Equality and Non-discrimination Law in the EU

2021 ◽  
pp. 387-462
Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Michal Ovádek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Treaty Of Rome ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This chapter addresses equality and non-discrimination, which are explicitly acknowledged as foundational values in the EU context in Article 2 TEU. Similarly, the right to non-discrimination enjoys wide recognition in international human rights law. In the EU, non-discrimination had a specific role to play from the outset of European integration. Despite being founded without explicit reference to human rights, the original Treaty of Rome nonetheless prohibited discrimination on the basis of nationality (now Article 18 TFEU), as well as discrimination regarding pay between men and women (now Article 157 TFEU). Today, the scope of non-discrimination was enlarged, paving the way for Directives on racial equality and non-discrimination in the field of employment on the grounds of religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation. Moreover, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) identified the principle of equality as a general principle of EU law.

Towards ever greater coherence? Human rights policies in the evolving EU

2020 ◽  
pp. 569-588
Author(s):  
Lisa Ginsborg ◽  
Graham Finlay
Keyword(s):  
Economic Policy ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Structural Coherence ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Eu

Coherence remains one of the most important challenges facing the European Union (EU) with respect to its commitment to human rights. While perfect coherence in EU human rights policy may never be possible, and is perhaps not even desirable, the normative coherence of EU human rights policy-making under international human rights law remains essential to uphold such a commitment and ultimately to avoid human rights violations by EU actors themselves. ‘Hard interests’, including security, managing migration, or economic policy, must never be used as an excuse to violate human rights, especially by the EU. The present chapter offers a number of suggestions to overcome different types of incoherence, and to promote normative, interest-based, and structural coherence in EU human rights action. Starting from this three-fold typology of incoherence, the chapter identifies different ways in which incoherence is a challenge for EU human rights policy, and offers suggestions to EU actors for opportunities to promote coherent human rights policy and best practices in this regard. Despite the EU’s complex institutional structure and web of competences, significant opportunities remain for the EU and its Member States to act coherently for human rights, both through law—in particular international and regional human rights law—and through the practice of EU actors themselves.

scholarly journals An EU Right to Interim Protection during Appeal Proceedings in Asylum Cases?

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelle Reneman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
International Human ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
The Eu

AbstractDoes EU law provide for a right to interim protection in asylum cases and if so under what circumstances and in what form? These questions are addressed in this article on the basis of relevant EU legislation, the EU principle of effectiveness and the right to effective judicial protection, and finally international human rights law, which serves as a source of inspiration for these principles. It is argued that Article 39 of the Procedures Directive, interpreted in the light of the EU principle of effectiveness and the EU right to effective judicial protection, requires a remedy with automatic suspensive effect in all asylum cases, regardless of their arguability. It is therefore conceivable that this provision offers broader protection than the right to an effective remedy, laid down in international human rights treaties, such as Article 13 ECHR.

Legal Pluralism, Human Rights and the Right to Vote: The Case of the Noken System in Papua

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 255-286
Author(s):  
Ignatius Yordan Nugraha
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Right To Vote ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Pluralist

Abstract The goal of this article is to explore the clash between international human rights law and a legal pluralist framework in the case of the noken system and also to investigate potential solutions to the clash. Elections in Indonesia are generally founded on the principle of direct, universal, free, secret, honest and fair voting. There is a notable exception in the Province of Papua, where tribes in the Central Mountains area are following the noken system. Under this system, votes are allocated to the candidate(s) based on the decision of the big man or the consensus of the tribe. The Indonesian Constitutional Court has accepted this practice as reflecting the customs of the local population. However, this form of voting seems to be contrary to the right to vote under international human rights law, since article 25(b) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that elections shall be held genuinely by universal suffrage and secret ballot to guarantee the free will of the electors. Consequently, the case of the noken system in Papua reflects an uneasy clash between a legal pluralist approach and universal human rights.

scholarly journals Rescuing Asylum-Seeker Stranded at Sea: Malaysia’s Duty under International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3.30) ◽  
pp. 182
Author(s):  
Syafiq Sulaiman ◽  
Salawati Mat Basir ◽  
Mohd Zamre Mohd Zahir
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

The protection of the right to life and the duty to rescue persons in distress at sea are the fundamental obligations under two specialized international law regimes which are the international human rights law and the law of the sea. These rules when read together form a strong protection of the human rights of the asylum-seekers stranded at sea. However, often states failed to honour this obligation for various reasons ranging from national security to economic reasons. This article will analyse Malaysia’s responsibilities as regards the right to life and the duty to rescue of these asylum-seekers. It will also identify the existing international and domestic legal framework relevant to the application of these obligations upon Malaysia and whether it has acted in breach of such obligations. The article then proceeded with suggestions for further improvement that Malaysia can adopt in order to better perform its obligations. This study is a pure doctrinal legal research which is qualitative in nature. The data used in this research is collected from library-based resources. These data were then analyzed by using methods of content analysis as well as critical analysis. The article found that Malaysia has a duty to protect the right to life under international human rights law. Additionally, Malaysia is also bound under the law of the sea to perform its duty to rescue. In view of Malaysia’s failure to perform these duties in two occasions in the past consequently had resulted in a violation of international law. Therefore, it is suggested that Malaysia should initiate a revision of its national laws and policies regarding treatment of asylum-seekers stranded at sea to be in line with Malaysia’s duty under international law. Besides, the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency is call upon to comply with the international standards of treatment of persons in distress at sea which includes the asylum-seekers.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document