Kadi Viik

There have been positive changes as well as standstill in the area of prohibition of discrimination last year. The approval of plan of action for pay gap and the Norway’s programs for gender equality and violence against women, ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and Estonia’s international activity in the field of human rights can be considered steps in the right direction. Yet the question of resources of one of the national institutions – the office of Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner – has still not been resolved and the Gender Equality Council, the establishing of which has been prescribed by law, is still yet to happen.

Political and institutional developments

At the end of 2012 the government approved the methodology for appraising the effects of acts of law[1] worked out by the State Chancellery in cooperation with the Ministry of Justice, where gender effects are observed under social effects, as well as the effects of rights of people belonging to risk groups,[2] along with control questionnaires. The application of the methodology is supported by the training program that came into effect in the autumn of 2012. The complete implementation of methodics should increase the quality of lawmaking through increased engagement of interest groups and experts and a more competent analysis of effects. A thorough appraisal of effects on various target groups has so far rather been the exception in Estonia. For example, gender effects were not appraised in the following draft acts: the Family Law Act,[3] the so-called parents’ pension act, the Employment Contracts Act or the Civil Service Act, although they directly influence the position of men and women in the society, and appraisal of effects to gender is obligatory according to the Gender Equality Act.

In 2012 guidelines were prepared by the Ministry of Finance and the State Chancellery for considering the basic themes in specialized development plans, where one of the running themes is equal opportunities. The four sub-themes in equal opportunities are gender equality, equal rights and opportunities for disabled persons, elderly persons and national minorities. The guideline has not been approved by the government at the time of writing this.

In July of 2012 the plan of action submitted by the Ministry of Social Affairs for the reduction of pay gap between men and women was approved at a cabinet meeting.[4] There are five blocks of action in the plan of action: better implementation of the Gender Equality Act, improving the opportunities for combining family, work and private life; constantly considering the aspect of gender in education and work policies; decreasing and eliminating the segregation in education and work; analysing practices of organisations and wage systems and, if need be, making proposals for amendments and providing support for making amendments. The plan of action only prescribes soft measures (analyses, notifications, etc) and lacks any stricter means. An important development plan came into force in 2012 – the development plan for children and families for 2012–2020. The text of the development plan pays a lot of attention to gender equality, the most significant problems in that area have been charted and the operational programme also prescribes methods for advancement of social equality.

The area of gender equality will receive foreign funds for years 2013-2015, which means this area is bound to become more active. The donor state of Norway approved two programmes at the end of 2012: the Programme on Mainstreaming Gender Equality and Promoting Work‐Life Balance[5] and the Domestic and Gender-based Violence programme.[6] The grant for either programme is 2,000,000 euros, which will be added the Estonian co-financing of 352,941 euros. From the first programme 700,000 euros is to be awarded the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner according to a predefined project.

Estonia was an active promoter of human rights on an international level in 2012. In November Estonia was elected a member of the UN Human Rights Council for the years 2013-2015. The priority topics for Estonia as a member of the UN Human Rights Council are: democracy, facilitation of fundamental rights and the principles of a state based on the rule of law; facilitating freedom of expression and facilitating and protecting internet freedom; rights of women and children, questions relating to rights of indigenous peoples, and other topics.[7] Estonia is also a member of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW)[8]  for the years 2011-2015, and the Executive Board of the United Nations Women (UNW)[9] for the years 2011-2012.[10]

Estonia ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and joined its Optional Protocol 30 May 2012.[11] In March of 2012 a memorandum on principles of cooperation was concluded between the Government of the Republic and representative organisations of persons with disabilities,[12] which will help better engage representative organisations of persons with disabilities in the decision making processes. An obligation was taken with the memorandum, to work out the strategy for protection of rights of persons with disabilities in 2013, based on what has been written down in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in order to strengthen the protection of rights of persons with disabilities and increase their independent coping.

There are also areas where no progress took place, even though recommendations had been made by Estonian citizens’ associations,[13] international organisations[14] as well as other states.[15] The Gender Equality Act prescribes creating a gender equality council, but despite the fact that soon nine years will have passed since the act came into force, this council still hasn’t been founded. Neither have there been fundamental changes in state funding of the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner.[16] The commissioner receives additional resources from the Norwegian gender equality programme and through its Estonian co-financing, but firstly, it is a programme-based foreign financing, which significantly decreases ways it can be used, and secondly, the funds have been allocated to facilitate just one area of the commissioner’s work (gender equality) and the other areas receive no additional funds.

