Discrimination (Law)

The article discusses the human rights implications of algorithmic decision-making in the social welfare sphere. It does so against the background of the 2020 Hague's District Court judgment in a case challenging the Dutch government's use of System Risk Indication-an algorithm designed to identify potential social welfare fraud. Digital welfare state initiatives are likely to fall short of meeting basic requirements of legality and protecting against arbitrariness. Moreover, the intentional opacity surrounding the implementation of algorithms in the public sector not only hampers the effective exercise of human rights but also undermines proper judicial oversight. The analysis unpacks the relevance and complementarity of three legal/regulatory frameworks governing algorithmic systems: data protection, human rights law and algorithmic accountability. Notwithstanding these frameworks' invaluable contribution, the discussion casts doubt on whether they are well-suited to address the legal challenges pertaining to the discriminatory effects of the use of algorithmic systems.

A call for papers is now open for the forthcoming issue of JCA. Please submit your manuscript to [email protected]. The deadline for submissions is November 15, 2019. All submissions are subjected to a blind peer review process. Your submission should comply with the authors’ guidelines, which may be found at https://www.academicstudiespress.com/s/InstructionsforJCAAuthors.pdf

Abstract
All kinds of conflicts, war and in particular the effects of the Second World War prompted the international community to develop standards that will protect the future of humanity from the disastrous effects of the dissemination of ideology based on the idea of the superiority of man over
man. One of the problems of today, not only in Europe but also in the world is discrimination based on age not only in the values around which are organized into society, expressed in the standards of constitutional and legal provisions, but also has a specific socio-economic impact. Discrimination based on age mostly affects older people. Phenomenon related to the elderly is often associated with the term “ageismu” which means discrimination based on belonging to a particular age group. Another problem is the problem of discrimination against people of unemployment and migration in order to search.It should be noted that one of the problems today in the integration of immigrants into the societies of the Member States of the European Union are cultural factors. Another problem people migrating for work is the separation from family, and thus very often leads to the breakdown of marriages. In terms of the relationship between human between immigrants and local communities lived for years and representing a majority believe there is a group of people of their own superiority against immigrants, whom they consider less intelligent or uncivilized. If immigrants are inferior to their discrimination is justified as part of the struggle for socially desirable goods such as jobs.
Extra-legal discrimination against immigrants in the EU Member States is widespread. As a result, immigrants occupy the holes of the social ladder, and do not feel full members of society. This situation poses a serious threat in the EU, as Member States will need in the future, tens of millions of immigrants in order to secure economic growth. Keep in mind that the public in the Member States of the EU are continuously getting old and many countries it is now a serious problem such as eg in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, etc.

In order to be afforded protection on the grounds of disability, individuals have to satisfy the criteria outlined in the Equality Act 2010. This has created controversy, which has caused ongoing issues for the courts and tribunals. This essay reviews the case law and statute of the United Kingdom and makes a comparative analysis with those of other jurisdictions and the theoretical and social models of disability.

En France comme dans de nombreux pays, le terme de discrimination s’est répandu dans l’espace public pour désigner une série d’atteintes illégitimes à l’égalité. Le renforcement du cadre juridique anti-discriminatoire depuis le début des années 2000, la mise en place – certes très limitée – d’un cadre institutionnel visant à rendre ce droit effectif (cf. la création de la Halde en 2005) et la mobilisation croissante d’acteurs divers autour du problème des discriminations attestent la montée en puissance de la catégorie de discrimination. Parallèlement, le terme s’est diffusé dans les sciences sociales, où il s’est trouvé approprié par des juristes, sociologues, politistes, économistes ou psychologues. Si la discrimination est une notion plurielle, construite au croisement des différents espaces où elle est mobilisée, elle reste fortement marquée par ses origines juridiques.

Ce dossier propose d’explorer les enjeux des usages de la notion de discrimination en sociologie, en accordant une attention particulière à ses rapports avec le droit. En adoptant comme point de départ une définition juridique de la discrimination, il s’agit de prendre au sérieux, d’un point de vue sociologique, les conséquences de cet ancrage initial. La définition par le droit tient en effet un statut particulier puisqu’en s’appuyant sur l’appareil étatique elle détient un pouvoir performatif particulier. Les articles qui composent ce dossier interrogent, de manière réflexive, les apports d’une articulation entre approches juridiques et sociologiques de la discrimination ; ils abordent en outre la catégorie juridique de la discrimination comme fait social en explorant, dans la perspective d’une sociologie du droit, ses usages concrets par des acteurs sociaux divers (militants, bureaucrates, sociologues, salariés, etc.). Ils posent ainsi la question de l’effectivité de ce droit, comprise comme l’étude de sa « validité concrète », mais aussi comme une interrogation sur la manière dont les acteurs se positionnent face à ce qu’ils considèrent comme un écart entre normes juridiques et normes sociales – et donc sur la façon dont ils se mettent eux-mêmes au service de l’effectivité de la règle de non-discrimination.


