Transforming EU Equality Law? On Disruptive Narratives and False Dichotomies

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Raphaële Xenidis
{"title":"Transforming EU Equality Law? On Disruptive Narratives and False Dichotomies","authors":"Raphaële Xenidis","doi":"10.1093/YEL/YEY005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n With the adoption of the Race Equality Directive (2000/43/EC), the Framework Directive (2000/78/EC) and the Gender Directive on goods and services (2004/113/EC) and their subsequent interpretation by the Court of Justice, the landscape of EU non-discrimination law changed dramatically. At the same time, beyond this legal evolution, an important discursive shift reframed equality as a genuine fundamental right, in opposition to its historical function as a catalyst for market integration. The aim of this article is to critically interrogate what has been presented as the normative transformation of EU equality law in the aftermath of the 2000s. The present article deconstructs this disruptive narrative and contests the conventionally assumed radical dichotomy between market integration and human rights as overarching rationales for the Union’s commitment to equality. It explores the tension between an ambitious fundamental rights rhetoric and the pragmatic fluctuations of the substance of the principle of equality in EU law. It argues that the ‘new’ post-Amsterdam language of rights, under the guise of ‘progress’, covers an actual continuity in the normative grammar of EU non-discrimination law. Arguably, the very normative indeterminacy of equality facilitated its exploitation by different EU actors to advance their own strategic aims. This resulted in a form of hybridity of the principle of non-discrimination, with important consequences in terms of enforceable equality rights and their hierarchy. The demonstration offered here operates at three different levels: the analysis successively focuses on the material and discursive substance of equality, its normative foundations and its operationalization in order to explore the question of the transformation of EU equality law beyond disruptive narratives and false dichotomies.","PeriodicalId":41752,"journal":{"name":"Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy","volume":"93 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/YEL/YEY005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

With the adoption of the Race Equality Directive (2000/43/EC), the Framework Directive (2000/78/EC) and the Gender Directive on goods and services (2004/113/EC) and their subsequent interpretation by the Court of Justice, the landscape of EU non-discrimination law changed dramatically. At the same time, beyond this legal evolution, an important discursive shift reframed equality as a genuine fundamental right, in opposition to its historical function as a catalyst for market integration. The aim of this article is to critically interrogate what has been presented as the normative transformation of EU equality law in the aftermath of the 2000s. The present article deconstructs this disruptive narrative and contests the conventionally assumed radical dichotomy between market integration and human rights as overarching rationales for the Union’s commitment to equality. It explores the tension between an ambitious fundamental rights rhetoric and the pragmatic fluctuations of the substance of the principle of equality in EU law. It argues that the ‘new’ post-Amsterdam language of rights, under the guise of ‘progress’, covers an actual continuity in the normative grammar of EU non-discrimination law. Arguably, the very normative indeterminacy of equality facilitated its exploitation by different EU actors to advance their own strategic aims. This resulted in a form of hybridity of the principle of non-discrimination, with important consequences in terms of enforceable equality rights and their hierarchy. The demonstration offered here operates at three different levels: the analysis successively focuses on the material and discursive substance of equality, its normative foundations and its operationalization in order to explore the question of the transformation of EU equality law beyond disruptive narratives and false dichotomies.
改革欧盟平等法?论破坏性叙事与错误二分法
随着《种族平等指令》(2000/43/EC)、《框架指令》(2000/78/EC)和《关于商品和服务的性别指令》(2004/113/EC)的通过,以及法院随后对它们的解释,欧盟非歧视法律的格局发生了巨大变化。与此同时,在这种法律演变之外,一个重要的话语转变将平等重新定义为一项真正的基本权利,而不是其作为市场一体化催化剂的历史功能。本文的目的是批判性地质疑在2000年代之后欧盟平等法的规范性转变。本文解构了这种破坏性的叙述,并对传统上认为的市场一体化和人权之间的根本二分法作为欧盟承诺平等的首要理由提出了质疑。它探讨了雄心勃勃的基本权利修辞与欧盟法律中平等原则实质的务实波动之间的紧张关系。它认为,在“进步”的幌子下,“新的”后阿姆斯特丹权利语言涵盖了欧盟非歧视法律规范语法的实际连续性。可以说,正是平等在规范上的不确定性,助长了欧盟不同行为体利用它来推进自己的战略目标。这导致了不歧视原则的一种混合形式,在可执行的平等权利及其等级方面产生了重要后果。这里提供的论证在三个不同的层面上进行:分析先后关注平等的物质和话语实质,其规范基础及其操作化,以探索超越破坏性叙述和错误二分法的欧盟平等法转型问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信