No Cover Image

Journal article 227 views

Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices

Pier-Luc Dupont Picard Orcid Logo

Nordic Journal of Human Rights, Volume: 34, Issue: 4, Pages: 289 - 313

Swansea University Author: Pier-Luc Dupont Picard Orcid Logo

Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.1080/18918131.2016.1243881

Abstract

With the development of human rights and anti-discrimination law, courts have increasingly been called upon to protect ethnicity-related practices from general criminal and civil sanctions. These ‘claims of culture’ have so far been addressed with remarkable inconsistency, leading to popular fears o...

Full description

Published in: Nordic Journal of Human Rights
ISSN: 1891-8131 1891-814X
Published: Informa UK Limited 2016
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa64745
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2023-10-13T13:23:15Z
last_indexed 2023-10-13T13:23:15Z
id cronfa64745
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rfc1807 xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>64745</id><entry>2023-10-13</entry><title>Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>a8843d62ec83157f25d4bc7935e1479e</sid><ORCID>0000-0003-1610-4667</ORCID><firstname>Pier-Luc</firstname><surname>Dupont Picard</surname><name>Pier-Luc Dupont Picard</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2023-10-13</date><deptcode>APC</deptcode><abstract>With the development of human rights and anti-discrimination law, courts have increasingly been called upon to protect ethnicity-related practices from general criminal and civil sanctions. These ‘claims of culture’ have so far been addressed with remarkable inconsistency, leading to popular fears of unlimited normative pluralism and targeted legislative measures. Compounding such controversies, philosophical approaches to multiculturalism have mostly been concerned with policy and offered vague or distorted portrayals of judicial challenges. This article seeks to fill the gap by exploring how the legal standard of substantive equality might structure the courts' approach to a range of cases involving minority litigants. In particular, I will argue that ethnic practices can be usefully divided into four categories triggering distinct modes of legal reasoning: criminal offences, human rights violations, civil infractions, and symbolic identification. In the first case, cultural differences mainly bear on the analysis of subjective blameworthiness, whereas in the second, they bring out an ongoing shift in the public/private and negative/positive nature of human rights obligations. Civil infractions call for the application of anti-discrimination standards developed in the doctrine of indirect discrimination and reasonable accommodation. As for symbolic identification, it raises the issue of national identities and legal instruments to make them inclusive of the whole citizenry.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Nordic Journal of Human Rights</journal><volume>34</volume><journalNumber>4</journalNumber><paginationStart>289</paginationStart><paginationEnd>313</paginationEnd><publisher>Informa UK Limited</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>1891-8131</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1891-814X</issnElectronic><keywords>Multiculturalism, Anti-discrimination, Human Rights, Ethnicity, Legal Philosophy</keywords><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>10</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2016</publishedYear><publishedDate>2016-10-01</publishedDate><doi>10.1080/18918131.2016.1243881</doi><url>http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/18918131.2016.1243881</url><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Politics, Philosophy and International Relations</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>APC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><funders>This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education under Grant FPU-12/00482 and by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness under Grants DER2012-31771 and DER2015-65840-R (MULTIHURI project, www.multihuri.com).</funders><projectreference/><lastEdited>2023-11-27T17:23:39.6770351</lastEdited><Created>2023-10-13T13:56:42.9988324</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences</level><level id="2">School of Social Sciences - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Pier-Luc</firstname><surname>Dupont Picard</surname><orcid>0000-0003-1610-4667</orcid><order>1</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling v2 64745 2023-10-13 Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices a8843d62ec83157f25d4bc7935e1479e 0000-0003-1610-4667 Pier-Luc Dupont Picard Pier-Luc Dupont Picard true false 2023-10-13 APC With the development of human rights and anti-discrimination law, courts have increasingly been called upon to protect ethnicity-related practices from general criminal and civil sanctions. These ‘claims of culture’ have so far been addressed with remarkable inconsistency, leading to popular fears