香港性别歧视条例二十五周年:成就、立法改革和持续挑战

A. Barrow
{"title":"香港性别歧视条例二十五周年:成就、立法改革和持续挑战","authors":"A. Barrow","doi":"10.1177/13582291221088423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article critiques Hong Kong’s Sex Discrimination Ordinance (SDO) as it turns 25, considering its achievements and impact, whilst highlighting continuing challenges for its operation. Although the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), the statutory body responsible for investigating and conciliating discrimination complaints, has promoted the ordinance and disseminated evidence-based research on sex discrimination, sexual harassment and pregnancy discrimination, the limited number of litigated cases has inhibited the educative impact of how discriminatory practices are perpetrated across a range of settings including in employment and the provision of goods and services. Politically contentious exemptions persist, and recent law reform does not go far enough in addressing the limitations of the SDO. Drawing on case law and qualitative research interviews with members of the EOC, scholars and non-governmental organisations, this paper questions whether Hong Kong’s SDO is coming of age. The article concludes that despite it 25-year history, there is much works that remains to be done to enhance societal understandings of gender equality.","PeriodicalId":42250,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hong Kong’s sex discrimination ordinance at twenty-five: Achievements, legislative change and continuing challenges\",\"authors\":\"A. Barrow\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13582291221088423\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article critiques Hong Kong’s Sex Discrimination Ordinance (SDO) as it turns 25, considering its achievements and impact, whilst highlighting continuing challenges for its operation. Although the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), the statutory body responsible for investigating and conciliating discrimination complaints, has promoted the ordinance and disseminated evidence-based research on sex discrimination, sexual harassment and pregnancy discrimination, the limited number of litigated cases has inhibited the educative impact of how discriminatory practices are perpetrated across a range of settings including in employment and the provision of goods and services. Politically contentious exemptions persist, and recent law reform does not go far enough in addressing the limitations of the SDO. Drawing on case law and qualitative research interviews with members of the EOC, scholars and non-governmental organisations, this paper questions whether Hong Kong’s SDO is coming of age. The article concludes that despite it 25-year history, there is much works that remains to be done to enhance societal understandings of gender equality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221088423\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Discrimination and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13582291221088423","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文在香港《性别歧视条例》(SDO)实施25周年之际,对其成就和影响进行评论,同时强调其运作面临的持续挑战。虽然负责调查和调解歧视投诉的法定机构平等机会委员会(平机会)已推广该条例,并传播关于性别歧视、性骚扰和怀孕歧视的循证研究,但诉讼案件数量有限,限制了在就业和提供商品和服务等一系列环境中如何实施歧视做法的教育影响。政治上有争议的豁免仍然存在,最近的法律改革在解决《禁止侵犯人权法》的局限性方面做得还不够。本文通过对平机会成员、学者和非政府机构的案例法和定性研究访谈,质疑香港的性别歧视是否已经成熟。文章的结论是,尽管有25年的历史,但要提高社会对性别平等的认识,还有很多工作要做。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hong Kong’s sex discrimination ordinance at twenty-five: Achievements, legislative change and continuing challenges
This article critiques Hong Kong’s Sex Discrimination Ordinance (SDO) as it turns 25, considering its achievements and impact, whilst highlighting continuing challenges for its operation. Although the Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC), the statutory body responsible for investigating and conciliating discrimination complaints, has promoted the ordinance and disseminated evidence-based research on sex discrimination, sexual harassment and pregnancy discrimination, the limited number of litigated cases has inhibited the educative impact of how discriminatory practices are perpetrated across a range of settings including in employment and the provision of goods and services. Politically contentious exemptions persist, and recent law reform does not go far enough in addressing the limitations of the SDO. Drawing on case law and qualitative research interviews with members of the EOC, scholars and non-governmental organisations, this paper questions whether Hong Kong’s SDO is coming of age. The article concludes that despite it 25-year history, there is much works that remains to be done to enhance societal understandings of gender equality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Intersectional discrimination and EU law: Time to revisit Parris Editorial - September 2024 The prohibition of discrimination and the workers’ right to maternity or paternity leave in light of the drafting history of Article 40 of the Constitution of Uganda and sections 56 and 57 of the Employment Act On the margins of refuge: Queer Syrian refugees and the politics of belonging and mobility in post-2019 Lebanon Legal status of the self-employed person in the field of social protection in Ukraine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1