Legislative developments

In June Riigikogu adopted an act establishing the system of parent pension or the Funded Pensions Act, the act amending State Pension Insurance Act and other relevant acts,[17] which enters into force in 2013. The system does not automatically award additional pension to the person staying at home with a small child (who are predominantly women in Estonia), but the parents have to agree which one of them will receive it. Considering the remarkable pay gap between the genders in Estonia, which has also transferred to pensions, and the connection of the pay gap with taking care of children, the lawmaker failed to take advantage of the opportunity to smooth the inequality in creating the new system.

Riigikogu also adopted the Civil Service Act in June, which will come into force 1 April 2013.[18] The new act no longer make references to the Equal Treatment Act and the Gender Equality Act, neither is there a specific list of bases (§ 361 of the current act). It has been replaced with a general and vague requirement to guarantee the protection from discrimination of persons wishing to serve and persons serving, to follow the principle of equal treatment and to facilitate equality (§ 13). Reform of the civil service is also important because Estonian public sector employs twice as many women as men and women face the problem of pay gap and the so-called glass ceiling in their work life. However, as has already been mentioned, an analysis on gender effects was not carried out before the reform.

1 August 2012 requirements set by Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council were adopted into Estonian legislation – about application of principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity. In order to guarantee equal treatment and elimination of entrepreneurship limitations the directive prescribes that a person has the right to the same social protection regardless of their gender and the form of earning money. The Social Tax Act, the Taxation Act, the Health Insurance Act, the State Pension Insurance Act, Employment Service and Support Act, the Gender Equality Act and the Equal Treatment Act were amended for that effect.[19]

Two important lawmaking processes are still in the works. Estonia, as a member of the European Union has the obligation to make incitement of hatred punishable by law according to the 2008 framework decision. The Ministry of Justice composed a draft act for that effect, the first version of which was drawn up 30 July 2012 and also passed two rounds of approval – the first of the level of ministries and the second on the level of interest groups. As the draft act was met with opposition – primarily seeing it as a danger that freedom of expression would be limited[20] – there have been several roundtables with the representatives of interest groups. In the words of the Ministry of Justice the discussions will continue until a wording that pleases all parties has been come to.[21] According to the current act of law the person inciting hatred can only be brought to justice if there is a real danger to the life, health or property of a person. According to the draft act the person can be punished already when he is purposefully inciting hatred or violence. The draft act also amends § 152 of the Penal Code (violation of equality) so that the qualified elements necessary to constitute an offence are reworded and the sanctions are made stricter. An aggravating circumstance while committing the act of discrimination by misuse of official position will be added, the requirement of repeating will be replaced by the plurality of victims and the upper limit of imprisonment will be increased to three years. The final version of the draft act is still to be determined.

Government of the republic approved the act amending Insurance Activities Act and other relevant acts at the end of the year. One of the purposes of the draft act is to take the judgment of the European Court of Justice into consideration, which states that insurance premiums and indemnities of life assurance, sickness insurance and accident insurance contracts of a man and a woman that have been concluded on the same conditions may no longer differ, which also amends the provisions adopting the 2004/113 Directive. The draft act made it to Riigikogu in the beginning of 2013.[22]

Court Practice

A judgment of the Supreme Court[23] came to force in 2012, which had to do with discrimination based on gender upon determining a disciplinary penalty. The decision is interesting as it partly quashes the earlier judgments of Tallinn Circuit Court and Harju County Court and contradicted the opinion of the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner that there had been a breach of principle of equal treatment of women and men in determining the disciplinary penalty (see the separate box).