CONTENT

Editorial
Collectif

La discrimination, de la qualification juridique à l'outil sociologique
Laure Bereni et Vincent-Arnaud Chappe

Illégitimer des distinctions en droit: Stratégies politiques et enjeux épistémologiques
Juliette Rennes

De la mobilisation du droit à la réalisation du droit: Les actions de l'association catalane « Familles Lesbiennes et Gays »
Marta Roca i Escoda

En quête d'une introuvable action antidiscriminatoire: Une sociologie de ce qui fait défaut
Joan Stavo-Debauge

Le cadrage juridique, une ressource politique? La création de la HALDE comme solution au problème de l'effectivité des normes anti-discrimination (1998-2005)
Vincent-Arnaud Chappe

Victimes dans l'ombre de la loi: Une critique du modèle de la protection juridique
Kristin Bumiller (texte traduit de l'anglais par L. Bereni, V.-A. Chappe, S. Lacalmontie et F. Corson)

Al volume "Il diritto al viaggio. Abbecedario delle migrazioni", curato da Luca Barbari e Francesco De Vanna, hanno partecipato con un contributo: Tindara Addabbo, Stefania Ascari, Luca Baccelli, Luca Barbari, Gualtiero Bassetti, Fabrizio Battistelli, Leonardo Becchetti, Barbara Giovanna Bello, Roberta Biagiarelli, Andrea Bosi, Alberto Caldana, Daniele Cantini, Thomas Casadei, Erio Castellucci, Andrea Cavallini, Bruno Ciancio, Luigi Ciotti, Gabriella Covri, Ignazio de Francesco, Francesco De Vanna, Carla Faralli, Giovanni Antonio Forte, Vera Gheno, Orsetta Giolo, Raffaele Iaria, Kashetu "Cécile" Kyenge, Marina Lalatta Costerbosa, Francesco Lauria, Delfina Licata, Donatella Loprieno, Fabio Macioce, Teresa Marzocchi, Bruno Mastroianni, Germain Nzinga Makitu, Giuseppe Moscati, Vincenzo Pacillo, Baldassare Pastore, Edoardo Patriarca, Gian Carlo Perego, Maria Rita Pozzi, Simone Ramilli, Lucia Re, Enrica Rigo, Vincenzo Russo, Emilio Santoro, Alessandra Sciurba, Paolo Seghedoni, Vincenzo Sorrentino, Maria Elisabetta Vandelli, Serena Vantin, Gianfrancesco Zanetti.



La collana “Diritto e vulnerabilità” è lo strumento del quale il Centro di Ricerca Interdipartimentale su Discriminazione e vulnerabilità (CRID) dell’Università degli studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia, con sede presso il Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza, si è dotato per dare forma strutturata, in veste di pubblicazioni, ad alcuni studi e attività che costituiscono una parte integrante della sua mission – sono le promesse mantenute del Centro. 

In essa trovano posto indagini teoriche e ricerche empiriche, ricostruzioni storiche e analisi istituzionali, nonché riflessioni e testimonianze della ricerca e del dibattito pubblico contemporanei, che hanno affrontato o affrontano vecchie e nuove configurazioni della discriminazione e della vulnerabilità.

È aperta a studiosi e studiose di ogni estrazione e di ogni orientamento dottrinale.



Direzione: Thomas Casadei e Gianfrancesco Zanetti

Le droit de la non-discrimination dans l'emploi des personnes en situation de handicap est encore difficile à mettre en oeuvre dans la fonction publique hospitalière, malgré les avancées du droit en la matière. C'est le constat dressé par les deux sociologues dans une enquête sociologique menée de juin à décembre 2016 dans le secteur public sanitaire et médico-social en France.

Cambridge University Press, 2011.

The worlds of law and religion increasingly collide in Parliament and the courtroom. Religious courts, the wearing of religious symbols and faith schools have given rise to increased legislation and litigation. This is the first student textbook to set out the fundamental principles and issues of law and religion in England and Wales. Offering a succinct exposition and critical analysis of the field, it explores how English law regulates the practice of religion. The textbook surveys law and religion from various perspectives, such as human rights and discrimination law, as well as considering the legal status of both religion and religious groups. Controversial and provocative questions are explored, promoting full engagement with the key debates. The book's explanatory approach and detailed references ensure understanding and encourage independent study. Students can track key developments on the book's updating website. This innovative text is essential reading for all students in the field.

Les textes réunis dans ce livre étudient les langages de la stigmatisation et les réponses que des sujets stigmatisés peuvent produire, individuellement ou collectivement, pour s'en défendre. La stigmatisation se manifeste dans les discours d'une société donnée à un moment donné, elle se nourrit d'une culture de la haine et repose sur la construction arbitraire d'une domination. Désigner une différence, attribuer un nom injurieux, assigner un rôle, exclure, légitimer des actes de violence, telles sont les étapes qui scandent le processus de stigmatisation. Classes sociales, genres, origines, couleurs de peau, professions, confessions, appartenances politiques, maladies, handicaps apparaissent alors comme la justification de rejets, de violences symboliques et physiques. Pour lutter contre la discrimination et la ségrégation, des formes multiples de résistances voient le jour qui peuvent s'inscrire dans le registre du politique et du militantisme. Certains groupes se saisissent des mots et des images qui stigmatisent pour les resignifier, et ainsi proposer des représentations qui combattent les préjugés.

