Pub Date : 2022-08-05DOI: 10.1177/13582291221115266
Katja Karjalainen, M. Issakainen, Marjo Ylhäinen, S. Marashi, Ann-Charlotte Nedlund, Jennifer Boger, A. Astell, A. Mäki-Petäjä-Leinonen, Louise Nygård
This article reports the results of a socio-legal investigation into how continued work among people living with progressive cognitive impairments such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or early onset dementia (EOD) can be supported. This study that makes use of empirical data collected in Finland, Sweden and Canada seeks to give voice to people living with MCI or EOD and set their experiential knowledge in dialogue with equality rights related tools provided by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). The results illustrate that there are effective tools available that remove barriers to participation and support continued work of employees living with cognitive impairments at least for some time while impairments are mild. Ideally, flexibility and solidarity in the workplace automatically eliminates the effects of individual impairment. However, cognitive impairments are often such that along with general accessibility measures individual accommodations are needed. Supporting continued work expands the freedom to continue meaningful work in the preferred manner and offers people the means to gain a livelihood and participate in society as a member of the work community on equal basis with others.
{"title":"Supporting continued work under the UNCRPD – views of employees living with mild cognitive impairment or early onset dementia","authors":"Katja Karjalainen, M. Issakainen, Marjo Ylhäinen, S. Marashi, Ann-Charlotte Nedlund, Jennifer Boger, A. Astell, A. Mäki-Petäjä-Leinonen, Louise Nygård","doi":"10.1177/13582291221115266","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221115266","url":null,"abstract":"This article reports the results of a socio-legal investigation into how continued work among people living with progressive cognitive impairments such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or early onset dementia (EOD) can be supported. This study that makes use of empirical data collected in Finland, Sweden and Canada seeks to give voice to people living with MCI or EOD and set their experiential knowledge in dialogue with equality rights related tools provided by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). The results illustrate that there are effective tools available that remove barriers to participation and support continued work of employees living with cognitive impairments at least for some time while impairments are mild. Ideally, flexibility and solidarity in the workplace automatically eliminates the effects of individual impairment. However, cognitive impairments are often such that along with general accessibility measures individual accommodations are needed. Supporting continued work expands the freedom to continue meaningful work in the preferred manner and offers people the means to gain a livelihood and participate in society as a member of the work community on equal basis with others.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65453717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-21DOI: 10.1177/13582291221116612
N. Busby, Grace James
{"title":"Special issue: Contesting and undoing discriminatory borders","authors":"N. Busby, Grace James","doi":"10.1177/13582291221116612","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221116612","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47775498","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1177/13582291221115440
Christian Prener
This article examines the acceptability of the differential treatment of dual citizens within contemporary denationalisation from both doctrinal and normative perspectives with particular focus on the right to non-discrimination as prescribed by the European Convention on Human Rights. The article concludes that denationalisation laws that target only dual citizens very likely have indirect discriminatory effects on particular subgroups of dual citizens along and possibly across discriminatory grounds such as ethnicity, race, gender, religion and national origin. The article contends that prevailing doctrinal justifications are based on a set of misconceptions concerning the suitability, efficacy, necessity and consequently proportionality of denationalisation in Western societies and that the re-emergence of denationalisation in the 21st century is not only illustrative of the inadequacies within current discrimination law norms but enhances them.