The applicant worked for the defendant as assistant manager. The male applicant who had been working the 2008 New Year’s Eve consumed the sparkling wine left over by the clients, along with a female employee who worked as a cashier. The applicant took two glasses of sparkling wine to the employees’ room twice and finished them with his co-workers. Both employees were asked to write letters of explanation. The employer wrote the applicant a letter terminating his contract as a disciplinary punishment for severe breach of duties on the part of the employee. The applicant’s co-worker received a reprimand as a disciplinary punishment from the employer. Harju County Court and Tallinn Circuit Court at first took the view that the applicant as a person comparable to the co-worker had been treated less favourably in a similar situation, and also that the defendant had no reasonable reason for different treatment of the employees. The panel of the Supreme Court, however, came to the conclusion that the applicant and his co-worker were not comparable persons in this case and therefore the issue of unequal treatment of the applicant cannot arise. Where the lower courts found that according to the job description the main area of duty for both employees was service and sales work and that they would cover for one another when needed and were therefore comparable persons in application of disciplinary punishment, the Supreme Court found that as it wasn’t claimed or detected in the case whether employees actually covered for one another, it wasn’t a case of comparable persons. Also, if they could have been seen as comparable, the Supreme Court found that discrimination of the applicant would have been precluded because the material facts of the disciplinary offence of the applicant and the co-worker were different – the co-worker had not taken the glasses meant for the clients in their presence and taken them through the clients’ zone to the employees’ room, thereby creating the opportunity to consume alcohol, as was done by the applicant. And it was the responsibility of the applicant to manage the client zone, whereas his co-worker had no such responsibility. The panel of the Supreme Court did not discuss the proportionality of the punishment in their judgment – that one employee was fired and the other reprimanded.

According to the Labour Inspectorate a total of 23 cases on discrimination were argued at the Labour Dispute Committee in 2012.[24] The Labour Inspectorate did not analyse the trends, however, the traits the employees claimed they were discriminated based on were language, age, health, convictions, nationality, etc. Gender and affiliation with a political party were also mentioned. There were two interesting cases where the applicant turned to the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner first, and then to the Labour Dispute Committee.

  • A man who worked part time at a company offering massage services turned to the Commissioner. One day the company made the employee a proposition to lower his work load and to conclude an authorisation agreement. The reason given was that the clients prefer the services of a female masseuse. As the applicant did not agree with the proposal of the employer he was made redundant by referring to reorganisation of work. The commissioner drew up an application to the Labour Dispute Committee for the victim. He won at the Labour Dispute Committee.
  • An employee contested an application for extraordinary cancellation of the employment contract received from the employer 31 December 2011. The applicant thereby claimed that he started to perceive and unfair treatment from the employer because of his nationality at the end of 2010, when he repeatedly expressed his desire to start work at a specialised line with improved conditions of remuneration. He made several applications to the employer which were replied in an evasive manner. It was claimed that the applicant lacked the necessary training and skills to work at the specialised line, yet a worker of Estonian nationality and with few skills was hired for the position in March of 2010. The Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner found that the employer had not proved that he had followed the principle of equal treatment upon recruitment and the suspicion of the applicant that he was discriminated against because of his nationality upon recruitment was not refuted. The Labour Dispute Committee decided not to satisfy the claim of the applicant because of expiration of dates without materially discussing the case.

Statistics and surveys

The Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner was turned to on 392 instances in 2012. Out of these 392, applications and requests for explanation amounted to 95, of these 69 were applications with applicants expressing doubts of possible discrimination, over half of which had to do with possible discrimination based on gender. In 9 of the mentioned discrimination applications (69) the commissioner found that there could have been discrimination, in 4 cases she did not detect inequal treatment, in 5 cases the proceedings are still ongoing and in 51 cases the commissioner offered legal consultation or replied in a written form, but did not give an appraisal because of insufficiency of materials, lack of jurisdiction, because there had been a court judgment discussing similar contents that had come into force, because the applicant did not want to initiate proceedings, etc.

A case that received the attention of the public was the so-called PRIA case.[25] The applicants who had turned to the commissioner suspected they were being discriminated against because they were parents. The applicants claimed the state authorities had established a practice whereby the wages of all the employees returning from parental leave were decreased by 10% during 4 months. PRIA was sent a memorandum calling on them to chance this illegal practice. PRIA decided to pay the wages that were not received to the victims – 40 in total.

