Withholding Party Funding from a ‘Discriminating’ Political Party
| Published date | 01 December 2007 |
| Author | Marjolein Busstra,Jogchum Vrielink |
| Date | 01 December 2007 |
| DOI | 10.1177/135822910700900204 |
International Journal
of
Discrimination and the Law,
2007,
Vol.
9,
pp.
113~129
1358-2291/2007
$10
©
2007
A B Academic Publishers. Printed
in
Great Britain
WITHHOLDING PARTY FUNDING FROM A
'DISCRIMINATING' POLITICAL PARTY
MARJOLEIN BUSSTRA*
and
JOGCHUM VRIELINKt
*Erasmus University Rotterdam,
The
Netherlands
tCatholic University
of
Leuven, Belgium
ABSTRACT
On
7 September 2005 the District
Court
in The Hague judged that it was unlawful
for the Dutch State to continue providing party funding to the 'Staatkundig Ger-
eformeerde Partij'.
On
the basis
of
religious considerations, this Calvinist political
party excluded women from full membership and denied women the possibility
of
taking up political and administrative mandates
on
behalf
of
the party. This
amounted to discrimination
of
women with regard to their right to political parti-
cipation, according to the court. Public funding
of
the SGP was thus contrary to
the obligations contained in the Convention on the Elimination
of
All Forms
of
Discrimination against Women (CEDA W).
This contribution analyses the court's decision
and
reasoning to conclude that
it
is
premised on a number
of
untenable assumptions, regarding the nature and
requirements
of
the principle
of
nondiscrimination
~
contained in
CEDA
W
~
vis-a-vis other rights and liberties.
INTRODUCTION
Respect
for
freedom
of
religion
has
historically figured
amongst
the
most
prominent
principles
governing
Dutch
society,
and,
together
with
the
principle
of
religious
neutrality
of
State
authorities,
makes
up
the
fundamental
constitutional
principle
of
separation
between
Church
and
State.1 Lately, however, this principle
has
come
under
pressure
as a
consequence
of
the
heightened
sensitivity
of
the
subject
of
religion
in
society.
Numerous
instances
of
conflicts
between
this
principle
and
other
fundamental
rights
or
principles
have
recently
come
to
the
fore
in
public
discourse, as well as
in
legalliterature.
2
One
case
that
has
received
much
attention
in
this
regard
involves
a Calvinist political
party,
the
'Staatkundig
Gereformeerde
Partij'
(State
Reformed
Party;
hereafter:
SGP)
Basing itself
on
a
traditional
reading
of
the
bible, this
party
excludes
women
from
full
membership
and
denies
them
the
possibility
of
taking
up
political
and
administra-
tive
mandates
on
behalf
of
the
party.
114
On
7 September 2005
the
District
Court
in
The
Hague
judged
that
it
was unlawful for
the
Dutch
State
to
continue
providing
party
funding
to
the
SGP,
which was considered
to
be
in
violation
of
its
obligation
to
ensure
the
right
of
women
to
political
participa-
tion
on
an
equal
footing
with
men. Public
funding
of
the
SGP
was
thus
contrary
to
the
obligations
contained
in
the
Convention
on
the
Elimination
of
All
Forms
of
Discrimination
against
Women
(CEDAW).
SGP:
THE
PARTY
AND
ITS
VISION
OF
MANKIND
AND
SOCIETY
The government
is
-as a servant
of
God -unconditionally submitted
to God's Word and Law, on the basis
of
which it shall be judged.
In the exercise
of
its
office
it
is
to bear the responsibility
of
a polity
of
the state in line with the norms as revealed in God's Word, and
for the strict observance
of
said norms. 3
The
above
excerpt is
not
taken
from
a historical theological treatise,
but
from
the
program
of
a
contemporary
political
party
in
The
Neth-
erlands:
the
SGP.
The
party
strives
for
a society
and
state
founded
on
'God's
divine
order
as
it
was revealed
in
the
Bible'.
Founded
in
1918,
the
SGP
is
the
oldest political
party
in
The
Netherlands
still in
existence.4
It
has
a small yet stable following:
in
parliament
the
party
has
consistently disposed
of
two
to
three
seats,
out
of
a
total
of
150.5
The
party's
standpoint
on
women
has
given rise
to
much
discus-
sion
and
controversy,
both
in
The
Netherlands
and
abroad.
On
the
basis
of
an
orthodox
reading
of
the
bible,
the
SGP
maintains
the
point
of
view
that
women
and
men
are
attributed
distinct tasks
and
responsibilities.
According
to
the
party,
God's
word
teaches
that
'men
and
women,
by
virtue
of
the
natural
order
of
the
Creation
have
received
their
own
specific, distinguishable calling
and
place.
In
this
order
the
man
is
the
head
of
the
woman.
Measures
and
policies
aimed
at
recognizing
the
equivalence
of
men
and
women
are
evalu-
ated
positively. Every
pursuit
of
emancipation
that
repudiates
the
God
given calling
and
place
of
men
and
women
is revolutionary,
however,
and
must
be
forcefully resisted'. 6
In
practice
the
party
takes
this
to
mean
that
administrative
and
governing functions
are
reserved
for
men
and
that
women
have
no
place
in
politics.
Women
cannot
be
delegated
to
municipal councils
or
to
parliament.
Nor
are
women
allowed
to
apply
for
internal
administrative
functions; they
do
not
even dispose
of
the
right
to
vote
within
the
party.
7
To continue reading
Request your trial