DOCSLIB.ORG

EU Gender Equality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EU Gender Equality No. 1 / 2008 In this Issue: Sacha Prechal EU Gender Equality Law: a source of inspiration for other EU law areas? Sophia Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos The Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights: maintaining and developing the acquis in gender equality THE EUROPEAN NETWORK OF LEGAL EXPERTS IN THE FIELD OF GENDER EQUALITY European Gender Equality Law Review 2008-1 EUROPEAN NETWORK OF LEGAL EXPERTS IN THE FIELD OF GENDER EQUALITY European Commission Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Unit EMPL/G/2 Theme Equality, Action against Discrimination: Legal Questions This publication has been commissioned by the European Commission under the framework programme PROGRESS (Decision 1672/2006/EC of the European Parliament and the Coun- cil, OJ L 315/1 of 15.11.2006). For more information on PROGRESS see: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/progress/index_en.htm Editorial board: Susanne Burri Hanneke van Eijken Hélène Masse-Dessen Christopher McCrudden Sacha Prechal Production: Susanne Burri Frans van Eck Hanneke van Eijken Titia Kloos Marit van der Lans Peter Morris Sacha Prechal Irene van Seggelen Manuscript completed in August 2008. The information contained in this review reflects, as far as possible, the state of affairs on 15 April 2008. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the opinion or position of the European Com- mission, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on its behalf is responsible for the use which might be made of the information in this publication. Contents Introduction 1 Susanne Burri Members of the European Network of Legal Experts in the Field of Gender Equality 4 The European Network of Legal Experts in the non-discrimination field 5 Isabelle Chopin EU Gender Equality Law: a source of inspiration for other EU law areas? 8 Sacha Prechal The Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights: maintaining and developing the acquis in gender equality 15 Sophia Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos EU Policy and Legislative Process Update 25 Hanneke van Eijken European Court of Justice Case Law Update 29 Hanneke van Eijken Decisions of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) 43 Marit van der Lans News from the Member States and EEA countries AUSTRIA Anna Sporrer 44 BELGIUM Jean Jacqmain 46 BULGARIA Genoveva Tisheva 48 CYPRUS Lia Efstratiou-Georgiades 51 CZECH REPUBLIC Kristina Koldinská 54 DENMARK Ruth Nielsen 57 ESTONIA Anneli Albi 59 FINLAND Kevät Nousiainen 63 FRANCE Sylvaine Laulom 66 GERMANY Beate Rudolf 69 GREECE Sophia Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos 73 HUNGARY Csilla Kollonay Lehoczky 75 ICELAND Herdís Thorgeirsdóttir 78 IRELAND Frances Meenan 80 ITALY Simonetta Renga 84 LATVIA Kristīne Dupate 88 LIECHTENSTEIN Nicole Mathé 90 LITHUANIA Tomas Davulis 93 LUXEMBOURG Anik Raskin 96 MALTA Peter Xuereb 97 NETHERLANDS Rikki Holtmaat 100 NORWAY Helga Aune 103 POLAND Eleonora Zielińska 106 PORTUGAL Maria Do Rosário Palma Ramalho 110 European Gender Equality Law Review — No 1/2008 i ROMANIA Roxana Teşiu 111 SLOVAKIA Zuzana Magurová 114 SLOVENIA Tanja Koderman Sever 117 SPAIN Berta Valdés 120 SWEDEN Ann Numhauser-Henning 123 UNITED KINGDOM Aileen McColgan 125 ii European Gender Equality Law Review — No 1/2008 Introduction ∗ Susanne Burri This first issue of the European Gender Equality Law Review (EGELR) provides in- formation on policies, legislative developments and case law in the field of gender equality both at the European level and at the level of the 27 Member States of the European Union and the EEA countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway). This (electronic) publication is produced by the European Network of Legal Experts in the field of Gender Equality, a Network financed by the funding programme PROGRESS of the European Union. This Community programme for Employment and Social Solidarity has been set up to support financially the implementation of the objectives of the European Union in the fields of employment and social affairs. One of the spe- cific objectives of the PROGRESS programme is to support the effective implementa- tion of the principle of gender equality and to promote gender mainstreaming in all Community policies.1 A network of legal experts in the field of equal treatment of men and women has assisted the Commission in its monitoring tasks since 1984 by providing information to the European Commission. Besides the bottom-up and top-down information ex- change between the national legal experts and the European Commission, an informa- tion exchange also takes place between the national experts. The continuity