Last year the Chancellor of Justice designed a point of view in three proceedings handling discrimination, in two of which a breach of rule of non-discrimination was not discovered.[26] In the third the applicant asked the appraisal of constitutionality of § 16 (1) 4) of the Value Added Tax Act as this provision does not provide exemption from value added tax to sign language interpreting service. Chancellor of Justice found that leaving the sign language service out of a list of services exempt from value added tax stated by § 16 (1) 4) of the Value Added Tax Act is not in breach of fundamental rights of consumers of sign language interpreting services, however, the situation may be in contradiction of article 132 (1) g) of the Council Directive 2006/112/EC1.[27]

Last year the Chancellor of Justice also initiated on his own initiative proceedings regarding guaranteeing the rights of the deaf and persons who are hard of hearing in extrajudicial proceeding of offences. Chancellor of Justice found that the practice so far might not guarantee deaf persons a fair proceeding allowing for effective participation, and made a recommendation to the Ministry of Justice and the Police and Border Guard Board to guarantee deaf persons who do not speak the language of the proceedings sufficiently the assistance of a sign language interpreter with competent professional standards.[28]

The Ministry of Social Affairs commissioned TNS Emor to conduct an opinion poll on pay gap and topics of unequal treatment (unpublished) in November.[29] 84% of Estonian residents had heard of the pay gap and 48% of them considered it rather a significant or a very significant problem. Three quarters of the residents agreed with the fact that problems accompanying pay gap would need to be explained.

According to the same poll a quarter of residents of Estonia of ages 15 and over had personally experienced unequal treatment in the past two years. The main reason for unequal treatment has been age, language or nationality. In the appraisal of the respondents 22% of their kin or acquaintances had experienced unequal treatment and the main reasons are the same. Putting together the personal experience as well as appraisal to experience of their acquaintances unequal treatment based on some reason has been experienced in the past few years by about half of the residents. Two thirds of the persons who personally experienced unequal treatment have experienced it in their work lives. 30% have experienced unequal treatment in their private lives and 26% have experienced it while buying goods or services. The first authority the persons experiencing unequal treatment would turn to would be the police (13%). Authorities that were mentioned spontaneously (without given multiple options) most often were Labour Dispute Committee (9%), the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner (8%), social workers, psychologist and help lines (7%). Half of the residents do not know where to turn for help and 8% believe that no authority can help with problems of unequal treatment. 56% of persons who personally experienced unequal treatment didn’t do anything about it. 28% of them talked to a friend or another person close to them. Of the law enforcement authorities the Labour Dispute Committee was the one they turned most often to (8%). People did not turn to law enforcement authorities mostly because they didn’t believe they could get a positive outcome (45%). A fifth of those who personally experienced unequal treatment did not want to relive the emotionally negative experience.

Eurostat published new data about gender pay gap in Estonia (now from 2010): 27,7%.[30]

The poll also enquired about awareness of acts of law in force in Estonia: 36% of residents were aware of the Gender Equality Act being in force in Estonia and 43% about the existence of the Equal Treatment Act. 28% of residents mistakenly thought that Estonia also had a racial discrimination act.

Good practices

The Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner’s project that had lasted for a year and a half called “Gender-sensitive budgeting” ended last year.[31] The purpose of the project was to give the officials participating in preparation of the state budget knowledge and skill about how to integrate principles of gender equality into the planning, drawing up and implementing process of the state budget and thereby help make spending state’s money in a more cost effective and transparent manner. A handbook was prepared in the course of the project, 35 state officials were trained and several budgeting micro analyses were carried out. The commissioner also changed the procedure of applications in order to service the citizens faster and assist victims of discrimination reach a more effective legal remedy by helping them draw up applications to the Labour Dispute Committee and the court.

The Ministry of Social Affairs carried out five training courses on Gender Equality Act for lawyers, judges, providers of legal assistance, workers of the Labour Dispute Committee and other specialists.[32] Minimal use of the Gender Equality Act in court judgments and decisions of the Labour Dispute Committee, especially in cases concerning a less favourable treatment of persons in regards to parental leave, refers to a low level of the target group’s knowledge of the field of regulation of this act. Therefore the training is necessary.

