The Impact of The Equal Rights Trust

ERT makes interventions whose impact is a positive change within one or more of the following areas:

• Development and improvement of comprehensive national equality legislation and policies giving effect to the universal right to equality.

• Enforcement of existing equality law and policies.

• Accountability of States and non-State actors with a view to their obligation to promote equality and protect against discrimination.

• Empowering civil society, in particular NGOs representing victims of discrimination, in promoting equality.  

• Development of the substantive and procedural aspects of the universal human right to equality and non-discrimination.

• The public understanding of equality as a right and as a value on which broader consensus is needed in present-day societies.

The impact sought in each ERT intervention is specific and measurable, and is targeting the key players who have the greatest power regarding the specific equality issue at hand. Reflecting the fact that the countries in the world differ greatly in the degree of implementing the principle of equality, ERT relies on country-specific strategies. The strategic approach for each country takes into account: a) the general political, social, economic and cultural situation in the country; b) the main patterns of discrimination and the most important inequalities in the country; c) the existing law related to equality, including international legal obligations, constitutional guarantees, and national and sub-national equality legislation; d) the implementation of existing legislation; e) policies and practices related to equality; f) the state of the struggle for equality. To define a country strategy, ERT identifies the stakeholders and the ways in which they have articulated their needs; and the key power players and their relative weight in making decisions on equality issues. Impact is sought on the identified key players. While States (and within them, specific State bodies) are key players and therefore targets for impact, ERT also seeks to influence other key players and stakeholders, including international governmental organisations, the judiciary, civil society organisations, the corporate sector, the education sector, the media, and the general public.
 
EXAMPLES OF IMPACT TO DATE

I. Impact on Governments

• General:(1) Through adopting a universal Declaration of Principles on Equality and accompanying documents on legal standards development, ERT has: a) given governments a reference document expressing the current expert consensus on equality principles that should be the cornerstone of legislation; b) created an important tool of international best practice to orient the efforts of governments and those within State institutions in developing comprehensive national equality legislation and equality policies.(2) Through its Legislation Watch news service, ERT has contributed to monitoring the accountability of governments in implementing the principles of equality.(3) Through its project “Detention of Stateless Persons”, ERT has influenced the outlook and understanding of key governments on the issue of statelessness and on the detention of stateless persons.

• Member States of the European Union:(1) Impact on independent national human rights and equality bodies in Europe, through training activities.(2) Impact on healthcare legislation and policies on issues on which religious has strong influence, including euthanasia, end of life issues, hospital policies, conflict of duty of healthcare practitioners, abortion, sterilisation, fertility treatment, HIV/AIDS, STDs, mental health issues (diagnosing of mental illness and therapy) - through its project "Religion and Healthcare in the European Union: Policy Issues and Trends". (2008-2009)

• Czech Republic – impact on the scope and content of national anti-discrimination legislation adopted in 2009.

• Kenya - impact on the constitutional reform process, in respect of the need for legislators to include strengthened equality provisions in the new Constitution. (2009-2010)

• Malaysia – (1) release of opponents protesting ethnically discriminatory policies (2007-2008). (2) raised awareness and beginning of policy change related to stateless Rohingya immigrants from Myanmar, building on recent positive developments by granting residency to Rohingya currently in the country. (2009-2010)

• Mali - impact on the stakeholders in adopting a new Family Law. (2009)

• Moldova - impact on the scope and content of national anti-discrimination legislation (2009); impact on the constitutional reform process initiated in December 2009, in respect to the need to expand the scope and content of the constitutional right to equality.(2009-2010)

• Serbia – impact on the scope and content of national anti-discrimination legislation adopted in 2008.

• Sudan - impact on some stakeholders' view on needs for change in criminal legislation, particularly on decriminalising certain offences such as indecency which are used in a discriminatory manner. (2009)

• Slovenia – impact on national policy regarding the so called “erased” persons. (2007-2009)

• Thailand – impact on policy regarding stateless Rohingya from Myanmar (investigation on the abuses of Rogingya by Thai military opened in 2009).

• Uganda – impact on MPs and other governmental stakeholders debating the Anti-Homosexuality Bill which was presented to parliament on 14 October 2009.(2009-2010)

• United Kingdom – impact on policy decisions regarding UK participation in the Durban Review Conference in April 2009; impact on shaping certain aspects of the Equality Bill; impact on leaders of UK political parties in respect of their commitment to ensure that the Equality Bill currently before parliament is adopted before the next General Election. (2009-2010).

II. Impact on IGOs

• Influencing the outlook of UNHCR and other UN bodies and mandate-holders on the issue of statelessness, in particular the definition of de facto statelessness and issues of detention of stateless persons. Through its project on statelessness, ERT has contributed to filling a documentation gap and analyzing the law related to the protection of statelessness.