of the work of the network was enhanced due to the fact that Sacha Prechal was the coordi- nator of the network between 1991 and 2007 and most experts have participated in the network for some years. They have built up long-lasting common experiences in this field. Sacha Prechal is still involved in the European Network of Legal Experts in the field of Gender Equality as a member of the executive committee. Many network documents were in the past meant for internal use by the European Commission and were not published. However, some electronic documents are available to the public (see below). Up to 2007, Bulletins (in English and French) provided information on developments in the field of gender equality on a regular basis and different thematic reports were published, for example on the gender pay gap and different forms of leave. Each year, the main developments in EU gender equality law both at the EU and the national level were reported in a general report, which was also published on the European Commission’s website. The current European Network of Legal Experts in the field of Gender Equality started its activities in January 2008. The main objectives of the Network are to give independent advice, analysis and relevant information to the European Commission on national legislation and policies in the field of gender equality and to contribute to the Commission’s review of the effectiveness of existing legislation and, if necessary, the development of new legislative instruments at EU level in this field. This area not only includes the application of the different directives on equal treatment between women and men in (access to) employment and in access to and the supply of goods and services, but is also closely related to issues such as the reconciliation of work, ∗ Co-ordinator of the European Network of Legal Experts in the field of Gender Equality and a Sen- ior Lecturer at Utrecht University, School of Law (Gender and Law). 1 See for more information: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/progress/index_en.html, accessed 15 June 2008. European Gender Equality Law Review — No 1/2008 1 private and family life, sexual harassment, domestic violence, and women in decision- making. The European Network of Legal Experts in the field of Gender Equality is com- posed of 30 high-level independent national legal experts, working as academics, lawyers or with non-governmental organizations in the field of gender equality. There is one national expert for each Member State and EEA country. The School of Law of Utrecht University, in the Netherlands, is responsible for the co-ordination of the Network. An executive committee – in which three independent senior experts and the co-ordinator participate – ensures the overall quality of the work of the Network and meets on a regular basis with the representatives of the Unit ‘Equality, Action against Discrimination: Legal Questions’ of the European Commission. The whole Network meets twice a year in Brussels in order to discuss recent relevant developments across the Community with representatives of the Commission. The Network’s programme includes the publication of this biannual European Gender Equality Law Review (available in English, French and German); the publica- tion of a general report on Gender Equality Law in the EU once a year (also available in English, French and German); and several thematic reports (in English), some of which will be published. Furthermore, (unpublished) flash-reports inform the Com- mission each month of relevant developments and deal with various ad hoc requests from the Commission. In this issue of the European Gender Equality Law Review Isabelle Chopin pro- vides a brief introduction to the European Commission’s European Network of Legal Experts in the non-discrimination field. This Network fulfils similar tasks to the Euro- pean Network of Legal Experts in the field of Gender Equality concerning relevant developments in the field of anti-discrimination as regards the other grounds men- tioned in Article 13 EC: race and ethnicity, religion and belief, age, disability and sexual orientation. Both Networks meet once a year during a joint meeting and legal seminar in Brussels. Such a meeting enables the members of both Networks to discuss equality issues common to all the discrimination grounds mentioned in Article 13 EC. In October 2007, the Unit ‘Equality, Action against Discrimination: Legal Ques- tions’ of the European Commission organized a Conference on 50 Years Gender Equality Law. Sacha Prechal – one of the key-note speakers – highlighted the impact of EU Gender Equality Law, in particular the case law of the European Court of Jus- tice (ECJ) on the anti-discrimination Directives adopted in 2000 and Community law in general. In this issue of the EGELR she analyses some issues in the gender equality case law which have considerably influenced Community law in general in other ar- eas, such as the free movement of workers or taxation. During the meeting of the European Network of Legal Experts in the field of Gender Equality in April 2008 in Brussels, attention was paid to some aspects of the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights in relation to the acquis com- munautaire in the field of gender equality. Sophia Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos, the Network’s Greek national expert, presented an introduction to this subject.