Kampen om diskrimineringsdiskursen
(2014) LAGM01 20142Department of Law
- Abstract
- Sweden currently has a civil law against discrimination (2008:567) that covers several aspects of society and seven different grounds for discrimination. This law is the product of the consolidation – and to some extent modification – of a number of laws primarily passed between 1999 and 2006. The law contains prohibitions against discrimination and proscribes certain active measures to foster equality. The stated purpose of the law is to "combat discrimination and in other ways promote equal rights and opportunities.", and the purpose of the consolidation was to make the law more forceful and effective. Despite the reform and despite broad political support for measures to combat discrimination there are few signs that societal... (More)
- Sweden currently has a civil law against discrimination (2008:567) that covers several aspects of society and seven different grounds for discrimination. This law is the product of the consolidation – and to some extent modification – of a number of laws primarily passed between 1999 and 2006. The law contains prohibitions against discrimination and proscribes certain active measures to foster equality. The stated purpose of the law is to "combat discrimination and in other ways promote equal rights and opportunities.", and the purpose of the consolidation was to make the law more forceful and effective. Despite the reform and despite broad political support for measures to combat discrimination there are few signs that societal discrimination and inequality have been reduced as a consequence of the new law. Judgments in the field of discrimination are rare compared to the number of complaints.
This paper explores if possible causes for this discrepancy can be found in the Swedish discourse on discrimination in the time period when the current laws were developed. In the paper the government's formulation of the problem of discrimination – stated in conjunction with the passing of the law against discrimination – is compared to some alternative legal and judicial formulations. The paper also explores what significance is ascribed to the prohibition against discrimination in comparison with other political measures. The analysis is aided by readings of theoretical analyses of anti-discrimination law, whereby three dominating judicial perspectives are identified: the individual perspective, the group perspective and the structural perspective. In addition to these dominant perspectives, a market-critical theoretical perspective is applied in the analysis of anti-discrimination law.
The paper shows that the process leading up to the law contained a struggle between proponents of the individual perspective (primarily the government) and the group- and structure-based perspectives (primarily other texts) for interpretative prerogative in discrimination discourse. Points of contention were found in all factors addressed, such as the purpose, function, focus and scope of anti-discriminatory law/politics. The fundamental question was found to be whether the courts should ascertain equal treatment of individuals irrespective of specific traits or if laws should be aimed at protecting certain groups and combating certain destructive societal structures.
With the passing of the law against discrimination in 2009 the formulation of discrimination as an individual problem was consolidated in Swedish discrimination discourse. When applying a market-critical perspective to the discourse of anti-discrimination law, the conclusion becomes that the fundamental conflict is ideological, and rooted in differing views of the market. Should politics be used to liberate the market from external disturbances to its competitive logic? Or should politics be used to combat (problems within) a dysfunctional market system? The problem formulation provided by the government can be said to focus on the former, which is made apparent by what is suggested and preferred (prohibitions against discrimination, promotion of equal rights for businesspeople, deregulation or soft-law-regulations) and what is not suggested (measures that affect business negatively, primarily demands to accommodate people with disabilities).
The analysis points to a possible contributing factor to the meager results of anti-discriminatory law: the discourse preceding the law and the resulting conflation of anti-discriminatory law with neoliberal ideals like depoliticisation, a focus on the individual and on competition. The end result of these factors is a contemporary Swedish anti-discrimination law that does not challenge the conflicts that produce unfair structures. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- I Sverige har vi idag en civilrättslig diskrimineringslag (2008:567) som täcker en rad samhällsområden och sju olika diskrimineringsgrunder. Denna lag är resultatet av att en samling lagar mot diskriminering som kom till runt millennieskiftet slogs samman och delvis förändrades. Lagen innehåller diskrimineringsförbud och aktiva åtgärder och dess syfte är att ”motverka diskriminering och på andra sätt främja lika rättigheter och möjligheter". Syftet med sammanslagningen sades vara att effektivisera och stärka lagstiftningen. Trots reformen och trots bred politisk enighet om att diskriminering är fel och rentav förkastligt, finns få tecken på att diskriminering och ojämlikhet i samhället minskat tack vare den nya lagstiftningen. Domar på... (More)
- I Sverige har vi idag en civilrättslig diskrimineringslag (2008:567) som täcker en rad samhällsområden och sju olika diskrimineringsgrunder. Denna lag är resultatet av att en samling lagar mot diskriminering som kom till runt millennieskiftet slogs samman och delvis förändrades. Lagen innehåller diskrimineringsförbud och aktiva åtgärder och dess syfte är att ”motverka diskriminering och på andra sätt främja lika rättigheter och möjligheter". Syftet med sammanslagningen sades vara att effektivisera och stärka lagstiftningen. Trots reformen och trots bred politisk enighet om att diskriminering är fel och rentav förkastligt, finns få tecken på att diskriminering och ojämlikhet i samhället minskat tack vare den nya lagstiftningen. Domar på diskrimineringslagens område är sällsynta i förhållande till mängden anmälningar.
Denna uppsats undersöker möjliga bidragande orsaker till detta förhållande. Detta görs genom att undersöka den svenska diskursen om diskrimineringsproblematiken under den period där nuvarande lagstiftning utvecklades och tog form. I uppsatsen jämförs regeringens problembeskrivning av diskriminering inför antagandet av diskrimineringslagen med några alternativa rättsliga och legislativa problemformuleringar. Dessutom undersöks vilken betydelse diskrimineringsförbudet respektive andra politiska åtgärder ges. Undersökningen görs med hjälp av teoretiska analyser av antidiskrimineringsrätten, som pekar ut tre dominerande perspektiv på diskrimineringsproblematiken: det individbaserade, det gruppbaserade och det strukturella. Även ett marknadskritiskt teoretiskt perspektiv appliceras på antidiskrimineringsrätten.