This article explores the effect of the 1996 Constitution and the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act on motor vehicle insurance. I illustrate that the use of some traditional rating variables is suspect by referring to foreign case law and provisions in the 1996 Constitution and the Act. I provide a number of arguments in favour of and against the continued use of these traditional rating variables. I also discuss the use of 'neutral' variables such as average mileage per insurance period, vehicle use and vehicle ownership and conclude that insurance companies should rather utilise 'neutral' variables instead of the traditional, 'suspect' criteria, although credible arguments exist in favour of sex and age motor vehicle insurance discrimination.

It doesn’t care if your boss fires you because you happen to be a Sagittarius. But a hiring policy that requires a college degree could land him in court. Discrimination law can be counter-intuitive and controversial. Marrying doctrine from five jurisdictions with contemporary political philosophy, this book provides a theoretical defence of this now maturing legal project. More fundamentally, the value of discrimination law is to be found in its enabling us all to lead flourishing lives.

Part I gives a theoretically rigorous account of the identity and scope of discrimination law: what makes a legal norm a norm of discrimination law? What is the architecture of discrimination law? Unlike the approach popular with most textbooks, the discussion eschews list-based discussions of protected grounds, instead organising the doctrine in a clear thematic structure.

This definitional preamble sets the agenda for the next two parts. Part II draws upon the identity and structure of discrimination law to consider what the point of this area of law is. Attention to legal doctrine rules out many answers that ideologically-entrenched writers have offered to this question. The real point of discrimination law, this Part argues, is to remove abiding, pervasive, and substantial relative group disadvantage. This objective is best defended on liberal rather than egalitarian grounds.

Having considered its overall purpose, Part III gives a theoretical account of the duties imposed by discrimination law. A common definition of the antidiscrimination duty accommodates tools as diverse as direct and indirect discrimination, harassment, and reasonable accommodation. These different tools are shown to share a common normative concern and a single analytical structure. Uniquely in the literature, this Part also defends the imposition of these duties only to certain duty-bearers in specified contexts. Finally, the conditions under which affirmative action is justified are explained.

A live automated facial recognition technology, rolled out in public spaces and cities across the world, is transforming the nature of modern policing.  In R (on the application of Bridges) v Chief Constable of South Wales Police, decided in August 2020 (‘Bridges’) – the first successful legal challenge to automated facial recognition technology worldwide - the Court of Appeal in the United Kingdom held that the use of automated facial recognition technology by the South Wales Police was unlawful. This landmark ruling can set a precedent and influence future policy on facial recognition in many countries. Bridges decision imposes some limits on the previously unconstrained police discretion on whom to target and where to deploy the technology. Yet, while the decision demands a clearer legal framework to limit the discretion of police who use such technology, it does not, in principle, oppose the use of facial recognition technology for mass-surveillance in public places, nor for monitoring political protests. To the contrary, the Court accepted that the use of automated facial recognition in public spaces to identify very large numbers of people and to track their movements is proportional to law enforcement goals. Thus, the Court dismissed the wider impact and significant risks posed by using facial recognition technology in public spaces; it underplayed the heavy burden placed on democratic participation and the rights to freedom of expression and association, which require collective action in public spaces. Neither did the Court demand transparency about the technologies used by the police force, which is often shielded behind the ‘trade secrets’ by the corporations who produce them, nor did the Court act to prevent fragmentation and inconsistency between local police forces’ rules and regulations on automated facial recognition technology, which leaves the law less predictable. Thus, while the Bridges decision is reassuring and demands change in the discretionary approaches of UK police in the short term, its long-term impact in burning bridges between the expanding public space surveillance infrastructure and the modern state is less certain.

"Since the seminal Sex Discrimination Act 1975, modern British equality law
developed in a piecemeal fashion over four decades. The landmark Equality
Act 2010 was designed to unify, simplify and, to a limited extent, strengthen
the legislation in this area. Despite its long gestation period, the Bill suffered
from a lack of parliamentary scrutiny. This article sets the Equality Act in context and, by analysing certain aspects, discusses how far it has met those aims.

Please follow the link (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03050718.2012.695001) to the final and definitive article (the authors' original manuscript is made available here under the terms of the publication agreement but no account is taken of amendments made during peer review or during the publication process)."

