Racism Report 2003 - Zara

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Page 54 Focus Issue: Racism and the Law Racism Report 2003through binding decisions. It is also clear that the access to the law must be improved under civil law. The MinoritiesOmbudsman, a post in existence since 2001, can also represent victims of discrimination in court in cases which forma special precedent but the role is mostly limited to that of an expert, i.e. the drafting of proposals for improvementand counselling victims.FranceIn France it is mainly criminal law that is relied on for combating racism - in February 2003 the penalties were mademore severe and racist motivation stipulated as a reason for increased severity. However, in November 2001 discriminationin the whole area of employment was forbidden and thereby new opportunities to fight it under employmentlaw. The problem of victimisation is still not acknowledged under French law. As far as the creation of an independentspecialised organisation is concerned, there have been extensive hearings on this question with many relevantactors as well as study trips to similar existing organisations in Canada, Belgium and Great Britain. A final report onthese activities is expected in February/March 2004 which should then form the basis for the setting up of such anorganisation in France. Specialised NGOs can already represent victims of discrimination in court.GreeceThroughout the 20th century the existence of ethnic minorities in Greece was always regarded with suspicion or evendenied, since there were fears about the unity of the new state. Now too, there is almost no debate about racism andno political party feels called upon to take up such issues. The preparations for the implementation of the guidelinewere undertaken by the state behind closed doors with the interested public excluded. Greece only has hardly-usedcriminal anti-racist laws, no specialised institution and solely the expectation that the above-mentioned preparationswill someday lead to a more or less acceptable conclusion.IrelandIn the judgement of many experts, in questions of non-discrimination Ireland has in recent years worked its way upfrom last place (not even ratified the UN Racism Convention) to first place. In any case Ireland seems to take the issuevery seriously. Two important laws form the basis of the Irish anti-racism policy: the Employment Equality Act andthe Equal Status Act. The former lays down detailed regulations for non-discrimination in the world of work - suchimportant fields such as access to goods and services, living space and social security. A strong „Equality Authority“is not exactly soft with discriminators and with the Office of the Director of Equality Investigations a special tribunalhas been created for equality questions, which has wide-ranging rights to investigate and obtain information andwhich has also worked with great zest. It is interesting that Irish legislation on equality pursues a strict horizontalapproach which means that all basically forbidden reasons for discrimination (gender, marital status, family status,disability, age, sexual orientation, religion, race [including colour, nationality, ethnic/national origin] and membershipof the Traveller community) are treated the same. In this respect Ireland goes far beyond the minimum implementationof the two EU guidelines.ItalyThe Italian government has not exactly taken up the issue of combating racism with great enthusiasm, but neverthelessissued a decree by and large to implement the racism guideline in July 2003. As a result Italian anti-racismlegislation as a whole has become somewhat more confusing. It has only partly moved away from the previouspractice of forbidding discrimination on the grounds of citizenship. A specialised institution has been set up but itis not independent. It comes under the Department for Equality of Opportunity in the Council of Ministers. Despitethis, the institution is intended to offer help to victims and also to make suggestions from improvement on structuraland institutional levels.LuxembourgLuxembourg has not yet implemented the guidelines - as a whole the legal position on this is very sketchy. On a simplelegal level there is a generally formulated ban on discrimination due to „race“ and origin, but no legal sanctions areprovided and it is therefore practically meaningless. In general, in Luxembourg the view is prevalent that racism andracist discrimination is not really a big issue since the small state is in any case diverse to an unprecedented degree(proportion of foreigners 38%) and everyone is doing well.HollandThe Dutch, who have traditionally seen themselves as particularly liberal and tolerant, have long pursued a muchrespected concept to fight discrimination. Approaches have been developed since the 1980s for legal proceedingsagainst discrimination. Particularly with the strong state support for the nationwide Office for Combating Racism(Landelijk Bureau Racismebestrijding, LBR) and later (1994) with the introduction of the Equal Opportunity Act and