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • University of Groningen 'Europeanisation' of the Law Prechal
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Groningen University of Groningen ‘Europeanisation’ of the law Prechal, S.; Ooik, R.H. van; Jans, J.H.; Mortelmans, K.J.M. Published in: Default journal IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2005 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Prechal, S., Ooik, R. H. V., Jans, J. H., & Mortelmans, K. J. M. (2005). ‘Europeanisation’ of the law: consequences for the Dutch judiciary. Default journal. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 12-11-2019 Prof. Dr. S. Prechal Dr. R.H. van Ooik Prof. Dr. J.H. Jans Prof. Dr. K.J.M. Mortelmans ‘Europeanisation’ of the law: consequences for the Dutch judiciary Table of Contents The report 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Volume 17 Issue 2
    2021 Volume 17 Issue 2 Contents Articles Anthoula Malkopoulou – Greece: A Procedural Defence of Democracy against the Golden Dawn – 177 Conor Casey and Eoin Daly – Political Constitutionalism under a Culture of Legalism: Case Studies from Ireland – 202 Jeremy B. Bierbach – The ‘Person of Northern Ireland’: A Vestigial Form of EU Citizenship? – 232 Tim Wolff – True Believers? – Sincerity and Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights – 259 Nuno Garoupa, Marian Gili and Fernando Gómez Pomar – Mixed Judicial Selection and 2021 Volume 17 Issue 2 Constitutional Review: Evidence from Spain – 287 Niels Petersen and Konstantin Chatziathanasiou – Balancing Competences? Proportionality as an Instrument to Regulate the Exercise of Competences after the PSPP Judgment of the Contributions by Bundesverfassungsgericht – 314 Tim Wolff, Susanne K. Schmidt, Niels Petersen & Konstantin Chatziathanasiou, Anthoula Malkopoulou, Nuno Garoupa & Marian Gili & Fernando Gómez Pomar, Case Note Conor Casey & Eoin Daly, Jeremy B. Bierbach, Lucía Alonso Sanz Lucía Alonso Sanz – Deconstructing Hirsi: The Return of Hot Returns ECtHR 13 February 2020, Nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15, ND and NT v Spain – 335 Subjects Defending democracy: conviction of the Golden Dawn party in Greece as a criminal Book Review Essay organisation; Nomination of judges: selection and its traces in constitutional review case law in Susanne K. Schmidt – Just Hitting the Nail or Also the Thumb? The Court’s Deference to Spain; Citizenship: the complexities of Northern Ireland; Constitution and the political: Member States – 353 a culture of legalism in Ireland; Fundamental freedoms: article 9 of the Convention and the sincerity of belief; Proportionality: a closer analysis of the German PSPP judgment; Migration law: a case note on ND and NT v Spain; Review essay: Zglinski’s book on deference to member states 2021 Volume 17 Volume 2021 177–367 Cambridge Core For further information about this journal please go to the journal website at: cambridge.org/euconst 2021/2 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Europeanisation' of the Law: Consequences
    Prof. Dr. S. Prechal Dr. R.H. van Ooik Prof. Dr. J.H. Jans Prof. Dr. K.J.M. Mortelmans ‘Europeanisation’ of the Law: Consequences for the Dutch Judiciary Table of Contents The report 1. Introduction 4 2. The horizontal dimension: general and common aspects of the ‘Europeanisation’ process of the Dutch judiciary 8 2.1 The organisation of the administration of justice in the EU 8 2.1.1 Centralised and decentralised enforcement of Community law 8 2.1.2 The interrelationship between centralised and decentralised enforcement and the shifting workload 9 2.1.3 The Constitutional Treaty and judicial enforcement of EU Law 11 2.2 EU law and national judicial procedures 13 2.2.1 The effects of EU law on national procedural law and the organisation of the courts 13 2.2.2 The duty to ensure effective judicial protection 14 2.2.3 Five practical examples of how the Court’s case law could affect the organisation of the Dutch judiciary 16 2.3 Procedural implications of recent developments in European substantive law 20 2.3.1 Free movement 20 2.3.2 Competition policy 