Le présent ouvrage ouvre la voie à des travaux de recherche et de pratique professionnelle concrète et entreprend de répondre notamment aux questions suivantes:
Comment ce critère de discrimination prohibée s’est-il construit dans notre droit et quel sens a-t-il ? Quelle acception faut-il retenir de l’apparence physique ? La couleur de peau ? La taille ? La surcharge pondérale ? Le handicap ? Ou le port de signes religieux ? Mais aussi, où s’arrêtent les codes sociaux et où commence la discrimination ? C’est la question des piercings et tatouages, par exemple; Quel est le rôle des préjugés ou des stéréotypes dans ce motif de discrimination ? Quels rôles ont pu jouer dans notre éducation, dans nos représentations mentales, conscientes ou inconscientes, les images de l’apparence physique basées sur une appréciation subjective mais partagée des canons de la beauté ? Quelles conséquences exercent sur le recrutement et le management la séduction et la beauté ? Comment lutter contre la stigmatisation et la discrimination subie par les personnes obèses ? Existe-t-il des discriminations policières au faciès en France, comment les mesurer et comment les réduire ? Comment, dans une approche internationale comparée, les institutions de lutte contre les discriminations telles que la HALDE, ont-elles pris en compte la question des discriminations au motif de l’apparence physique ?
Actes du colloque de sciences-po Lille 2009

Das jährliche Standardwerk zur Religionsfreiheit 2019 und das jährliche Standardwerk zur Verfolgung von Christen 2019 in einem Wendebuch zusammen gebunden – jedes Jahrbuch beginnt auf einer Seite des Umschlages. Herausgegeben für den Arbeitskreis für Religionsfreiheit der Deutschen und Österreichischen Evangelischen Allianz und die Arbeitsgemeinschaft Religionsfreiheit der Schweizerischen Evangelischen Allianz, das Internationale Institut für Religionsfreiheit und die Internationale Gesellschaft für Menschenrechte von Thomas Schirrmacher, Max Klingberg und Martin Warnecke.

Sommario: 1. Le discriminazioni contrattuali nella pluralistica società dei consumi. Indispensabilità di un intervento di etero-regolamentazione del mercato. — 2. Progressiva
affermazione della non discriminazione quale principio del diritto italo-europeo dei contratti. — 3. Nozione normativa di discriminazione contrattuale e àmbiti applicativi del
divieto. Estensione alle discriminazioni indirette ed esigenza di giustificazione dell’effetto
di diseguaglianza. — 4. Procedimenti di formazione del contratto e graduazione dell’incidenza della proibizione di discriminare: il problema degli scambi individuali. — 5.
Eguaglianza quale fondamento assiologico del divieto di discriminazione e struttura del
giudizio. — 6. Imputazione oggettiva dell’illecito discriminatorio. — 7. Regime probatorio
e configurazione di una presunzione legale relativa. — 8. Diversificazione delle tecniche
di tutela e scelta del « giusto rimedio » civile.

Ainsi la notion de discrimination indirecte, basée sur le constat d’un effet disparate de facto, bouleverse la perspective traditionnellement libérale du droit français des discriminations. Comme nous l’avons vu à propos de la question des statistiques ethniques, les logiques d’égalité formelle et réelle sont parfois contradictoires. Quand l’une cherche à gommer les différences pour ne laisser subsister qu’une égalité des droits abstraite, l’autre crée des « catégories » pour rétablir une équité. A en observer les profonds changements survenus en matière de non-discrimination – dont l’introduction de la discrimination indirecte est emblématique – depuis 2001, nous pouvons poser la question de savoir si l’on assiste ou non à une mutation du principe d’égalité ? En effet, il semble que la logique d’égalité réelle qui était jusque-là cantonnée au domaine des relations socio-économiques est en train de s’étendre aux relations sociales de sexe, de genre et de race. Cela ne signifie pas qu’un tel changement soit absolu, ni même irréversible, bien au contraire.(Conclusion)

I was a senior lecturer at London South Bank University for 27 years. In that time I built up an international reputation for excellence in the fields of the production of urban public space and urban regeneration.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Routledge-Handbook-Henri-Lefebvre-Society-ebook/dp/B07V8JY8QJ/ref=sr_1_1?crid=8UE10LNNDAHB&keywords=leary-owhin&qid=1646855484&s=books&sprefix=leary-owhin%2Cstripbooks%2C83&sr=1-1
I had a spotless reputation which was the jewel in the crown of my academic and professional life. My academic life was brought to an end when I was dismissed by the University for amongst other things being found guilty of harassment and bullying of two of my colleagues who had been friends for 15 years.
I knew the disciplinary investigation and the report by Prof Patrick Callaghan was incompetent and biased. I knew that no reasonable employer would have dismissed me in those circumstances based on that report. I made a claim with the Employment Tribunal (part of the England and Wales court system) in January 2020. The claims are as follows: unfair dismissal, unfair dismissal for whistleblowing, detriment for whistleblowing, skin colour, ethnic origins and race discrimination, racial harassment and racial victimisation. The Vice Chancellor, Prof David Phoenix and four governors are named in the claim which is a public document. In closing submissions the University accused me of being morally and intellectually bankrupt.