Undersökningen visar att det under perioden fanns en kamp mellan det individbaserade perspektivet (i huvudsak regeringens) respektive de grupp- och strukturbaserade perspektiven (i huvudsak övriga texter) om tolkningsföreträdet i den svenska diskrimineringsdiskursen. Konfliktlinjer fanns vad gäller alla genomgångna variabler, som antidiskrimineringsrättens/politikens syfte, funktion, fokus och omfattning. Grundfrågan gällde om rätten ska säkerställa likabehandling av individer oavsett deras särart, eller om det handlar om att se till att skydda vissa grupper och motverka vissa skadliga samhällsstrukturer.
I och med diskrimineringslagens ikraftträdande 2009 konsoliderades en individbaserad formulering av diskrimineringsproblemet i den svenska diskrimineringsdiskursen. Utifrån det marknadskritiska perspektivet på antidiskrimineringsrätten slutleds att grundkonflikten är ideologisk och grundar sig i synen på marknaden. Ska politiken se till att marknaden befrias ifrån yttre element som stör dess konkurrenslogik? Eller ska politiken motverka (problem inom) ett bristfälligt fungerande marknadssystem? Den problembeskrivning som regeringen gav uttryck för kan sägas fokusera på det förstnämnda, vilket framgår av vad som föreslås och föredras (diskrimineringsförbud, främjande av lika möjligheter för företagare, avreglering eller soft law-reglering) och vad som inte föreslås (näringslivsbetungande åtgärder, framförallt krav på anpassning för personer med funktionsnedsättning).
Analysen pekar ut en möjligt bidragande orsak till diskrimineringslagens magra resultat: den föregående diskursens och själva antidiskrimineringsrättens samband med nyliberala ideal, som avpolitisering, individcentrering och konkurrens. Dessa gör att den samtida svenska antidiskrimineringsrätten inte utmanar de konflikter som skapar orättvisa strukturer. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4905455
- author
- Carlsson, Hanna LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Defining justice: Analysis of the Swedish discrimination discourse
- course
- LAGM01 20142
- year
- 2014
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- rättsvetenskap, folkrätt, civilrätt, EU-rätt, diskrimineringsrätt, diskursanalys, diskriminering
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4905455
- date added to LUP
- 2015-01-31 10:56:13
- date last changed
- 2015-01-31 10:56:13
@misc{4905455,
abstract = {{Sweden currently has a civil law against discrimination (2008:567) that covers several aspects of society and seven different grounds for discrimination. This law is the product of the consolidation – and to some extent modification – of a number of laws primarily passed between 1999 and 2006. The law contains prohibitions against discrimination and proscribes certain active measures to foster equality. The stated purpose of the law is to "combat discrimination and in other ways promote equal rights and opportunities.", and the purpose of the consolidation was to make the law more forceful and effective. Despite the reform and despite broad political support for measures to combat discrimination there are few signs that societal discrimination and inequality have been reduced as a consequence of the new law. Judgments in the field of discrimination are rare compared to the number of complaints.
This paper explores if possible causes for this discrepancy can be found in the Swedish discourse on discrimination in the time period when the current laws were developed. In the paper the government's formulation of the problem of discrimination – stated in conjunction with the passing of the law against discrimination – is compared to some alternative legal and judicial formulations. The paper also explores what significance is ascribed to the prohibition against discrimination in comparison with other political measures. The analysis is aided by readings of theoretical analyses of anti-discrimination law, whereby three dominating judicial perspectives are identified: the individual perspective, the group perspective and the structural perspective. In addition to these dominant perspectives, a market-critical theoretical perspective is applied in the analysis of anti-discrimination law.
The paper shows that the process leading up to the law contained a struggle between proponents of the individual perspective (primarily the government) and the group- and structure-based perspectives (primarily other texts) for interpretative prerogative in discrimination discourse. Points of contention were found in all factors addressed, such as the purpose, function, focus and scope of anti-discriminatory law/politics. The fundamental question was found to be whether the courts should ascertain equal treatment of individuals irrespective of specific traits or if laws should be aimed at protecting certain groups and combating certain destructive societal structures.
With the passing of the law against discrimination in 2009 the formulation of discrimination as an individual problem was consolidated in Swedish discrimination discourse. When applying a market-critical perspective to the discourse of anti-discrimination law, the conclusion becomes that the fundamental conflict is ideological, and rooted in differing views of the market. Should politics be used to liberate the market from external disturbances to its competitive logic? Or should politics be used to combat (problems within) a dysfunctional market system? The problem formulation provided by the government can be said to focus on the former, which is made apparent by what is suggested and preferred (prohibitions against discrimination, promotion of equal rights for businesspeople, deregulation or soft-law-regulations) and what is not suggested (measures that affect business negatively, primarily demands to accommodate people with disabilities).
The analysis points to a possible contributing factor to the meager results of anti-discriminatory law: the discourse preceding the law and the resulting conflation of anti-discriminatory law with neoliberal ideals like depoliticisation, a focus on the individual and on competition. The end result of these factors is a contemporary Swedish anti-discrimination law that does not challenge the conflicts that produce unfair structures.}},
author = {{Carlsson, Hanna}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Kampen om diskrimineringsdiskursen}},
year = {{2014}},
}