Estonian Women’s Studies and Resource Centre (ENUT) has analysed state’s strategic documents and development plans from the point of view of gender equality.[33] In 2012 they analysed the first year of implementation of the civil society’s development plan for 2011-2014 and the development plan for children and families for 2011–2020. The economizing development strategy “Säästev Eesti 21” and the competitiveness plan “Eesti 2020” had been analysed earlier. The analyses may facilitate better governing if sufficiently introduced to the right parties.

The “Diversity Enriches” project carried out by the Tallinn Law School at Tallinn University of Technology took place for the third year running, which, in 2012, mainly focused on promoting equal treatment in companies. Special attention was also paid to homophobia and discrimination of the elderly. The greatest achievement last years was the work with companies and their unexpected interest in participating in project activities. 17 companies signed the diversity agreement, with which they voluntarily took the task to facilitate diversity and equal treatment in their companies.[34]

Noteworthy public discussions

Gender quotas and freedom of expression can be considered the buzzwords of 2012. The debate was raised by the draft to the European Parliament and Council Directive, which stated that 40% of all members of directing bodies that do not belong to management in publicly traded companies must be of the under-represented gender. This is to be attained latest by 1 January 2020, and by 1 January 2018 in companies with state participation. The directive does not apply to small and medium sized companies that are publicly traded. The Estonian government supported the main aim of the draft but opposed the quotas by supporting alternative methods.[35] Publicly traded Estonian companies who were asked for their opinion also opposed this,[36] however Estonian Women’s Associations Roundtable supported this draft.[37] Lively debate also broke around the Ministry of Justice’s so-called incitement of hatred draft act, where some opinion groups feared limitation of freedom of expression (see legislative developments).

Low levels of representation of women in Estonia’s politics were also discussed quite a bit, as well as measures for improving this situation. In the beginning of the year Mart Laar made a speech at the convention of the Pro Patria and Res Publica Union, on his last day as the political party’s chairman, inviting people to support female candidates and women to make an effort to be better represented at the next convention of the party.[38] Estonia’s leading political parties signed a memorandum of cooperation on the initiative of Estonian Association of Business and Professional Women,[39] where they declared support for principles of gender equality and their implementation (the so-called zipper method) in setting up a list of candidates, in other words alternatively setting up a female and a male candidate. At the end of the year a debate broke on the sexist attitude to female politicians, which was initiated after on-air statements made by the Minister of Finance about Kaja Kallas, his fellow politician in his political party.[40]

The issue of pay gap continued to be the object of discussion and the problem was repeatedly taken up in Riigikogu, which in turn transferred to the media. The poll ordered by the Ministry of Social Affairs (referred to above) shows that Estonia’s residents are aware of pay gap as a problem. A demonstration about pay gap took place in April and larger women’s organisations signed a public address.[41] Two larger strikes took place in fields where the employees are mostly made up of women (the teachers’ strike in March and the medics’ strike in October) in 2012. The strikes and especially the problem of low wages of teachers were covered thoroughly in media, however, the feminisation of these fields of activities (education and medicine are the leading areas in terms of proportion of women in the employment and educational market) was not paid attention to, nor the connection to the topic of pay gap.

The debate on the institution of the commissioner and her funding also continued. Coming into force of the Equal Treatment Act widened the jurisdiction of the commissioner many times over, yet the commissioner’s budget was not increased, although the letter of explanation provided for it. This situation could be compared to adding the Chancellor of Justice the task of children’s ombudsman, where the office of Chancellor of Justice received a separate department with four workers upon the addition of one topic. The commissioner, in addition to discrimination based on gender, received six new topics – discrimination based on nationality (ethnicity), race, skin colour, creed or beliefs, age, disability or sexual orientation – while the budget was reduced by 8% and the number of workers (one adviser) remained the same. The state funding actually limits the capability of the institution, contradicts the recommendations of international organisations and leads to the situation where the commissioner is unable to fulfil all tasks set by the act.[42] Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi made the following comment about the commissioner’s budget at the first reading of 2013 state budget:

“I would be willing to allocate the money if the preferences of the Minister of Social Affairs change. But people in every profession must consider how important their activity is for the society and how feasible it seems. I believe that quite a few discussions initiated by the gender commissioner have not proved the need for increasing funding for this institution. For example, my former running club was quite unfoundedly baffled when they were accused of racism simply because they chose who to invite to compete. Another example: the Minister of Foreign Affairs must hear the opinion, via the media no less, that we discriminate someone because they are Russian, in that if he doesn’t win the competition, it is because he is Russian. I know for sure that both of these solutions were incompetent.” [43]

It can be concluded from the beginning of the speech that the Minister of Finance distances himself from the topic of commissioner’s budget. But then he makes a clear statement that since the Minister of Finance “knows for sure” that two resolutions of an institution independent from the government were ”incompetent” the commissioner has not proved that the funding for the institution needs to be increased. This is a direct interference in the work of an independent institution, which would be customary in a less democratic state.

