metadata: authors: 0: author: Panter,Elaine Rene Elizabeth
1: author: Primiani,Tanya
2: author: Hasan,Tazeen
3: author: Calderon Pontaza,Eduardo
count: World
docna: 0: docna: Antidiscrimination law and shared prosperity
            : an analysis of the legal framework of six economies and
            their impact on the equality of opportunities of ethnic,
            religious, and sexual minorities
docty: Policy Research Working Paper
subtopic: Human Rights,Indigenous Peoples,Indigenous Peoples Law,Gender and Development,Inequality,Indigenous Communities
teratopic: Education,Poverty Reduction
abstracts: cdata!: This paper looks at the structural
            marginalization of eth-nic, religious, and sexual minorities
            in six pilot economies (Bulgaria, Mexico, Morocco, the
            Netherlands, Tanzania, and Vietnam) and proposes a new
            methodology for collecting cross-country comparable data on
            antidiscrimination legal frameworks. The data cover six
            areas of law, ad-dressed by six indicators: (a) access to
            institutions, (b) access to education, (c) access to the
            labor market, (d) access to property, (e) access to public
            services and social protection, and (f) protection from hate
            crimes and hate speech. The laws, policies, and regulations
            presented fall under one of these indicators. For each, the
            paper attempts to identify the minority gap, the difference
            between the legal treatment of the ruling majority and that
            of the minority. Data were collected through two sources:
            first, standardized surveys submitted to ombudsman
            institutions, lawyers, academics, and civil society
            organizations; second, public government records on laws and
            regulations and data from international legal databases and
            human rights organizations. The idea driving the study is
            that institutional measures that hamper the access of
            ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities to the labor market
            and financial systems directly affect their economic
            performance and, as a consequence, represent a cost for the
            economy. Among the findings of the study is that
            antidiscrimination labor legislation is well developed in
            all six pilot economies, but many gaps still exist in access
            to property and in access to public goods and social
            services. The study also found that, of the three groups
            covered by the study, the least protected under the law are
            the sexual minorities. Although data from six economies
            cannot provide statistical evidence, findings suggest the
            need for further research. The authors hope to encourage a
            wider debate on the consequences of systematic
            discrimination against minorities and to help governments
            critically review their legal frameworks to ensure equal
            opportunities for all citizens, regardless of religion,
            ethnicity, gender identity or sexual orientation.
repnme: repnme: Antidiscrimination law and shared
            prosperity : an analysis of the legal framework of six
            economies and their impact on the equality of opportunities
            of ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities
display_title: Antidiscrimination law and shared
            prosperity : an analysis of the legal framework of six
            economies and their impact on the equality of opportunities
            of ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities
listing_relative_url: /research/2017/03/27240496/antidiscrimination-law-shared-prosperity-analysis-legal-framework-six-economies-impact-equality-opportunities-ethnic-religious-sexual-minorities
topicv3: Poverty m1326687 695,Indigenous Peoples m1326947 749,Gender m1327621 615,Human Rights m1327778 2203,Discrimination m1505707 3379
publishtoextweb_dt: 2017-03-03T00:00:00Z
historic_topic: Education,Poverty Reduction
no_of_pages: 87
author_keys: 0: author_key: 1350578
1: author_key: 973066
2: author_key: 1059962
3: author_key: 1375438
fullavailablein: node_id: 27240496
node_id: 27240496
model_extractions: WPS7992 Policy Research Working Paper 7992 Antidiscrimination Law and Shared Prosperity An Analysis of the Legal Framework of Six Economies and Their Impact on the Equality of Opportunities of Ethnic, Religious, and Sexual Minorities _Elaine Panter Tanya Primiani Tazeen Hasan Eduardo Calderon Pontaza_ Development Economics Global Indicators Group March 2017
Policy Research Working Paper 7992

# **Abstract**

This paper looks at the structural marginalization of ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities in six pilot economies (Bulgaria, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, Tanzania, and Vietnam) and proposes a new methodology for collecting cross-country comparable data on antidiscrimination legal frameworks. The data cover six areas of law, addressed by six indicators: (a) access to institutions, (b) access to education, (c) access to the labor market, (d) access to property, (e) access to public services and social protection, and (f) protection from hate crimes and hate speech. The laws, policies, and regulations presented fall under one of these indicators. For each, the paper attempts to identify the minority gap, the difference between the legal treatment of the ruling majority and that of the minority. Data were collected through two sources: first, standardized surveys submitted to ombudsman institutions, lawyers, academics, and civil society organizations; second, public government records on laws and regulations and data from international legal databases and human rights organizations.

The idea driving the study is that institutional measures that hamper the access of ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities to the labor market and financial systems directly affect their economic performance and, as a consequence, represent a cost for the economy. Among the findings of the study is that antidiscrimination labor legislation is well developed in all six pilot economies, but many gaps still exist in access to property and in access to public goods and social services. The study also found that, of the three groups covered by the study, the least protected under the law are the sexual minorities. Although data from six economies cannot provide statistical evidence, findings suggest the need for further research. The authors hope to encourage a wider debate on the consequences of systematic discrimination against minorities and to help governments critically review their legal frameworks to ensure equal opportunities for all citizens, regardless of religion, ethnicity, gender identity or sexual orientation.

This paper is a product of the Global Indicators Group, Development Economics. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://econ.worldbank.org. The authors may be contacted at epanter@worldbank.org.

_The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent._ Produced by the Research Support Team
Acknowledgments
# I. Introduction

The economic marginalization of ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities is a problem that affects all nations around the world and is one that policy makers can no longer afford to ignore. Exclusion of minorities from the labor force is becoming politically and economically unsustainable for many states that are struggling to retain their legitimacy and strengthen their competitive potential in an increasingly global market (Hamm 2014; see also _Economist_ 2015). As a consequence, governments, international development agencies, and academic institutions are now looking seriously at ways to develop policies that guarantee a more equal and sustainable economic development—economic development that addresses both short- and long-term economic goals. Among the long-term goals is the promotion of equality of opportunities for those members of society who, because of prejudice, legacies of the colonial period, and discriminatory cultural norms, are marginalized and discouraged from fully participating in and contributing to the growth of their country (World Bank 2013a).

Promoting equal opportunities for all requires introducing new economic models and political changes in the way institutions are structured and power dynamics are regulated within society (Stiglitz 2013). In other words, a radical change in mentality must occur so that everyone, regardless of his or her parents’ socioeconomic status—including aspects of ethnicity and race—is seen as a valuable member of society and is given the same opportunities to succeed (Roemer and Trannoy 2013).

Despite extensive documentation on discrimination against minorities around the world, the lack of data on laws that should protect those groups from discrimination and on the effect those laws have on the economic growth of a country is worrisome. Recent studies show that laws that protect minorities from discrimination contribute to the economic empowerment of such groups and that empowerment, in turn, contributes to the development of the country by serving economic and, particularly, efficiency-based ends (Deakin, Malmberg, and Sarkar 2013; see also Badgett and others 2014). Results in this field are mostly anecdotal, however, and available data are still scarce and patchy. Data sets in related fields do exist but are often not presented in a cross-country comparable manner that can give rise to actionable data (see appendix A). The reason is partially that hard data on discrimThe UN experts called on governments to establish appropriate anti-racism action plans as well as equality bodies and to provide adequate redress to the victims. They also highlighted the need for collecting reliable data to monitor changes. (United Nations 2016) ination are notoriously difficult to acquire and often come down to some kind of self-reporting. Although such reporting may be indicative of underlying trends, it relies heavily on individuals’ interpretation of what is happening. As reported by the International Labour Organization (ILO), “Data [on discrimination] are typically collected through ad hoc research or situation tests, but seldom in a systematic way” (ILO 2011b, xi). Also, when collected, data often are not disaggregated in a manner that can help develop policies to prevent discrimination and promote equality (FRA 2013, 4).

Furthermore, data available on equality legislation are limited geographically. The great majority of the existing studies focus on Europe and North America.<sup>1</sup> Several countries in other regions also have extensive literature because of their particular institutional history. For example, South Africa has been the focus of studies on its apartheid and postapartheid periods (see, for example, Human Rights Watch 2015, 2016). Profound disparities also exist in the coverage of the different forms of discrimination. Gender discrimination is the most widely researched, followed by racial and ethnic discrimination and religious discrimination. Discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity has only recently emerged as an international concern, and it is less commonly researched and documented in the literature (Fredman 2012, 13).

This paper is the World Bank Group’s first study on the antidiscrimination legal framework of a country and its effect on equal opportunities for ethnic (including indigenous), religious, and sexual minorities. The authors of this paper acknowledge that a country’s legal framework is only one of the many factors that contribute to the creation of equality

> 1 Notably, studies address discrimination against Roma people in Europe (European Commission 2016); racial discrimination and overrepresentation of minorities in prisons in the United States (Amnesty International n.d.); and discrimination against indigenous persons, particularly women, in Canada (Amnesty International 2009).

3 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
of opportunity. It is one that has gained increased attention in recent years, however, especially after the global financial crisis and recognition of the need for more stringent regulatory frameworks in the labor and financial sectors (Stiglitz 2013; see also Ferreira and Peragine 2015). By developing a methodology for the collection of comparable cross-country global data, the researchers aim to create a framework for the identification of gaps in the legislation of countries around the world that, if addressed, may help tackle the marginalization of minorities and ultimately strengthen the economy of those countries.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows: Section II provides definitional clarifications. Section III discusses the theoretical underpinnings of the research and relevant literature on equality of opportunity and equality legislation. Section IV presents the survey design and data collection methodology. Section V is divided into six subsections and is a summary of some of the major findings in the six pilot countries for the six indicators. Section VI concludes.

# II. Definitions

_Discrimination_ was defined in the 1989 Human Rights Committee’s Comment on Non-Discrimination as follows: any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference which is based on a number of identified grounds and which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by all persons, on an equal footing, of all rights or freedoms.<sup>2</sup> The definition of _minorities_ used in this paper is the one used in the United Nations human rights system, which was provided in 1977 by Francesco Capotorti, special rapporteur of the United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, who stated the following:

[A minority is] a group numerically inferior to the rest of the population of a State, in a nondominant position, whose members—being nationals of the State—possess ethnic, religious or linguistic characteristics differing from those of the rest of the population and show, if only implicitly, a sense of solidarity, directed towards preserving their culture, traditions, religion or language.<sup>3</sup> Since 1977, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has further defined this concept and specified that to be a minority, a group does not need to be numerically inferior to the majority. Although in most instances, a minority group will be a numerical minority, in other instances, a numerical majority may also find itself in a minority-like or nondominant position.<sup>4</sup> _Indigenous peoples_ are defined thus: Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with preinvasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system. (United Nations 2004) Under international law, indigenous peoples are granted their own set of rights and duties (UNOHCHR 2010). Among them are communal land rights, which are at times violated by the central government or the ruling group.<sup>5</sup> Like ethnic

> 2 Human Rights Committee 1989. Authoritative interpretation that formulates a legal definition and understanding of the meaning and reach of nondiscrimination at the international level.

> 3 See UNOHCHR n.d.

> 4 Ibid.

> 5 For many indigenous peoples, traditional lands are an integral part of their beliefs and traditions and are essential to their existence. Countries around the world are gradually recognizing those practices and are granting exceptions from laws that may interfere with

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 4
and religious minorities, indigenous peoples often are among the poorest in society and face institutionalized discrimination at different levels of power, forcing them into economic marginalization and financial insecurity. For this reason, the study also covers indigenous populations and includes a question on the laws regulating communal land rights.<sup>6</sup> _Sexual minorities_ refers to people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or intersex. Lesbian women are women who are attracted to women, and gay men are men who are attracted to other men. Bisexuals are attracted to both men and women. As for _transgender_ , the United Nations defines the term as follows:

[A]n umbrella term used to describe a wide range of identities—including transsexual people, crossdressers (sometimes referred to as “transvestites”), people who identify as third gender, and others whose appearance and characteristics are perceived as gender atypical. Transwomen identify as women but were classified as males when they were born. Transmen identify as men but were classified female when they were born. (Free and Equal Initiative n.d.) Further, an _intersex person_ is someone born with sexual anatomy, reproductive organs, and/or chromosome patterns that do not fit the typical definition of male or female. This may be apparent at birth or become so later in life. An intersex person may be identified as male or female or as neither. Intersex status is not about sexual orientation or gender identity: intersex people experience the same range of sexual orientations and gender identities as non-intersex people. (Free and Equal Initiative, n.d.) International law in the field of LGBTI rights is still in its infancy, and the World Bank Group has only recently acknowledged the economic fragility of those populations (SOGI Task Force 2015) and the effect that exclusion of sexual minorities can have on the economic growth of a country (Kim 2014). As highlighted in a World Bank report on LGBTI communities around the world, data on LGBTI people are scarce, even in developed countries (Koehler and Menzies, forthcoming).

Two terms often used in the LGBTI literature are _sexual orientation_ and _gender identity_ . The closest to generally accepted definitions of those terms are those provided by the Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Human Rights Law in relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity: Sexual orientation is understood to refer to each person’s capacity for profound emotional, affectional and sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual relations with, individuals of a different gender or the same gender or more than one gender.

Gender identity is understood to refer to each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond to the sex assigned at birth, including the personal sense of the body (which may involve, if freely chosen, modification of bodily appearance or function by medical, surgical or other means) and other expressions of gender, including dress, speech and mannerisms. (ICJ 2007) Finally, adopting the more developed language used in the gender equality and women’s rights literature—which often talks about _gender gap_ to refer to the gender-based disparities in the economic, political, education, and health spheres<sup>7</sup> — the study refers to disparities in the same fields between ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities and the respective majorities as _the minority gap_ . The term is clearly a gross generalization of the myriad differences among the three groups and within each group; however, it is useful in highlighting the existence of the phenomenon and is used in this paper.

> their usufructuary traditions. Unfortunately, in many countries, indigenous peoples have seen their traditional lands eroded through mass deforestation. Mining and oil and mineral exploitation are notable problems in large swaths of Africa and Latin America.

> 6 Because many of the issues concerning ethnic minorities also affect indigenous peoples, issues related to indigenous peoples are included in the ethnic minorities survey.

> 7 The Global Gender Gap Index, World Economic Forum, http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2015/the-globalgender-gap-index-2015/.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 5
# III. The Theory behind the Study: Equality of Opportunities and Discrimination Against Minorities

Rising income inequality between the rich and the poor has dominated political and economic debates in recent years. Today, 48 percent of the global wealth is owned by less than 1 percent of the world population (Oxfam 2014). High-income countries generate 55 percent of the global income but account for only 16 percent of the world’s population.<sup>8</sup> Low-income countries create just over 1 percent of the global income even though they contain 72 percent of the global population (UNDESA 2013, 25). Also, in countries where inequality has risen, income is “Extreme inequality isn’t just a moral wrong. We know that it hampers economic growth and it threatens the private sector’s bottom line.” Winnie Byanyima _,_ executive director, Oxfam International (Oxfam International 2015) concentrated increasingly at the very top of the distribution ladder (UNDESA 2013). In the United States, income disparities have become so pronounced that Americans in the top 1 percent earn on average more than 38 times more income than the bottom 90 percent, and the top 0.1 percent earns more than 184 times the income of the bottom 90 percent.<sup>9</sup> Classical economic theories had not predicted such profound income inequality. On the contrary, classical economists believed that the invisible hand of the free market and the laws of supply and demand would automatically allocate resources efficiently.<sup>10</sup> According to those theories, everyone who participates in a free economy will eventually reap the benefits of growth because benefits at the top are bound to “trickle down” to those at the lower end of the distribution. As a consequence, the economic progress of a country is simply assessed by measuring the growth of gross domestic product per capita.

The recent growth in income inequality at the global and national levels has forced governments around the world to reconsider some of those theories and look at new policies to tackle the increased poverty within their societies (ILO 2011a). Interestingly, in countries where inequality has declined, the expansion of education and public transfers to the poor seem to have played a more important role than free-market allocation (Dabla-Norris and others 2015). In Latin America and the Caribbean, for instance, an increase in public expenditure on education since the early 1990s led to rising secondary school enrollment and completion rates and became a major determinant of the fall in wage inequality (Ferreira and others 2013; López-Calva and Lustig 2010).

The rise in income inequality has generated a rich literature on the causal links between inequality and development, with many researchers suggesting that inequality has a negative effect on economic growth.<sup>11</sup> Stiglitz (2012) argues that income inequality hinders economic growth because it skews the economy toward rich households, which have a lower propensity to consume and spur aggregate demand, rather than to middle- and low-income households. Herzer and Vollmer (2012, 489) also found in their study on per capita income in 46 countries over the period 1970–95 that “inequality has a negative long-run effect on income.”<sup>12</sup> The World Bank (2013a, 54) highlights that “social inclusion matters because exclusion is too costly. These costs are social, economic, and political and are often interrelated.” Also, recent International Monetary Fund studies provide statistical evidence that income inequality (as measured by the Gini coefficient) negatively affects growth and its sustainability (Berg and Ostry 2011; Ostry, Berg, and Tsangarides 2014).

