It should probably be seen as a violation of
the general principle of equality to construct legislation that excludes even the possibility — it is not just a question of money, the insurance does not exist on the market — of non-economic migration for those with chronic or ongoing illnesses, even though they may well be capable of study or normal life.
Adopting this approach, the Supreme Court held that the exclusion in the Equality Act breached
the general principle of equality to which Directive 2000/78 gives effect, and so disapplied it insofar as it permitted a restriction on the payment of benefits based on periods of employment pre-5 December 2005.
Not exact matches
They include the «chilling effects»
of libel suits, the perennial conflicts between property and access, the three out
of four publishers who intervene in news decisions affecting their local markets, the advertisers» freedom to move their money to where their interests are, industry self - regulation in broadcasting and advertising, the backlash against conveying under duress (as in a hostage crisis) points
of view that are never aired as directly without duress, the flareups
of book banning and censorship
of textbooks, the rout
of the civil rights movement, the retreat from
principles of fairness and
equality (even where never implemented), the attack on scientific and humane teaching, the threat
of self - appointed media watchdogs to also spy on teachers in the classroom, and the
general vigor
of ancient orthodoxies masquarading as neo-this and neo-that.
Said President Weah: «Article 7 — The Republic shall, consistent with the
principles of individual freedom and social justice enshrined in this Constitution, manage the national economy and the natural resources
of Liberia in such manner as shall ensure the maximum feasible participation
of Liberian citizens under conditions
of equality, so as to advance the
general welfare
of the Liberian people and the economic development
of Liberia.»
It's something which would probably happen automatically as a result
of one
of my manifesto proposals (a requirement that laws must be consistent, where possible, with uncontroversial
principles such as
equality of opportunity) but it's the kind
of thing that a properly functioning system would do automatically, without requiring the
general public to agitate about it.
Like you, I believe that there are strategies the LSUC could pursue which would achieve their substantive goals, strategies which accurately reflect existing (and unambiguous) legal and ethical obligations and which are consistent with constitutional requirements and
principles (as I've noted above, if the current requirement around a Statement
of Principle merely required acknowledgement
of our actual existing obligations under the Rules, rather than a
general duty to promote
equality, diversity and inclusion which is found nowhere in the Rules, I suspect much opposition would melt away and the LSUC would be on far stronger Charter grounds).
The Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination has recognised as aspects
of the
principle of equality the obligations
of States parties to CERD to ensure that no decisions directly relating to the rights and interests
of indigenous peoples are taken without their informed consent, as well as to recognise and protect the rights
of indigenous peoples to own, develop, control and use their communal lands and territories and resources:
General Recommendation on Indigenous Peoples, UN Doc CERD / C / 51 / Misc 13 / Rev 4 (1997) paras 4 - 5.
These
general capabilities aim to instil in students attitudes and behaviours that relate to human rights values and
principles including those
of equality, non-discrimination, respect, responsibility, human dignity, universality and participation.