Racism Report 2003 Focus Issue: Racism and the Law Page 55an Equality Commission, Holland has been far ahead of other countries. Interestingly, in the Dutch context alsorelatively „soft“ regulations and Equality Commission judgements which are not legally binding have shown themselvesto be very effective because there is strong social pressure - especially on companies - not to be regarded asdiscriminatory or racist. Therefore this approach cannot be carried over into legal traditions such as the Austrian, inwhich legally binding rulings (town signs, Independent Administrative Board - Cheibani Wague) often remain withoutconsequences. Under the constitution the Dutch approach to equality is not restricted only to Dutch citizens butincludes all people on Dutch territory. This is also explicitly continued in the Equal Opportunity Act, which also forbidsdiscrimination on grounds of citizenship. Dutch legislation also recognises the obligation to „positive measures“which for example provide for an approximately representative proportion of members of ethnic minorities in theworkforces of larger companies. It is repeatedly criticised that subjection to the equal opportunity regulations is inthe end extremely dependent on the voluntary cooperation and understanding of (potential) perpetrators and thatmany regulations are not binding.PortugalAlso in Portugal the smaller of the government coalition parties has drawn attention to itself through populist policieshostile to immigration. Nevertheless further steps towards the implementation of the guideline can be expectedin the foreseeable future since a relevant government bill has already been introduced in Parliament. The Portugueseconstitution in principle recognises the precept of equality also between nationals and non-nationals, which will alsobe reflected in the new equality legislation. However, currently there are only relatively few regulations, mostly basedon (administrative) criminal law which rather have a view to implementing the UN racial discrimination convention.A „Commissar for Immigration and Ethnic Minorities“ is simultaneously president of the „Commission for Equalityand Against Racial Discrimination“, on which NGOs, migrants‘ representatives and unions and management collectinformation about discrimination, work out suggestions for improvement for the legislature and stimulate researchon the subject of racial discrimination and publicise cases of discrimination. Anti-racism NGOs, human rights organisationsand migrant associations can be a party to legal proceedings if the direct victim does not object. SOS Racismhas already made successful use of this opportunity.SpainIn Spain the implementation of the anti-discrimination guidelines has produced some rather strange effects. The issuehas been carefully kept off the political agenda - despite all attempts by NGOs. Then in October 2003 the governmenthid 32 amendments, intended to implement the guidelines, in a draft for a „Budget Concomitant Law“. Without anyprevious public debate many people were naturally surprised by the content. The Spanish legal framework is stillextremely unclear and general with regard to discrimination - always falling back upon the central equality clausein the constitution. There is also still no independent institution as provided for in the guideline. The „Council forthe Promotion of Equal Opportunities for All without Discrimination due to Race or Ethnic Origin“ provided for inthe amendment will not be independent but affiliated to the Employment and Social Ministry. However, NGOs mayappear in court on behalf of those affected.SwedenIn Sweden the implementation of the guidelines has already made much progress. In addition to older criminal lawregulations there are also sufficient civil law provisions which offer appropriate protection in the „Law ForbiddingDiscrimination“ (Lag (2003:307) om förbud mot diskriminering) which came into force in July 2003. Sweden has anextensive system of „Ombudsmen“ with separate offices responsible for the fields of ethnic discrimination, sexualorientation, gender and disability. The „Ombudsman“ against ethnic discrimination (the post incidentally filled by awoman for a long time) currently has a staff of about 20, mostly lawyers, who help to fulfil the wide ranging competenciesin the support of victims of discrimination.Great BritainWith the Race Relations Act (RRA) Great Britain created a comprehensive legal basis to proceed against ethnic discrimination.Very early on, less importance was attached to criminal law than to concrete civil law measures againstdiscrimination and many successes achieved. The RRA is clearly a living legal framework that must be reckoned within everyday life. The important problem fields of the employment and housing markets, access to goods, servicesand education are included and stipulated in much detail. The recognition of immaterial damages has also become amatter of course. The comprehensive judicature and especially the widely-developed struggle against indirect racismshow that confrontation with the theme in Great Britain is serious, persevering and takes place at the highest level.The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) is an influential institution which has the necessary material and personnelresources at its disposal and can make a lot happen. The institution participates both on the political level withthe planning of future strategies as well as intervening in individual cases with a whole series of measures. With its
Page 3 and 4:
ContentsIntroductionPreface by the
Page 5 and 6: Racism Report 2003 Introduction Pag
Page 7 and 8: Racism Report 2003 The Death of Che
Page 9 and 10: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Public Sp
Page 21 and 22: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Media Pag
Page 27 and 28: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Racist Gr
Page 29 and 30: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Police Pa
Page 37 and 38: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Public In
Page 39 and 40: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Work Page
Page 41 and 42: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Housing P
Page 43 and 44: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Housing P
Page 45 and 46: Racism Report 2003 Cases: Against Z
Page 47 and 48: Racism Report 2003 Full Reports Pag
Page 53 and 54: Racism Report 2003 Focus Issue: Rac
Page 55: Racism Report 2003 Focus Issue: Rac
Page 65 and 66: Racism Report 2003 Our Demands Page
Page 71 and 72: Racism Report 2003 Equal Opportunit
Page 73 and 74: Racism Report 2003 List of contribu
Page 75 and 76: Advertisement
Page 78: The ZARA team at the counselling ce
show all

Racism Report 2003 - Zara

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?