> 8 High-income countries are those with a gross national income per capita of US$12,476 or more in 2011, whereas low-income countries are those with a gross national income per capita of US$1,025 or less, according to the World Bank. See UNDESA 2013, 25, <u>http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/reports/InequalityMatters.pdf.</u>

> 9 See Inequality.org, “Income Inequality,” http://inequality.org/income-inequality/.

> 10 Most notably Mill (1848), Smith (1776), and Ricardo (1817).

> 11 Surveys on this issue can be found in Bénabou (1996); Aghion, Caroli, and García-Peñalosa (1999); Bourguignon (2004); Bertola et al. (2005) and Ehrhart (2009). See also World Development Report 2006: Equity and Development (World Bank 2006), which provides a strong empirical underpinning to the claim that interventions that narrow inequality can be good for growth and long-term prosperity.

> 12 Herzer and Vollmer 2012, 489.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 6
Researchers have advanced different theories on the determinants of inequality. Some researchers believe that inequality can be traced back to inequality of opportunities, namely, unequal access to opportunities arising from circumstances outside the individual’s control, including parental background, gender, ethnicity, and religion. The major proponents of this theory (also identified as luck egalitarianism by philosophers and political scientists) are, among others, John Roemer (2009), Xavier Ramos and Dirk Van de Gaer (2012), Marc Fleurbaey and Vito Peragine (2013), and Gustavo Marrero Juan Gabriel Rodriguez (2013). Those economists believe that the “circumstances” a person is born into—such as gender, location, and parental, social, and economic background—should not determine outcomes but that the individual’s achievements in life should depend only on effort and innate ability. The principle is based on ideas developed by a long list of influential thinkers on issues of fairness and rights that underscore fairness of process and opportunities rather than outcomes (Dworkin 1981a, 1981b; Rawls 1971).

To address the rising income inequality and in response to these developments in economic theories, in 2013, the World Bank Group redefined its mission and gave itself two goals: ending extreme poverty by 2030 and boosting shared prosperity (World Bank 2013c). The twin-goal paradigm adopts a multidisciplinary approach recognizing that sustainable development can occur only when countries achieve progress in both monetary and nonmonetary dimensions of welfare. At the heart of the twin goals is the normative principle laid out by Basu (2001, 2006), which states that one should focus on the country’s “quintile income” (per capita income of the poorest 20 percent of the country) in evaluating a country’s well-being (Basu 2013). In other words, to help the poor and achieve real welfare for all, countries must adopt sound and robust economic policies while also promoting equal access to and participation in all aspects of the economic, social, and political arenas, including, among others, education, health care, water, sanitation, and essential infrastructure. This “new” World Bank mission contends that (a) unless all members of society partake in the development of the country, that country cannot possibly eradicate poverty and move toward shared prosperity; and (b) without institutions that encourage the ruling majorities to share resources equitably, the existing inequality among sectors of society will likely perpetuate over time, and the traditionally marginalized sectors will be further excluded and trapped in a cycle of low income and few opportunities for generations.

Among the factors that can hamper equality are laws and regulations that exclude certain sectors of society from reaping the benefits of economic growth. Such exclusion happens when minorities are discouraged and, at times, prevented from participating in the development of a country because of prejudice, racial stereotypes, and discriminatory cultural attitudes by the ruling majority. Often, those attitudes are enshrined in the laws that perpetually reinforce—both conceptually and in practice—the economic marginalization of members of society who could otherwise be a force for economic progress. Initial studies suggest that such discriminatory legal frameworks represent real costs for the economy that could be prevented. For example, a recent World Bank study on the cost of excluding minorities in Eastern Europe quantified the annual productivity losses resulting from Roma exclusion in Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Romania, and Serbia to range from €230 million to €900 million (World Bank 2010). Another World Bank study on the exclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) individuals in India shows that the cost of such discrimination in employment and health sectors in the country could be as high as US$30.8 billion (Badgett 2014).

Discrimination against ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities is widely documented by international institutions and human rights groups. The most obvious manifestations of such divisions are the ongoing civil conflicts and the surge of the extremist group Daesh in the Middle East, which followed the Arab Spring and are, arguably, the consequence of deep-rooted hostility between Shia and Sunni Muslims **.** The immediate and long-term economic consequences of those wars in the region are incalculable. Similar struggles have affected Afghanistan, the Central African Republic, Pakistan, South Sudan, and Sudan for many years (Lattimer and Verbakel 2015). But even in non-war-torn countries, minorities often are the people most discriminated against. Following the economic downturn of 2008, racial discrimination in the workplace increased, posing, according to recent International Labour Office studies, tough questions about policies that have existed in the past decade (ILO 2011a). In the report titled _State of the World’s Minorities and Indigenous Peoples 2015_ , Minority Rights Group International reports that in Southeast Asia in 2014, minorities were evicted to make way for infrastructure and high-income housing developments in urban centers in Cambodia and Thailand. Similarly, in Myanmar, the Rohingya urban minority populations in Sittwe were at times openly discriminated against and violently targeted (Grant 2015, 148).

Discrimination often seems to go hand-in-hand with poverty and marginalization. In Vietnam, World Bank data show minorities face more barriers to obtaining access to education, credit, land, and the marketplace than do the Kinh majorAnti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 7
ity (2009, 2). World Bank data also show that the general poverty rate for ethnic minority groups in Vietnam in 2006 was 52 percent, more than five times that of ethnic majority groups (Dang 2010). The country made some reforms in recent years to address the problem, but the economic divide between the majority Kinh and the ethnic minorities— as highlighted by the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UNCERD 2012)—is still profound, even when those groups live in the same mountainous area.

“Institutionalized discrimination is bad for people and for societies. Widespread discrimination is also bad for economies. There is clear evidence that when societies enact laws that prevent productive people from fully participating in the workforce, economies suffer.” Jim Yong Kim, president, World Bank Group (Kim 2014) In 2013, the United Nations independent expert (now special rapporteur on minority issues) warned that hundreds of minority groups in Africa were in need of attention and protection because minorities remain among the poorest people, trapping them in a cycle of discrimination, exclusion, poverty, and underdevelopment.<sup>13</sup> As reported by Minority Rights Group International, the Batwa people, a pastoralist minority in the Great Lakes Region in Africa, are among the poorest of the poor. A combination of lack of access to cultivable lands, poor health, and poor education places them as one of the most marginalized and poorest minorities on the continent.<sup>14</sup> Similarly, indigenous peoples (who include about 5 percent of the world’s population) are estimated to represent 15 percent of the world’s poor (Hall and Patrinos 2012). In Mexico, as in most Latin American countries, they consistently rank lower than nonindigenous peoples on poverty indicators (Garcia-Moreno and Patrinos 2011). As noted by the World Bank Latin America and the Caribbean [LAC] Equity lab, “Even if the Latin American and Caribbean region has seen significant progress in terms of poverty reduction over the past decade, the indigenous populations have benefited little and remain among the poorest in LAC. In some areas, the difference in poverty between them and other groups has grown even wider.”<sup>15</sup> Also, a recent World Bank study shows that from the early to the late 2000s, although the proportion of indigenous people living in moderate poverty (US$4/day) and extreme poverty (US$2.50/day) has decreased, the poverty gap between indigenous and nonindigenous people increased by 32 percent in Bolivia, 13 percent in Ecuador, and 99 percent in Brazil, but in Guatemala the gap decreased 0.36 percent. As a result of those gaps, in the Latin American countries for which data are available, the proportion of indigenous households living in poverty today (a) still doubles the proportion of nonindigenous households living in poverty, (b) is 2.7 times as high for extreme poverty, and (c) is three times as high for people living on less than US$1.25 a day (see figure 1).<sup>16</sup>

> 13 UNOHCHR 2014b, paras. 17 and 31, <u>https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G14/100/72/PDF/G1410072 .pdf?OpenElement.</u>

> 14 Minority Rights Group International  2008.

> 15 See LAC Equity Lab, “Overview,” http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/lac-equity-lab1/overview.

> 16 World Bank 2015a, 59.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 8
Figure 1: Percentage of People Living on Less Than US$1.25, US$2.50, and US$4 per Day, Late 2000s Weighted Average for Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru <!-- Start of picture text --> 50<br>43<br>40<br>30<br>24<br>21<br>20<br>9 9<br>10<br>3<br>0<br><$1.25 <$2.50 <$4.00 <$1.25 <$2.50 <$4.00<br>Indigenous Nonindigenous<br>Percent<br><!-- End of picture text --> _Source_ : SEDLAC data (CEDLAC and the World Bank) in World Bank 2015a.

Even in the more developed economies of Europe, minorities often are among the most disadvantaged. The European Union (EU) Special Eurobarometer 437—a public opinion survey conducted regularly on behalf of the European Commission, which looks into attitudes and perceptions of Europeans toward discrimination based on different grounds—reports that “discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin continues to be regarded as the most widespread form of discrimination in the EU (64 percent), and it is more likely to be seen as widespread than was the case in 2012 (+8 percentage points). More than half of respondents in the EU say that discrimination is widespread in their country on the basis of sexual orientation (58 percent; +12) and gender identity (56 percent; +11), both showing substantial increases from the 2012 survey” (European Commission 2015). As in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, discrimination in Europe seems to be associated with poverty and economic marginalization. In a recent study on poverty and unemployment rates among the Roma population in 11 EU member states, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights concluded that, despite being the largest ethnic minority in the EU, 90 percent of the Roma people surveyed “live in households with an equivalised income below national poverty lines” and that “on average, around 40 percent of Roma live in households where somebody had to go to bed hungry at least once in the last month since they could not afford to buy food” (FRA 2014, 11).

# IV. Indicators and Methodology

This paper proposes six new indicators for the collection of comparable cross-country data on discriminatory legal frameworks and tests the data collection methodology in six pilot economies (Bulgaria, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, Tanzania, and Vietnam).<sup>17</sup> 17 The pilot countries were selected to represent the various regions and legal traditions of the world. They range from low- to highincome economies, and all of them contain segments of the population that are considered minorities and that face discrimination.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 9
The methodology consists in a survey-based dataset and is drawn from the experience of the World Bank’s Doing Business<sup>18</sup> and Women, Business, and the Law<sup>19</sup> reports, which have produced global objective quantitative indicators of business regulation and gender discrimination.<sup>20</sup> The dataset presents laws and policies in three main areas:

1. Laws that establish discriminatory treatment based on ethnicity, religion, gender identity, and sexual orientation

2. Laws that prohibit discrimination against ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities 3. Policies and other enforcement mechanisms to implement existing antidiscrimination laws The six indicators identified to measure the equal treatment of people belonging to ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities are:

1. Access to institutions

2. Access to education 3. Access to the labor market 4. Access to property 5. Access to public services and social protection 6. Protection from hate crimes or hate speech Data were collected from two sources, namely, surveys to experts of the pilot countries and desktop research. In particular, three surveys were developed: (a) one for ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples, (b) one for religious minorities, and (c) one for sexual minorities. Each survey was then divided into six sections, one for each indicator. The surveys were distributed to legal experts in the six pilot countries, including lawyers, ombudsman institutions, judges, academics, and civil society organizations (see appendix B).

The survey on ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples includes questions on laws, policies, and regulations related to obtaining citizenship and how they differ, if at all, from those that apply to the country’s ethnic majority. The survey also includes questions on the rights of indigenous peoples to obtain collective land titles under access to property and questions on whether legal provisions on bilingual education exist, among others.

Under the indicator for access to institutions, the survey on religious minorities includes questions that address constitutional provisions that guarantee the freedom of belief and religion. Under access to education, the survey includes questions that attempt to identify whether legal quotas exist for religious minorities in primary, secondary, and tertiary education. The section on protection from hate crimes and hate speech addresses the existence of criminal provisions on hate speech that incites religious hatred and hate crimes motivated by religious bias.

The sexual minorities’ survey includes questions that address legal discrimination and legal protection from discrimination for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) communities. Under each indicator, questions attempt to capture the laws related to those communities and whether those same laws apply to the majority of the population (that is, heterosexual or cisgender). For example, the survey determines whether the country has a comprehensive law that specifically mentions sexual orientation and gender identity as protective characteristics. The equal treatment of LGBTI communities in schools is addressed under access to education, which assesses whether the state has introduced laws and policies to combat bullying of LGBTI students in schools. The topic of access to public services and social protection mechanisms is especially important for LGBTI communities, and it is covered through questions about access to health care, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) preventive services, and gender reassignment surgery, among others. The indicator for hate crimes and hate speech includes questions on the criminalization of hate crimes and hate speech

> 18 For further details on the Doing Business database and reports, see http://www.doingbusiness.org/.

> 19 For further details on the Women, Business, and the Law database and reports, see http://wbl.worldbank.org/.

> 20 The Doing Business indicators are recognized as being extremely influential and successful in attracting the attention of senior policy makers, government officials, and members of the business community in many countries. Thus, they have contributed significantly to benchmarking economies against good practices and motivating policy makers to improve their laws and regulations. Similarly, in the period following the publication of _Women, Business, and the Law 2014_ (World Bank 2013b), 65 countries reformed 94 laws that had discriminated against women.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 10
motivated by bias against sexual minorities and questions on the existence of policies that mandate training for police officers on the identification and investigation of hate crimes.

The data collected from the surveys were then cross-referenced with public legal databases from international organizations and local human rights nongovernmental organizations. When the answers to the surveys were unclear, the experts were contacted again for clarification and the data verified through desk-top research. The findings were subsequently codified and submitted to experts within and outside the World Bank Group for peer review.

Disagreement often arises about which groups constitute a minority in a country. To control for different interpretations and to guarantee uniformity in the data collection, the experts who completed the surveys were given a predetermined list of ethnic and religious minorities in each of the pilot countries drawn from internationally recognized studies of minorities, including work by the International Labour Organization,<sup>21</sup> United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination,<sup>22</sup> United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNOHCHR 2010, 2014),<sup>23</sup> United Nations Universal Periodic Review Process,<sup>24</sup> Minority Rights Group International,<sup>25</sup> and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.<sup>26</sup> Equality of opportunities for minorities in society depends on the interplay of a variety of factors. This paper focuses on only one of those factors: the formal legal and regulatory environment ( _de jure_ ) for six indicators; it does not cover the practice or implementation of the law ( _de facto_ ) more than tangentially through the identification of policies and other enforcement mechanisms seen as proxies of implementation. Also, not everything of importance is covered. For example, although access to institutions includes laws covering quotas in parliament, it does not include political party laws—an important factor in determining minority representation in political parties. The indicator for access to education covers only public—not private—education. The indicator for protection from hate speech and hate crimes does not include the crime of genocide. Although genocide may be regarded as a crime inherently motivated by hate or bias, it is not included in the study because the study concerns only individually motivated crimes, not mass atrocities that constitute international crimes.

Also, the study focuses on laws governing the formal economy. Although many people belonging to ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities work in the informal economy, one of the main goals of the study is to define features of the formal economy that prevent those individuals from making the transition from the informal to the formal economy.

The study does not include immigrants and migrant workers unless they have been living in the country long enough to justify, on the basis international standards, the right to citizenship.<sup>27</sup> The contribution of migrant workers to the economy of the host country is undeniable. Their labor and residency rights should thus be respected. Also undeniable is the widespread discrimination suffered by those minorities. Because the primary responsibility of governments is to provide safe and equal economic environments to their citizens, however, the authors defer to the many existing studies on the cost of exclusion of migrant workers (see, for example, OECD 2014; World Bank 2010b).

> 21 Even if ILO Convention 169 does not define _indigenous_ or _tribal peoples_ , it is the only international treaty that deals with the rights of those peoples. See http://www.ilo.org/global/topics/equality-and-discrimination/indigenous-and-tribal-peoples/lang--en/.

> 22 For example, see General Recommendation XXVII on Discrimination against Roma, 57th session (2000), and General Recommendation XXIII on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 51st session (1997); both are available on the United Nations Treaty Body Database, http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/TBSearch.aspx?Lang=en&TreatyID=6&DocTypeID=11.

> 23 See UNOHCHR, “Combating Discrimination against Minorities”, <u>http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Discrimination/Pages/ discrimination_minorities.aspx.</u>

> 24 See UNOHCHR, “Universal Periodic Review” website, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/UPRMain.aspx.

> 25 Minority Rights Group International provides a nonexhaustive list of minorities in many countries on its website, http://minorityrights.org/.

> 26 See “EU-MIDIS: European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey,” http://fra.europa.eu/en/project/2011/eu-midiseuropean-union-minorities-and-discrimination-survey.

> 27 On average, migrant workers around the world have to be legally employed and reside in the host country for 10 years before becoming eligible to apply for citizenship. Thus, the project sets 10 years as the length of time after which migrant workers should be covered by the study.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 11
Finally, the study does not cover customary or religious law because of their often-uncodified status and the resulting difficulties in defining their rules.

