TY - JOUR
T1 - The Strasbourg Court and Indirect Race Discrimination: Going Beyond the Education Domain
T2 - Going beyond the education domain
AU - Möschel, Mathias
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Author.
PY - 2017/1/1
Y1 - 2017/1/1
N2 - Prohibiting indirect discrimination has been hailed as guaranteeing substantive equality by addressing issues of structural discrimination and inequalities in a way that direct discrimination cannot and will not. However, Article 14, the ECHR’s non-discrimination provision, does not distinguish between direct and indirect discrimination. It was only in 2007 that the European Court of Human Rights explicitly included the notion of indirect (race) discrimination under Article 14 in DH and Others v the Czech Republic, its famous judgment on Roma education segregation. Since then it has applied the prohibition of indirect race discrimination in a limited manner to similar education cases. However, in its recent Grand Chamber decision, Biao v Denmark, the Strasbourg Court started clarifying some unsolved issues in the distinction between direct and indirect discrimination in its case law and finally applied the concept to the much broader area of immigration and citizenship.
AB - Prohibiting indirect discrimination has been hailed as guaranteeing substantive equality by addressing issues of structural discrimination and inequalities in a way that direct discrimination cannot and will not. However, Article 14, the ECHR’s non-discrimination provision, does not distinguish between direct and indirect discrimination. It was only in 2007 that the European Court of Human Rights explicitly included the notion of indirect (race) discrimination under Article 14 in DH and Others v the Czech Republic, its famous judgment on Roma education segregation. Since then it has applied the prohibition of indirect race discrimination in a limited manner to similar education cases. However, in its recent Grand Chamber decision, Biao v Denmark, the Strasbourg Court started clarifying some unsolved issues in the distinction between direct and indirect discrimination in its case law and finally applied the concept to the much broader area of immigration and citizenship.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85008975736&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/1468-2230.12245
DO - 10.1111/1468-2230.12245
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85008975736
SN - 0026-7961
VL - 80
SP - 121
EP - 132
JO - Modern Law Review
JF - Modern Law Review
IS - 1
ER -