{"title":"The dichotomy within denationalisation: Perpetuating or emancipating from its discriminatory past?","authors":"Christian Prener","doi":"10.1177/13582291221115440","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221115440","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the acceptability of the differential treatment of dual citizens within contemporary denationalisation from both doctrinal and normative perspectives with particular focus on the right to non-discrimination as prescribed by the European Convention on Human Rights. The article concludes that denationalisation laws that target only dual citizens very likely have indirect discriminatory effects on particular subgroups of dual citizens along and possibly across discriminatory grounds such as ethnicity, race, gender, religion and national origin. The article contends that prevailing doctrinal justifications are based on a set of misconceptions concerning the suitability, efficacy, necessity and consequently proportionality of denationalisation in Western societies and that the re-emergence of denationalisation in the 21st century is not only illustrative of the inadequacies within current discrimination law norms but enhances them.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48477086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1177/13582291221114082
Catherine Briddick
This article analyses the CEDAW Committee’s General Recommendations and Views on individual complaints, to evaluate its contribution to the elimination of discrimination against women experienced in the context of migration control. It makes two arguments. First, the Committee’s General Recommendations contain a range of doctrinal and empirical shortcomings. This opacity, and these omissions, considerably reduce the value of the Committee’s statements as a means by which States’ discriminatory migration control practices might be contested. Second, the Committee’s decisions, in communications concerned with discrimination experienced in the context of migration control, are inconsistent with those standards that it has set, and with the decisions it makes in other types of cases. A detailed analysis of the jurisprudence grounds the conclusion that the Committee is, in practice, according States a margin of appreciation that varies according to the subject of the complaint. Particular, representative communications are drawn on to argue that the margin granted in cases concerned with migration control is over-wide, characteristic not of appropriate (quasi) judicial restraint, but unprincipled deference. The article concludes by suggesting how some of the criticisms outlined may be remedied, notably by the Committee adopting its own justification and proportionality assessment.
{"title":"Unprincipled and unrealised: CEDAW and discrimination experienced in the context of migration control","authors":"Catherine Briddick","doi":"10.1177/13582291221114082","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221114082","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the CEDAW Committee’s General Recommendations and Views on individual complaints, to evaluate its contribution to the elimination of discrimination against women experienced in the context of migration control. It makes two arguments. First, the Committee’s General Recommendations contain a range of doctrinal and empirical shortcomings. This opacity, and these omissions, considerably reduce the value of the Committee’s statements as a means by which States’ discriminatory migration control practices might be contested. Second, the Committee’s decisions, in communications concerned with discrimination experienced in the context of migration control, are inconsistent with those standards that it has set, and with the decisions it makes in other types of cases. A detailed analysis of the jurisprudence grounds the conclusion that the Committee is, in practice, according States a margin of appreciation that varies according to the subject of the complaint. Particular, representative communications are drawn on to argue that the margin granted in cases concerned with migration control is over-wide, characteristic not of appropriate (quasi) judicial restraint, but unprincipled deference. The article concludes by suggesting how some of the criticisms outlined may be remedied, notably by the Committee adopting its own justification and proportionality assessment.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46568815","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-12DOI: 10.1177/13582291221113517
Sumedha Choudhury
With the recent National Register of Citizens updating process in Assam (a northeastern state in India) and the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA 2019), there have been significant changes to India’s citizenship laws and policies. This may create one of the world’s largest stateless populations in modern times. These changes manifest the government’s othering process of creating binaries of belonging and non-belongingness between the majority Hindus and minorities (especially followers of the Islamic faith). In this article, taking these recent changes to citizenship as a case study, I discuss how India’s colonial past, the experience of partition, and the henceforth nation-building contributed to perceiving the ‘citizen’ primarily along Hindu majoritarian lines. I argue that the nation-building process in India was based on retaining and simultaneously re-establishing the ‘others’, thereby reinforcing colonial legacies in the structure and functioning of the postcolonial state. Consequently, this article deals with two questions, first, how the adoption of discriminatory citizenship laws and the risk of statelessness in India is rooted in its complex history, the impact of British colonial expansion and the postcolonial realities and second, what role ‘law’ has played in the process.
