Reaction to Discrimination by Quasi- and Non-Judicial Mechanisms

Abstract

Chapter 5 comparatively assesses the implementation of the provision of the RED dealing with the Equality Bodies’ function of providing independent assistance to victims of discrimination in pursuing their complaint. Although the EED does not call for the establishment of such bodies, most countries have extended their mandates to include the discrimination grounds covered by this Directive. After discussing issues related to the structure of these bodies, the chapter focuses on the legal framework and implementation practice concerning the independence of Equality Bodies. It then looks separately at predominantly tribunal-type bodies and predominantly promotion-type bodies. While the former spend the bulk of their time and resources hearing, investigating, and deciding on individual instances of discrimination brought before them, the latter can either engage in mediation or consultation, engage in various ways before courts, or decide (mostly in a legally non-binding form) cases brought before them. Case studies look at the practical implementation in Romania, Bulgaria, and Austria for the former type of body, and in Belgium, Ireland, and Germany for the latter type of body. The findings show that Equality Bodies are suffering from inadequate resources, limited independence, and lack of awareness of their existence and the support they can provide. Nevertheless they have contributed to individual redress, societal change, and legal clarification by litigating cases as far as the CJEU. The chapter closes with indicators derived from the comparative analysis that can be used to monitor the effective implementation of the obligation to establish bodies that independently support victims of discrimination.