The survey data are current as of December 31, 2015. If a law was enacted but did not come into force before that date, the law was not included in the country data. Nonetheless, it was mentioned in the paper.

# V. Findings and Analysis

The main goal of this paper is twofold: (a) to test six new indicators and the methodology for the collection of crosscountry comparable data on discriminatory legal frameworks related to ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities; and (b) to present some findings from the data collection in six economies, highlighting some good and bad practices in the legal frameworks as they relate to equality of opportunities for minorities and their access to institutions, education, property, the labor force, social services, and protection from hate speech and hate crimes (the indicators). In doing so, the study aims to fill a gap in the existing literature related to poverty and development, which seldom looks at the issue of discrimination against those minorities through the prism of the effect that such exclusion might have on their economic potential and the overall cost for the country.

Following is an overview of the data collected (a) in the six pilot countries through the three surveys distributed to local experts and (b) from international legal databases and human rights organizations. The results are divided by indicators. Details of the specific variables examined and the answers to the surveys may be found in appendix C.

# _1. Access to Institutions_

The access to institutions indicator explores the ability of individuals within a minority group to interact and influence the decision-making process of public authorities in the same way as people belonging to the majority or ruling minority. The indicator also covers certain fundamental political rights, such as the freedom of expression and freedom of religion. Participation of minorities in all three branches of government—legislative, executive, and judiciary—is a fundamental component of economic empowerment. If a group is unable to gain equal access to instituParliaments as institutions can do more to extend some procedural accommodation for the participation of minorities and indigenous groups in legislative process.

(Inter-Parliamentary Union and the United Nations Development Programme 2010) tions that determine the allocation of national resources (both monetary and nonmonetary), the allocation will likely be skewed in favor of the ruling group. Participation and representation of minorities in parliaments and local governments can affect government spending priorities toward more inclusive and equitable economic reforms. Similarly, representation of minorities in the judiciary can encourage respect for antidiscrimination laws and implementation of policies promoting the fair allocation of resources. As stated by the Inter-Parliamentary Union, “The parliamentary representation of minorities and indigenous peoples is essential for ensuring these groups’ effective participation in public affairs” (Protsyk 2010). Such disaggregated data in national parliaments are scarce, however, forcing the Leadership Council of the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network (2015, 149) to call for action and urge states to collect such data as a necessary step toward the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Of the six pilot economies analyzed, none has a formal legal quota system for the minimum participation of ethnic, religious, or sexual minorities in parliament. Vietnam, however, has a mechanism that allows for representation in Parliament of the 54 ethnic minority groups registered in the country. The Council of Ethnic Minorities is a body consisting of 40 deputies, and its main duties are to contribute to, investigate, and oversee legal documents (laws, acts, ordinances) and legal procedures regarding ethnic affairs. As a consequence, the Vietnamese parliament has passed various pieces of legislation that target the interests of ethnic minorities (Palmieri 2010, 11). Examples include (a) Decision 1592 related to land cultivation, housing, and water required to support ethnic minority households; (b) a provision that gives priority to ethnic minorities in accessing educational facilities, and (c) a law providing for interpreters for minorities using the courts.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 12
Survey results also revealed that although all six economies ratified the 1969 UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD)—Article 2 of which calls on all ratifying states to “prohibit and bring to an end, by all appropriate means, including legislation as required by circumstances, racial discrimination by any persons, group or organization”—only Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands have a comprehensive nondiscrimination law (see table 1). In all three of those economies, the law provides protection from discrimination on ethnic, religious, and sexual orientation grounds. Only in Bulgaria does the law also protect individuals from discrimination on gender identity grounds.<sup>28</sup> In Morocco and Tanzania, homosexuality is a crime and, therefore, no reference to the rights of LGBTI communities exists in the legislation of those two pilot countries.

Table 1: Does the Country Have an Antidiscrimination Law That Prohibits Discrimination Based on Ethnicity, Religion, and Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity?

||Bulgaria|Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Ethnic minorities|ü|ü||ü|||
|Religious minorities|ü|ü||ü|||
|Sexual orientation|ü|ü||ü|||
|Gender identity|ü||||||

# _Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

In Morocco, the only relevant law is Dahir 19-68, a 1969 royal decree giving effect to ICERD in national jurisdiction. Although Morocco is a monist state<sup>29</sup> and thus the decree is, strictly speaking, a national law, the articles of the Convention are not as detailed as a nondiscrimination law, thus the decree can hardly be considered a sufficient tool to effectively protect the rights of ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities in the country.

In addition to ratifying the ICERD, all of the pilot economies have ratified the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; ILO 100, the Convention on Equal Remuneration; and ILO 111, the Convention on Discrimination (Employment and Occupation), all of which provide some form of protection for the rights of people belonging to ethnic and religious minorities. Only Mexico and the Netherlands have also ratified ILO 169, the Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples<sup>30</sup> (table 2).

28 On March 25, 2015, the Bulgarian parliament adopted on second hearing (final) a bill to amend two provisions of the Protection Against Discrimination Act: (a) Article 9 on the shift of the burden of proof and (b) a new provision that partially defines _sex_ as a protected ground to include transgender status. New Subsection 17 in Section 1 of the Additional Provision reads, “Within the meaning of art. 4, section 1 [listing the protected grounds] the ground of ‘sex’ includes also gender reassignment cases,” http://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/2756-52-bg-nd-amendments-adl-adopted.

29 In a monist legal system, international law is considered joined with and part of the internal legal order of a state. In a dualist legal system, on the other hand, international law stands apart from national law, and to have any effect on rights and obligations at the national level, international law must be domesticated through legislative process.

30 Bulgaria voted in favor of adopting the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ratified the Rome Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in 1992. Mexico voted in favor of the adoption of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ratified the American Convention on Human Rights, “Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica,” in 1981. Morocco was absent during the session that adopted the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and has not ratified the African (Banjul) Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, as it is not a member of the African Union. The Netherlands voted in favor of the adoption of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ratified the Rome Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in 1954. Tanzania voted in favor of the adoption of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ratified the African (Banjul) Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights in 1984. Vietnam voted in favor of the adoption of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Although the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous 13 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
Table 2: Treaties Ratified, by Country

||Bulgaria|Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|International Convention on the<br>Elimination of All Forms of Racial<br>Discrimination(ICERD)|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|International Covenant on Civil<br>and Political Rights (ICCPR)|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|International Covenant on Eco-<br>nomic, Social and Cultural Rights<br>(ICERD)|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|Convention on Equal Remunera-<br>tion (ILO Convention 100)|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|Convention on Discrimination<br>(Employment and Occupation)<br>(ILO Convention 111)|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|Indigenous and Tribal Peoples<br>Convention (ILO Convention 169)||ü||ü|||

_Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

In the field of LGBTI rights, the United Nations has yet to adopt a convention against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In June 2016, however, the UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution to appoint an “independent expert” to investigate the causes of violence and discrimination against people because of their sexual orientation and gender identity and to discuss their protection with governments.<sup>31</sup> Although a resolution does not impose any legal obligation on the states, it represents a step forward toward the development of an international consensus on the need to protect sexual minorities from violence and discrimination.

At the regional level, both Bulgaria and the Netherlands are bound by the European Union Directives 2000/43 (Racial Equality Directive)<sup>32</sup> and 2000/78 (Employment Equality Directive),<sup>33</sup> which prohibit discrimination on grounds of ethnic origin, disability, age, and sexual orientation. Mexico ratified the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights<sup>34</sup> and the 1988 “Protocol of San Salvador,”<sup>35</sup> which recognizes the right to work, health, and education.<sup>36</sup> Tanzania is a party to the African Charter and ratified the 1980 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights,<sup>37</sup> which, in addition to protecting civil and political rights, recognizes the right to development (Art. 22), especially relevant for minorities. Vietnam signed the 2012 ASEAN Human Rights Declaration,<sup>38</sup> which incorporates the principle of nondiscrimination in General Principles 2 and 9. Finally, Morocco is a party of the League of Arab States and signed—but has not ratified—the Arab Charter on Human Rights, which calls on ratifying states to provide equality of opportunity without disPeoples, as a declaration, is not a formally binding treaty, it contains rights and freedoms, such as self-determination and nondiscrimination, set out in binding international human rights treaty law, of which some may be considered customary international law. 31 <u>http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=54385#.V9M540-V-Uk.</u>

> 32 <u>http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32000L0043&from=EN.</u>

> 33 <u>http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32000L0078&from=EN.</u>

> 34 <u>http://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_B-32_American_Convention_on_Human_Rights.htm.</u>

> 35 <u>http://oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-52.html.</u>

> 36 A recent effort that may potentially benefit minorities is the adoption of the Inter-American Convention Against All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance (2013), which emphasizes that discrimination may be based on “sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, religion, and cultural identity.” The treaty has not entered into force, however, and Mexico has not ratified it.

> 37 <u>http://www.achpr.org/instruments/achpr/.</u>

> 38 2012 ASEAN Human Rights Declaration, <u>http://www.iglhrc.org/sites/default/files/629-1.pdf.</u>

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 14
crimination of any kind on grounds of race, sex, religion, language, political opinion, membership in a union, national origin, social origin, disability, or any other situation.<sup>39</sup> Other results of the surveys related to access to institutions show that hidden forms of institutionalized discrimination can cause certain groups to have difficulty exercising their political rights and, as a consequence, equal access to public services. For example, in Bulgaria, regulations on the issuance of identification cards require a registered address. Those regulations adversely affect mostly Roma minorities, who often have problems obtaining housing and do not have a registered address. Also, the Bulgarian Act on Social Benefits for Children, introduced in 2015, suspends child benefits for children of underage girls, affecting mostly Roma women, who tend to have children at a younger age than do women in the rest of the population. Those laws, coupled with the widely reported economic underperformance of Roma minorities in Bulgaria (Gatti and others 2016), give rise to interesting research questions on the correlation between seemingly neutral laws and the disproportionate effect that such laws can have on the continual economic marginalization of minorities in the country.

Similar findings come from Morocco, where the Nationality Law of 1958, as amended in 2007, provides that Moroccan nationality is acquired by birth except when the minister of justice opposes it. The Amazigh people from the south, however, usually lack birth certificates. As a result, the law setting out the requirements for foreigners to obtain Moroccan nationality—including knowledge of the Arabic language, which those ethnic minorities often do not speak—also applies to them. That apparently neutral provision in the nationality law makes obtaining nationality harder for the Amazigh people than for the Moroccan Arabic majority and, as a consequence, hinders access to social services and the labor market (UNCERD 2010). In the area of cultural rights, however, Morocco has made some progress in the new 2011 Constitution by recognizing Tamazight, the language of the Amazigh people, as an official language.<sup>40</sup> All six economies have constitutional provisions that guarantee the freedom of religion or belief;<sup>41</sup> however, lack of harmonization with national legislation sometimes means that such rights are severely curtailed. In Morocco, although the law permits voluntary conversion, the authorities have used Article 220 of the penal code (see box 1) to actively prohibit attempts to proselytize Sunni Maliki Muslims.<sup>42</sup> In Vietnam, the Ordinance on Belief and Religion (Ordinance 21) and government Decree 92, which implements the law, have been criticized by international observers for the excessive discretion they give to the government in regulating, restricting, and forbidding the free exercise of religion or belief in the country.<sup>43</sup> Box 1: Article 220 of the Moroccan Penal Code Article 220 of the Moroccan Penal Code states that “anyone who has impeded or prevented one or more persons from worship or from attending worship services of any religion may be punished by six-months’ to three-years’ imprisonment and a fine of 200 to 500 dirhams.” Although Article 220 appears favorable to religious freedom, it applies the same penalty to “anyone who employs enticements to shake the faith of a Muslim or to convert him to another religion.” Source: Penal Code of Morocco, Art. 220 With regard to enforcement mechanisms, the surveys highlight an encouraging practice in Mexico, where the 2003 Federal Law to Prevent and Eliminate Discrimination requires the judiciary and the police to receive training on existing an-

> 39 Art. 34 of the Arab Charter of Human Rights, http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/loas2005.html.

> 40 Art. 5, Constitution of Morocco, 2011.

> 41 Bulgaria, art. 37, para. 1; Mexico, art. 24; Morocco, art. 3; the Netherlands, art. 6, para. 1; Tanzania, art. 19 (1); and Vietnam, art. 24 (2013).

> 42 United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Doc. A/HRC/WG.6/13/Mar/3, Summary Prepared by the Office of the high commissioner for human rights in accordance with paragraph 5 of the annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 16/21 Morocco, Para. 42.

> 43 United Nations Doc. A/HRC/28/66/Add.2, Report of the special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Heiner Bielefeldt, Addendum, Mission to Vietnam (July 21–31, 2014).

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 15
tidiscrimination legislation. No other country studied shows a similar commitment to training the front-liners. Also, all economies except Vietnam have established a specialized body to receive complaints for violations of human rights. In Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands, those human rights bodies hear complaints of discrimination against ethnic, religious, and LGBTI groups. The Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance in Tanzania hears complaints of discrimination only on ethnic and religious grounds. In Morocco, the National Council for Human Rights is concerned mostly with the rights of women, children, persons with disabilities, detainees, and migrant workers.<sup>44</sup> The newly established Authority for Equality and the Combat of All Forms of Discrimination addresses discrimination based on ethnic and religious grounds but does not include a judicial mandate to hear complaints<sup>45</sup> (see figure 2).

Figure 2: Does the Country Have a Specialized Body Tasked with Hearing Complaints of Discrimination against Ethnic, Religious, or Sexual Minorities?

<!-- Start of picture text --> Bulgaria Mexico Morocco Netherlands Tanzania Vietnam<br>Ethnic minorities Religious minorities Sexual orientation Gender identity<br><!-- End of picture text --> _Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

This brief overview of the results of the sections of the three surveys covering access to institutions enables one to make a few general considerations. First, all countries have some provisions to protect the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, but the level of protection varies greatly, with some countries directly or indirectly discriminating against those groups through other national legislation and other countries lacking appropriate legislation. Second, LGBTI communities are the least protected under the law, particularly in countries such as Morocco<sup>46</sup> and Tanzania,<sup>47</sup> where homosexuality is criminalized. Bulgaria is the only economy that has passed a comprehensive law that protects against discrimination on both sexual orientation and gender identity grounds. Finally, enforcement mechanisms for the implementation of nondiscrimination legislation are scarce and do not always equally address the needs of all targeted groups.

> 44 United Nations Doc. A/HRC/WG.6/13/MAR/1, National report submitted in accordance with paragraph 5 of the annex to Human Rights Council resolution 16/21, March 8, 2012, para. 20.

> 45 HuffPost Moroc, Le projet de loi sur l’Autorité pour la parité adopté (May 10, 2016), <u>http://www.huffpostmaghreb.com/2016/05/10/loi-autorite-parite-maroc_n_9886560.html.</u> 46 Penal Code (2015), art. 489.

> 47 Penal Code of 1945, art.154 and art. 157. A careful analysis of the law suggests that only gay, not lesbian, relationships are prohibited under the law.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 16
# _2. Access to Education_

Receiving a good education is arguably the most important factor for the development of a child into a mature and productive member of society. If children receive substandard education and are discriminated against throughout their formative years, they will not develop the skills and the confidence they need to be competitive in the labor market.<sup>48</sup> That is especially true in today’s emerging knowledge-based global economy, and numerous studies demonstrate that “Education is key to a better life and the foundation of every strong society—but far too many children are still being left behind. To realize all our development goals, we need every child in school and learning.” Anthony Lake, executive director, UNICEF (UNICEF 2015) learning and skills play an increasingly important role in shaping prospects for economic growth, shared prosperity, and poverty reduction (Leitch 2006; Sapir 2003). Unfortunately, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO 2010, 5) reports, “Around a third of all children in developing countries, or 175 million annually, enter primary school having experienced malnutrition that irreparably damages their cognitive development.” Often, such deprivation is the consequence of circumstances beyond the control of the children and their families. “Marginalization in education is the product of inherited disadvantage, deeply ingrained social processes, uneven power relationships, unfair economic arrangements—and bad policies. The overall effect of marginalization is to restrict opportunity as a result of circumstances over which children have no control, such as parental wealth, gender, ethnicity, and language” (UNESCO 2010, 272).

The access to education indicator examines legislation related to the access of minority groups to education and whether those laws differ from those applicable to the majority groups. In some countries—such as the Netherlands—education is well developed and offers children and their families a variety of educational curricula and the opportunity to choose a school according to one’s ethnic, religious, and cultural preferences.<sup>49</sup> Liberal legislation in education, however, is not necessarily a guarantee of equal opportunity for all, as demonstrated by the recent discussions in the Netherlands on the segregation of children of Moroccan, Turkish, Surinamese, and Netherlands Antillean origins to so-called black schools (Hamilton 2015) (see box 2).