{"title":"Denationalisation and discrimination in postcolonial India","authors":"Sumedha Choudhury","doi":"10.1177/13582291221113517","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221113517","url":null,"abstract":"With the recent National Register of Citizens updating process in Assam (a northeastern state in India) and the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA 2019), there have been significant changes to India’s citizenship laws and policies. This may create one of the world’s largest stateless populations in modern times. These changes manifest the government’s othering process of creating binaries of belonging and non-belongingness between the majority Hindus and minorities (especially followers of the Islamic faith). In this article, taking these recent changes to citizenship as a case study, I discuss how India’s colonial past, the experience of partition, and the henceforth nation-building contributed to perceiving the ‘citizen’ primarily along Hindu majoritarian lines. I argue that the nation-building process in India was based on retaining and simultaneously re-establishing the ‘others’, thereby reinforcing colonial legacies in the structure and functioning of the postcolonial state. Consequently, this article deals with two questions, first, how the adoption of discriminatory citizenship laws and the risk of statelessness in India is rooted in its complex history, the impact of British colonial expansion and the postcolonial realities and second, what role ‘law’ has played in the process.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41517819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1177/13582291221111290
T. Nguyen, Luong Duc Doan
This article discusses the various factors in Vietnam that are influencing the possibility of introducing a law on same sex marriage and draws three main conclusions. Firstly, it argues that the greatest concern about the possible success of the campaigns on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues in general, and the recognition of same sex marriages in particular, is indeed a political fear. It recommends keeping the campaigns on LGBT issues separate from the political sphere and to differentiate themselves from the traditional confrontational methods used by political dissidents. Secondly, the enactment of a law on LGBT rights which incorporates the principles and rules of anti-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and identity is proposed. This law will fill the gap left by the current lack of an anti-discrimination law in the specific field of LGBT rights in the first step of a typical process towards the legalization of same sex marriages. Thirdly, the paper highlights the leading role to be played by legislation in Vietnam, and which shall need to be acquired though legal transplanting, in granting marital rights to same sex couples and providing the basis for the courts to give them substantive rights.
{"title":"The prospects for the legalization of same sex marriages in vietnam","authors":"T. Nguyen, Luong Duc Doan","doi":"10.1177/13582291221111290","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221111290","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the various factors in Vietnam that are influencing the possibility of introducing a law on same sex marriage and draws three main conclusions. Firstly, it argues that the greatest concern about the possible success of the campaigns on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues in general, and the recognition of same sex marriages in particular, is indeed a political fear. It recommends keeping the campaigns on LGBT issues separate from the political sphere and to differentiate themselves from the traditional confrontational methods used by political dissidents. Secondly, the enactment of a law on LGBT rights which incorporates the principles and rules of anti-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and identity is proposed. This law will fill the gap left by the current lack of an anti-discrimination law in the specific field of LGBT rights in the first step of a typical process towards the legalization of same sex marriages. Thirdly, the paper highlights the leading role to be played by legislation in Vietnam, and which shall need to be acquired though legal transplanting, in granting marital rights to same sex couples and providing the basis for the courts to give them substantive rights.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44871015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-18DOI: 10.1177/13582291221102380
N. Busby, Grace James
{"title":"Editorial Summer 2022","authors":"N. Busby, Grace James","doi":"10.1177/13582291221102380","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221102380","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42357577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-03DOI: 10.1177/13582291221094923
Mohammad Ibrahim
Following the post-Soeharto constitutional reform from 1999 to 2002, the Indonesian Constitutional Court was established with powers, inter alia, to review the constitutionality of national legislation. The constitutional amendments also incorporated a constitutional Bill of Rights, which includes the right to be free from discrimination on any ground and the right to protection against discrimination under Article 28I(2) and the right to equality before the law under Article 28D(1). However, the Constitution does not specify an enumerated list of grounds against which discrimination is prohibited. This article examines a body of constitutional jurisprudence in Indonesia, an Asian civil law country with no formal system of precedent. It seeks to determine the extent to which the Indonesian Constitutional Court has protected the citizens' fundamental rights of equality and against discrimination. Through describing and analysing three court decisions on the principles of equality and non-discrimination, this article argues that the Indonesian Constitutional Court, in its early years of operation, took these principles seriously. Nevertheless, in its later decisions, the Court departed, albeit not explicitly, from its earlier ruling by relying on ‘the belief in One God’ and ‘the religious values consideration’ under Articles 29(1) and 28J of the Constitution to restrict the fundamental rights of equality and non-discrimination. Consequently, the Court has unjustifiably held that discrimination is not prohibited insofar as it is in accord with religious orthodoxy.