Monografia ujmuje problem dyskryminacji oraz mobbingu w zatrudnieniu w sposób syntetyczny. Autorzy wyrażają nadzieję, że przybliży ona Czytelnikowi różne aspekty obu zjawisk i stanowić będzie praktyczny przewodnik dla osób odpowiedzialnych za opracowanie i wdrażanie procedur antydyskryminacyjnych i antymobbingowych w zakładach pracy.

Sometime in July 2013, Nigeria’s Senate stunned the entire country when it voted to retain s. 29 (4) (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended (herein after "CFRN"). Senator Ahmed Sani Yerima  championed the retention.  He argued that removing the section will go against the religion of Islam . A lot of noise was made about that decision mostly out of genuine concern for the welfare of children. Some argued that it legalizes child marriage while others viewed the section as a mask for high level paedophilia. However, my concern in this paper is the constitutional contradiction this retention by the Senate may create.

المستخلص
يتيح الجيل الثاني من الويب للمستفيدين سهولة استخدام المحتوى والتحكم فيه، ويزيد هذا من خطر خرق القانون الحالي الخاص بحماية حقوق المؤلفين، وحماية البيانات، وغيرها من قوانين تتعلق بالملكية الفكرية، وقد يكون هناك زيادة في استخدام نماذج الترخيص المختلفة لحماية الأصول، مع زيادة في متطلبات المعايير، ويرجع ذلك لزيادة عدد المستفيدين المتنامي. ومن ثم يواجه الجيل الثاني من الويب نفس القيود القانونية التي كانت تواجهها الإصدارة السابقة من الويب، لكن مع زيادة الشبكات الاجتماعية يزيد خطر خرق اللوائح والقوانين. 
وتركز هذه الدراسة على التحديات والقضايا التي يواجهها الجيل الثاني للويب، وتم تقسيم هذه التحديات والقضايا إلى أربعة محاور أساسية وهي التحديات والقضايا التي تواجهها أدوات الجيل الثاني للويب وخاصة المدونات والويكي والشبكات الاجتماعية، ثم القضايا التكنولوجية المتعلقة بالجيل الثاني للويب، وبعدها القضايا القانونية المتعلقة بحقوق الملكية الفكرية وحق التأليف وحماية المحتوى وغيرها من القضايا، وأخيرا ناقشت الدراسة القضايا المتعلقة بالجيل الثاني للويب في المكتبات والتي تم تقسيمها إلى العمليات التي تتم داخل المكتبات، وما يتعلق بأخصائي المكتبة ثم المستفيد، مع وضع مقترحات لما ينبغي على المكتبات إتباعه لتفادي مشاكل التكنولوجيا الجديدة ومحاولة مسايرة التطورات الحديثة.
الكلمات المفتاحية: الجيل الثاني للويب، الجيل الثاني للمكتبات، الشبكات الاجتماعية، المدونات، الويكي، آجاكس أو الجافا سكريبت غير المتزامنة ولغة التكويد الممتدة، تطبيق الإنترنت الغني، بروتوكول وصول الكائن البسيط (SOAP)، نقل حالة التمثيل (REST)، الصيغ المصغرة، واجهة برمجة التطبيقات المفتوحة (Open APIs.)، حقوق الملكية الفكرية (IPR)، حماية البيانات، انتهاك حق تأليف المحتوى، قانون تمييز ذوي الاحتياجات الخاصة، وتشهير المحتوى.

Abstract
Web 2.0 allows users ease of use and content control, and this increases the risk of violating the current law of the protection of authors' rights, data protection and other laws relating to intellectual property.  That leads to an increase in the use of licensing models of protection, with an increase in requirements standards, due to the growing increase in the number of users. So Web 2.0 face the same legal restrictions that Web 1.0 faced, but with the increase in social networking; the risk of breach regulations and laws increases.
This study focuses on the challenges and issues faced Web 2.0, these challenges and issues have divided into four key areas: challenges and issues of web 2.0 tools, especially blogs, wikis and social networks; web 2.0's technological issues, and web 2.0 legal issues that relating to intellectual property rights, right of authorship, and content protection and other issues, and finally discussed the issues relating to web 2.0 in libraries, which have been divided into the processes that take place within the libraries, and related librarians then user. The Study try to set suggestions to what should libraries followed to avoid the problems of new technology and trying to keep up with recent developments.
Keywords: Web 2.0, Library 2.0, Social Networks, Blogs, Wiki, Ajas, Rich Internet Application (RIA), Intellectual Property Rights, Open APIs., Data Protection, Violation of the right authoring content, discrimination law with special needs, and libelous content.