In addition to identifying the minority gap in accessing education, the indicator attempts to measure the quality of education and, in particular, the quality of the national school curriculum. That measurement is very important in overcoming prejudicial attitudes. A national study on structural discrimination in education in Pakistan highlights the many ways in which prejudice against religious minorities is reinforced by biased and outdated curricula that contain stereotypes of non-Muslims. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom found that textbooks used in Pakistani primary and secondary schools foster prejudice and intolerance of religious minorities, especially Hindus and Christians (Hussain and Salim 2011, 9). According to its report, Hindus are repeatedly described in social studies textbooks as extremists and eternal enemies of Islam (Hussain and Salim 2011, 15). Finally, the sections of the three surveys covering access to education attempt to capture discrimination or nondiscrimination laws and policies at all stages of education, including primary, secondary, and tertiary education. That distinction is motivated by the vast literature in the field that suggests that intervention at the early stages of a child’s education is important to address systematic inequalities (Human Rights Commission of New Zealand 2012, 30; see also Bishop 2010, 61).

> 48 For more information on the importance of quality education, see Sustainable Development Goal 4: Quality Education, <u>http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/education/.</u>

> 49 Center on International Education Benchmarking, “System and School Organization,” http://www.ncee.org/programsaffiliates/center-on-international-education-benchmarking/top-performing-countries/netherlands-overview/netherlands-system-andschool-organization/. See also Patrinos (2014).

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 17
Box 2: The “Black Schools” of the Netherlands Parental choice regarding education in the Netherlands is sacrosanct. This derives partly from Article 23 of the Constitution, which was passed in 1917 and guaranteed equal government funding for both public and private schools, including denominational schools and institutions following specific pedagogical principles, such as Montessori schools. That system worked in the past, when schools were divided into Catholic, Protestant, and public schools. Following the influx of low-skilled immigrants in the 1950s and 1960s, however—especially Surinamese and Antilleans from former Dutch colonies, Moroccans, and Turks—native Dutch parents began selecting schools that were attended mostly by native-Dutch children, segregating the children of immigrants to predominantly “black” schools. Today, approximately 500 black schools operate in the Netherlands. (Hamilton 2015) According to Mohammed Jaater, the policy assistant for the Department of Education: “Even though a school is not allowed to officially refuse children, it may use many strategies to deter certain families from bringing their child to a school. Schools may emphasize the identity of the school. For example, a school with a particular religious affiliation may place obstacles in the way of Muslim families. Also, many immigrant families are deterred by schools’ requests for high voluntary monetary donations. While giving money is never required, schools may choose not to emphasize this fact when addressing ethnic minorities. Currently, schools are not made accountable for their selection process so there is often no accurate documentation available which one may consult in cases of presumed (instrumental) discrimination.” Source: Arts and Nabha (2001) In Bulgaria, nearly 25 percent of Roma children ages 7–15 have never attended school, compared with 12 percent of ethnic Turks and only 6 percent of ethnic Bulgarians. Further, about 70 percent of ethnic Turks and 93 percent of Roma have not completed secondary education. By comparison, only 30 percent of ethnic Bulgarians have not completed secondary education (World Bank 2015c). Also, as shown in table 3, all economies surveyed have a law prohibiting discrimination on ethnic and religious grounds in education. Only Bulgaria and the Netherlands explicitly prohibit discrimination on sexual orientation and gender identity grounds, however.<sup>50</sup> In Morocco, worth noticing is the 2003 Circulaire Ministérielle 108, which introduced the teaching of Amazigh language in primary schools.<sup>51</sup> According to UNESCO, the reform contributed to increased school attendance, with the percentage of children who had never been to school falling from 9 percent in 2003 to 4 percent in 2009.<sup>52</sup> Table 3: Does the Law Explicitly Prohibit Discrimination on Ethnic, Religious, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity Grounds in Education?

||Bulgaria|Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Ethnic minorities|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|Religious minorities|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|Sexual orientation|ü|||ü|||
|Gender identity|ü|||ü|||

_Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

> 50 Bulgaria explicitly prohibits discrimination in education based on sexual orientation and gender identity grounds in the Protection Against Discrimination Act but not in its education law. Bulgaria recently passed a law on preschool and school education which entered into force in August 2016. Although articles 3, 4, 5, and 7 of the law include various antidiscrimination provisions, they do not explicitly mention LGBTI communities as a protected group. http://www.mon.bg/?go=page&pageId=7&subpageId=57. 51 Circulaire ministérielle 108, 2003.

> 52 UNESCO 2014.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 18
In the realm of enforcement mechanisms, a good example comes from Vietnam, where the Education Act of 2005 prescribes nomination quotas<sup>53</sup> for admission to secondary education and university for children belonging to ethnic minorities.<sup>54</sup> Also, article 61 of the same law calls on the government to establish and give priority in the budget allocation to boarding schools and pre-university schools for ethnic minority children.<sup>55</sup> That law has guaranteed access to education and skills development for many traditionally marginalized children and has increased their chances of being competitive in the labor market. In Bulgaria, the Action Plan for the Implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategy sets out a detailed program to promote the right to equal access to quality education and integration of Roma children and students in kindergartens and schools.<sup>56</sup> Also, in Bulgaria and Mexico, the laws require the reform of outdated curricula that include prejudicial language against minorities and the training of primary and secondary education teachers on nondiscrimination.<sup>57</sup> To evaluate the efforts of the pilot economies in sensitizing students to the principles of equality, the surveys also included a question on the teaching of cultural sensitivity courses in primary, secondary, and tertiary schools. Although the approaches vary, Bulgaria, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Vietnam have policies that attempt to educate students about human rights and nondiscrimination. No similar provisions could be identified in Morocco and Tanzania.

As revealed by the results of the surveys, all of the pilot economies have taken some positive steps to improve access to education for minorities; however, gaps remain. Especially in the realm of LGBTI rights, lack of protective legislation for sexual minorities may be a factor contributing to the widely reported discrimination against LGBTI individuals in schools.<sup>58</sup> In a recent assessment of the protection of LBGTI individuals in Vietnam, the U.S. Agency for International Development reports: “In summary, education institutions are not safe for LGBT students due to the lack of antibullying and non-discrimination policies. Furthermore, education on sex and on sexual orientation and gender identification (SOGI) is still limited in Vietnam and are considered sensitive topics that teachers usually avoid. There are also no government initiatives to teach diversity and tolerance, or interpersonal skills.” (UNDP and USAID 2014, 28).

# _3. Access to the Labor Market_

Access to the labor market is the most intuitive of the indicators. When individuals are prevented from obtaining and keeping a job because of a cultural prejudice against their ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity—not because of their skills or performance—human capital is wasted, resources are not efficiently allocated, and the economy as a whole suffers. Also, if people are discriminated against in the workplace, their productivity decreases, and unemployment grows as people are discouraged from applying for a job because of fear of discrimination and distrust in the labor market. Employment discrimination also burdens the employer who, by giving up productive minority employees, must bear higher average labor costs and lose profit opportunities (Hanouz 2015). That situation causes higher levels of unemployment and consequential costs for the economy. Nonetheless, discrimination against minorities in the workplace is widely acknowledged and documented.<sup>59</sup>

> 53Article 1.1 of Decree 49/2015/ND-CP defines _nomination_ as follows: “Nomination means the enrollment of students into professional secondary education, college, and university without taking enrollment examination in order to train public officials according to the tasks, job positions, and payroll norms; to train public employees according to working demand, job positions, professional title standards, and salary fund of public administration units for areas meeting with extraordinary socio-economic difficulties and ethnic minorities with no or few officials of college, university, or professional secondary education degrees.” Given the above definition, “nomination quotas” in the context of Article 90.2 of Law on Education 2005 means the maximum number of students who may be enrolled into professional secondary education, college and university without taking an enrollment examination, which the State sets aside for an ethnic minority.

54 Education Law (2005), art. 90 para 1.

55 Education Law (2005), art. 61.

56 “Action Plan for Implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategy of the Republic of Bulgaria (2012–2020) and the Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005–2015,” http://www.romadecade.org/cms/upload/file/9305_file2_bg-action-plan-updated.pdf.

57 See art. 35, para. 1 and 3, Protection Against Discrimination Act, Bulgaria; and art. 8 and art. 12, para. 3, General Education Law, Mexico.

58 Bulgaria recently enacted the new Primary and Secondary Education Act. The law entered into force on August 1, 2016, and includes provisions for the protection of LGBTI individuals in education.

59 See the International Labour Organization NATLEX database, which contains national laws regarding equal opportunity in employment and occupation, including specific laws on ethnic minorities or indigenous peoples, at http://www.ilo.org/natlex. See also OECD (2008) and ILO (2015).

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 19
In the United Kingdom, a test commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions found that people with minority ethnic or foreign-sounding names are one-third less likely to be shortlisted for jobs than people with “white”-sounding names (Wood and others 2009). Also in the United Kingdom, among those age 16 years old and older, almost all ethnic minority groups have a higher proportion of their male population unemployed than do their white counterparts (Sims 2012, 11). In the United States, the General Society Survey, a national probability survey representative of the U.S. population, reports that, between 2003 and 2008, 38 percent of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual people who were open about their sexual orientation in the workplace and 78 percent of transgender people experienced at least one form of discrimination, be it in hiring, promotion, or job retention (Sears and Mallory 2011). In Belgium in 2009, 45 percent of all employment discrimination complaints received by the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism were race related; of those, 36.5 percent concerned access to employment and 56.1 percent concerned conditions of work (ILO 2011a, 28).

The access to the labor market indicator identifies restrictions to accessing the job market, such as limitations to certain forms of discriminatory employment or hiring practices, and the existence of workplace protections for people belonging to ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities. The surveys revealed that all six pilot economies have constitutional provisions or national laws that prohibit discrimination in the workplace on ethnic and religious grounds.<sup>60</sup> In Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands, that prohibition also applies to sexual orientation,<sup>61</sup> and in Bulgaria, it also applies to gender identity. All of the pilot economies prescribe equal remuneration for work of equal value for individuals belonging to religious and ethnic minorities. The same applies to LGBTI communities in Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands.<sup>62</sup> The surveys also found that, in 2014, the government of the Netherlands passed a comprehensive action plan against labor market discrimination, targeting discrimination on the grounds of age, disability, race or ethnic origin, gender, and sexual orientation. The plan includes a wide range of measures, including the creation of the Labor Market Discrimination Team, which is charged with visiting companies to check on whether they have an effective antidiscrimination policy in place (Holtmaat 2016).

Even where nondiscriminatory labor laws exist, they will be effective only if the states ensure that no other barriers—such as high legal or administrative fees, lack of language interpreters, or other procedural hurdles—prevent or discourage minorities from lodging a claim for employment discrimination (see box 3). As stated by the United Nations Rule of Law Indicators’ report on access to justice, administrative hurdles and lack of transparent procedures can prevent a victim of discrimination from obtaining remedy.<sup>63</sup> The indicator for access to labor thus aims to assess the access to remedies for individuals who have been subject to employment discrimination and examines the ease of bringing a claim for employment discrimination on racial, religious, or sexual grounds in the public sector. Given the growing role of companies in the global economy, the indicator also assesses whether corporations have effective mechanisms for filing and addressing grievances from employees and communities that may be discriminated against by the companies’ operations. In that regard, the surveys revealed that all six economies have laws that allow an employee to bring a claim for employment discrimination on ethnic and religious grounds in both the private and public sectors. In Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands, that holds true also for claims of employment discrimination on sexual orientation and gender identity grounds (see table 4).

> 60 Bulgaria, Labor

> Code (1992), Art. 8, Para 3; Mexico, Federal Labor Law (1970), Articles 3, 133; Morocco, Labor Code (2011), Art. 9; the Netherlands, Equal Treatment Act (1994), Sec. 5(1); Tanzania, Employment and Labour Relations Act, (2004), Art. 7(4); Vietnam, Labor Code (2012), Art. 8.

> 61 Bulgaria, Labor Code (1992), Art. 8, Para 3; Mexico, Labor Law (1970), Articles 3, 133; the Netherlands, Equal Treatment Act (1994), Sec. 1(1)(b).

> 62 Protection Against Discrimination Act (2004), Art. 12, Para. 1 and Art. 4, Para. 1

> 63 The United Nations Rule of Law Indicators is a tool for assessing the rule of law in post-conflict situations. See UNOHCHR (2011).

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 20
Box 3: Article 283(12) of the Mexican Federal Labor Act Indigenous workers in the rural economy are particularly vulnerable to labor rights violations, the lack of training on rights and entitlements being one reason. In Mexico, 2012 amendments to the Federal Labor Act have introduced a provision requiring employers to use interpretation services when rural workers do not speak Spanish. Mexico has also launched a specific program to disseminate information on the rights of daily agricultural workers through community leaders and local authorities.

Source: Federal Labor Act of Mexico, Art. 283(12) Table 4: Does the Law Allow an Employee to Bring a Claim for Employment Discrimination on Religious, Ethnic, Sexual Orientation, or Gender Identity Grounds in the Public and Private Sectors?

||Bulgaria|Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Ethnic minorities|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|Religious minorities|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|ü|
|Sexual orientation|ü|ü||ü|||
|Gender identity|ü|ü||ü|||

_Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

Recently, the International Labour Organization highlighted a global trend in nondiscrimination legislation in the workplace that shifts the burden of proof to the employer in cases of alleged discrimination (ILO 2011b, x). The survey results show that Bulgaria, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Tanzania are in line with such international trends. In all four economies, once an employee has brought a claim for discrimination, the burden of proof shifts to the employer, who must demonstrate that discrimination did not take place. Vietnam’s new Civil Proceedings Code adopts a hybrid approach. According to the new law, the burden of proof shifts to the employer when the employer is the repository of the evidence or, in other words, holds the documentation related to the employment claim.<sup>64</sup> At present, Morocco has no similar forms of protection for its employees.

Discriminatory hiring practices, unfair labor treatment, and prejudicial attitudes toward certain minority groups may hinder their full participation in the labor market, wasting their potential and lowering the competitiveness of the economy. Survey results suggest that legislation in the field of nondiscrimination labor law is fairly well developed in all six economies. Interestingly, despite the fact that such economies have profoundly different legal traditions, they are adopting similar forms of enforcement mechanisms to implement the laws. Certainly, that trend is a reflection of the work of international organizations such as the International Labour Organization that have tirelessly worked for many years on the promotion of labor standards and harmonization of the law in that field. As mentioned, however, discrimination against minorities in the workplace is still a reality, which suggests that stronger enforcement mechanisms must be put in place to ensure equal opportunity in the labor market. Figure 3 shows that, as with the results of the surveys related to the previous indicators, the weakest body of law protecting access to the labor market is that related to LBGTI communities. In Morocco and Tanzania—where homosexuality is a crime—all existing protective legislation in the workplace applies only to ethnic and religious minorities.

> 64 Decree 92/2015/QH13 on Civil Procedures Code (2015), Art. 91(1)(b), effective July 1, 2016.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 21
## Figure 3: Legal protection in the workplace

<!-- Start of picture text --> Protection against discrimination<br>on ethnic grounds<br>Protection against discrimination<br>on religious grounds<br>Protection against discrimination<br>on sexual orientation<br>Protection against discrimination<br>on gender identity grounds<br>Protection for equal<br>remuneration regardless of ethnicity<br>Protection for equal<br>remuneration regardless of religion<br>Protection for equal remuneration<br>regardless of sexual orientation<br>Protection for equal remuneration<br>regardless of gender identity<br>Bulgaria Mexico Morocco Netherlands Tanzania Vietnam<br><!-- End of picture text --> _Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

# _4. Access to Property_

Access to property is the cornerstone of economic security. Land ownership is important not only as a means of capital accumulation but also as a source of income. Moreover, property reinforces bargaining power and agency. In addition, the ability to leverage property as collateral is important for obtaining credit and starting a business.

The access to property indicator seeks to capture the minority gap in the ability to own, manage, control, and inherit real property and to register and transfer a private business. The initial findings show that, although many property-related laws are apparently minority neutral, hidden regulations and gaps in the law are at the root of many forms of indirect discrimination regarding access to land and property rights.

In Mexico, “inequality has a particular effect on the most vulnerable sectors of the population, such as indigenous peoples—among whom the poverty rate is four times higher” (InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights 2015, 42). Article 27 of the Mexican constitution recognizes indigenous peoples’ lands, protects their property, and grants them preferential rights over their traditionally occupied territories. Still, the struggle remains in the way the property law translates into inclusion and economic empowerment. Mexico has not implemented a law on free, prior, and informed consultation of indigenous peoples regarding development projects Around one-quarter of the world’s urban population continues to live in slums and informal settlements. An increasing number of urban dwellers, especially the most poor and vulnerable groups, are living in precarious conditions, addressing their housing needs informally, lacking access to basic services and living space, isolated from livelihood opportunities and vulnerable to forced evictions or homelessness. ... Efforts to improve access to adequate housing for women, migrants, refugees, people with disabilities, indigenous and minorities have made little progress so far. (UN Habitat 2015) that are implemented in their territories or that affect them in a direct manner. That situation has a negative effect on their use of their land and property by causing instability. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights acknowlAnti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 22
edged the problem in the latest human rights report on Mexico: “The granting of permits or concessions in or around indigenous lands without free, prior, and informed consent has triggered social unrest and even violence” (2015, 120).

