STIKKORD likestilling, diskriminering, reell likhet, effektiv sanksjonering, håndheving, individuelt og strukturelt vern SUMMARY This article provides a critical analysis of the Solberg-government's equality and anti-discrimination reform. The government has recently presented a new unified and gender-neutral equality and anti-discrimination bill, which will explicitly prohibit intersectional discrimination. It also proposes a new law enforcement system, which will have the power to grant economic compensation for victims of discrimination. How the reform, which aims at a simpler and more effective anti-discrimination regime, may weaken the position of individuals within vulnerable and marginal groups, is an overall concern. The article discusses the relationship between the Solberg-government's proposal and the legal limits provided by the Norwegian Constitution and Norway's obligations under international human rights conventions and EU/EEA-law.
The article draws attention to how integrative interpretationa methodology where the European Court of Human Rights integrates its normative environment into the interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rightsmay offer an important path to bridging many of the challenges caused by fragmentation in the field of human rights. More specifically, the article offers insight into a selection of ECHR cases that are characterized by the existence of normative overlap between the ECHR, the CEDAW and the CRC; and by the fact that interaction between these legal sources actually takes place in the interpretation carried out by the Court. Interaction is discussed through two topics: the issue of state obligations in relation to domestic violence, and the issue of state obligations in relation to expulsion of immigrants with children. The article demonstrates that systemic integration may result in a strengthening of the protection of human rights under ECHR through what is termed 'interpretive widening and thickening'.
The reasoning and conclusions reached by the European Court of Human Rights in cases against some Member States that involve prohibitions against the wearing of religious clothes and symbols in public educational institutions have led scholars to argue that introduction of similar prohibitions in other Member States will be in conformity with the Convention. By broadening the spectrum of relevant case-law, this article will argue that the wide margin of appreciation often referred to, conceals that the strictness of review may vary considerably depending on the circumstances of each case. The principle of equal treatment of religious manifestations is introduced as a norm that influences the strictness of review. Further, it is discussed to what extent the aim of preserving gender equality and the aim of avoiding religious pressure may be put forward in order to justify the introduction of prohibitions.
Menneskerettighetenes stilling i den interne rettsorden har de senere år på mange måter blitt styrket ved at stadig flere konvensjoner har blitt inkorporert gjennom lovgivningen. Samtidig gir andre utviklingstrekk grunnlag for å spørre om det likevel har funnet sted en endring i myndighetenes grunnleggende holdning til ivaretakelse av de internasjonale menneskerettigheter. Dette gjelder saerlig den tilbakeholdenhet som utvises fra norske myndigheter i saker om styrking av individenes muligheter til internasjonal håndheving av konvensjonsrettigheter. Innlegget retter fokus mot gjennomslagskraften til det såkalte forutberegnelighetshensynet: hensynet til å sikre størst mulig grad av forutberegnelighet for nasjonale myndigheter. Det hevdes at forutberegnelighetshensynet den senere tid har fått stadig større gjennomslagskraft på bekostning av styrking av individvernet. Spørsmålet er om dette innebaerer at vi er i ferd med å gå bort fra det system for ivaretakelse av menneskerettigheter som ble etablert gjennom menneskerettsloven.
I NNLEDNINGDebatten om menneskerettighetenes stilling i Norge har i stor grad fokusert på valg av metode for gjennomføring av internasjonale menneskerettskonvensjoner i nasjonal lovgivning, samt hvilke konvensjoner som uttrykkelig skulle 1 Takk til Ingunn Ikdahl og Ingvild Bruce, redaktør for Kritisk Juss, for verdifulle innspill til teksten. 2 Vibeke Blaker Strand er stipendiat ved Institutt for offentlig rett ved Det juridiske fakultet, Universitetet i Oslo. Hun arbeider med en ph.d.-avhandling der hun anvender retten til vern mot diskriminering som innfallsvinkel til å belyse spenninger aktualisert av religionsutøvelse i Norge.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.