The issue of when EU law applies, its scope, is obviously important and yet it has no clear answer. Two extreme positions are that EU law has a general scope, which it does not, and that all EU law provisions have different scopes, which clarifies nothing. This article explores the middle ground by seeking to identify underlying ideas capable of explaining when different EU law provisions apply on the national level and why seemingly similar provisions differ in scope. The article studies under what conditions an individual seeking protection against discrimination can invoke EU law on the national level and concludes that EU law provisions preventing discrimination differ greatly in scope but that such differences can be explained by the fact that they are based on different ideas: the idea of the internal market, the idea of actor equivalence, or the idea of a Europe without borders.

Body height seems to be an universal problem when used as an employment criterion. When it comes to armed forces or law enforcement bodies, the use of such criterion is not universal. The criterion itself lacks uniformity. Various nations’ legislation and jurisprudence are highly debatable. Germany is an example of irregular jurisprudence, Italian and French governments, both took steps in eliminating the use of body height (steps being taken recently by Italy in 2015). North American continent uses court rules in establishing if using body height criterion is an act of discrimination, but not prohibiting its use. EU non discrimination regulations simply ignore the body height discrimination problem allowing European nations to legiferate, according with their particular needs.
Romania has the same problems, and an inventory of possible solutions is not possible without analyzing the body height criterion and other states experiences relating to this topic.
In Romania the National Council for Combating Discrimination has the legal right to sanction acts of discrimination. It acted accordingly when it reached the conclusion that using body height as recruitment criterion is an act of discrimination. Still, its jurisprudence is debatable.
The Romanian Constitutional Court reached a verdict that limits the National Council for Combating Discrimination rights to intervene whenever a law is applicable. The reason behind such a verdict is the constitutional separations of powers, where the National Council for Combating Discrimination has no rights to legislate. In case body height is mentioned in a law, it cannot be treated as a discrimination act. Of course all this can change if the law is declared an act of constitutional infringement, but otherwise, using this criterion is perfectly legal in such circumstances.
Using this criterion in its singularity in the 21-st century raises more questions than answers. Eliminating it raises problems like those faced by the Royal Canadian Air Force, where some jobs require a certain body height for an optimal performance.
An analysis concerning the usage of such a criterion in relation with job description is strongly encouraged as a general viable solution and particularly when accommodating exceptions from the rule.

Algorithms may seriously impair the right to privacy held by groups of individuals (and thus, more subtly, individuals themselves, but relationally). Indeed, a functional equivalence exists between the way personal data is gathered and aggregated, and the patterns of data analysis about groups of individuals, with the difference that whilst the first is (unevenly) regulated domestically, EU-wide, as well as internationally, the second is almost consistently disregarded. Consequently, one needs to determine whether a full-standing “right to group privacy” should be recognised also as a legal (alternatively to only moral) obligation. In the positive, policymakers shall establish the (expectedly sophisticated) criteria for deciding what groups would not be simply considered as “aggregated bundles of individual privacy rights” (defined here as “collective rights”, like in a standard “class action”) by algorithms’ owners, programmers, and end-users. The main contribution of the present study is to further the theoretical understanding of the relevance of mentioned distinction (collective vs group rights) by drawing normative inferences from the modern-day psychology theory of Gestalt, eventually encoding a wider range of legal shades, and possible implications thereof for privacy entitlements in everyday life.

Defining the characteristics targeted by banning discrimination constitutes a central challenge for EU discrimination law, and defining disability is particularly challenging due to the dispute around the very concept of disability. From 2006, the Court of Justice has wrestled with this definition in six judgments, five of which were delivered from 2013. Instead of classifying the case law definition as conforming to a medical or social model of disability, this article analyses the case law with a view to illustrate challenges of defining discrimination grounds generally, demanding that a sufficiently precise and non-exclusive definition of each discrimination ground can be achieved by re-focusing EU discrimination law around the nodes of sex, race and disability. The analysis exposes that the ECJ definition of disability neither complies with the UN CRPD nor adequately responds to intersectionality theory, for example because the definition is exclusionary in relation to the female experience of disability.

To provide a valid consent to – or refusal of – medical intervention, a patient must be legally capable to decide. This dissertation evaluates and compares when the assessment of mental abilities to refuse – or consent to – somatic medical intervention is required in England, Russia and Sweden, and what criteria must be applied to assess the ability to decide about somatic medical interventions in these legal orders. Two standards are used for evaluation and comparison. These standards are consistency with scientific knowledge of the decision-making process, and compliance with the United Nations and the Council of Europe human rights law requirements. The evaluation and comparison of the national legal orders seek to highlight the solutions and the potential difficulties that the domestic legal systems face when they attempt to realise the two standards.

The analysis in the thesis indicates that the United Nations and the Council of Europe treaty bodies have chosen different approaches as to permissibility of capacity assessment procedures. It is argued that after adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the capacity assessments of adults should not be allowed in healthcare.

A number of common problems within the selected legal systems are identified and analysed in the thesis. The question of when capacity assessments must start has not yet received much attention at national levels, which results in an absence of foreseeability and a possibility for discriminating against patients on the grounds of disability or health. The thesis highlights the fact that the national law requirements to draw a distinction between mental and somatic disorders/care are particularly problematic, and may lead to arbitrariness. The questions as to the legal classification of capacity assessment procedures (whether they are medical interventions or the collection of personal data), and accordingly, the legal status of refusal or absence of consent are also poorly foreseeable, which may lead to a violation of the patient’s right to privacy.