{"title":"The judicialisation of discrimination in the Indonesian constitutional court","authors":"Mohammad Ibrahim","doi":"10.1177/13582291221094923","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221094923","url":null,"abstract":"Following the post-Soeharto constitutional reform from 1999 to 2002, the Indonesian Constitutional Court was established with powers, inter alia, to review the constitutionality of national legislation. The constitutional amendments also incorporated a constitutional Bill of Rights, which includes the right to be free from discrimination on any ground and the right to protection against discrimination under Article 28I(2) and the right to equality before the law under Article 28D(1). However, the Constitution does not specify an enumerated list of grounds against which discrimination is prohibited. This article examines a body of constitutional jurisprudence in Indonesia, an Asian civil law country with no formal system of precedent. It seeks to determine the extent to which the Indonesian Constitutional Court has protected the citizens' fundamental rights of equality and against discrimination. Through describing and analysing three court decisions on the principles of equality and non-discrimination, this article argues that the Indonesian Constitutional Court, in its early years of operation, took these principles seriously. Nevertheless, in its later decisions, the Court departed, albeit not explicitly, from its earlier ruling by relying on ‘the belief in One God’ and ‘the religious values consideration’ under Articles 29(1) and 28J of the Constitution to restrict the fundamental rights of equality and non-discrimination. Consequently, the Court has unjustifiably held that discrimination is not prohibited insofar as it is in accord with religious orthodoxy.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47727343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-24DOI: 10.1177/13582291221096615
Denisa Nevická, Matúš Mesarčík
The article is focused on the issue of discrimination against Roma communities in the use of educational online platforms on account of failure to provide digital consent. The digital education model used during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Slovak Republic somehow forgot about Roma communities, thus preventing Roma students from accessing education through online platforms. This contribution is aimed to foster the discussion of discrimination against marginalized Roma communities in accessing education through online platforms and to point out the inadequacy of national legislation on the provision of digital consent.
{"title":"Why are you offline? The issue of digital consent and discrimination of Roma communities during pandemic in Slovakia","authors":"Denisa Nevická, Matúš Mesarčík","doi":"10.1177/13582291221096615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221096615","url":null,"abstract":"The article is focused on the issue of discrimination against Roma communities in the use of educational online platforms on account of failure to provide digital consent. The digital education model used during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Slovak Republic somehow forgot about Roma communities, thus preventing Roma students from accessing education through online platforms. This contribution is aimed to foster the discussion of discrimination against marginalized Roma communities in accessing education through online platforms and to point out the inadequacy of national legislation on the provision of digital consent.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48823514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-23DOI: 10.1177/13582291221096561
A. Alteri
In 2020 the U.S. Supreme Court extended federal employment discrimination protections to individuals based on their gender identity or sexual orientation. While this decision represents a victory for LGBTQIA+ employees, it did not speak to whether religious freedom laws would provide a suitable defense for violating this law. After this decision, we are left with an HR puzzle. When employment discrimination protections collide, what set of rights, those based on our religious beliefs or those based on our gender identity or sexual orientation, win out? Existing laws and Court cases suggest that individuals and corporations may be able to avoid the non-discrimination requirement by claiming a religious objection to an employee’s gender identity or sexual orientation, but this issue is far from settled. Accordingly, this paper provides legal analysis of the conflict and presents advice regarding how to foster an inclusive workplace and ensure that the rights of all are safeguarded.
{"title":"When rights collide: Examining conflicts between gender identity, sexual orientation, & religious discrimination protections","authors":"A. Alteri","doi":"10.1177/13582291221096561","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221096561","url":null,"abstract":"In 2020 the U.S. Supreme Court extended federal employment discrimination protections to individuals based on their gender identity or sexual orientation. While this decision represents a victory for LGBTQIA+ employees, it did not speak to whether religious freedom laws would provide a suitable defense for violating this law. After this decision, we are left with an HR puzzle. When employment discrimination protections collide, what set of rights, those based on our religious beliefs or those based on our gender identity or sexual orientation, win out? Existing laws and Court cases suggest that individuals and corporations may be able to avoid the non-discrimination requirement by claiming a religious objection to an employee’s gender identity or sexual orientation, but this issue is far from settled. Accordingly, this paper provides legal analysis of the conflict and presents advice regarding how to foster an inclusive workplace and ensure that the rights of all are safeguarded.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47373863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：