Another finding related to access to indigenous land concerns Tanzania, where the hunter-gatherer Akie and Hadzabe and the pastoralist Barabaig and Maasai tribes face similar insecurity in land tenure as a consequence of discriminatory land legislation. As reported by the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA), those four peoples “all share a strong attachment to the land, distinct identities, vulnerability, and marginalization. They also experience similar Social protection policies directly improve resiliproblems in relation to tenure insecurity, poverty, and inadeence by helping people insure against drops in quate political representation.”<sup>65</sup> The 1999 Village Land Act well-being from a range of shocks and improve allows rural people to formalize their land holdings by registerequity by reducing poverty and destitution and ing their land as “village land.” The law grants indigenous peopromoting equality of opportunity. (World Bank ples little real tenure security however, because the law also 2012) provides that all lands, including “village land,” are “public land vested in the President as trustee for and on behalf of all citizens of Tanzania.”<sup>66</sup> These provisions could potentially allow a head of state to convert village land into general public land or reserved land on the grounds of “public interest”<sup>67</sup> or because the land is considered to be “hazard land” (IWGIA 2016, 23).<sup>68</sup> This can weaken land security for pastoralists and hunter-gatherers who can be evicted on these grounds without any guarantee that the land will be used for the public interest. Although the new draft constitution grants wider recognition of the rights of indigenous populations, it leaves unchanged the grounds of eviction under the Village Land Act (IWGIA 2015b).

With regard to access to housing, discrimination against LGBTI communities often is a reality in all six pilot economies covered by the study. In Tanzania, because of the criminalization of homosexuality, LGBTI individuals often are denied rental housing. According to the chief operations officer of Amka Empowerment, a nonprofit organization that focuses on health and human rights issues of sexual minorities and sex workers in Tanzania, “Almost all house owners don’t accept LGBT people” as tenants and “take it as a curse to their house to rent [to] LGBT.”<sup>69</sup> Detecting institutionalized discrimination against ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities in the area of access to property is more challenging than in the other indicators. Some forms of legal discrimination could be identified, but discrimination in this sector often happens in practice through de facto discriminatory behaviors by property managers and owners. The laws on contract formation, licensing, and inheritance also seem to be, for the vast majority, neutral with regard to ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Those results suggest the need for more targeted legislation to discourage discriminatory behaviors and to guarantee equal access to property, which is key in promoting financial stability and equal access to public services and social safety nets for vulnerable populations.

# _5. Access to Public Services and Social Protection_

_Social protection_ can be defined as “all public and private initiatives that provide income or consumption transfers to the poor, protect the vulnerable against livelihood risks, and enhance the social status and rights of the marginalized; with the overall objective of reducing the economic and social vulnerability of poor, vulnerable, and marginalized groups.”<sup>70</sup> World Bank Group research has consistently reaffirmed the importance of social protection in achieving the twin goals of “reducing extreme poverty” (World Bank 2014, 33) and helping “achieve visible impacts in terms of reducing inequal-

> 65 International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs, “Indigenous Peoples in Tanzania,” http://www.iwgia.org/regions/africa/tanzania. 66 See Village Land Act, Part II.

> 67 See Village Land Act, part III on Transfers and Hazard Land, section 4 (I).

> 68 Hazard land is land that, if developed, may endanger life or lead to degradation or environmental destruction.

> 69 Correspondence from the chief operations officer of Amka Empowerment to the Research Directorate, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, July 28, 2014, http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=search&docid=540421f24&skip =0&query=AMKA.

> 70 This definition is from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO 2015), quoting Devereux and Sabates‐Wheeler (2004, 9). For a more thorough discussion about the differences between _social protection_ , _social security_ , _social insurance_ , and _social safety nets_ , see Morlachetti 2015 (2–4).

23 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
ity” (World Bank 2015b, 48). Although a rapid expansion of social assistance programs has taken place in developing countries over the past 15 years (Morlachetti 2015, 4), not everyone is benefiting equally from those programs. The United Nations reports, “Because indigenous peoples often engage in informal work, they tend to lack coverage under existing social security schemes and, even where covered, they may not meet the conditions for the realization of their entitlements or are unable to access effectively programs and benefits (e.g., due to geographical and linguistic barriers, lack of adequate infrastructure)” (United Nations Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Issues 2014, 9).

The indicator for access to public services and social protection examines the ability of individuals belonging to a minority group to access public services and social protections—including health care, social housing, electricity, water supply, microcredit, subsidized health insurance, social pensions, and child benefits—in the same way as does the dominant population in the country. The indicator also attempts to capture whether laws encourage nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to provide similar services and whether the government imposes funding limitations on the provision of such services and allows tax deductions for donations to such NGOs.

The data show that Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands have comprehensive legal frameworks for nondiscrimination against minorities in the provision of social services. As shown in figure 4, those three economies prohibit discrimination (either in a clause in the constitution, in their respective nondiscrimination laws, or in a specific law that regulates each of the social services) in access to health care, housing, electricity, water supply, microcredits, health insurance, and social pensions. The Protection Against Discrimination Act of Bulgaria and the Equal Treatment Act of the Netherlands also prohibit discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities and LGBTI communities in obtaining child benefits. Morocco and Vietnam prohibit discrimination against minorities in the provision of some but not all of those services. In Tanzania, where the indigenous pastoralists and hunter-gatherers have little access to basic public services—such as education, health care, and water (IWGIA 2015a, 86–88)—no relevant laws could be identified.<sup>71</sup> Figure 4: Does the Law Prohibit Discrimination against Ethnic and Religious Minorities and LGBTI Groups in Obtaining Social Protection Floors?

<!-- Start of picture text --> Health care<br>Social housing<br>Electricity<br>Water supply<br>Microcredits<br>Health insurance<br>Social pensions<br>Child benefits<br>Bulgaria Mexico Morocco Netherlands Tanzania Vietnam<br><!-- End of picture text --> _Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

_Note_ : Services listed are covered by the surveys; however, the list is not exhaustive, and the economies may have legal provisions prohibiting discrimination in obtaining other forms of social services. No relevant laws were found in Tanzania.

> 71 For a detailed analysis of Tanzania’s social protection framework, see ILO (2008).

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 24
The case of Mexico is particularly interesting. First, Mexico has a comprehensive constitutional framework that covers economic and social rights. Also, its Federal Law to Prevent and Eliminate Discrimination prohibits discrimination in obtaining those services for religious minorities, ethnic minorities, and LGBTI persons. In addition, Mexican laws on social security, health, housing, water, electricity, and financial services all contain an article that prohibits discrimination in the provision of the respective services.

In Morocco, the only relevant provision is Article 31 of the constitution, which guarantees equal access of its citizens to health care, housing, water supply, health insurance, and social pensions. Article 31 does not address equality in the provision of financial services, but the country has adopted a law on microcredits—Dahir 1-99-16 of 1999, modified by Dahir 1-04-12 of 2004—which provides for the disbursement of up to DH 50,000 to destitute people to help them either start a business for the production of goods or services, improve their housing conditions, or gain access to electricity and clean water.<sup>72</sup> Although the law does not refer specifically to minorities, many of the minorities are among the poorest in the country and are therefore covered by the law.<sup>73</sup> In Vietnam, the 2013 constitution includes some—but not all—of the social services covered by the study. In particular, the Vietnamese constitution regulates health care and health insurance (Articles 38 and 58), welfare, social security, and housing (Art. 59). Despite such constitutional protections, other national laws in Vietnam limit access to social services for ethnic minorities in the country. In particular, the _hộ khẩu_ , or system of household registration, represents a barrier to ethnic minorities, especially children, to obtaining access to education, health insurance, and other services<sup>74</sup> (see box 4).

# Box 4: Vietnamese Household Registration System

The _hộ khẩu_ , or system of household registration, was established by law in 1964 and stated that every citizen was to be registered as a resident in one and only one household at the place of permanent residence, and movements could take place only with the permission of authorities. Registration was linked to the provision of public services and employment. As shown in a recent World Bank Group report on Vietnam’s Household Registration System, although the system has become less rigid over time, concerns persist that _hộ khẩu_ limits the rights and access to public services of those who lack permanent registration. Incidentally, extremely few ethnic minorities are permanent registrants—just 1.8 percent of the overall permanent registrant population. (Nationally, ethnic minorities constitute approximately 14 percent of the population.) Ethnic minorities are a much larger fraction of temporary registrants. Children with temporary registration are substantially less likely to be enrolled in school at the lower and upper secondary levels, even after controlling for individual and household characteristics. Also, despite a national policy of free health insurance for children under age 6, one-quarter of temporary registrant children in that age group lack health insurance. Qualitative evidence indicates that this is due in part to their registration status. Some temporary registrants also face obstacles in designating a local facility as their health care location, which means that they pay higher fees for health care. Additionally, qualitative evidence suggests that policies on whether temporary registrants can qualify for social assistance are inconsistent. Temporary registrants are slightly less likely than comparable permanent registrants to appear on the “poor list,” but overall rates of appearing on the poor list and receiving most forms of social assistance are low (regardless of registration status) in areas where temporary registrants live. Temporary registrants also face difficulties in conducting basic government procedures such as registering a motorcycle.

Source: World Bank and Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences (2016)

> 72 Dahir 1-99-16 of February 5, 1999, promulgating the law 18-97 related to microcredit, http://81.192.52.100 /BO/Fr/1999/BO_4678_Fr.pdf; and Dahir 1-04-12 of April 21, 2004, promulgating the law 58-03 modifying and supplementing the law 18-97 related to microcredit, http://www.albaraka.ma/portail-des-administrateurs/wp-content/themes/albaraka/textes %20reglementaires/Dahir%20Loi%20microcr%C3%A9dit/Dahir%201-04-12.pdf.

> 73 World Bank 2011, 103.

> 74 World Bank and Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences 2016, XI.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 25
As shown previously, even when laws are neutral, minorities tend to have less access to property because of de facto discrimination by property managers and owners. As a consequence, minorities tend to depend more on public housing. Survey results in Bulgaria reveal that the government has created a policy to address the issue. The National Roma Integration Strategy aims to improve the living conditions of neighborhoods with a high density of Roma people and other ethnic minorities. The strategy inLGBT individuals are at particular risk of targeted violence at the hands of private actors. Homophobic and transphobic violence has been recorded in all regions. Such violence may be physical (including murder, beatings, kidnappings, rape, and sexual assault) or psychological (including threats, coercion, and arbitrary deprivations of liberty). (UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights 2012) cludes building public housing and undertaking other measures to increase the ability of Roma populations and other ethnic minorities to acquire public services and social protection floors, such as preventive maternal and child care, health services, health awareness and information, and health insurance for long-term unemployed persons.

In Morocco, Article 3 of the Associations Act, as amended in 2002, imposes indirect restrictions on the access to services for people belonging to religious minorities. According to that article, “An association that is founded for illegal purpose or goal contrary to the public morals or that may aim at violating the Islamic religion or the unity of the national soil or the royal regime or may call on all forms of discrimination will be invalid.”<sup>75</sup> Although Article 3 can be justified by the government’s need to restrict the operations of extremist religious groups, it is debatable whether such wide government discretion on the formation of religious associations in general is conducive to equal opportunity and the protection of religious freedom in the country.<sup>76</sup> Finally, public services and social protection can be enhanced by the work of NGOs locally. Data collection from the six economies revealed that none of them impose direct funding limitations to the work of NGOs. In Morocco and Tanzania, however, where homosexuality is criminalized, the law applies only to the work of NGOs dealing with the interest of ethnic and religious minorities but not the interests of sexual minorities. This situation can have some serious consequences for the LGBTI community. Despite having the fourth-highest number of deaths from AIDS in the world, Tanzania does not provide specialized HIV services to LGBTI individuals (Human Rights Watch 2013).

This survey of the laws on provision of public services and social protection in the six economies has shown that most countries acknowledge the importance of providing citizens basic access to public services and social protection, with some countries addressing discrimination in some but not all of the public services and social protection floors covered by the study. A notable exception on this topic is Tanzania, where the law is much less developed. In Vietnam, nondiscrimination provisions in obtaining public services are present, but indirect discrimination occurs as a consequence of other national laws that limit access of ethnic minorities in the country to certain public services.<sup>77</sup>

# _6. Protection from Hate Crimes or Hate Speech_

The indicator for protection from hate crimes or hate speech examines the existence of laws and mechanisms that prosecute hate crimes and laws that prosecute hate speech and provide protection for individuals belonging to ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities (see box 5). In addition to being a violation of the fundamental rights of every human being

> 75 International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, Morocco Act on the Right of Association, http://www.icnl.org/research/library/files /Morocco/Act-2002-en.pdf.

> 76 For example, see UNCERD (2010).

> 77 Worth mentioning is that the government of Vietnam has recently taken the initial steps toward an alternative system that could ultimately supplant the household registration system. Under the Law on Civil status, which came into effect at the beginning of 2016, the government is establishing a national population database and a citizen identification card with a citizen identification number linked to the database. The national database will hold basic information on each individual, including gender, ethnicity, and marital status. It will also include place of permanent registration and current residence. Public officials have described a gradual expansion of the system, with citizen identification cards linked to the national database largely replacing other administrative papers, such as the _hộ khẩu_ booklet. See World Bank and Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences 2016, http://documents.worldbank .org/curated/en/158711468188364218/pdf/106381-PUB-P132640-ADD-ISBN-ON-BACK-COVER-PUBLIC.pdf; See also World Bank and Ministry of Planning and Investment of Vietnam 2016, https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/23724 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 26
to life and security,<sup>78</sup> violence against minorities (in the case of hate crimes) affects the economic outcomes of individuals and of the country as a whole (Crehan and McCleary-Sills 2015, 6). Countries that criminalize homosexuality also have costs associated with police enforcement, judicial proceedings, and incarceration. In the particular case of transgender prisoners, for example, reports reveal that they are susceptible to abuse when they are placed within the general prison population, and avoiding the abuse increases the costs associated with the incarceration of those individuals (UNOHCHR 2012, 24). A recent World Bank study on the cost of discrimination against LGBT people in India estimates that the cost of violence against LGBT people in the country could be as high as US$30.8 billion (Badgett 2014).

Box 5: What Are Hate Crimes and Hate Speech?

Hate crimes are criminal acts motivated by bias or prejudice toward particular groups of people. To be considered a hate crime, the offense must meet two criteria: First, the act must constitute an offense under criminal law; second, the act must have been motivated by bias. Bias motivations can be broadly defined as preconceived negative opinions, stereotypical assumptions, intolerance or hatred directed to a particular group that shares a common characteristic, such as race, ethnicity, language, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, gender, or any other similar common factor.

Source: OSCE (2009) As shown in table 5, data gathered by the study show no uniformity among the pilot economies in confronting the issue of bias-motivated crimes. In general, three different approaches were found: (a) countries with specific legislation concerning hate crimes and laws concerning hate speech (Bulgaria); (b) countries with legislation regarding hate speech but no laws related to hate crimes (Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, and Vietnam); and (c) countries with no legislation regarding either hate crimes or hate speech (Tanzania). One good practice is found in Bulgaria’s criminal code, which contains specific provisions regarding bias-motivated crimes in Articles 162–165. Article 162(2) concerns “crimes against national and racial equality” and punishes anyone who “uses violence against another or damages his property because of his nationality, race, religion, or political convictions.” Table 5: Does the Law Criminalize Hate Crime or Hate Speech?

||Bulgaria|Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Hate crime|ü||||||
|Hate speech|ü|ü|ü|ü||ü|

_Source_ : World Bank Equality Project.

Mexico criminalizes hate speech but does not provide for autonomous hate crime legislation at the federal level. Article 138(VIII) of the Penal Code of Mexico City, however, considers “hate” an aggravating circumstance that augments the punishment of the “base crimes” of homicide and bodily harm or injuries. Interestingly, this code provides that “hate” includes the religious and ethnic origin of the victim, but it also expressly mentions sexual orientation and gender identity as characteristics that constitute a bias when committing the crimes of homicide or bodily harm or injuries.<sup>79</sup> The gender identity characteristic is not expressly mentioned in any of the penal codes of the other countries. In Morocco, the penal code criminalizes inciting hatred during sports events. Vietnam’s penal code does not regulate hate crimes, but it does prohibit hate speech as the action of “sowing hatred, ethnic bias and/or division, infringing upon the rights to 78 See Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which reads, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person.” 79 Criminal Code for the Federal District (2002), Art. 138, Para. VIII.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 27
equality among the community of Vietnamese nationalities.”<sup>80</sup> The Netherlands created a system of prosecutorial guidelines, called BOS/Polaris,<sup>81</sup> which require prosecutors to seek higher sentences when bias motivation is found in a crime. The implementation of those guidelines imposes increased penalties on the perpetrator if an element of hate is present in a crime. The target groups of bias crimes are defined on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion and faith, sexual orientation, and disabilities (Ringnalda and Kool 2012).

