IJ №3 (27) 2018
Gender discrimination jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights: some areas of concern

Abstract
The European Court of Human Rights regards gender equality as one of the key principles underlying the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. At the same time, the jurisprudence of the European Court currently reveals certain approaches that may lead to a denial of protection against discrimination on the basis of sex. Starting from the concept of transformative equality, the author explores such approaches of the Court based on several categories of cases related to the protection from domestic violence, as well as the implementation of social and reproductive rights. On the one hand, the approaches of the European Court in these cases confirm the Court’s attention to the issues of discrimination and protection of women’s rights. On the other hand, a detailed analysis demonstrates that gender discrimination cases imply several risks for applicants. These risks are connected, first, with the Court’s restrictive approach to dealing with cases under Article 14 of the Convention and its limiting the subject of the analysis to violations of the substantive provisions of the Convention. In some cases, this approach leads to a simplification of the legal problem by ignoring the gender dimension of the issues raised by the applicants in their complaints. This risk is demonstrated by the author through the cases on domestic violence. Second, when considering cases on gender discrimination, the Court relies on the doctrine of the margin of appreciation of the States in regulating issues affecting gender equality, and defines it as substantially wide. In this respect, the States can justify discriminatory measures by the existing perceptions of gender roles within society, which are not always condemned by the European Court. Based on the cases related to the distribution of social guarantees and the exercise of the right to an abortion by women, the author shows that this approach practically results in an inability to eradicate the roots of inequality.

About the author
Olga Podoplelova – Senior Lawyer, Institute for Law and Public Policy, Moscow, Russia.

Citation 
Podoplelova O. (2018) Dela o gendernoy discriminatsii v praktike Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka: otsenka effektivnosti podkhodov [Gender discrimination jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights: judging the effectiveness]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.8, no.3, pp.36–45. (In Russian).

References

Alebastrova I. (2015) Gendernoe ravnopravie i gendernye privilegii: tseli i sredstva [Gender equality and gender privileges: aims and means]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie. no.1, pp.80–91. (In Russian).

Baines B., Rubio-Marin R. (2005) The Gender of Constitutional Jurisprudence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chilipenok Yu.Yu. (2014) Gendernye aspekty neformal’nyh trudovyh otnosheniy v sovremennyh rossijskih organizatsiyah [Gender aspects if labour relations in modern Russian organisations]. Zhenshchina v rossiy­skom obshchestve, no.2, pp.61–68. (In Russian).

Dudko I.A. (2016) Konstitutsionnoe pravo na vybor professii: gendernyy aspekt (na primere resheniy Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF i Komiteta OON po likvidatsii diskriminatsii v otnoshenii zhenshchin) [Constitutional rights to choose a profession: a gender aspect (based on decisions of the Russian Constitutional Court and the UN Committee on the elimination of discrimination against women)]: Proceedings of the conferences of 2016, рр.68–77. (In Russian).

Filatova M.A. (2014) Sovremennye voprosy pozitivnoy diskriminatsii v kontekste praktiki konstitutsionnykh sudov [Contemporary issues of positive discrimination in the jurisprudence of constitutional courts]. Zhurnal konstitutsionnogo pravosudiya, no.4, pp.19–28. (In Russian).

Fredman S. (2012) Discrimination Law, 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fredman S. (2017) Vozvrashchayas’ k voprosu o soderzhatel’nom ravenstve [Substantive equality revisited]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, no.1, pp.37–63. (In Russian).

Harris D., O’Boyle M., Warbrick С. (2016) Pravo Evkopeyskoy Konventsii po pravam cheloveka [Law of the European Convention on Human Rights], Moscow: Razvitie pravovykh sistem. (In Russian).

Irving H. (2017) Constitutions and Gender, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Isaeva E.A. (2012) Pravovye garantii dlya lits s semeynymi obyazannostyami: problema gendernoy neytral’nosti [Legal guarantees for persons with family duties]. Vestnik YarGU. Seriya Gumanitarnye nauki, no.2, pp.89–92. (In Russian).

Khaitan T. (2015) A Theory of Discrimination Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mikhaylenko I. (2016) Diskriminatsiya v trudovykh otnosheniyakh v praktike Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka [Discrimination in employment relations in the European Court of Human Rights case law]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, no.4, pp.132–140. (In Russian).

Nevezhina M.V. (2018) Gendernaya diskriminatsiya v sfere truda: opyt bor’by na mezhdunarodnom urovne [Gender discrimination in labour: the experience at the international level]. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel’stva i sravnitel’nogo pravovedeniya, no.3, pp.187–193. (In Russian).

Podoplelova O. (2018) Gendernye stereotipy v konstitutsionnom prave Rossii: lovushka “osobogo otnosheniya”? [Gender stereotypes in Russian constitutional law: the “special treatment” trap?]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, no.3, pp.73–91. (In Russian).

Polenina S.V. (2014) Prava devochek v kontekste norm Konstitutsii Rossiy­skoy Federatsii [The Rights of girls in the context of the Constitution of the Russian Federation]. Gosudarstvo i pravo, no.8, pp.27–34. (In Russian).

Schabas W. (2015) The European Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shelyutto M.L. (2013) Realizatsiya konstitutsionnykh printsipov semeynogo prava v rossiyskom zakonodatel’stve [Implementation of constitutional principles of family law in Russian laws]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no.12, pp.56–64. (In Russian).

Timmer A. (2015) Judging Stereotypes: What the European Court of Human Rights Can Borrow from American and Canadian Equal Protection Law. The American Journal of Comparative Law, vol.63, no.1, рр.239–284.

Wesson M. (2010) Contested Concepts: Equality and Dignity in the Case-Law of the Canadian Supreme Court and South African Constitutional Court. In: Sajó A., Uitz R. (eds.) Constitutional Topography: Values and Constitutions, The Hague: Eleven International Publishing, pp.271–298.

Issue articles