The analysis shows that the criteria for capacity assessments are regulated in a manner that inevitably leads to arbitrariness when deciding whether a patient can make healthcare decisions. It was shown that the criteria are interpreted differently by various actors, and no agreement as to the required level of performance is reached. It is also argued that capacity assessments rarely allow for achieving the goal of checking whether or not a patient can choose what to do with his or her own body.

Migrant workers are often discriminated in almost every aspect of life. Using doctrinal research methodology, this article discusses direct and perceptive discrimination against them. This article concludes that physical discriminations are mostly happened because ineffective enforcement of the law, abuse of powers and human-trafficking problem. Besides, perceptive discrimination happened due to the claim that migrant workers contribute to the crimes hike in Malaysia whereas it is unsupported based on statistic given by The Royal Malaysian Police. Intisari Diskriminasi terhadap pekerja migran di Malaysia berlaku hampir dalam setiap aspek kehidupan mereka. Penelitian ini dilakukan melalui metode penelitian doktrinal dan membicarakan mengenai diskriminasi secara langsung (fisik) dan diskriminasi berdasar persepsi terhadap golongan migran. Kesimpulannya adalah diskriminasi secara langsung terjadi karena ketidakefektifan undang-undang, relasi kuasa dan perdagangan manusia. Sedangkan diskriminasi berdasar persepsi terjadi karena adanya klaim bahwa pekerja migran menyebabkan peningkatan jinayah padahal hal ini tidak didukung oleh data dari Royal Malaysian Police. Kata Kunci: diskriminasi, pekerja migran, tingkat jinayah.

The Court of Justice judgments in Römer and Dominguez deserve to be jointly reviewed as they raise similar constitutional questions, which the Court, however, was seemingly anxious to avoid. Indeed, in these two cases, the Court, sitting as a Grand Chamber, essentially sidestepped the most fundamental issues raised by the referring national courts. This is not utterly surprising considering that the Court was, in essence, asked to clarify the impact of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights in a situation where two of the rights enshrined in it, which are furthermore given expression in two EU directives, are invoked by employees against their employers. Addressing this particular issue would have required, in turn, an explanation of the relationship between the Charter and the general principles of law as sources of EU human rights standards; their respective scope of application; and their eventual directly effective nature in the context of national civil proceedings between private parties (so-called ‘horizontal disputes’).
As this paper will show, the first opportunity to shed light on these intricate issues was offered by the Römer case, and it is an opportunity the Court decided not to seize. Viewed in that light, the case of Dominguez represents another missed opportunity.
In that respect, Römer and Dominguez may illustrate a broader phenomenon at work: the growing tendency of the Court to favour judicial minimalism in preliminary reference cases. This paper, however, has a narrower focus and concentrates on the issues left unaddressed by the Court in these two judgments. Part 2 of this paper clarifies the nature of the constitutional issues raised by the Römer and Dominguez cases and describes how the Court sidestepped them. Part 3 then seeks to confront these issues. In other words, this paper will examine how the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and entitlement to paid annual leave should be categorised within the hierarchy of norms of the EU legal order, before considering their scope of application and justiciable nature in the context of national litigation relating to the alleged failure of a public employer and a private employer to comply with Directive 2000/78 in the case of Römer, and Directive 2003/88 in the case of Dominguez.

Alle Rechte sind vorbehalten. Kein Teil dieser Publikation darf ohne die vorherige Zustimmung des Herausgebers in irgendeiner Form oder in irgendeiner Weise -sei es elektronisch, mechanisch, als Fotokopie, Aufnahme oder anderweitig -reproduziert, in einem Abfragesytem bereitgestellt oder übertragen werden. +++ Förderprognose: negativ +++ Eine Bestandsaufnahme zur Diskriminierung von Bulgar_innen und Rumän_innen mit zugeschriebenem oder tatsächlichem Roma-Hintergrund in Deutschland

This article analyses the current situation of discrimination towards foetuses with Down syndrome in Spain, both legally and through the medical practice, pointing out how this discrimination breaches the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), ratified by Spain, according to the Committee of the CRPD. This work argues that an eventual modification of the Spanish abortion legislation (in appeal before the Constitutional Court) might not be enough to prevent the said discrimination due to the emergence of the non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). It explores the challenges introduced by the non-invasive prenatal testing and the relationship between a prenatal diagnose of a disability (DS in particular) and termination of pregnancy rates. Health practitioners, mainly through the communication of the diagnose, play a significant role in the bias against the Down syndrome population that leads to discrimination. Consequently, this article suggests the need for a different approach towards a DS diagnose, more accurate, positive and based on the actual experience of individuals with DS and their families.