The discussion on switching from education in Russian language to Estonian continued, the chapter on national minorities discusses it further.

Trends in 2012

The topics of inequality and discrimination continue to be discussed and even surpass the threshold of news quite easily. The debate tends to be passionate, but lacking in quality. The statements made by top politicians are often ambivalent – on one hand, there has been more acknowledgement of problems, on the other they are reluctant to offer solutions of their own and concentrate of criticising possible measures (for example in the quotas debate). Examples about this could be the speeches made by politicians of two political parties of the government. The chair of the Social Affairs Committee in Riigikogu Margus Tsahnka found that instead of gender quotas in boards of companies the problem to tackle is that of pay gap,[44] even though more women in higher positions would help decrease the pay gap. Tsahkna did not specify how the problem of pay gap should be solved. The Minister of Finance Jürgen Ligi wrote an opinion piece about gender inequality, but it did not introduce any fresh ideas of the government on how to reduce it in Estonia, but the thoughts of the minister on what the “real” problems are and what the real problems are not, nor did he offer any solutions to them in his article.[45] It could be considered a trend that to some extent the problems are not being acknowledged (which is clearly progress), however the solutions have not been found.


To the government

  • Coordinate the funding of the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner with the tasks of the commissioner.
  • Increase the state funding of non-governmental human rights organisations and make the basis for funding clearer and more transparent.
  • Adopt development plans to facilitate gender equality and equal opportunities on other bases, also create the Gender Equality Council to show the political will to achieve something nationally (in comparison to ambitions in foreign politics).

To non-governmental organisations

  • Actively monitor the use of the so-called zipper method in the 2013 local elections.
  • Actively monitor the application of appraisal of effects of legislation by ministries, especially on draft acts which directly concern the lives of people.
  • Guide the debate on issues of discrimination actively; use polls, facts and cases to draw attention to problems faced by people in Estonia and come up with solutions.
  • Pressure the political parties to adopt clear statements in their programs on equality and equal treatment.


[1] Available at: http://www.just.ee/oma.

[2] The effects should be appraised from the point of view of equal treatment (including the right not to be discriminated against based on race, colour, gender, language, origin, creed, political or other beliefs, the proprietary situation and social status, age, disability, sexual orientation or other circumstances).

[3] Available at: http://www.sm.ee/tegevus/sooline-vordoiguslikkus/tooelu/palgalohe-tegevuskava.html.

[4] Available at: http://www.sm.ee/tegevus/sooline-vordoiguslikkus/tooelu/palgalohe-tegevuskava.html.

[5] Available at: http://www.eeagrants.fin.ee/index.php?id=80002.

[6] Available at: http://www.eeagrants.fin.ee/index.php?id=80004.

[7] Available at: http://www.vm.ee/?q=node/15867.

[8] A commission of the UN’s Economic and Social Council with the aim to promote gender equality, define global standards and specific policies.

[9] A UN agency, which aims to guarantee the UN’s efficient support for promoting gender equality and women’s rights in various parts of the world.

[10] Available at: http://www.vm.ee/?q=node/9111.

[11] Available at: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/204042012005.

[12] Available at: http://www.sm.ee/nc/sinule/puudega-inimesele.html?cid=2065&did=7138&sechash=55104536.

[13] For example, Eesti Naisliit [Federated Estonian Women’s Clubs]. Available at: http://www.epl.ee/news/online/eesti-naisliit-otsib-soolise-vordoiguslikkuse-seaduse-rakendamiseks-abi-oiguskantslerilt.d?id=61779556.

