerning sexual harassment, they had to be corroborated by other evidence.
However, in the present case, the evidence did not support the applicant’s allegations that she had
suffered psychological harm or humiliation”.

The last but not least, the Government pointed out that the domestic decisions had been amply and
relevantly reasoned.

How did this case relate to article 8 of ECtHR?

Based on applicant revoking, it was determined that sexual harassment at work can have
an impact on a person's psychological and sexual integrity to the point where it is covered by
the application of Article 8. This discovery is hardly shocking: Over the past few decades, the
ECHR's Article 8 has frequently been invoked as a legal justification for the assertion of new
rights.9 The court reasoned that the term "private life" does not have a strict definition and
"includes a person's physical and psychological integrity, and extends to other values such as
well-being and dignity, personality development, and relationships with other human beings" .

According to Article 8, States have a responsibility to defend a person's physical and

mental integrity. To that aim, they must uphold and effectively implement a sufficient legislative
framework that provides protection against private individual acts of violence, particularly in the
context of workplace harassment.

➢ In the context of attacks on the physical integrity of a person, such protection should be ensured
through efficient criminal-law mechanisms
➢ As regards less serious acts between individuals which may violate psychological integrity, an
adequate legal framework affording protection does not always require that an efficient criminal-
law provision covering the specific act be in place.

9
M. Burbergs, ‘How the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence became the nursery
in which new rights are born. Article 8 ECHR’, in: E. Brems and J. Gerards, Shaping Rights in the ECHR. The Role of
the European Court of Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press 2014, p. 315-329

Page | 10
 ➢ Regarding positive obligations under Article 8, Contracting States have a lot of flexibility in
deciding what steps to take to ensure compliance to the Convention while taking into account the
needs and resources of the community and of individuals.
➢ criminal proceedings should be organised in such a way as not to unjustifiably imperil the life,
liberty or security of witnesses, and in particular those of victims called upon to testify, or their
interests coming generally within the ambit of Article 8 of the Convention

VI. Judgment

A decision of the European Court of Human Rights which recognizes that conduct that
constitutes sexual harassment can violate Article 8 if it influences a certain level of severity, in
certainly good news for sexual harassment victims. Meanwhile to this case, it was recognized as
“violated article 8 of the convention”. The applicant claimed 20,000 euros (EUR) in respect of
non-pecuniary damage. The claim, according to the government, was excessive, and the discovery of a
violation ought to be sufficient justification. The applicant must have suffered non-economic harm,
according to the court, which cannot be made up for by a judgment of a violation alone. The Court grants
the applicant EUR 7,500 in respect of non-pecuniary loss, plus any applicable tax, after taking into account
the nature of the infringement identified and determining its judgment on an equitable basis.

First of all, respondent State shall pay the applicant EUR 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred
euros), plus any applicable tax, within three months of the date the judgment becomes final under
the Convention, to be converted into the currency of the Respondent State at the exchange rate in
effect on the date of settlement.

Second, from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest
shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European
Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

VII. The effect of judgement: National level & constitution system

➢ The restriction on the human right implementation in national level. The government
took steps to identify, investigate, prosecute, and punish officials who committed
abuses, but authorities did not have effective mechanisms to do so and delayed
proceedings involving alleged police abuse and corruption, with the result that many

Page | 11
 of the cases ended in acquittals. That’s why government try to improve on the steps of
investigation. 10
➢ The national court shall set aside any provision of domestic law which may conflict
with EC law, even where the period prescribed for transposition of that Directive has
not yet expired
➢ Rising awareness of freedom of private life to citizen.
➢ sets up a robust protection mechanism for victims.
➢ Romania has improved protection of women from domestic violence (partial) 11.

VIII. Conclusion

In conclusion, this law case is known as one of the key cases of the European Court of
Human Rights in 2022 because it involves respect for private life and sexual harassment in the
workplace. The final judgment of the court has given hope to many other victim women who suffer
from sexual harassment. As most of the victims of harassment choose to be silent and not talk
because sometimes, they don’t want to speak against their superiors, their boss, or get fired from
the job. As messages, no matter what happen “please don’t stay silent”, “stand up and move on”
in order to fight for yourself, for justice, and what you must be deserve.

10
U.S embassy in Romania, “2022 country reports on Human rights practice”. 2022.
https://ro.usembassy.gov/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices-romania/
11
Council of Europe, “Newsroom”. June 2022. https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/romania-has-improved-
protection-of-women-from-domestic-violence-but-progress-needed-on-definition-of-rape

Page | 12
 Bibliography

Council of Europe, “Newsroom”. June 2022. https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/romania-has-

improved-protection-of-women-from-domestic-violence-but-progress-needed-
on-definition-of-rape
ECtHR, “C. v. Romania”. Case No. 47358/20, Judgment 30.8.2022.
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=002-13755
ECtHR, “CASE OF C. v. ROMANIA”. Strasbourg, Fourth section, 30 August 2022.
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-218933
ECtHR, “Guide on Article 8 of ECHR”. Prepared by the registry, updated on 31 Aug 2022.
Frentzen, E., Reisacher, D., Brähler, E., Rassenhofer, M., Fegert, J. M., & Witt, A. (2022). The
predictors of awareness of sexual abuse and sexual violence in the media and
the influence on actions of the individuals. Frontiers in psychiatry, 2220.

ILO, “ Violence and harassment at work has affected more than one in five people”. A first
global survey. Press release 05 Dec 2022. Retrieved from
http://ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_863177/lang--
en/index.htm
ILO, “Violence and harassment convention”. 2019.
https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P1210
0_ILO_CODE:C190
M. Burbergs, ‘How the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence
became the nursery in which new rights are born. Article 8 ECHR’, in: E. Brems
and J. Gerards, Shaping Rights in the ECHR. The Role of the European Court of
Human Rights in Determining the Scope of Human Rights, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press 2014, p. 315-329
Moise, Adrian Cristian. "Some Comments on the Criminalization and the Investigation of the
Crime of Harassment in the Romanian Law." Bulletin of the Transilvania
University of Braşov. Series VII: Social Sciences• Law (2022): 169-174.

Nikolakopoulou, D. C v. Romania (ECtHR, 47358/20)–Workplace sexual harassment: the extent

of protection under the European Convention on Human Rights. (2022).

Page | 13
Nikolakopoulou, Danai. "C v. Romania (ECtHR, 47358/20)–Workplace sexual harassment: the
extent of protection under the European Convention on Human Rights." (2022).
Pineiro, L. C., & Kitada, M. Sexual harassment and women seafarers: The role of laws and
policies to ensure occupational safety & health. Marine Policy, 117, 103938.
(2020).

Siuta, R. L., & Bergman, M. E. Sexual harassment in the workplace. In Oxford research
encyclopedia of business and management. (2019).

U.S embassy in Romania, “2022 country reports on Human rights practice”. 2022.
https://ro.usembassy.gov/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices-
romania/

Page | 14