Finally, to assess whether the economy is committed to the implementation of the law, the indicator for protection from hate crime or hate speech assesses the existence of policies or other forms of enforcement mechanisms that mandate the training of the judiciary in hate crime legislation so judges can effectively address crimes motivated by ethnic, religious, and sexual orientation or gender identity bias. None of the economies surveyed in the study have such detailed provisions in their laws. Some notable results with regard to enforcement mechanisms were found in Bulgaria, however, where Articles 377–384 of the Judiciary System Act require government agencies to collect data on hate crimes and Articles 21– 22 of the Legal Aid Act guarantee free legal aid to the victims.

# VI. Conclusions

Findings from the six pilot economies seem to confirm anecdotal information regarding a correspondence between gaps in equality laws and policies and the economic marginalization of certain ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities. Ten main findings resulted from the data collection and analysis for the six indicators:

1. **All of the pilot economies have some laws addressing discrimination against minorities** . Some countries— Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands—have a comprehensive law that addresses discrimination on the basis of ethnic, religious, and sexual orientation grounds. Following a 2015 amendment, the Bulgarian law also covers discrimination on gender identity grounds. The other countries—Morocco, Tanzania, and Vietnam—have some form of legislation aimed at protecting ethnic and religious minorities but not sexual minorities, who are subject to criminal prosecution in Morocco and Tanzania.

2. Of the laws surveyed for the six indicators (access to institutions, access to education, access to the labor market, access to property, access to public good and social protection, protection from hate crimes and hate speech), **nondiscrimination legislation in access to the labor market is the most advanced.** In that area, all pilot economies have provisions in their labor codes that prohibit discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities in the workplace. In Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands, those provisions also cover sexual minorities. In all six economies, a claim can be filed for employment discrimination in both the public and the private sectors. Also, in Bulgaria, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Tanzania, the burden of proof (that is, proving that no discrimination occurred) is shifted to the employer, in line with recent international developments.<sup>82</sup> A recent amendment to the Vietnamese labor law includes a similar provision.

3. **Of the laws surveyed under the access to property indicator, the only de jure discrimination identified relates to indigenous lands** . That suggests that discrimination in this area is mostly de facto (that is, in practice) rather than de jure (that is, by law). It also suggests that wider government intervention is needed to prevent discrimination in this area.

4. **All pilot economies have adopted some enforcement mechanism for the implementation of existing nondiscrimination laws** . Bulgaria, Mexico, Morocco, the Netherlands, and Tanzania all have specialized agencies tasked with hearing complaints of discrimination. In Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands, such agencies hear complaints of discrimination on ethnic, religious, and sexual orientation grounds. In Tanzania the agency only hears complaints of discrimination on ethnic and religious grounds. In Morocco, the National Council for Human Rights addresses the rights of ethnic minorities but only if they are migrant workers. The country recently established a specialized agency to address other forms of discrimination, but that agency is not charged

> 80 Criminal Code (1999), Art. 87, Para. 1(b).

> 81 The guidelines were created to establish uniformity and standardize decision making with regard to the scale of punishment for crimes because similar crimes should be judged similarly.

> 82 International Labour Organization, Labour Legislation Guidelines, chapter VII, <u>http://www.ilo.org/legacy/english/dialogue/ifpdial/llg/noframes/ch7.htm#28.</u>

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 28
with hearing complaints. Vietnam does not have a similar institution, but the Council of Ethnic Minorities in the National Assembly has been instrumental in the adoption of various pro-ethnic minority laws.

5. **In all pilot economies, some good practices have been identified** . Among them are (a) the inclusion of transgender individuals in the Protection Against Discrimination Act of Bulgaria; (b) the training of individuals in the judiciary and the police under Mexico’s Federal Law to Prevent and Eliminate Discrimination; (c) the recognition of Tamazight as an official language in the new constitution of Morocco; (d) the Labor Market Discrimination Team established by the Dutch Action Plan against Labor Market Discrimination; (e) the recognition of ethnic minorities and the introduction of a special provision for their protection in Tanzania’s new draft constitution; and (f) the Vietnamese Education Act of 2005, which sets quotas for children belonging to ethnic minorities, allowing them to gain access to education.

6. **De jure discrimination can be direct** —such as Article 220 of the Moroccan penal code, which prohibits the proselytization of Sunni Malik Muslims by other sects and religions— **and indirect** —such as the Vietnamese household registration system, which limits Protestant minorities’ access to services by requiring a household registration booklet to obtain services that is often denied to those communities by local wardens.

7. At times, **discrimination is an unintended effect of liberal laws that were intended to promote freedom of choice** —such as in the Netherlands, where liberal laws in education have contributed to segregating Moroccan, Turkish, Surinamese, and Netherlands Antillean children to so-called black schools.

8. **Lack of protective legislation can also contribute to discrimination against certain groups** . For example, in Mexico, the lack of a law on free, prior, and informed consultation with indigenous peoples regarding development projects in their territories has limited their access to property.

9. **The absence of harmonization between pieces of national legislation can have the unintended consequence of affecting one group more than another** . For example, in Bulgaria, the equal access to services guaranteed by the Protection Against Discrimination Act is hampered by regulations that require a registered address—which Roma minorities often do not possess—for obtaining national identification documents.

10. **Of the three groups—ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities—the least protected under the law are sexual minorities** . In Bulgaria, Mexico, and the Netherlands, the laws protecting LGBTI communities from discrimination are slowly being developed, but more must be done in the realm of enforcement mechanisms. In Vietnam, homosexuality is not a crime, but same-sex couples are ineligible for the legal protections available to heterosexual couples. In Morocco and Tanzania, homosexuality is a crime, and sexual minorities are marginalized and denied even the most basic services, such as housing and health care.

A few general lessons can be drawn from this exercise. First, a worrisome dearth of systematic data exists in the field of nondiscrimination legislation disaggregated by ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation and gender identity. More research is needed to understand the problem, calculate the economic costs of marginalization, and conduct comparable cross-country analysis. In addition, the surveys must be revised to include questions that address other hidden forms of institutionalized discrimination, especially in the area of access to property.

The premise of this study is that legislation and policies that discriminate against ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities or lack of appropriate protective measures against discrimination has a reverse effect on the economy. The reasoning is that excluding otherwise productive members of society from the labor market and financial systems (through marginalization in institutions, education, property, public services, the labor market, and the criminal law) reduces the competitiveness of the economy and its potential revenues. Admittedly, a much wider pool of data is needed to prove this premise; however, what is clear is that people around the world are systematically discriminated against for reasons beyond their control. Also apparent is that countries with have adopted more inclusive laws and policies have seen improvements in their economies. That may be a coincidence—or maybe what is needed is a more critical look at legal frameworks, with the underlying premise that human dignity is not negotiable and that everyone deserves equal opportunities, irrespective of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 29
# Appendix A: Existing Legal Datasets on Nondiscrimination

|Database|Agency|Focus|How it differs from the World Bank<br>EqualityProject|
|---|---|---|---|
|Legislationonline|<br>Organization<br>for Security<br>and Co-<br>operation in<br>Europe<br>(OSCE)|Legislationonline is a free, online legislative<br>database created in 2002 to assist OSCE<br>participating states in bringing their legisla-<br>tion in line with relevant international hu-<br>man rights standards.<br>Includes legislation on nondiscrimination,<br>freedom of religion, citizenship, national<br>human rights institutions, and hate crimes.|Covers only OSCE countries and does<br>not cover issues related to education,<br>property, social services and social<br>protection, and the labor market (un-<br>less covered by the antidiscrimination<br>legislation). Does not allow for cross-<br>country comparison.|
|NATLEX|International<br>Labour Or-<br>ganization<br>(ILO)|NATLEX is a database of national labor,<br>social security, and related human rights<br>legislation. Includes legislation on nondis-<br>crimination in the labor market.|Covers only labor legislation and re-<br>lated human rights laws and not issues<br>related to institutions, education,<br>property, public goods, social protec-<br>tion, and hate crimes or hate speech.<br>Does not allow for cross-country<br>comparison.|
|NORMLEX|ILO|NORMLEX is a database of national labor<br>and social security laws, ratification infor-<br>mation, reporting requirements, and com-<br>ments of the ILO’s supervisory bodies.<br>Includes legislation on nondiscrimination in<br>the labor market and ratification of em-<br>ployment discrimination conventions.|<br>Covers only labor legislation and in-<br>ternational instruments and does not<br>cover issues related to institutions,<br>education, property, public goods, so-<br>cial protection, and hate crimes or<br>hate speech. Does not allow for cross-<br>country comparison.|
|General Surveys<br>(2012, 1996,<br>1986) of the<br>Committee of<br>Experts|ILO|The General Surveys are reports examin-<br>ing law and practice in a particular subject<br>area related to labor in member states that<br>have or have not ratified relevant ILO con-<br>ventions.<br>Includes legislation on nondiscrimination in<br>the labor market.|<br> <br>Covers only labor legislation and does<br>not cover issues related to institu-<br>tions, education, property, public<br>goods, social protection, and hate<br>crimes or hate speech. Does not allow<br>for cross-country comparison.|
|The OHCHR<br>antidiscrimina-<br>tion database|Office of the<br>High Com-<br>missioner for<br>Human Rights<br>(OHCHR)|<br>The database includes existing measures<br>and practices to combat address racism,<br>racial discrimination, xenophobia, and re-<br>lated intolerance at the international, re-<br>gional and national levels.|Does not cover issues related to insti-<br>tutions, education, property, public<br>goods, social protection, and hate<br>crime and hate speech (unless covered<br>by nondiscrimination legislation). Does<br>not allow for cross-country compari-<br>son.|
|Planipolis|United Na-<br>tions Educa-<br>tional,<br>Scientific and<br>Cultural Or-<br>ganization<br>(UNESCO)|The Planipolis database provides legisla-<br>tion, policies, and plans on education from<br>official sources of UNESCO member<br>states.|Does not cover issues related to insti-<br>tutions, labor market, property, public<br>goods, social protection, and hate<br>crime or hate speech. Does not allow<br>for cross-country comparison.|

30 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|The Internation-<br>al Bureau of Ed-<br>ucation (IBE)—<br>legal dataset|UNESCO|The IBE provides a country database that<br>includes profiles of education systems (in-<br>cluding laws and policies), a selection of<br>official reports from national education au-<br>thorities, information on national curricula,<br>and links to official information sources on<br>education (including Ministries of Educa-<br>tion).|Does not cover issues related to insti-<br>tutions, labor market, property, public<br>goods, social protection, and hate<br>crime or hate speech. Does not allow<br>for cross-country comparison.|
|---|---|---|---|
|European Equal-<br>ity Law Net-<br>work—Legal<br>Developments|European<br>Equality Law<br>Network|The network includes updates on legisla-<br>tive, policy, and case-law developments in<br>the field of nondiscrimination in the 35<br>states that participate in the network.|Does not cover non-European coun-<br>tries. Does not allow for cross-<br>country comparison.|
|WORLD Policy<br>Forum—Data<br>on Education|The WORLD<br>Policy Analy-<br>sis Center at<br>University of<br>California, Los<br>Angeles<br>(UCLA)|<br>The WORLD Policy Forum includes laws<br>and public policies in 191 countries cover-<br>ing poverty, discrimination, education,<br>health, child labor, child marriage, and pa-<br>rental care.|Does not cover institutions, property,<br>public goods, social protection, and<br>hate crime or hate speech.|
|Compendium of<br>blasphemy laws|Human Rights<br>First|Compendium of blasphemy laws covers<br>legislation that seeks to criminalize those<br>who insult or defame religions and related<br>legislation.<br>Includes legislation on freedom of religion<br>and discriminatory laws against religious<br>minorities.|Covers only religious minorities. Does<br>not cover other groups and does not<br>cover labor market, education, prop-<br>erty, public goods, social protections,<br>and hate speech and hate crimes.|
|Sexual Orienta-<br>tion Laws in the<br>World|International<br>Lesbian, Gay,<br>Bisexual,<br>Trans and In-<br>tersex Asso-<br>ciation (ILGA)|The Sexual Orientation Laws in the World<br>dataset includes criminalization, protection,<br>and recognition laws related to sexual mi-<br>norities.|<br>Covers only sexual minorities.|

31 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
# Appendix B: Contributors

This report was possible with the contribution of nearly 50 experts who answered the surveys and provided guidance with regard to local legislation in the six pilot countries. We greatly appreciate the time and effort they dedicated to the Equality Research Paper.

|Ms.|Yordanska Bekirska|Bulgarian Lawyers for Human Rights|Bulgaria|
|---|---|---|---|
|Ms.|Dilyana Giteva|Bulgarian Lawyers for Human Rights|Bulgaria|
|Ms.|<br>Miriana Ilcheva|Center for the Study of Democracy|Bulgaria|
|Mr.|Ilko Jordanov|Open Society Institute Sofia|Bulgaria|
|Ms.|Denitsa Lyubenova|LGBT Youth Association|Bulgaria|
|Ms.|Ilina Maltzeva|Boyanov & Co.|Bulgaria|
|Mr.|Dimitar Markov|Center for the Study of Democracy|Bulgaria|
|Mr.|<br>Hristo Peshev|2G consultants|Bulgaria|
|Ms.|Monika Pisankaneva|Bilitis Resource Center Foundation|Bulgaria|
|Ms.|Sayuri Shimoda|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Bulgaria|
|Mr.|Deyan Terziev|Boyanov & Co.|Bulgaria|
|Mr.|Simeon Vasilev|Gays and Lesbians Accepted in Society (GLAS)|Bulgaria|
|Ms.|Maria Yordanova|Center for the Study of Democracy|Bulgaria|
|Ms.|Andrea Melissa Alanis|Peña Mouret Abogados S.C.|Mexico|
|Ms.|Yenesenia Barberena|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Mexico|
|Ms.|Maria Jose Buccio|Peña Mouret Abogados S.C.|Mexico|
|Ms.|Fiona Coffee|Clifford Chance|Mexico|
|Ms.|Cinthia Aguilar Flores|Clifford Chance|Mexico|
|Ms.|Catherine Freeman|Clifford Chance|Mexico|
|Ms.|Ivonne Garza||Mexico|
|Ms.|Gladys Morales|Clínica de Justicia y Género Marisela Escobedo|Mexico|
|Mr.|<br>Luis Alberto Muñoz|Clínica de Justicia y Género Marisela Escobedo|Mexico|
|Ms.|Adriana Muro|Elementa Asesoria en Derechos Humanos|Mexico|
|Mr.|Gabriel Peña Mouret|Peña Mouret Abogados S.C.|Mexico|
|Mr.|Gizeh Polo|Clifford Chance|Mexico|
|Ms.|Lisseth Rincon|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Mexico|
|Ms.|Nora Robledo|Elementa Asesoria en Derechos Humanos|Mexico|
|Ms.|Catherine Romero|Elementa Asesoria en Derechos Humanos|Mexico|
|Mr.|<br>Arturo Sotelo|Oficina de Defensoría de los Derechos de la Infancia|Mexico|
|Ms.|Mariana Villanueva|Peña Mouret Abogados S.C.|Mexico|
|Ms.|Uttara Dukkipati|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Morocco|
|Mr.|Thomas Parigot|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Morocco|
|Ms.|Byambadulam Enkhbayar|Clifford Chance|Netherlands|
|Ms.|Natasha Fricker|Clifford Chance|Netherlands|
|Ms.|Jocelyn Huang|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Netherlands|
|Mr.|Folhino Telg||Netherlands|
|Ms.|Becky Wall|Clifford Chance|Netherlands|

32 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Ms.|Juliana Apopo|Clifford Chance|Tanzania|
|---|---|---|---|
|Ms.|Camilla Bunney|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Tanzania|
|Ms.|Jessica Gladstone|Clifford Chance|Tanzania|
|Ms.|Phoebe Richardson|Clifford Chance|Tanzania|
|Mr.|Kevin Smith|Clifford Chance|Tanzania|
|Mr.|Dang Duong Anh|Vietnam International Law Firm (VILAF)|Vietnam|
|Mr.|<br>Savas Manoussakis|Shearman & Sterling LLP|Vietnam|
|Mr.|<br>Hoang Anh Linh Nguyen|Vietnam International Law Firm (VILAF)|Vietnam|
|Ms.|<br>Yen Nguyen|ICS Center|Vietnam|
|Mr.|Tran Hanh Linh Pahm|Vietnam International Law Firm (VILAF)|Vietnam|
|Mr.|<br>Le Trung Vu|Vietnam International Law Firm (VILAF)|Vietnam|

33 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
# Appendix C: Country Data

