Editorial
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1358229117716558 |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Author | Susan Easton |
| Subject Matter | Editorial |
Editorial
Editorial 17(2)
The potentialand limits of anti-discrimination law are illustrated in this issue inrelation to
gender discrimination in Nigeria. Ebenezer Durojaye and Yinka Owoweye review the
interpretation of s 42 of the Nigerian Constitution,the non-discrimination provision, in the
domestic courts.They criticise the courts’ focus on formalequality and argue that moving
towards a substantive equality approach, focusing on outcomes, would better safeguard
women’s rights and address inequalities of power. It would also be consistent with
Nigeria’sobligations under international law, including the non-discrimination provision
in Article 2 of the African Charter. Despite the many improvements in the protection of
women’s rights in international law, discrimination against women has survived in many
areas of Africa including Nigeria. For example, in the eastern part of Nigeria, a woman
cannot inherit property from her deceased father under customary law. The approach of
the Nigerian courtsis contrasted with the more progressive substantive equality approach
taken by the South AfricanConstitutional Court and the CanadianSupreme Court.
Jamil Mujuzi considers the role of the African Commission on Human and People’s
Rights,which aims to protect human and peoples’rights in Africa. A key reason fordrafting
and adoptingthe Charter was to address discrimination and thisis clearly stated in Article 2
which stipulates that all are equal before law and should not be discriminated against on
groundsincluding gender, religion,political beliefsor other status, while Article18(3) deals
specificallywith discrimination againstwomen. But the Commission, inits observation on
state parties’ reports, has noted the lack of concrete legislation at the national level on
gender-based violence, FGM and discrimination against women in some states and has
stressedthe need to introducemeasures to prevent discrimination againstwomen, to combat
FGM and to protect people living with HIV/AIDS, including prisoners. Although
discrimination is clearly a major issue for the African Commission and African states,
Mujuzi argues that the Commission’s recommendations are hard to monitor or implement
and need to be clearer,specific and more easily measurableto facilitate states’ compliance.
Sam Middlemiss considers victimisation in relation to whistle-blowing in the UK and
assesses the extent of protection under the 1998 Public Interest Disclosure Act given to
employees making disclosures. Middlemiss questions the effectiveness of the legislation
because certain groups of workers are not protected and there is a low success rate,
especially for those without legal representation. He discusses the position of employees
who have been victimised because they have blown the whistle. He notes the complexity
of the threshold requirements in the law, its scope and the evidential requirements which
must be met.
International Journalof
Discrimination and theLaw
2017, Vol. 17(2) 69
ªThe Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1358229117716558
journals.sagepub.com/home/jdi
To continue reading
Request your trial