Abstract
The Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC, hereafter RED) as well as the Employment Equality Directive (2000/78/EC, hereafter EED) celebrated their twentieth anniversary in 2020. This contribution reflects on whether the objectives of the Directives, namely “ensuring a common high level of protection against discrimination in all the Member States” and “the creation within the Community of a level playing-field as regards equality in employment and occupation” have been reached and if not, what could be done about it. It identifies a number of structural problems as a result of which the EU non-discrimination regime is failing to deliver on the goals for which it was established. However, there are only signs by the Commission intending to adapt the legal framework on the basis of the lessons learned during the many years of implementation practice. If Member States will follow suit still needs to be seen. Therefore, a governance approach which is able to make the best out of the existing legal framework is required. This paper proposes reflexive governance as a possible way out from the current deadlock.
Associate Prof. Mag. Dr. iur. Emma Lantschner, Centre for Southeast European Studies (CSEES) at the University of Graz.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Dalli (2020).
- 2.
O’Flaherty (2020).
- 3.
Lenoble and Maesschalck (2010), pp. 3–21.
- 4.
Commission of the European Communities, “Proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation”, COM(2008) 426 final (02.07.2008).
- 5.
- 6.
Based on Habermas (1981).
- 7.
- 8.
de Schutter (2010), p. 261.
- 9.
de Búrca (2017), p. 282.
- 10.
European Parliament (2000) Report on the proposal for a Council directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, A5-0136/2000, p. 6.
- 11.
- 12.
de Schutter and Lenoble (2010), pp. XIX–XXI.
- 13.
Evans Case and Givens (2010), pp. 221–241.
- 14.
The parallel provision in EED is Art. 9(2).
- 15.
As mentioned above, a similar provision is missing in EED.
- 16.
Evans Case and Givens (2010), pp. 232–233.
- 17.
Tyson (2001), p. 212.
- 18.
Tyson (2001), p. 216.
- 19.
Chopin (2000), p. 428.
- 20.
The parallel provision in EED is Art. 19.
- 21.
Chopin (1999), p. 127.
- 22.
European Parliament (2000) Report on the proposal for a Council directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, A5-0136/2000, p. 39.
- 23.
The Commission’s proposal foresaw: ‘Member States shall communicate to the Commission, within two years of the date mentioned in Article 15, all the information necessary for the Commission to draw up a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive.’
- 24.
The transposition date for both Directives (RED and EED) for the EU 15 was 19.07.2003.
- 25.
Lantschner (2021), p. 143 ff.
- 26.
For explanations going beyond legal opportunity structures and resources for the choice to use litigation see Vanhala (2009).
- 27.
FRA (2017) EU-MIDIS II: Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey – Main results. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2017-eu-midis-ii-main-results_en.pdf, accessed 11.08.2022.
- 28.
Lantschner (2021), p. 154 ff.
- 29.
European Commission (29.06.2020) Feasibility Study for financial support for litigating cases relating to violations of democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights, available at https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/feasibility_study_for_financial_support_for_litigating_cases_relating_to_violations_of_democracy_rule_of_law_and_fundamental_rights.pdf, accessed 11.08.2022.
- 30.
Lantschner (2021), pp. 193–194.
- 31.
European Commission (19.03.2021) Report on the application of Council Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (‘the Racial Equality Directive’) and of Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘the Employment Equality Directive’), COM(2021) 139 final.
- 32.
Lantschner (2021), p. 232 ff.
- 33.
Bribosia (2019), p. 110.
- 34.
FRA (2017) EU-MIDIS II: Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey – Main results. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2017-eu-midis-ii-main-results_en.pdf, accessed 11.08.2022, p. 123.
- 35.
European Commission (19.03.2021) Report on the application of Council Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (‘the Racial Equality Directive’) and of Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘the Employment Equality Directive’), COM(2021) 139 final.
- 36.
European Commission (19.03.2021) Equality bodies and the implementation of the Commission Recommendation on standards for equality bodies, SWD(2021) 63 final, p. 30.
- 37.
European Commission (17.01.2014) Joint Report on the application of Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29.062000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (‘Racial Equality Directive’) and of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27.11.2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (‘Employment Equality Directive’), COM(2014) 2 final, p. 3.
- 38.
Infringements no. 2014/2174 (Czech Republic), no. 2015/2025 (Slovakia) and no. 2015/2206 (Hungary).
- 39.
- 40.
OHCHR (2012) Human Rights Indicators. A Guide to Measurement and Implementation, HR/PUB/12/5. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-and-mechanisms/human-rights-indicators, accessed 11.08.2022, p. 13 ff.
- 41.
Kochenov (2008), p. 311.
- 42.
For the yearly country reports see https://www.equalitylaw.eu/country, accessed 11.08.2022.
- 43.
The institutionalization of their involvement in the rule-making and rule-application process is particularly important before accession, as it may lock in conditionality-induced institutional change (Sedelmeier 2012, p. 34).
