Neus Torbisco Casals

Liberal theories have long insisted that cultural diversity in democratic societies can be accommodated through classical liberal tools, in particular through individual rights, and they have often rejected the claims of cultural minorities for group rights as illiberal. Group Rights as Human Rights argues that such a rejection is misguided. Based on a thorough analysis of the concept of group rights, it proposes to overcome the dominant dichotomy between "individual" human rights and "collective" group rights by recognizing that group rights also serve individual interests. It also challenges the claim that group rights, so understood, conflict with the liberal principle of neutrality; on the contrary, these rights help realize the neutrality ideal as they counter cultural biases that exist in Western states. Group rights deserve to be classified as human rights because they respond to fundamental, and morally important, human interests. Reading the theories of Will Kymlicka and Charles Taylor as complementary rather than opposed, Group Rights as Human Rights sees group rights as anchored both in the value of cultural belonging for the development of individual autonomy and in each person’s need for a recognition of her identity. This double foundation has important consequences for the scope of group rights: it highlights their potential not only in dealing with national minorities but also with immigrant groups; and it allows to determine how far such rights should also benefit illiberal groups. Participation, not intervention, should here be the guiding principle if group rights are to realize the liberal promise.

Across Europe, courts (both domestic and international) are increasingly playing a central role in dealing with identity-driven conflicts across deeply entrenched ethnocultural divides. At the outset, many of these controversies are seemingly religious or cultural disputes, involving the interpretation of individual rights such as freedom of conscience, freedom of association, and freedom of religion. Yet if we scratch beyond the surface, there is much more at stake in these disputes, or so this paper contends. Broader disagreements that confront majority and minority cultures regarding group rights and the shifting intersections between religion, ethnicity, and gender are played out in these judicial battles. The paper traces the so-called “crisis of multiculturalism” in the European political rhetoric and practice and highlights its impact on the de-juridification of cultural rights and on the tendency to seek accommodation through litigation (typically by minority litigants increasingly frustrated with the political backlash against their rights). It then inquires into the prospects of this strategy, pointing out the limitations courts face when adjudicating identity conflicts pertaining to minority groups traditionally disadvantaged in mainstream political processes. These concerns are illustrated through revisiting a number of controversies over Muslim veils that have been resolved by the European Court of Human Rights. The paper cautiously concludes that a shift toward more participatory political processes is more likely to mitigate the decline of progressive forms of multiculturalism and consolidate minority rights.

The progressive strengthening of global governance raises concerns about whether it might come at the expense of democracy. This article aims at substantiating this concern. It contends that trust is especially important at the transnational level, partly because transnational institutions need to rely on voluntary compliance. Yet it remains unclear how the type of generalized, non-strategic, form of trust that matters to democracy can emerge in a context marked by strong divides and lack of affinity. In view of the limits of cosmopolitan allegiance, the article suggests the need to shift the focus towards an ‘institutional’ approach, which recognizes the possibility of ‘trust building without ‘nation-building’.

cabinet split equally between men and women. Yet Spain is far from achieving any kind of gender equality, both in public and private life. Politically, the percentage of women representatives in the Lower House is currently 28.3, comparatively better than the average OSCE member countries, which is 17.7, but still far from the almost parity representation that women enjoy in the three countries that currently rank higher in this regard: Rwanda (48.8), Sweden (45.3) and Denmark (38.0)1. Socially, women’s overall share of jobs is low2 and they suffer from various sorts of discrimination in the labour market: they earn at least 25 per cent less wages than their male co-workers for undertaking the same job in almost every occupation studied3, they have more difficulty obtaining top jobs- even in female-dominated sectors, the ‘glass ceiling ’ remains nearly intact- and the complaints lodged for labour discrimination related to ‘risk of maternity’, sexual harassment and mobbing are on the...

The Catalan government has pledged to hold a consultation on independence from Spain on 9 November, under a different legal basis from the proposal that Catalan President Artur Mas had originally announced, which was declared illegal by the Spanish constitutional court. Nevertheless, with less than a week until the vote, the latest plan is also facing a legal challenge and might also be blocked. Neus Torbisco Casals and Nico Krisch assess whether the use of legal obstacles to prevent a Catalan independence referendum is likely to be successful long-term. They argue that while the law within a state is afforded a degree of legitimacy, it cannot provide a solution entirely. Only a political agreement which recognises the views of Catalonia’s citizens can provide a lasting settlement.

Per a l’autora, la manera en que s’emmarca el proces sobiranista –es a dir, els arguments que es ressalten tant per explicar les seves arrels com per justificar les reivindicacions essencials que es plantegen– es fonamental mes enlla de l’analisi teoric. De fet, en la mesura que els enfocs dominants obvien l’analisi de questions de legitimitat subjacents a les demandes de secessio, aquestes poden, fins i tot, resultar contraproduents

El proposito de la tesis es analizar el problema de la justificacion de la atribucion de derechos colectivos a las minorias cuturales. En los ultimos anos este debate ha cobrado un protagonismo especial, tanto en la filosofia politica como en el derecho publico. El punto de partida de este debate se halla en una critica general al liberalismo por la escasa atencion prestada a fenomenos como el multiculturalismo, el nacionalismo o las migraciones masivas, o a temas como la influencia de la pertenencia a determinados grupos etnicos, linguisticos y culturales en el desarrollo humano, tanto personal como social. En tanto categoria distinta a los derechos individuales, los derechos colectivos se configuran como un instrumento de legitimacion de una amplia diversidad de demandas que se plantean en estados con elevados indices de pluralismo social. Por regla, sus proponentes pretenden enfatizar las limitaciones del sistema democraticos y de los derechos individuales en tanto instrumentos d...

Across Europe, courts play a central role in dealing with identity-driven conflicts across entrenched socio-cultural divides. Many of these controversies are seemingly religious disputes, involving the interpretation of individual rights. Judges are presented with what they see as a familiar legal challenge of demarcating the legitimate exercise of rights and assessing the grounds for accommodating or restricting a given expression. Yet, there is much more at stake in these disputes. This paper traces the so-called ‘crisis of multiculturalism’ in the rhetoric and political practice in many countries highlighting its influence in the tendency to seek accommodation through litigation. It inquires into the prospects of this strategy, pointing out the limitations courts face when dealing with identity conflicts pertaining to minority groups traditionally disadvantaged in mainstream political processes. The paper cautiously concludes that a shift towards more participatory political proc...

Introduction. 1. Multiculturalism and Group Rights: The Issues. 2. Outline of the Book. Part 1: Cultural Minorities and Group Rights: Contested Concepts. 1.1 Introduction. 1.2 A Preliminary Elucidation of the Concept of Minority. 1.2.1 Objective Elements. 1.2.2 The Subjective Element. 1.3. Minorities and Group Rights: The Inadequacy of the Dominant Approach. 1.3.1 The Problem of Defining 'Minority' Revisited. 1.3.2 What Conception of Group Rights? 1.4. Liberalism vs. Communitarianism: An Inadequate Framework. 1.5. Conclusion. Part 2: Towards an Alternative Notion of Group Rights. 2.1 Introduction. 2.2 Group Rights: an Unnecessary Concept? 2.2.1 The Reductionist Strategy. 2.2.2 Questioning the Need for the Language of Rights. 2.3 Two Complementary Conceptions of Group Rights. 2.3.1 Group Rights as Rights to Public Goods. 2.3.2 Group Rights as Special Rights. 2.4. Conclusion. Part 3: Understanding Multiculturalism: Which Groups Qualify? 3.1. Introduction. 3.2. Social Minoritie...