• Impact on the UN anti-racism agenda: the 2007 UN Expert study on complementary standards on non-discrimination, which reflected the main aspects of the ERT approach to non-discrimination, had an impact on shaping the subsequent agenda on anti-racism which underlined the Durban Review Conference. (2007-2009)

• Impact on the content of the UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights General Comment No. 20 on non-discrimination. (2008-2009)

• Impact on the concept and content of draft EC directive on equal treatment irrespective of religion, sexual orientation, age and disability in non-employment areas. (2008) • Impact on UN Treaty Bodies’ understanding of equality: The Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights has distributed the Declaration of Principles on Equality among all Treaty Body members and there is evidence that it has influenced their work. (2009)

• Impact on Council of Europe bodies approach to equality: the Council of Europe Commissioner on Human Rights has issued a statement praising the Declaration of Principles on Equality as the model approach to equality and human rights at the present time and recommending it to Council of Europe bodies. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has decided to conduct a study of the Declaration. (2009)

III. Impact on Courts

• The High Court of Delhi – declared the criminalisation of homosexuality unconstitutional, relying inter alia on the Declaration of Principles on Equality as “the current international understanding on the principle of equality”. (2009)

• Impact of the judiciary through the Court Watch component of the email news service disseminating ERT comments on important court decisions related to equality.

• Impact of the judicial understanding of the right to equality as applied in European Union law through participation in European Commission organised trainings for members of the judiciary from EU Member States.

IV. Impact on Other Stakeholders and Key Players

• Multiple countries – (1) ERT has influenced the entire discourse on equality, through its numerous communications with a variety of stakeholders. ERT has raised capacity through providing resources and training, including: a) a Virtual Library on Equality; b) email news service containing Legislation Watch, Court Watch and calls to action; c) The Equal Rights Review; d) contributing to training projects.(2) Through its project “Detention of Stateless Persons”, ERT has been a catalyst for change -- influencing the outlook and understanding of key organisations working in the field. Through its work ERT has challenged refugee and immigration organisations to view statelessness as primarily a human rights and equality issue. In general, the level of documentation, analysis and research undertaken by ERT has immensely contributed to a growing body of literature on statelessness and related issues.(3) ERT has on an ad hoc basis helped stateless detainees who were interviewed for research purposes, by linking them with immigration lawyers and helping understand the arbitrary nature of their detention.

• Australia - the Declaration of Principles on Equality has been used in 2009 national consultation on strengthening the protection of human rights, e.g. in submission by Human Rights Council of Australia, with a recommendation to use the definition of discrimination and the list prohibited grounds as in Principle 5 of the Declaration. (2009)

• India -  increased capacity of lawyers, paralegals and activists on international, comparative and national anti-discrimination law, in particular gender discrimination, disability discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination and equality enforcement mechanisms through conducting legal workshop in Mumbai in December 2009.

• Kenya – increased capacity of staff from civil society organizations working on human rights and on behalf of vulnerable groups, in respect of ability to apply concepts of non-discrimination in advocacy, litigation and awareness raising through conducting a workshop in Nairobi in January 2010.

• United Kingdom – on the stakeholders comprising the Equality and Diversity Forum; on the members of the Discrimination Lawyers Association; on other NGOs; academics; and the general public. (2008-2010)

IMPACT SOUGHT THROUGH CURRENT PROJECTS

I. Impact on Governments

• Multiple countries – (1) positive changes related to the adoption and implementation of national law and policy on equality and non-discrimination;(2) positive changes related to the development and application of progressive jurisprudence on the right to equality;(3) positive changes related to national law and policy regarding statelessness determination procedure; (4) positive changes limiting the legally admissible term of detention of stateless persons.  

• Belarus – development of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation and policies.

• India – (1) on improving national equality legislation as well as the implementation of current equality legislation; (2) on policies regarding the investigation and prevention of discrimination by law enforcement.

• Kenya – on adopting national equality legislation.

• Malaysia – development of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation and better implementation of existing equality norms.

• Nigeria – on policies regarding the investigation and prevention of discrimination by law enforcement.

• Slovenia – further policy changes, including providing remedy to the “erased”.

• Solomon Islands – improving the equality legislation and policy as well as raising the capacity of state actors to give effect to the right to equality.

• United States – (1) on policies regarding the investigation and prevention of discrimination by law enforcement; (2) on policies regarding the detention of stateless persons in the context of immigration and s security detention.

II. Impact on IGOs

• Positive changes in the understanding and application of the right to equality in conventions, declarations, and other standard setting procedures of IGOs. • Positive change in the international (UN and regional systems) standards related to the investigation and prevention of discriminatory practices by law enforcement bodies. • Positive changes in the standards regulating the detention of stateless persons, in particular limiting the maximum term of detention.

III. Impact on Courts

• Further jurisprudence based on the Declaration of Principles on Equality.

IV. Impact on Other Stakeholders and Key Players

• India – increased capacity of key NGOs and lawyers to implement equality and non-discrimination law in India through promotion of national, regional and international standards and best practice.

• Kenya – increased capacity of key Kenyan civil society stakeholders to be key players in building a national anti-discrimination regime.

(Last updated 12 February 2010)