Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

International Comparison of Anti-Discrimination Laws on Disability

장애에 관한 차별금지법 국제비교

  • Received : 2021.09.29
  • Accepted : 2021.12.20
  • Published : 2021.12.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the elements of anti-discrimination laws on disability in major OECD countries. This study used the analysis framework for the elements of the anti-discrimination law on disability presented in the national report of Chopin et al.,(2018). In addition, It was analyzed including the Anti-Discrimination Act on Disability, the General Anti-Discrimination Act including Disability, the Equality Act in the UK, and the Human Rights Act in Canada. The research results were as follows. In Austria, Belgium, France and Sweden, it were found that the countrys satisfied all of the provisions of the Act on 'Direct discrimination', 'Indirect discrimination', 'Harassment', 'Legal standing to act on behalf of victims', 'Legal standing to act in support of victims' and 'Prohibition of victimisation'. In particular, in Korea, 'Legal standing to act on behalf of victims' and 'Legal standing to act in support of victims' were not included. However, it was a country that satisfied the provisions of the Act on 'Direct discrimination', 'Indirect discrimination', 'Harassment' and 'Prohibition of victimisation'. Finally, this study suggested legal and institutional supplementation.

이 연구의 목적은 OECD 주요 국가를 대상으로 장애인이 차별받지 않고 자유를 완전히 누릴 수 있는 사회적 인식인 장애에 관한 차별금지법의 요소를 비교하는 것이다. 이 연구는 Chopin 외(2018)의 국가보고서에서 제시하고 있는 장애에 관한 차별금지법 요소를 분석 틀로 활용하여, 장애에 관한 차별금지법과 장애를 포함하는 일반 차별금지법, 영국의 평등법, 캐나다의 인권법을 포함하여 분석하였다. 연구결과는 다음과 같다. 장애에 관한 차별금지법에서 '직접차별', '간접차별', '혐오', '단체의 소송대리 역할', '단체의 소송지원 역할', '불이익조치 금지' 법조항 모두를 충족한 국가는 오스트리아, 벨기에, 프랑스, 스웨덴으로 나타났다. 특히, 한국은 '단체의 소송대리 역할'과 '단체의 소송지원 역할'이 포함되지 않았고 '직접차별', '간접차별', '혐오', '불이익조치 금지'에 관한 법조항을 충족한 국가였다. 마지막으로 이 연구는 법 제도적인 보완을 제언하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Y. H. Ju & K. R. Kim. (2019). Effects of Perceived Importance of Community Services on Institutionalization Intention in Parents of Children with Disabilities. Journal of Disability and Welfare, 45, 93-113. https://doi.org/10.22779/KADW.2019.45.45.93
  2. Bagenstos, S. R. (2003). Comparative disability employment law from an American perspective. Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, 24(4), 649-667.
  3. Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan.
  4. Waddington, L., & Lawson, A. (2009). Disability and non-discrimination law in the European Union - An analysis of disability discrimination law within and beyond the employment field. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  5. Doyle, B. (1996). Disability Discrimination: The New/law. London: Jordan. 1966 Gooding, C. Disability Discrimination Act 1995, London: Blackstone Prss.
  6. Grover, C., & Piggott, L. (2007). Social security, employment and incapacity benefit: Critical reflections on a new deal for welfare. Disability & Society, 22(7), 733-746. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590701659584
  7. H. S. Kim, K. M. Yoo, S. J. Kwon & K. Y. Park. (2019). International Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Development of Legislation. Seoul: Korea Disabled people's Development Institute.
  8. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. New York: Princeton University Press.
  9. OECD. (2010). Sickness, disability and work. Breaking the barriers. Synthesis report. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  10. Chopin, L ., Conte, C., & Chambrier, E. (2018). Comparative analysis ofanti-discrimination law in Europe 2018. European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination. Available at: https://www.equalitylaw.eu/publications/comparative-analyses[20 Jan. 2020].
  11. S. K. Lee & S. W. Lee. (2017). A Study on the Change of Employment Rates of Persons with Disabilities in 10 OECD Countries using PCSE analysis. Korean journal of social welfare studies, 48(1), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.16999/kasws.2017.48.1.5
  12. U. C. Oh (2016). A Comparative Study on the Broadness of the Concept of Disability in Anti-discrimination Laws of OECD Countries. Critical Social Welfare Academy, 53, 442-486.
  13. U. C. Oh (2016). Analyzing the Reasonable Accommodation Duty: A Comparative Law Study of OECD Countries. Journal of Disability and Welfare, 32, 245-274.
  14. Barnard, C., & Hepple, B. (2000). Substantive equality. Cambridge Law Journal, 59(3), 562-585. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008197300000246
  15. Y. H. Ju & I. J. Chung. (2016). The Impact of Discrimination Experience of Persons with Developmental Disability on Self-Esteem. Social Science Research Review, 32, 55-78. https://doi.org/10.18859/ssrr.2016.02.32.1.55