Sindacato Autonomo Pensionati v. Italy

The complaint filed by a pensioners trade union,  Sindacato Autonomo Pensionati to ECSR refers to alleged discriminatory reduction in benefits payable to survivors in cases where there is more than one recipient or where the recipient receives income from various sources. The benefit is granted to survivors who were financially dependent on the deceased at the time of their death, and is given if the deceased person was receiving a direct pension or was actively working at the time of death. The  trade union complained  that, through the reduction of the benefit, the Italian authorities have violated Social Charter’s Articles: 4 (the right to a fair remuneration), 12 (the right to social security), 16 (the right of the family to social, legal and economic protection), 20 (the right to equal opportunities and equal treatment in employment and occupation without sex discrimination) and 23 (the right of elderly persons to social protection) of the European Social Charter. According to the complainant organisation, these reductions disproportionately affect elderly and vulnerable individuals, such as widows or dependent family members, leading to economic hardship. The Italian government argued that the reduction mechanism, introduced  by the Italian pension law, (Law No. 335/1995, Article 1 para. 41 of Law No. 335/1995 and Law No. 145/2019,) aims to ensure adequate state budget allocated to pensions and applies to beneficiaries whose income exceeds the minimum pension amount. Concerning the alleged violation of Article 4 of the European Social Charter (ESC), the Committee noted that that Article is related to the remuneration for active working life, and does not include the pension. On that note, the Committee decided that Article 4 is irrelevant to the case. The Committee, when referring to ESC Article 12§1, pointed out that the reduction of this benefit only applies to those with income that exceeds the minimum annual amount more than three times. The reduction does not put survivors at the risk of poverty, therefore the Committee decided that the case does not raise any issues with regard to Article 12(1). 
As concerns Article 12§2 which provides that the State should maintain the social security system at a satisfactory level, aligned with the European Code of Social Security,  the Committee noted that Italy had not ratified the European Code of Social Security Part X regarding survivor’s benefit. Anyhow, The Committee considered that the standard set by Italy in the respect of survivors’ pension is seemingly  higher than the standard set by the European Code. According to the Committee  the survivors’ benefit is a means-tested benefit and is calculated as a proportion of the previous income of the deceased, which also is allowed by the Code. In view of the above considerations, the Committee stated that there was no violation of Article 12(2). 
As for the alleged violations of Article 12§3 which requires States to progressively improve social security systems, the complainant organization argued that reductions in survivors’ pensions, especially when combined with beneficiaries' other income and tax burdens, amounted to a deprivation of social security rights, unfairly affecting pensioners. The Committee assessing those allegations,  took into consideration the 2011-2015 economic crises. It was noted that while different reforms aimed to ensure the financial sustainability of the pension system—a legitimate objective—they must still maintain adequate protection. The Committee recognized that the reductions were proportional, income-based, and also necessary during mentioned above financial crisis. In addition it was noted that there was a 2022 Italian Constitutional Court ruling that had already corrected a disproportionate reduction mechanism. In conclusion, the Committee found no violation of Article 12(3).
Sindacato Autonomo Pensionati in the complaint also claimed the violation of Article 16, but did not display any further arguments in this matter. In view of the lack of any specific data, the Committee  dismissed those allegations as unsubstantiated.
As for Article 23, which referred to the rights of elderly people, the claimant organization stated  that the reduction of pension benefits payable to survivors puts elderly people at risk of not having sufficient resources for a dignified and independent existence that would ensure their full participation in public, social and cultural life. The view of the Committee is that when assessing whether a sufficient level of living is guaranteed, all pensions, contributory or non-contributory, and other complementary cash benefits available to elderly persons have to be taken into account. As all those information were not provided, The Committee decided that the allegations of violations of Article 23 are also unsubstantiated. 
The last Article mentioned in the complaint and examined by the Committee was Article 20. Sindacato Autonomo Pensionati claimed that the reduction of this benefit affected particularly women, which indicated an indirect form of discrimination between workers and pensioners on the grounds of sex. The organization indicated that around 80% of beneficiaries of survivor’s benefits are women. The Committee agreed with the fact that beneficiaries of survivor’s benefits are mostly women. However, based on the information at its disposal, there is, in the Committee’s view, nothing in the legislation and rules governing survivor’s benefit which would indicate that the taking into account of other family members results in discrimination against women. Moreover, the survivors’ benefit is reduced only in the case of person with relatively high income. Therefore, the group affected by the reduction cannot be considered as vulnerable in this case, which indicates that it does not need additional protection from the State. Therefore the Committee held that there was no violation of Article 20 and the legislation on the survivors’ pension does not discriminate against women.
In view of the above findings the Committee came to the conclusion that there was no violations of the European Social Charter in the case of Sindacato Autonomo Pensionati Or.S.A v. Italy.

Amnesty International v. Italy

Amnesty International filed with the ECSR a collective complaint against  Italy for discriminatory housing policies towards Roma people. The claimant organization alleged that Italy proceeded with forced evictions of Roma people, without providing alternative housing options. The claim reported many cases that showed their unequal access to social housing, which is a major barrier in the Roma community lives. This practice leads to Roma people living without adequate legal protection or any rehousing options. Moreover, Amnesty International documented that Roma were being placed in ethnically segregated camps with no access to water, sanitation, electricity, or infrastructure. In view of the allegations of Amnesty international and the replies  from the Italian government, the Committee examined the situation of Roma community in Italy and came to several conclusions. The ECSR recalled that it is not the first time that Italy is under scrutiny for its treatment towards the Roma community in violation of Human Rights standards. In previous years Italy was found in breach of its obligation, by two United Nations Committees (the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural rights and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination) on the exclusion or discrimination of the Roma from social housing.  The ESCR found that although there had been  more funds allocated by Italy since then to improve social housing allocation, it could not assess their impact on the Roma community . According to the ECSR the stigmatization and marginalization of Roma people continues, as Italy has no coherent national approach to the subjects of inclusion and integration of community. In addition, there were even more camps created after 2011, for example the Barbuta camp in the outskirts of Rome. The Committee recalled that It is an obligation of the State to provide people with the right to housing equally and effectively. Therefore the unjustified evictions from their homes by the Italian authorities has exposed many of the Roma people to homelessness or forced them to live in camps. Moreover, It was noted that Italy did not meet this obligation, failing to ensure effective remedies in cases of forced evictions to such disadvantaged minority. 
In the end the Committee, after examination of all allegations, came to the conclusion that Italy had violated the rights of Roma people to adequate housing in relation to Article 31 of the European Social Charter, which states:

“With a view to ensuring the effective exercise of the right to housing, the Parties undertake to take measures designed:

1. to promote access to housing of an adequate standard;
2. to prevent and reduce homelessness with a view to its gradual elimination;
3. to make the price of housing accessible to those without adequate resources.”

It is also noted that violations of Article 31 were made in conjunction with Article E, which states:

“The enjoyment of the rights set forth in this Charter shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national extraction or social origin, health, association with a national minority, birth or other status.”

In view of its findings, the Committee expects Italy to take effective measures to ensure adequate, non-discriminatory and well-conditioned housing for the Roma people,  meaning a place that possess all basic amenities (water, heating, waste disposal, sanitation facilities, electricity), a safe health environment, structurally secured and not overcrowded.  Moreover,. Moreover,  Italy should provide remedies and justice for those who have experienced discrimination and segregation in those matters. 

The collective complaints procedure is a human rights protection system for social and economic rights enshrined in the European Social Charter. It complements the judicial protection of the European Convention on Human Rights for civil and political rights. Organisations entitled to lodge collective complaints include international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) holding participatory status with the Council of Europe