of unlimited normative pluralism and targeted legislative measures. Compounding such controversies, philosophical approaches to multiculturalism have mostly been concerned with policy and offered vague or distorted portrayals of judicial challenges. This article seeks to fill the gap by exploring how the legal standard of substantive equality might structure the courts' approach to a range of cases involving minority litigants. In particular, I will argue that ethnic practices can be usefully divided into four categories triggering distinct modes of legal reasoning: criminal offences, human rights violations, civil infractions, and symbolic identification. In the first case, cultural differences mainly bear on the analysis of subjective blameworthiness, whereas in the second, they bring out an ongoing shift in the public/private and negative/positive nature of human rights obligations. Civil infractions call for the application of anti-discrimination standards developed in the doctrine of indirect discrimination and reasonable accommodation. As for symbolic identification, it raises the issue of national identities and legal instruments to make them inclusive of the whole citizenry. Journal Article Nordic Journal of Human Rights 34 4 289 313 Informa UK Limited 1891-8131 1891-814X Multiculturalism, Anti-discrimination, Human Rights, Ethnicity, Legal Philosophy 1 10 2016 2016-10-01 10.1080/18918131.2016.1243881 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/18918131.2016.1243881 COLLEGE NANME Politics, Philosophy and International Relations COLLEGE CODE APC Swansea University This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Education under Grant FPU-12/00482 and by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness under Grants DER2012-31771 and DER2015-65840-R (MULTIHURI project, www.multihuri.com). 2023-11-27T17:23:39.6770351 2023-10-13T13:56:42.9988324 Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences School of Social Sciences - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations Pier-Luc Dupont Picard 0000-0003-1610-4667 1
title Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices
spellingShingle Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices
Pier-Luc Dupont Picard
title_short Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices
title_full Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices
title_fullStr Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices
title_full_unstemmed Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices
title_sort Human Rights and Substantive Equality in the Adjudication of Ethnic Practices
author_id_str_mv a8843d62ec83157f25d4bc7935e1479e
author_id_fullname_str_mv a8843d62ec83157f25d4bc7935e1479e_***_Pier-Luc Dupont Picard
author Pier-Luc Dupont Picard
author2 Pier-Luc Dupont Picard
format Journal article
container_title Nordic Journal of Human Rights
container_volume 34
container_issue 4
container_start_page 289
publishDate 2016
institution Swansea University
issn 1891-8131
1891-814X
doi_str_mv 10.1080/18918131.2016.1243881
publisher Informa UK Limited
college_str Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofhumanitiesandsocialsciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
department_str School of Social Sciences - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences{{{_:::_}}}School of Social Sciences - Politics, Philosophy and International Relations
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/18918131.2016.1243881
document_store_str 0
active_str 0
description With the development of human rights and anti-discrimination law, courts have increasingly been called upon to protect ethnicity-related practices from general criminal and civil sanctions. These ‘claims of culture’ have so far been addressed with remarkable inconsistency, leading to popular fears of unlimited normative pluralism and targeted legislative measures. Compounding such controversies, philosophical approaches to multiculturalism have mostly been concerned with policy and offered vague or distorted portrayals of judicial challenges. This article seeks to fill the gap by exploring how the legal standard of substantive equality might structure the courts' approach to a range of cases involving minority litigants. In particular, I will argue that ethnic practices can be usefully divided into four categories triggering distinct modes of legal reasoning: criminal offences, human rights violations, civil infractions, and symbolic identification. In the first case, cultural differences mainly bear on the analysis of subjective blameworthiness, whereas in the second, they bring out an ongoing shift in the public/private and negative/positive nature of human rights obligations. Civil infractions call for the application of anti-discrimination standards developed in the doctrine of indirect discrimination and reasonable accommodation. As for symbolic identification, it raises the issue of national identities and legal instruments to make them inclusive of the whole citizenry.
published_date 2016-10-01T17:23:40Z
_version_ 1783738737130209280
score 11.013686

Similar Items