# _Ethnic Minorities_

|INSTITUTIONS||Bulgaria||Mexico|Morocco||Netherlands|Tanzania||Vietnam|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|The Constitution and Nati<br>Under the Constitution:<br>|onal Leg<br>|islation<br>||||||<br>|||
|Is there a general nondis-<br>crimination clause?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para.<br>2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mexi-<br>canos (1917), Art. 1|No|Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Arts. 9(g),<br>13(1)(2)|Yes|Constitution of<br>Vietnam (2013),<br>Art. 5 Para. 2|
|If yes, does it explicitly<br>mention ethnic minorities?|<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para.<br>2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mexi-<br>canos (1917), Art. 1|N/A|Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Arts. 9(g),<br>13(1)(2)|Yes|Constitution of<br>Vietnam (2013),<br>Art. 5 Para. 2|
|Is there a provision that<br>guarantees equality before<br>the law?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Pa-<br>ras. 1,2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mexi-<br>canos (1917), Art. 4|Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 6|<br>Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Arts. 12,<br>13(1)|Yes|Constitution of<br>Vietnam (2013),<br>Art. 16 Para. 1|
|If yes, does it explicitly<br>mention ethnic minorities?|<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para.<br>2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mexi-<br>canos (1917), Art. 2 Para.<br>A Sec. III|No|Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 13(5)|No||
|Is customary law recog-<br>nized as a valid source of<br>law?|No||Yes.|<br>Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mexi-<br>canos (1917), Art. 2 Para.<br>A Sec. II|No|No||Yes<br>Judicature and Applica-<br>tion of Laws Act (1920),<br>Art. 11 (1)|No||
|If yes, is customary law<br>invalid if it violates provi-<br>sions on nondiscrimination<br>or equality?|<br>Not<br>appli-<br>cable<br>(N/A)||Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mexi-<br>canos (1917), Art. 2 Para.<br>A Sec. II|N/A|N/A||Yes<br>Judicature and Applica-<br>tion of Laws Act (1920),<br>Art. 11 (3)|N/A||
|Is there a provision that<br>guarantees the freedom of<br>ethnic minorities to ex-<br>press their cul-<br>ture/traditions or speak<br>their language?|<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Arts. 36, 54|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mexi-<br>canos (1917), Art. 2 Para.<br>A Sec. IV|Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 6|<br>No||No|Yes|Contitution of<br>Vietnam (2013),<br>Art. 5 Para. 3; Art.<br>42|
|Under National Legislation:|||||||||||
|Is there a specific law on<br>nondiscrimination?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act(2004)|Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliiminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003)|No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994)|No|No||

34 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|If yes, does it provide pro-<br>tection from discrimina-<br>tion on ethnic grounds?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliiminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 1 Sec.<br>III|N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 1(b) is the<br>most accurate answer<br>even though it does not<br>state the words_ethnic_or<br>_ethnicity_|N/A|N/A||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Are there any other laws<br>that protect ethnic minori-<br>ties from discrimination?<br>Political Rights|Yes|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Arts 162 Para.<br>1, 172 Para. 1<br>Labor Code<br>(1992), Art. 8<br>Para. 3<br>National Edu-<br>cation Act<br>(1991), Art. 4|Yes|Ley General de<br>Derechos Linguisti-<br>cos de los Pueblos<br>Indígenas (2003)<br>Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional para el<br>Desarrollo de los<br>Pueblos Indígenas<br>(2003)|<br>Yes<br>Code Pénal (1962),<br>Art. 431-1, Art. 431-2<br>Dahir n 1-79-186<br>portant publication du<br>Pacte international<br>relatif aux droits<br>économiques, sociaux<br>et culturels et du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits civils et poli-<br>tiques (1979), Art. 27|<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1881), Art<br>137|.<br>No|Yes|Criminal Code<br>(1999), Art. 3 Para.<br>2|
|Is there a provision that<br>guarantees freedom of<br>opinion and expression?|Yes|Constitution<br>of the Repub-<br>lic of Bulgaria<br>(1991) Art.|Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917) Arts. 6 7|Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 25|<br>Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 7|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 18|Yes|Constitution of<br>Vietnam (2013),<br>Art. 25|
|Do laws and/or regulations|relatingt|,<br>39 Para. 1<br>o anyof these categ|ories diffe|, ,<br>r between ethnic minoriti|es and the ethnic majority?||||||
|Obtaining citizenship?|No|Constitution<br>of the Repub-<br>lic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art.<br>25 Para. 1|No|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 30 Pa-<br>ra. A|No<br>Code de la nationalité<br>moracaine (1958), Art.<br>9|No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1<br>Netherlands Nationality<br>Act(2010), Art. 3|No<br>Tanzania Citizenship Act<br>(1995), Arts. 4–6|<br>No|Nationality Law<br>(2008), Art. 2 Para.<br>2|
|Registering birth?|No|Constitution<br>of the Repub-<br>lic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art.<br>25 Para. 3|No|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 4.|No<br>Loi n°37-99 relative à<br>l'état civil (2002), Art.<br>16|No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|No<br>Births and Deaths Regis-<br>tration Act (1920), Art.<br>11|No|Decree<br>158/2005/ND-CP<br>on Civil Status<br>Registration and<br>Management,<br>(2005), Artt. 13–16|
|Obtaining a passport?|No|Bulgarian Per-<br>sonal Docu-<br>ments Act<br>(1999), Art. 4<br>Para. 1|No|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 4<br>Reglamento de<br>Pasaportes y del<br>Documento de<br>Identidad y Viaje<br>(2011), Art. 14|<br>No<br>Décret n°2-08-310<br>instituant le passeport<br>biométrique (2008),<br>Art. 1|No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|No<br>Tanzania Passports and<br>Travel Documents Act<br>(2002), Art. 12|No|Decree No.<br>136/2007 ND-CP<br>17 on Vietnamese<br>Citizens' Exit and<br>Entry (2007), Art.<br>8|

35 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Obtaining an ID card?<br>Do laws and/or regulations<br>|No<br>relatingt<br>|Bulgarian Per-<br>sonal Docu-<br>ments Act<br>(1999), Art. 4<br>Para. 1<br>o freedom of move<br>|No<br>ment diffe<br>|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 4<br>r between ethnic minoritie<br>|No<br>Loi n° 35-06 (2007),<br>instituant la carte na-<br>tionale d'identité élec-<br>tronique, Art. 1<br>s and the ethnic majority?<br> <br>|No<br>|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1<br>|No<br>Registration and Identifi-<br>cation of Persons Act<br>(1986), Arts. 8, 9<br> <br>|No<br>Decree No.<br>05/1999/ND-CP 3<br>on the People's<br>Identity Card<br>(1999), Art. 3 Para<br>2 and 4<br> <br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|In moving within the coun-<br>try?|No|Constitution<br>of the Repub-<br>lic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art.<br>35|No|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 11|No<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc, Art. 24<br>Dahir n 19-68 portant<br>ratification et publication<br>de la convention interna-<br>tionale sur l'élimination<br>de toutes les formes de<br>discrimination raciale<br>(1969), Art. 5|<br>No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1<br>Directive 2004/38/EC of<br>the European Parliament<br>and of the Council (2004),<br>Art. 3|<br>No<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 17(1)|No<br>Constitution of<br>Vietnam (2013),<br>Art. 23|
|In leaving and returning to<br>the country?|No|Constitution<br>of the Repub-<br>lic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art.<br>35|No|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 11|No<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc, Art. 24<br>Dahir n 19-68 portant<br>ratification et publication<br>de la convention<br>internationale sur l'élimi-<br>nation de toutes les<br>formes de discrimination<br>raciale (1969), Art. 5|<br>No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1 Di-<br>rective 2004/38/EC of the<br>European Parliament and<br>of the Council, (2004),<br>Arts. 4, 5|No<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 17(1)|No<br>Contitution of<br>Vietnam (2013),<br>Art. 23|
|Are NGOs thatpromote t|he interes|ts of ethnic minoriti|es:|||||||
|Permitted under the law?|Yes|Bulgarian<br>Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities<br>Act (2000),<br>Art. 2 Paras.<br>1–2|Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 9<br>Ley Federal de Fo-<br>mento a las Ac-<br>tividades realizadas<br>por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5, Sec.<br>XIII|<br>Yes<br>Dahir 1-58-376 régle-<br>mentant le droit d'as-<br>sociation (1958), Art. 2|Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 8<br>Civil Code, Book 2 (1972),<br>Art. 2:285|Yes<br>Non-Governmental Or-<br>ganizations Act (2002),<br>Art. 2|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of<br>operation of non-<br>governmental or-<br>ganizations in<br>Vietnam, (2012),<br>Art. 3 Para. 1<br>Decree No. 30 on<br>social and charity<br>funds (2012), Art.<br>2|

36 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|If yes, are the NGOs sub-<br>ject to limitation by the<br>state on the basis of na-<br>tional security, public or-<br>der, morality, or other<br>grounds?<br>Representation in the Thre<br>Does the law:|Yes<br>e Branche|Bulgarian<br>Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities<br>Act (2000),<br>Art. 3 (2)<br>s of Government(|Yes<br>Legislative, Exe|Ley Federal de Fo-<br>mento a las Ac-<br>tividades realizadas<br>por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 30<br>cutive, andJudiciary)|<br> <br>Yes<br>Dahir 1-58-376 régle-<br>mentant le droit d'as-<br>sociation (1958), Art. 3|Yes|Civil Code, Book 2 (1972),<br>Art. 2:20|Yes<br>Non-Governmental Or-<br>ganizations Act (2002),<br>Art. 14(1)|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>12/2012/ND-CP on<br>registration and<br>management of<br>operation of non-<br>governmental or-<br>ganizations in<br>Vietnam, (2012),<br>Art. 4<br>Decree No. 30 on<br>social and charity<br>funds (2012), Art.<br>7.1|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Mandate quotas for ethnic<br>iii ili?|No||No||No|No||No|No|
|mnortes nparament||||||||||
|Does the lawprohibit an in|dividual b|elongingto a ethnic|minorityfrom|:||||||
|Holding ministerial posts?|No||No||No|No||No|No|
|Enforcement of Antidiscrim|ination La|ws and Policies||||||||
|Does the law:||||||||||
|Require the judiciary to<br>receive training on the<br>application of existing an-<br>tidiscrimination laws deal-<br>ing with ethnic minorities?|No||Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 20,<br>Para. XL, 34, Para.<br>IV|No|No||No|No|
|Require the police to re-<br>ceive training on the appli-<br>cation of existing<br>antidiscrimination laws<br>dealing with ethnic minori-<br>ties?|No||Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 20,<br>Para. XL, 34, Para.<br>IV<br>Ley General del<br>Sistema Nacional<br>de Seguridad Públi-<br>ca (2009), Art. 40,<br>Secs. I, IV|<br>No|No||No|No|

37 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Establish a specialized<br>body tasked with receiving<br>complaints for violations<br>of human rights (Human<br>Rights Committee, Om-<br>budsman, etc.)?|<br>Yes<br>Ombudsman<br>Act (2003),<br>Art. 2<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 40|Yes|Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los<br>Derechos Humanos<br>(1992), Art. 2:<br>Comisión Nacional<br>de los Derechos<br>Humanos<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 16:<br>Consejo Nacional<br>para Prevenir la<br>Discriminación (not<br>a general human<br>rights body, but<br>specialized in dis-<br>crimination)|<br>Yes|Dahir n 1-11-19<br>portant création du<br>Conseil national des<br>droits de l'Homme<br>(2011) Constitution<br>du Royaume du Maroc<br>(2011), Artt. 19, 161,<br>and 164|Yes<br>Institute for Human Rights<br>Act, Sec.1.<br>Institute for Human Rights<br>(formerly Equal Treatment<br>Commission)|<br>Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 129(1)<br>Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Gov-<br>ernance Act (2001), Art.<br>6(1)(b)|<br> <br>No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|If yes, does such body<br>hear complaints of ethnic<br>discrimination?|Yes<br>Ombudsman<br>Act (2003)<br>Art. 19 Para.<br>1<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>48 Para. 2|Yes|Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los<br>Derechos Humanos<br>(1992), Art. 3<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Arts. 1 Pa-<br>ra. III, 43|<br>No|Dahir n 1-11-19<br>portant création du<br>Conseil national des<br>droits de l'Homme<br>(2011), Artt. 1, 3, and 4|<br>Yes<br>Institute for Human Rights<br>Act (2011), Secs. 3(a),<br>10(1)|Yes<br>Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Gov-<br>ernance Act (2001),<br>Arts. 6(1)(b), 28(1)(c)|N/A|
|Is there a budget alloca-<br>tion for the operation of<br>such body/bodies?|Yes<br>Ombudsman<br>Act (2003),<br>Art. 7<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 40 Para.<br>3|<br>Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 102<br>Para. B<br>Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los<br>Derechos Humanos<br>(1992), Arts. 2, 75<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Disciminación<br>(2003), Art. 16 (re-<br>garding<br>CONAPRED, not<br>the Ombudsman)|<br>Yes|Dahir n 1-11-19<br>portant création du<br>Conseil national des<br>droits de l'Homme<br>(2011), Art. 55|Yes<br>The Ministry of Justice has<br>the main responsibility for<br>the Institute's budget. The<br>budget is regulated in the<br>Annual Budgets Act and<br>not in the Netherlands<br>Institute for Human Rights<br>Act.|Yes<br>Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Gov-<br>ernance Act (2001), Art.<br>29|<br>N/A|
|EDUCATION|Bulgaria||Mexico||Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Participation in Education|||||||||
|Does the law prohibit discr|imination in school admission|on ethni|c grounds in:||||||

38 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Primary education?|Yes|National Edu-<br>cation Act<br>(1991) Art. 4<br>Para. 2<br>|Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 3<br>Ley General de<br>Educación (1993),<br>Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9|<br> <br>Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31 Dahir n<br>19-68 portant ratification<br>et publication de la con-<br>vention internationale<br>sur l'élimination de<br>toutes les formes de<br>discrimination raciale(<br>1969), Art. 5 Dahir n 1-<br>79-186 portant publica-<br>tion du Pacte interna-<br>tional relatif aux droits<br>économiques, sociaux et<br>culturels et du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits civils et politiques<br>(1979), Art. 13|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7(1) (c).|Yes<br>Education Act (1978),<br>Art. 56(2)<br>Law of the Child Act<br>(2009), Art. 5(2), 8(2)|<br>Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11<br>on Education Law<br>(2005), Art. 10|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Secondary education?|Yes|National Edu-<br>cation Act<br>(1991) Art. 4<br>Para. 2<br>|Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 3<br>Ley General de<br>Educación (1993),<br>Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9|<br> <br>Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31 Dahir n 19-68<br>portant ratification et<br>publication de la con-<br>vention internationale<br>sur l'élimination de<br>toutes les formes de<br>discrimination raciale<br>(1969), Art. 5<br>Dahir n 1-79-186<br>portant publication du<br>Pacte international<br>relatif aux droits<br>économiques, sociaux<br>et culturels et du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits civils et politiques<br>(1979), Art. 13|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7(1) (c).|Yes<br>Education Act (1978),<br>Art. 56(2)<br>Law of the Child Act<br>(2009), Arts. 5(2), 8(2)|<br> <br>Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11<br>on Education Law<br>(2005), Art. 10|

