Deliberative Equality and the Transgovernmental Politics of the Global Financial Architecture

Revisiting the concept of transgovernmentalism, originally developed by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, can shed considerable light on the nature of interstate cooperation in contemporary global financial governance. Transgovernmentalism highlights how certain technocratic policy communities, composed of finance ministries, central banks, and regulators, dominate the global financial architecture. It also provides insights into the political and social basis of these actors' interactions and deliberations. Most importantly, renovating the concept of transgovernmentalism brings the participatory deficits in the current global financial architecture into sharp focus and points us in the direction of a workable reform agenda that would expand inclusion and participation. This article advocates basing future reform on efforts to achieve a closer realization of the principle of “deliberative equality.” Unfortunately, “transgovernmentalism” is incompatible with deliberative equality, meaning that it is precisely the transgovernmental characteristics of the current global financial architecture that have to be challenged and overturned if we are to arrive at anything approximating deliberative equality.

Multiculturalism, freedom of religion, equality, and the British constitution: The JFS case considered

In the JFS case, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom held that the admissions policy of a Jewish faith school constituted unlawful racial discrimination because it used the Orthodox Jewish interpretation of who is Jewish as a criterion for determining admission to the school. A detailed discussion of the case is located in the context of two broader debates in Britain, which are characterized as constitutional in character or, at least, as possessing constitutional properties. The first is the debate concerning the treatment of minority groups, multiculturalism, and the changing perceptions in public policy of the role of race and religion in national life. It is suggested that this debate has become imbued with strong elements of what has been termed “post-multiculturalism”. The second debate is broader still, and pertains to shifting approaches to “constitutionalism” in Britain. It is suggested that, with the arrival of the European Convention on Human Rights and EU law, the U.K. has seen a shift from a pragmatic approach to constitutional thinking, in which legislative compromise played a key part, to the recognition of certain quasi-constitutional principles, allowing the judiciary greatly to expand its role in protecting individual rights while requiring the judges, at the same time, to articulate a principled basis for doing so. In both these debates, the principle of equality plays an important role. The JFS case is an important illustration of some of the implications of these developments.

Elements of A New Framework for the principle of Equal Treatment of persons in EC Law

In June and November 2000, the European Parliament and the Council adopted two Directives referring to ‘the principle of equal treatment irrespective of’ in their title, one relating to racial and ethnic origin, the other to disability, age, religion and belief or sexual orientation. A thorough reform of Directive 76/207/EEC on the principle of equal treatment for women and men in employment matters is pending between the European Parliament's second reading and adoption while this is written. Community secondary legislation on equal treatment of persons has thus expanded in scope and number of reasons which must not serve as starting points for differentiation. Does this signify progress in legal protection against personal discrimination? While not providing a ready answer, this article proposes an analytical framework to answer this question, concentrating on conceptions of equality in general and in particular on the problems multi-dimensional discrimination might pose for the law.

Women's Nightwork :deregulation as a straight road to equality?

The book considers the question whether the traditional prohibition of nightwork for female manual workers could be defended against EU (then: EEC) discrimination law requirements and against the German constitution itself. While I was working on the PhD, German labour law still prohibited manual workers (but not white collar employees, or nurses, or policewomen) from working nights. Just before the thesis was published, the German constitutional court held that the prohibition indeed violates the Constitution, but that it must not be repealed without providing for specific protection against health risks ensuing from night work. The Court thus mainly confirmed the thesis' results. The thesis first considers the history of the legislation (which was based on an ILO convention), and discusses the social and health risks related to night work. It then comes to the conclusion that gender roles imply that women are at a greater risk when working nights, but that there is no biological justification (except during pregnancy of course). The thesis further develops a recommendation, based on the constitutional welfare states principle and the constitutional protection of health, to not just abolish the prohibition, but to provide uplevel equalisation of working conditions for women and men. This was the first time I also tried to work comparatively (not perfect at all), but I have certainly improved since then. An English summary of the thesis was published in the 3rd issue of the Cardozo Women's Law Journal 1996, which was also my first ever publicatin in English

Equality, justice and feasibility: an ethical analysis of the WBGU’s budget approach

According to the Budget Approach proposed by the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU), allocating CO2 emission rights to countries on an equal per-capita basis would provide an ethically justified response to global climate change. In this paper, we will highlight four normative issues which beset the WBGU’s Budget Approach: (1) the approach’s core principle of distributive justice, the principle of equality, and its associated policy of emissions egalitarianism are much more complex than it initially appears; (2) the “official” rationale for determining the size of the budget should be modified in order to avoid implausible normative assumptions about the imposition of permissible intergenerational risks; (3) the approach heavily relies on trade-offs between justice and feasibility which should be stated more explicitly; and (4) part of the approach’s ethical appeal depends on policy instruments which are “detachable” from the approach’s core principle of distributive justice.

Discourses of equality in post-Agreement Northern Ireland

This article analyses the use of equality as a concept central to the implementation of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland. The authors argue that, although equality legislation is succeeding in redressing previous discrimination in society, the discourses that have emerged around it have exacerbated competition and polarization between communities for two main reasons. Firstly, in " selling' the Agreement to their supporters, political elites have appropriated community-specific definitions of the concept, thus reinforcing rather than weakening group differences. Secondly, the practice of equality legislation involves the definitive categorization of individuals as members of particular groups. This article examines these processes and their effects through the analysis of the discourse of nationalist and Unionist Party elites and of individual Catholics and Protestants. This is done in order to capture the dynamics of change in political communication and identification rather than simply describing institutional alterations.