Editorial
| Published date | 01 March 2007 |
| Date | 01 March 2007 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/135822910700800401 |
International
Journal
of
Discrimination
and
the
Law,
2007,
Vol.
8,
p.
217
1358-2291/2007
$10
©
2007
A B
Academic
Publishers. Printed
in
Great Britain
EDITORIAL
Three
distinct
areas
of
discrimination
are
considered
in
this issue,
disability, race
and
sexual
orientation,
with reference
to
Australian
and
European
Union
law.
Waldeck
and
Guthrie
consider
the
prob-
lem
of
disability discrimination
in
the
context
of
applications
to
emigrate
to
Australia.
They
show
how
health
requirements
prevent
migration
for
those
suffering
from
disabilities.
As
the
Migration
Act
1958 is
exempt
from
the
Disability
Discrimination
Act
1992,
this
discrimination
is lawful. However, as
they
show,
two
recent
cases Robinson
and
Ramlu,
have
found
in
favour
of
the
applicants
because
the
medical opinions
had
not
looked
at
the
actual
nature
and
content
of
the
applicant's
condition,
which
might
be
mild
or
managed
and
controlled,
but
instead
focused
on
a
hypothetical
generic
person
with
that
disease
or
disability.
They
consider
the
impact
of
these decisions for
applicants
with these illnesses
or
disabil-
ities
and
for
future
Australian
immigration
policy.
Waldeck
and
Guthrie
propose
reforms, for example,
undertakings
to
defray
health
costs,
in
order
to
ensure
compliance
with
international
imperatives
to
respect disability rights.
The
remaining
papers
focus
on
European
Union
law, specifi-
cally,
the
and
the
and
consider
their
implications for challenging inequality
and
discrimination
on
grounds
of
race
or
sexual
orientation.
Erica
Howard
considers
the
problems
with
the
EU
Directive, namely its limited scope,
the
fact
that
it
aims
for
formal
rather
than
substantive equality
and
that
it
gives limited
protection
to
third
country
nationals,
although
she also highlights its merits
compared
to
previous Directives.
Howard
proposes
changes
to
improve
its effectiveness
in
challenging
racism
and
racial
and
ethnic origin discrimination.
Mark
Walters
reviews
the
effectiveness
of
sexual
orientation
discrimination
law
of
the
European
Union,
focusing
on
Article
13
and
the
He
argues
that
the
Directive is also
too
narrow
in
its scope as
it
covers
only
employ-
ment,
and
does
not
cover social security,
health
education
or
other
areas, while
the
exceptions
are
too
broad.
Walters
reviews recent
cases
in
the
European
Court
of
Justice
and
the
European
Court
of
Human
Rights
to
show the
problems
with
this
area
of
law
and
also
considers
the
role
of
the
European
Parliament
as
a key influence
on
the
evolution
of
sexual
orientation
discrimination
law
and
on
gay
and
lesbian rights within
the
European
Union.
To continue reading
Request your trial