[14] For example, 2007 Recommendations of CEDAW (UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women). Available at:


[15] 2011 Recommendations of UPR (UN Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review). Available at: http://www.vm.ee/sites/default/files/UPR%20soovitused%20(est).pdf.

[16] Available at: https://humanrights/2013/02/peaministri-buroo-vastused-kumne-vabauhenduse-uhispoordumisele/.

[17] Available at: http://www.valitsus.ee/et/valitsus/tegevusprogramm/peresobralik-riik/valitsuse-tegevused-peresobralik-riik/6062012-Riigikogu-vottis-vastu-vanemapensioni-systeemi-kehtestava-seaduse.

[18] Read more about it in last year’s annual report. Available at: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/106072012001.

[19] Available at: http://www.riigikogu.ee/?op=ems&page=eelnou&eid=be4d767a-e504-4521-9b58-0080007ea808&.

[20] For example. Available at: http://www.postimees.ee/1022958/eestis-hakatakse-sonavabadust-piirama/.

[21] The process of draft legislation. Available at: http://www.just.ee/57738.

[22] Available at: http://www.riigikogu.ee/index.php?page=en_vaade&op=ems&enr=349SE&koosseis=12.

[23] Available at: http://www.riigikohus.ee/?id=11&tekst=RK/3-2-1-135-11.

[24] Data from mail exchange with the Labour Inspectorate. 28.12.3012.

[25] The story was covered by nearly all media outlets, including Postimees. Available at:


[26] Available at: http://oiguskantsler.ee/sites/default/files/field_document2/6iguskantsleri_seisukoht_vastuolu_puudumise_

kohta_kods_kooskola_diskrimineerimise_keeluga.pdf ning http://oiguskantsler.ee/sites/default/files/field_document2/6iguskantsleri_seisukoht_oigusrikkumise_


[27] Available at: http://oiguskantsler.ee/sites/default/files/field_document2/6iguskantsleri_seisukoht_vastuolu_


[28] Available at: http://oiguskantsler.ee/et/seisukohad/seisukoht/soovitus-kurti-vahendava-tolgi-kaasamine-kohtuvalisesse-suuteomenetlusse.

[29] E-mail exchange with Social Policy Information and Analysis Department of the Ministry of Social Affairs 6.02.2012. The sample consisted of 552 residents of Estonia age 15 and over.

[30] Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&tableSelection=1&labeling=labels&footnotes=yes&language=en&pcode=tsdsc340&plugin=1.

[31] Available at: http://www.svv.ee/index.php?id=519.

[32] The training took place in the course of the ESF programme “Promotion of gender equality 2011-2013”.

[33] Analyses. Available at: www.enut.ee.

[34] Available at: http://www.erinevusrikastab.ee/austameerinevusi/.

[35] What these alternative methods are is not quite clear. Available at: http://valitsus.ee/et/uudised/istungid/otse-valitsuse-istungilt/73771/valitsus-kinnitas-seisukohad-soolise-v%C3%B5rd%C3%B5iguslikkuse-kohta-ettev%C3%B5tete-n%C3%B5ukogudes.

[36] Available at: http://www.e24.ee/1105144/ansip-borsiettevotted-ei-olnud-sookvootidest-huvitatud/.

[37] Available at: http://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main#1XfKqn6F.

[38] Available at: http://www.postimees.ee/719766/laar-irl-vajab-rohkem-naisjuhte/.

[39] Available at: http://bpw-estonia.ee/admin/upload/koost%C3%B6%C3%B6memorandum%209_11_2012.jpg.

[40] Available at: http://www.epl.ee/news/eesti/naispoliitikud-peavad-jurgen-ligi-utlusi-matslikeks.d?id=65237200.

[41] Available at: http://www.naine24.ee/814350/avalik-poordumine-palgalohe-ei-tohiks-vahemalt-uletada-euroopa-keskmist/.

[42] Available at: http://www.postimees.ee/804790/vordoiguslikkuse-volinik-ei-saa-mond-ulesannet-taita/.

[43] 12th Riigikogu shorthand notes. 23.10.2012.

[44] Available at: http://uudised.err.ee/index.php?06270274.

[45] Available at: http://www.epl.ee/news/arvamus/jurgen-ligi-sona-ilust-vaataja-silmades.d?id=65248506.