21 2.3.3 State aid 24 2.4 The preliminary reference procedure 25 2.4.1 Length of the procedure 25 2.4.2 Proposals for revamping the preliminary reference procedure 26 2.4.3 Short term solutions 29 2.5 The Constitutional Treaty and the protection of fundamental rights 29 3. The vertical dimension: European developments specific to civil, administrative and criminal law 32 3.1 Civil law 32 3.1.1 Internal market legislation 32 3.1.2 Private international law 33 3.1.3 Enforcement and the future of European private law 34 2 ‘Europeanisation’ of the Law: Consequences for the Dutch Judiciary 3.2 Administrative law 35 3.2.1 Competition law 35 3.2.2 Environmental law 36 3.2.3 Immigration law 37 3.2.4 Telecom law 39 3.2.5 Agriculture and fisheries 40 3.3 Criminal law 40 3.3.1 The traditional role of the criminal judge 40 3.3.2 Obligation to enforce EC law through criminal law 41 3.3.3 Third pillar: police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters 42 3.3.4 Criminal law and the Constitutional Treaty 43 4.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Volume 17 Issue 1
    2021 Volume 17 Issue 1 Contents Articles Renata Mieńkowska-Norkiene – The Political Impact of the Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union – 1 Charlotte Reyns – Saving Judicial Independence: A Threat to the Preliminary Ruling Mechanism? – 26 Marcin Rojszczak – Extraterritorial Bulk Surveillance after the German BND Act Judgment – 53 David Quinn – The Law and Norms of the European Central Bank as Sovereign Lender of Last Resort: Crystallising Endogenous Authority – 78 2021 Volume 17 Issue 1 Case Notes Marian Enache and Cristina Titirişcă – References for Preliminary Rulings Submitted in a priori Constitutional Review. Insights from Romania in Light of Decision No. 137 of 13 March Contributions by 2019 of the Romanian Constitutional Court – 107 Suvi Sankari, Marcin Rojszczak, Charlotte Reyns, David Quinn, Darinka Piqani, Aleksandra Gliszczyńska-Grabias and Wojciech Sadurski – The Judgment That Wasn’t Renata Mieńkowska-Norkiene, Aleksandra Gliszczyńska-Grabias & Wojciech Sadurski, (But Which Nearly Brought Poland to a Standstill) – 130 Marian Enache & Cristina Titirişcă Book Review Essay Subjects Suvi Sankari – Is Yet Another Book on Constitutional Pluralism Worth Reading? – 154 Court of justice: the political impact of its judgments; judicial independence and admissibility Darinka Piqani – A Tale of Three Constitutional Courts in Democratic Transitions –163 of questions for preliminary ruling; European central bank: its role as a sovereign lender of last resort; Fundamental rights abroad: extraterritorial bulk surveillance; Case notes: the Romanian Constitutional Court’s dialogue with the European Court of Justice; and a purported judgment on abortion law from Poland; Book review essays: constitutional pluralism; and constitutional courts in democratic transition compared. 2021 Volume 17 Volume 2021 Cambridge Core 1–176 For further information about this journal please go to the journal website at: cambridge.org/euconst 2021/1 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Volume 17 Issue 2
    2021 Volume 17 Issue 2 Contents Articles Anthoula Malkopoulou – Greece: A Procedural Defence of Democracy against the Golden Dawn – 177 Conor Casey and Eoin Daly – Political Constitutionalism under a Culture of Legalism: Case Studies from Ireland – 202 Jeremy B. Bierbach – The ‘Person of Northern Ireland’: A Vestigial Form of EU Citizenship? – 232 Tim Wolff – True Believers? – Sincerity and Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights – 259 Nuno Garoupa, Marian Gili and Fernando Gómez Pomar – Mixed Judicial Selection and 2021 Volume 17 Issue 2 Constitutional Review: Evidence from Spain – 287 Niels Petersen and Konstantin Chatziathanasiou – Balancing Competences? Proportionality as an Instrument to Regulate the Exercise of Competences after the PSPP Judgment of the Contributions by Bundesverfassungsgericht – 314 Tim Wolff, Susanne K. Schmidt, Niels Petersen & Konstantin Chatziathanasiou, Anthoula Malkopoulou, Nuno Garoupa & Marian Gili & Fernando Gómez Pomar, Case Note Conor Casey & Eoin Daly, Jeremy B. Bierbach, Lucía Alonso Sanz Lucía Alonso Sanz – Deconstructing Hirsi: The Return of Hot Returns ECtHR 13 February 2020, Nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15, ND and NT v Spain – 335 Subjects Defending democracy: conviction of the Golden Dawn party in Greece as a criminal Book Review Essay organisation; Nomination of judges: selection and its traces in constitutional review case law in Susanne K. Schmidt – Just Hitting the Nail or Also the Thumb? The Court’s Deference to Spain; Citizenship: the complexities of Northern Ireland; Constitution and the political: Member States – 353 a culture of legalism in Ireland; Fundamental freedoms: article 9 of the Convention and the sincerity of belief; Proportionality: a closer analysis of the German PSPP judgment; Migration law: a case note on ND and NT v Spain; Review essay: Zglinski’s book on deference to member states 2021 Volume 17 Volume 2021 177–367 Cambridge Core For further information about this journal please go to the journal website at: cambridge.org/euconst 2021/2 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Volume 16 Issue 2
