Systemes nationaux d'egalite et institutions de droits de l'homme l'union Europeenne

The emergence of this new hybrid model of institution is a relatively new

development in the EU. It has received little attention in the academic literature or in

official reports. This gap is striking, given that many of the new hybrid institutions

have been formed by the merger of some of the most prominent, best-funded and

longest-established NEBs and NHRIs in the EU. The establishment of these new

integrated institutions gives rise to an interesting array of issues: it represents an

attempt to ‘bridge the divide’ that currently exists in many EU states between the

spheres of equality and human rights, but developing effective links and synergies

between functions commonly associated with NEBs and those associated with NHRIs

can be hard to achieve.

As a result, valuable lessons may be learnt from how this integration process has

unfolded. In particular, this experience may yield useful insights for states considering

whether to proceed with integrated NEBs and NHRIs in the future, for newly

integrated bodies exploring how to implement their new combined mandate, and for

European and international bodies and civil society organisations responding to

integration. It may also provide guidance as to how effective functional co-ordination

can be achieved between NEBs and NHRIs which remain separate and independent

institutions but nevertheless wish to work more closely together. Light may also be

shed on how the gap between equality and human rights can be bridged in other

contexts, including in the work of public authorities and civil society activism.

This study concentrates upon developments in five EU member states, where

integrated bodies have been or are in the course of being established: Belgium,

Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands and the UK (with specific reference to Britain).

Five in-depth expert reports were prepared for this study, which analysed how the

integration process has proceeded in each of these states: all of these reports were

based on data collected through a combination of desk-based research and interviews

ii

with key stakeholders from civil society, government departments, academia and the

institutions directly affected by the integration process.

This study also refers to the recent integration of the French NEB - Haute Autorité de

Lutte contre les Discriminations et pour l’Egalité (HALDE) - within the institution of

the Défenseur des Droits in France, which was the subject of a sixth in-depth expert

report, and to the experience of the Polish Ombudsman in combining the functions of

a NEB and a NHRI as extensively documented in academic and official publications.

Reference is also made to developments in other EU states and non-EU states such as

Australia and Canada where appropriate, and to the results of further desk-based

research and interviews with representatives of the European Network of Equality

Bodies (Equinet), the European Network of Human Rights Institutions, the EU

Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), the UN Office for the High Commissioner on

Human Rights (OHCHR) and the European Commission.

NATIONAL EQUALITY BODIES AND HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS IN

THE EUROPEAN UNION

The Diverse Range of NEBs and NHRIs in the European Union

In general, NEBs and NHRIs are expected to function independently of government

in combating discrimination and promoting equality of opportunity, in the case of

NEBs, and encouraging greater compliance with national and international human

rights standards in the case of NHRIs. However, considerable variations exist between

the power, functions, mandates and operational practices of NEBs and NHRIs across

the EU. The institutional and operating relationship between NEBs and NHRIs can

also differ considerably from state to state, as can their relationship with national

ombudsmen and other organs of the state performing similar functions.

This complex ‘biodiversity’ of NEBs, NHRIs and other public bodies who perform

related functions makes it difficult to make generalisations about the functioning of

NEBs and NHRIs, or the national contexts in which they operate. However, it is still

possible to compare and contrast the key characteristics of both types of bodies, the

European and international standards that serve as significant reference points for

their functioning, and the factors that have influenced their development.

National Equality Bodies (NEBs)

There are now thirty-six NEBs in the EU. There are two principal types of equality

bodies: predominantly tribunal-type equality bodies, who spend the bulk of their time

and resources hearing, investigating and determining individual cases of

discrimination, and predominantly promotion-type equality bodies

...