- 44.
FRA (2017) EU-MIDIS II: Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey – Main results. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2017-eu-midis-ii-main-results_en.pdf, accessed 11.08.2022.
- 45.
Lantschner (2021), pp. 193–194.
- 46.
FRA (2017) EU-MIDIS II: Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey – Main results. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2017-eu-midis-ii-main-results_en.pdf, accessed 11.08.2022, p. 42.
- 47.
The EU Environmental Implementation Review is more or less following such a proposed structure. See European Commission 2017.
- 48.
Here I borrow from de Búrca’s “stumbling into experimentalism” (de Búrca 2010).
References
Bribosia E (2019) Country report. Non-discrimination. Belgium, Network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination
de Búrca G (2010) Stumbling into experimentalism: the EU anti-discrimination regime. In: Sabel C & Zeitlin J (eds) Experimentalist governance in the European Union: towards a new architecture. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 215–235
de Búrca G (2017) Human rights experimentalism. Am J Int Law 111(2):277–316. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2016.16
Chopin I (1999) The starting line group: a harmonised approach to fight racism and to promote equal treatment. Eur J Migr Law 1(1):111–129. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718169920958478
Chopin I (2000) Possible harmonisation of anti-discrimination legislation in the European Union: European and non-governmental proposals. Eur J Migr Law 2(3/4):413–430. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718160020959006
Crowley N (2018) Equality bodies making a difference. European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination. European Commission
Dalli H (2020) Speech at the online conference ‘Equality 2020’ organised by Equinet. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2019-2024/dalli/announcements/commissioner-dalli-speaking-online-conference-equality-2020-organised-equinet_en. Accessed 11 Aug 2022
Del Sarto RA, Schumacher T, Lannon E, Driss A (2006) Benchmarking democratic development in the Euro-Mediterranean area: conceptualising ends, means, and strategies. EuroMeSCo annual report
Dorf MC, Sabel C (1998) A constitution of democratic experimentalism. Columbia Law Rev 98(2):267–473. https://doi.org/10.2307/1123411
Evans Case R, Givens TE (2010) Re-engineering legal opportunity structures in the European Union? The starting line group and the politics of the racial equality directive. J Common Mark Stud 48(2):221–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2009.02050.x
Habermas J (1981) Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt
Kádár T (2019) The legal standing of equality bodies. Eur Equality Law Rev 1:1–15
Kochenov D (2008) EU enlargement and the failure of conditionality: pre-accession conditionality in the fields of democracy and the rule of law. Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn
Lantschner E (2020) Indicators for monitoring implementation of EU equality directives. Rev Central East Eur Law 45(4):444–471. https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10038
Lantschner E (2021) Reflexive governance in EU equality law. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Lenoble J, Maesschalck M (2010) Renewing the theory of public interest: the quest for a reflexive and learning-based approach to governance. In: de Schutter O, Lenoble J (eds) Reflexive governance: redefining the public interest in a pluralistic world. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 3–21
O’Flaherty M (2020) Intervention at the CEPS webinar on racism and discrimination in the EU at times of Covid-19: the role of fundamental rights monitoring. https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-events/racism-and-discrimination-in-the-eu-at-times-of-covid-19/. Accessed 11 Aug 2022
OHCHR (2012) Human rights indicators. A guide to measurement and implementation, HR/PUB/12/5. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-and-mechanisms/human-rights-indicators. Accessed 11 Aug 2022
Sabel CF, Zeitlin J (2010) Experimentalist governance in the European Union: towards a new architecture. Oxford University Press, Oxford
de Schutter O (2010) The role of evaluation in experimentalist governance: learning by monitoring in the establishment of the area of freedom, security and justice. In: Sabel C & Zeitlin J (eds) Experimentalist governance in the European Union: towards a new architecture. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 261–296
de Schutter O, Lenoble J (2010) Introduction: institutions equipped to learn. In: de Schutter O, Lenoble J (eds) Reflexive governance: redefining the public interest in a pluralistic world. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp XV–XXX
Sedelmeier U (2012) Is Europeanization through conditionality sustainable? Lock-in of institutional change after EU accession. West Eur Polit 35(1):20–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2012.631311
Tyson A (2001) The negotiation of the European community directive on racial discrimination. Eur J Migr Law 3:199–229. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718160120959177
Vanhala L (2009) Anti-discrimination policy actors and their use of litigation strategies: the influence of identity politics. J Eur Publ Policy 16(5):738–754. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760902983473
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert an Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lantschner, E. (2023). 20+ Years of the EU Non-discrimination Directives: Can a Reflexive Governance Approach Improve Their Implementation?. In: Donath, P.B., Heger, A., Malkmus, M., Bayrak, O. (eds) Der Schutz des Individuums durch das Recht. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66978-5_65
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-66978-5_65
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-66977-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-66978-5
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)