    2020 Volume 16 Issue 2 Contents Articles Daniel Thym – Friendly Takeover, or: the Power of the ‘First Word’. The German Constitutional Court Embraces the Charter of Fundamental Rights as a Standard of Domestic Judicial Review – 187 Michael Gordon – Referendums in the UK Constitution: Authority, Sovereignty and Democracy after Brexit – 213 Jaakko Husa – Locking in Constitutionality Control in Finland – 249 Delia Ferri – The Unorthodox Relationship between the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Secondary Rights in the Court of Justice Case Law on Disability Discrimination – 275 2020 Volume 16 Issue 2 Case Notes Piotr Bogdanowicz and Maciej Taborowski – How to Save a Supreme Court in a Rule of Law Contributions by Crisis: the Polish Experience – 306 Daniel Thym, Tomáš Ľalík, Jaakko Husa, Michael Gordon, Delia Ferri, Piotr Bogdanowicz Tomáš Ľalík – The Slovak Constitutional Court on Unconstitutional Constitutional & Maciej Taborowski Amendment (PL. ÚS 21/2014) – 328 Subjects Finland: a peculiar method of constitutionality control and its historical background; United Kingdom: referendums and the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty; EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: a standard for constitutional review by the Bundesverfassungsgericht; Disability discrimination: Court of Justice case law between Charter, UN Convention and secondary rights 2020 Volume 16 Volume 2020 187–343 Cambridge Core For further information about this journal please go to the journal website at: cambridge.org/euconst 2020/2 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Athens, on 27 Sep 2021 at 17:55:38, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Volume 17 Issue 1
    2021 Volume 17 Issue 1 Contents Articles Renata Mieńkowska-Norkiene – The Political Impact of the Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union – 1 Charlotte Reyns – Saving Judicial Independence: A Threat to the Preliminary Ruling Mechanism? – 26 Marcin Rojszczak – Extraterritorial Bulk Surveillance after the German BND Act Judgment – 53 David Quinn – The Law and Norms of the European Central Bank as Sovereign Lender of Last Resort: Crystallising Endogenous Authority – 78 2021 Volume 17 Issue 1 Case Notes Marian Enache and Cristina Titirişcă – References for Preliminary Rulings Submitted in a priori Constitutional Review. Insights from Romania in Light of Decision No. 137 of 13 March Contributions by 2019 of the Romanian Constitutional Court – 107 Suvi Sankari, Marcin Rojszczak, Charlotte Reyns, David Quinn, Darinka Piqani, Aleksandra Gliszczyńska-Grabias and Wojciech Sadurski – The Judgment That Wasn’t Renata Mieńkowska-Norkiene, Aleksandra Gliszczyńska-Grabias & Wojciech Sadurski, (But Which Nearly Brought Poland to a Standstill) – 130 Marian Enache & Cristina Titirişcă Book Review Essay Subjects Suvi Sankari – Is Yet Another Book on Constitutional Pluralism Worth Reading? – 154 Court of justice: the political impact of its judgments; judicial independence and admissibility Darinka Piqani – A Tale of Three Constitutional Courts in Democratic Transitions –163 of questions for preliminary ruling; European central bank: its role as a sovereign lender of last resort; Fundamental rights abroad: extraterritorial bulk surveillance; Case notes: the Romanian Constitutional Court’s dialogue with the European Court of Justice; and a purported judgment on abortion law from Poland; Book review essays: constitutional pluralism; and constitutional courts in democratic transition compared. 2021 Volume 17 Volume 2021 Cambridge Core 1–176 For further information about this journal please go to the journal website at: cambridge.org/euconst 2021/1 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Groningen Unity and Diversity of the Public Prosecution
    University of Groningen Unity and diversity of the public prosecution services in Europe. A study of the Czech, Dutch, French and Polish systems Marguery, Tony Paul IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2008 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Marguery, T. P. (2008). Unity and diversity of the public prosecution services in Europe. A study of the Czech, Dutch, French and Polish systems. s.n. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
    [Show full text]