This article is an analysis of the current immigration policy in
Australia from the perspective of critical social work. The
analysis is based on the outcomes of the immigration applications
of three families of children with disabilities. It is
argued that, as seen in the experience of the three families,
Australian immigration policy is markedly underpinned by
ableism and economic rationalism, rendering the assessment
process to determine immigration eligibility patently discriminatory
against people with disabilities and their families.
Such discriminatory practice is seen as a challenge for social
work practice.

“Islamophobia” has been used as an umbrella term capturing different types of religious stigma towards Muslims. However, the operationalization of the term for research purposes varies greatly, where little attention heretofore has been paid on how islamophobia affects Muslim minorities’ lives. Against this background, we aimed to develop and validate the Perceived Islamophobia Scale (PIS). In the first study (167 German-Arabs, 184 German-Turks and 205 British-Pakistanis), exploratory factor analyses of a preliminary item pool gave support of a three-factor scale in all samples. Subscales were computed for each factor (i.e., perceptions of a general fear of Islam and Muslims, fear of islamization, and islamophobia in the media), which were reliable across the samples. In all samples, the PIS was positively related to psychological distress and in two samples this relation remained significant, after controlling for experiences of discrimination. In Study 2 (262 German-Turks, 277 French-Maghrebis and 249 British-Pakistanis), confirmatory factor analyses supported the structural equivalence of the scale’s three-factor solution. The PIS was positively related to perceived stress and discrimination. Lastly, PIS predicted higher levels of religious and ethnic identification, controlling for discrimination. The PIS seems to be a valid and reliable measure across different Muslim minority groups. The fact that perceptions of islamophobia in two samples negatively predicted psychological distress after controlling for experiences of discrimination, suggests that anti-discrimination laws may be insufficient in protecting Muslim minorities of the negative effects of stigma on psychological well-being.

The regulatory frameworks that characterized HIV and AIDS under Nigerian legislation are examined in this research. In doing so, it unearths the myriads of provisions appreciated by the Nigeria judiciary while instilling substantial faith in the statutes enacted by the Nigerian National Assembly supposed to be the most comprehensive frameworks for the regulation of HIV and AIDS victims' fundamental rights against discrimination in their relationships with others within Nigeria. It additionally investigates with substantive perspective the scope of procedures for enforcing the right, notably for PLWHA . Hence, this writer has embraced logical techniques to accomplish the aforementioned by reviewing in-depth the appropriate profiles of the accessible laws and relating the laws to the subject matter addressed.

Over the last half-century, the United States has developed an increasingly complex web of mechanisms for resolving individual labour and employment disputes. During this period, the percentage of the private sector workforce represented by unions, protected by the “just cause” provisions established by a collective bargaining agreement, and using private labour arbitration to enforce these protections, has dipped significantly. The vast majority of workers are now “at-will” employees. But, as unionization declined, an increasing number of statutory rights were granted to workers, such as guarantees of minimum labour standards or prohibitions on discrimination, and these have been the source of a large number of legal disputes. These statutes often exist at multiple levels – federal, state and local – and many establish a new administrative mechanism to enforce the rights they create. Aggrieved workers can often also enforce these rights directly in the federal or state courts. In part owing to the high volume and costs of litigation, employers are increasingly establishing private mechanisms within the workplace to resolve disputes, such as mediation programmes, and requiring workers to pursue any still unresolved claims through private employment arbitration.

This chapter seeks to unpack this complicated institutional structure by describing how its components function and interrelate, with a particular focus on some of the more uniquely American aspects of the system. Some initial attempt will also be made at evaluating the performance of these various mechanisms in resolving disputes. To this end, the chapter will be guided by the “efficiency”, “equity” and “voice” framework developed by Budd and Colvin (2008, pp. 460–66), while also adding an “access” dimension.

The chapter proceeds in three sections. Section 10.2 sets out the background, discussing the general labour and employment law landscape of the United States, the changing nature of employment relations, and the specific laws and institutions that will be covered here. Section 10.3 analyses and evaluates the performance of the various dispute resolution mechanisms – administrative agencies, the courts and private dispute resolution mechanisms – and how alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is being used in conjunction with each of these. Section 10.4 summarizes and offers some concluding reflections on the analysis that precedes it.

This long annotation to the ECJ's decision in Mangold focuses on the question whether the Court indeed approved of horizontal effects of directives, or whether the relevance of the case is narrower and more important at the same time. I defend the view that the Court accorded exclusionary horizontal effects to such provisions in directives which give expression to constitutional principles. Exclusionary effects are merely negative, in that they exclude application of a piece of national law. Thus, the provision of a directive never is directly effective in horizontal relations. This view was confirmed by the German Constitutional Court in its final decision on the matter (the case is known under "Honeywell case" in 2010. I explain the relevance of this in my annotation of the ECJ ruling in Kuecuekdeveci (sorry, can't be bothered to copy-paste the Umlauts), which was published in the 2010 in the European Labour Law Review (also available here)