39 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Tertiary education?|Yes|National Edu-<br>cation Act<br>(1991) Art. 4<br>Para. 2|Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 3<br>Ley General de<br>Educación (1993),<br>Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9|<br> <br>Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31 Dahir n 19-68<br>portant ratification et<br>publication de la con-<br>vention internationale<br>sur l'élimination de<br>toutes les formes de<br>discrimination raciale(<br>1969), Art. 5 Dahir<br>n 1-79-186 portant<br>publication du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits économiques,<br>sociaux et culturels et<br>du Pacte international<br>relatif aux droits civils<br>et politiques (1979),<br>|<br>Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7(1) (c).|Yes<br>Education Act (1978)|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11<br>on Education Law<br>(2005), Art. 10|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||||||Art. 13|||||
|Does the law prescribe q|uotas for indi|viduals belonging t|o ethnic|minorities in:||||||
|Primary education?|No||No||No|No||No|No|
|Secondary education?|No||No||No|No||No|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11<br>on Education Law<br>(2005), Art. 90<br>Para. 1|
|Tertiary education?|No||No||No|No||No|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11<br>on Education Law<br>(2005), Art. 90|
|FightingMarginalization i<br>Does the law mandate th|n Education<br>e adoption of|measures aimed a|t sensitiz|ingthe students to thepri|nciples of nondiscrimination and eq|ualityin|:||<br>Para. 1|
|Primary education?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 35 Paras.<br>1, 3<br>National Edu-<br>cation Act<br>(1991) Art. 15<br>Para. 2|<br>Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 3 Para.<br>4<br>Ley General de<br>Educación (1993),<br>Arts. 7, 8, 33|<br>No|Yes|Primary Education Act<br>(1981), Art. 46|No|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11<br>on Education Law<br>(2005), Arts. 5<br>Para. 1, 7 Para 2.|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 40
|Secondary education?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 35 Paras.<br>1, 3<br>National Edu-<br>cation Act<br>(1991), Art.<br>15 Para. 2|<br>Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 3 Para.<br>4<br>Ley General de<br>Educación (1993),<br>Arts. 7, 8, 33|<br>No|Yes|Secondary Education Act<br>(1963), Art. 42|No|Yes<br>Law No.<br>38/2005/QH11<br>Education<br>Law(2005), Arts.<br>5 Para. 1, 7 Para<br>2.|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Does the law:||||||||||
|Mandate the revision of<br>national textbooks in pri-<br>mary and secondary edu-<br>cation to eliminate<br>discriminatory language?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 35 Paras.<br>1, 3|Yes|Ley General de<br>Educación (1993),<br>Arts. 8, 12 Para. III|No|No||No|No|
|Mandate the training of<br>school teachers in primary<br>and secondary education<br>on antidiscrimination of<br>ethnic minorities?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 35 Paras.<br>1, 3|Yes|Ley General de<br>Educación (1993),<br>Arts. 8, 12 Para. III|No|No||No|No|
|LABOR|B|ulgaria||Mexico|Morocco||Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Equality in Accessing the La<br>Does the law:|bor Force|||||||||
|Prohibit individuals belong-<br>ing to ethnic minorities<br>from obtaining employ-<br>ment in specific sectors?|No|Labor Code<br>(1992) Art. 8<br>Para. 3<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 12|No|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>III.|No<br>Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 9, and Art.<br>478 Constitution du<br>Royaume du Maroc<br>(2011), Art. 31|No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 19 Para. 3.<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5(1)(b)|<br>No<br>Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 22 (1)<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act (2004),<br>Art. 7(1)|<br>No<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Art. 5<br>Para 1, Art. 8<br>Para. 1|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 41
|Prohibit discrimination on<br>ethnic grounds in recruit-<br>ment in the public sector?<br>Yes|Labor Code<br>(1992), Art. 8<br>Para. 3<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 12<br>Civil Servants<br>Act (1999),<br>Art. 7 Para. 6|<br>Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>III. Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Arts.3, 133|Yes|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 9, and Art.<br>478 Constitution du<br>Royaume du Maroc<br>(2011), Art. 31|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5(1)|Yes|Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 22 (2)<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act (2004),<br>Arts. 7(1), 7(4)(g)|<br>Yes|Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Art. 5<br>Para. 1<br>Decree No.<br>05/2011ND-CP<br>on Ethnic Minori-<br>ties Work, Art. 7<br>Para. 1<br>Decree No.<br>58/2010/QH12<br>Law on Public<br>Employees<br>(2010), Art. 21<br>Paras. 1, 5<br>Decree No.<br>22/2008QH12 on<br>Cadres and Civil<br>Servants (2008),<br>Art. 38 Paras. 1, 4|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Prohibit discrimination on<br>ethnic grounds in recruit-<br>ment in the private sector?<br>Yes|Labor Code<br>(1992), Art. 8<br>Para. 3<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 12 Para.<br>1|Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>III. Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Arts.3, 133|Yes|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 9, and Art.<br>478 Constitution du<br>Royaume du Maroc<br>(2011), Art. 31|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5(1).<br>The exception is Equal<br>Treatment Act (1994), Sec.<br>5(3)|<br> <br>Yes|Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Art. 7(4)(g)|Yes|Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Art. 8<br>Para. 1|
|Prohibit an employer from<br>asking about an individual’s<br>ethnicity during the re-<br>cruitment phase?<br>Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 12 Para.<br>1|No||No||No||No||No||
|Prescribe equal remunera-<br>tion for work of equal<br>value for individuals be-<br>longing to ethnic minori-<br>ties?<br>Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 14 Para.<br>1|Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 123<br>Para. VII<br>Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Art. 56|<br>Yes|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 9 and Art.<br>478.|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)(e), (h)|Yes|Constitution of the<br>United Republic of Tan-<br>zania (1977), Art. 23 (1)<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act (2004),<br>Art. 7(10)|<br>Yes|Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Arts. 5<br>Para. 1 (a), 8<br>Para. 1 , 90 Para.<br>3|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 42
|Prohibit discrimination on<br>ethnic grounds in the dis-<br>missal of employees?<br>Access to Remedy<br>Does the law allow an emp|Yes<br>loyee to|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Art. 172 Para.<br>1<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Arts. 20–21<br>bringa claim for emp|<br>Yes<br>loyment|Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Arts. 3, 133<br>discrimination on ethnicg|Yes<br>rounds:|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 9, Art. 36,<br>Para. 5|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 5(1), 8|Yes<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Arts. 7(4)(c), 37(3)(b)(iii)|<br>Yes|Law on Public<br>Employees, Art.<br>30, Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Art. 3<br>Para. 7, and 194<br>Para. 6|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|In the public sector?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Arts. 50, 71.|Yes|Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Arts. 2, 3, 133<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir la Dis-<br>criminación (2003),<br>Art. 43.|<br>Yes|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Arts.9, 41|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 10, 12 (2)|Yes<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Arts. 7(4)(c), 37(3).|Yes|Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Art. 8<br>Para. 1|
|If there is a law, does it<br>prohibit retaliation by the<br>employer for bringing a<br>complaint or participating<br>in any manner in an em-<br>ployment discrimination<br>proceeding?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Arts. 5, addi-<br>tional provi-<br>sions, Sec. 1<br>(3)|No|No provisions<br>could be located|Yes|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 36, Para. 4|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 8(a)|No<br>No provisions could be<br>located|No|No provisions<br>could be located|
|In the private sector?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Arts. 50, 71.|Yes|Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Arts.2, 3, 133.<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir la Dis-<br>criminación (2003),<br>Art. 43|<br>Yes|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Arts. 9, 41|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 10, 12 (2)|Yes<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Arts. 7(4)(c), 37(3).|Yes|Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Art. 3<br>Para. 7, and 194<br>Para. 6|
|If there is a law, does it<br>prohibit retaliation by the<br>employer for bringing a<br>complaint or participating<br>in any manner in an em-<br>ployment discrimination<br>proceeding?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Arts. 5, addi-<br>tional provi-<br>sions, Sec. 1<br>(3)|No|No provisions<br>could be located|Yes|Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 36, Para. 4|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 8(a)|No<br>No provisions could be<br>located|No|No provisions<br>could be located|
|Does the law:||||||||||||

43 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Shift the burden of proof<br>for antidiscrimination<br>claims from the employee<br>to the employer?|Yes<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 9|Yes|Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Art. 784|Yes<br>Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 63|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (1)|Yes<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Art. 7(8)(a)|<br>No<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code<br>(2012), Art. 192<br>Para. 2(a); Civil<br>Proceeding Code<br>(2012), Art. 79<br>Para. 1|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Allow class action lawsuits<br>for employment discrimi-<br>nation on ethnic grounds?|Yes<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 71 Paras.<br>2, 3<br>Civil Proce-<br>dure Code<br>(2007), Art.<br>379 Para. 1|<br>Yes|Ley Federal del<br>Trabajo (1970),<br>Art. 697|Yes<br>Code du Travail<br>(2011), Art. 549|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (2)|No|Yes<br>Civil Proceeding<br>Code (2012), Art.<br>31 Para. 2(a)|
|PROPERTY|Bulgaria||Mexico|Morocco||Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Access to Land<br>Do laws and/or regulations|relatingto anyof these trans|actions di|ffer between ethnic minor|ities and the ethnic majority?|||||
|Obtain a title of land (e.g.,<br>for the purposes of trans-<br>fer or sale)?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Lease land?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|License land?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Obtain a mortgage?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Inherit land?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Does the law allow indigen|ouspeoples:||||||||
|To demarcate and obtain a<br>communal or collective<br>title to property for their<br>territories and lands?|<br>No|Yes|Constitución Políti-<br>ca de los Estados<br>Unidos Mexicanos<br>(1917), Art. 27 Pa-<br>ra. VII<br>Ley Agraria (1992)|<br>No|No||No|Yes<br>Land Law (2013),<br>Art. 5.3|
|Contractual Capacity, Own<br>Do laws and/or regulations|ership and Private Businesses<br>relatingto anyof these trans|<br>actions di|,<br>Art. 106<br>ffer between ethnic minor|ities and the ethnic majority?|||||
|Sign a contract?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Register a company?|No|No||No|No||No|No|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 44
|Transfer a private busi-|No||No||No|No||No|No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|ness?||||||||||
|PUBLIC SERVICES AND<br>SOCIAL PROTECTION<br>Public Services Provided b<br>Does the lawprohibit disc|Bulgaria<br>ythe Gove<br>rimination|rnment<br>against individuals b|Mexico<br>elongingt|o ethnic minorities in acc|Morocco<br>essing:|Nethe|rlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Health care?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 37<br>Health Act<br>(2004), Art.<br>85|<br>Yes|Ley General de<br>Salud (1984), Art.<br>77 bis 36 Paras. VII,<br>XX<br>Ley del Seguro So-<br>cial (1995), Arts.<br>214–217, 238<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>XX|<br> <br>Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|<br>Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>40/2009/QH12<br>Law on Medical<br>Examination and<br>Treatment<br>(2009), Art. 9<br>Para. 1|
|Social housing?|Yes|Social Assis-<br>tance Act<br>(1998), Art. 3|Yes|Ley General de<br>Vivienda (2006),<br>Art. 3<br>Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>XXI|<br>Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|<br>Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|No|
|Electricity?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 37<br>Energy Act<br>(2003), Art.<br>31|<br>Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>XXII<br>Ley de la Industria<br>Electrica (2014),<br>Art. 50|<br>No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>28/2004/QH11<br>Electricity Law<br>(2004), Art. 4.2|
|Water supply?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 37|Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>XXII|Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|<br>Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>15/2012/L/CTN<br>Law on Water<br>Resources<br>(2012), Art. 3.<br>Para 5|
|Microcredits?|Yes|Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Art. 37|Yes|Ley para la Trans-<br>parencia y el Or-<br>denamiento de los<br>Servicios Financi-<br>eros (2007), Arts. 4<br>bis 3 Para. III, 17|Yes<br>Loi 18-97 relative au<br>micro-crédit (1999),<br>Art. 6|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(d)|No|No|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 45
|Subsidized health insur-<br>ance? ̊|Yes<br>Social Assis-<br>tance Act<br>(1998), Art. 3|Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>VII|<br>Yes<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31<br>|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>23/2008/L-CTN<br>Law on Health<br>Insurance (2009),<br>Art. 11 Para. 4|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Social pensions?|Yes<br>Social Assis-<br>tance Act<br>(1998), Art. 3|Yes|Ley Federal para<br>Prevenir y Eliminar<br>la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 9 Para.<br>XX|No<br>|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|No|
|Child benefits?<br>Public Services Provided<br>Does the law allow civil s|Yes<br>Constitution<br>of the Repub-<br>lic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6<br>Para. 2<br>Protection<br>Against Dis-<br>crimination<br>Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para.<br>1, 37<br>Social Assis-<br>tance Act<br>(1998), Art. 3<br>by Civil Society<br>ocietyorganizations(CSOs)to|<br>No<br> provide|social services specificallyt|No<br> <br>o individuals belongingto ethnic mi|Yes<br>noritie|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)<br>s including:|No|No|
|Vaccination?|Yes<br>Bulgarian<br>Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities<br>Act (2000),<br>Art. 38<br>Health Act<br>(2004), Art.<br>222|<br>Yes|Ley Federal de Fo-<br>mento a las Ac-<br>tividades realizadas<br>por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Pa-<br>ras. I, V, XI|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2<br>|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution of<br>the Kingdom of The Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 8|<br>Yes<br>Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicitly but<br>should be cov-<br>ered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-<br>CP on registra-<br>tion and man-<br>agement of<br>operation of non-<br>governmental<br>organizations in<br>Vietnam, (2012),<br>Art. 4|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 46
|Water?|Yes|Bulgarian<br>Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities<br>Act (2000),<br>Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fo-<br>mento a las Ac-<br>tividades realizadas<br>por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Pa-<br>ras. I, V, XI|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2<br>Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution of<br>the Kingdom of The Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|<br>Yes|Not explicitly but<br>should be cov-<br>ered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-<br>CP on registra-<br>tion and man-<br>agement of<br>operation of non-<br>governmental<br>organizations in<br>Vietnam, (2012),<br>Art. 4|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Sanitation?|Yes|Bulgarian<br>Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities<br>Act (2000),<br>Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fo-<br>mento a las Ac-<br>tividades realizadas<br>por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Pa-<br>ras. I, V, XI|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2<br>Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution of<br>the Kingdom of The Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|<br>Yes|Not explicitly but<br>should be cov-<br>ered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-<br>CP on registra-<br>tion and man-<br>agement of<br>operation of non-<br>governmental<br>organizations in<br>Vietnam, (2012),<br>Art. 4|
|Family Planning?|Yes|Bulgarian<br>Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities<br>Act (2000),<br>Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fo-<br>mento a las Ac-<br>tividades realizadas<br>por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Pa-<br>ras. I, V, XI|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2<br>Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution of<br>the Kingdom of The Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|<br>Yes|Not explicitly but<br>should be cov-<br>ered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-<br>CP on registra-<br>tion and man-<br>agement of<br>operation of non-<br>governmental<br>organizations in<br>Vietnam, (2012),<br>Art. 4|
|Does the law:|||||||||||
|Impose funding limita-<br>tions on CSOs on the<br>provision of such ser-<br>vices?<br>Taxation|No||No||No<br>No||No||No||
|Does the law:|||||||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 47
|Allow tax deductions<br>for donations to NGOs<br>that promote the inter-<br>ests of ethnic minori-<br>ties?|Yes|Bulgarian<br>Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities<br>Act (2000),<br>Art. 4<br>Corporate<br>Income Tax<br>Act (2006),<br>Art. 31|<br>Yes|Ley del Impuesto<br>sobre la Renta<br>(2013), Arts. 79|Yes<br>Loi n. 24-86 instituant<br>un impôt sur les socié-<br>tés (1986), Art. 7 Para.<br>9 (b)|Yes|Law on Giving Act, Geef-<br>wet (2012), Art. 8|Yes<br>Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by the In-<br>come Tax Act, (2004)<br>Art. 16(1)|<br>No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|HATE CRIMES AND<br>HATE SPEECH||Bulgaria||Mexico|Morocco||Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Hate Crimes Legislation<br>Does the law:||||||||||
|Criminalize hate<br>speech?|Yes|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Arts. 162<br>Para. 1|No|Codigo Penal Fed-<br>eral (1931), Art.<br>149 Ter refers to<br>the crime of "dis-<br>crimination"|Yes<br>Code Pénal (1962),<br>Art. 308-5 referring<br>only to incitement of<br>hate during sport<br>events.|Yes|Criminal Code (1881), Art.<br>137c|<br>No|Yes<br>Criminal Code<br>(1999), Art. 87<br>Para. 1(b)|
|Criminalize hate<br>crimes?|Yes|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Arts. 162–165|<br>No||No|No||No|No|
|If there is a law, does it<br>define hate crime as a<br>substantive offense?|Yes|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Art. 162|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|
|If there is a law, does it<br>define hate crime as an<br>aggravating circum-<br>stance?|Yes|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Art. 116.|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|
|If there is a law, does it<br>define ethnic identity as<br>a protected character-<br>istic?|Yes|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Art. 162|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|
|If there is a law, does it<br>protect property?|Yes|Criminal<br>Code (1968),<br>Art. 163|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|
|If there is a law, does it<br>extend to victims by<br>association?<br>Awareness Raising and T|No<br>raining o|n Hate Crimes|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|
|Does the law:||||||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 48
|Require government<br>agencies to collect data<br>on hate crimes commit-<br>ted on ethnicgrounds?|<br> <br> <br>Yes|Judiciary Sys-<br>tem Act<br>(2007), Arts.<br>377–384|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Does the law mandate t<br>|rainings of t<br>|he following professi|onals on recognizing<br>|and identifying hate crimes?<br>||||
|Paramedics?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Police officers?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Prosecutors?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Judges?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Social workers?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Other?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Services to Victims of H<br>Does the law mandate t|ate Crimes<br>heprovision|<br>of anyof the followi|ngservices to victim|s of hate crimes:||||
|Legal assistance (includ-<br>ing asylum applica-<br>tions)?|Yes|Legal Aid Act<br>(2005), Arts.<br>21, 22<br>Asylum and<br>Refugees Act<br>(2002), Art.<br>20|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Shelter/Housing?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Forensic or medical<br>examinations?|Yes|Law on Sup-<br>port and Fi-<br>nancial<br>Compensa-<br>tion to Crime<br>Victims<br>(2006), Art. 8|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 49
# _Religious Minorities_

|INSTITUTIONS<br>The Constitution and Nation<br>Under the Constitution:<br> <br>|Bulgaria<br>al Legislation<br>||Mexico<br> <br>|Morocco<br>|Netherlands<br>||Tanzania<br>|Vietnam<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Is there a state<br>religion?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 13 Para. 3|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Arts.<br>24, 40, 130<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 3|No|No|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 3 (1)|No|
|Is there a provision<br>that guarantees the<br>freedom of belief<br>and religion?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 37 Para. 1|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>24<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 3|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 6<br>Para. 1|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 19 (1)|Yes<br>Constitution of Vietnam<br>(2013), Art. 24|
|Is there a general<br>nondiscrimination<br>clause?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>1<br>No||Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Arts. 9(g),<br>13(1)(2)|Yes<br>Constitution of Vietnam<br>(2013), Art. 16 Para. 2|
|If yes, does it ex-<br>plicitly mention<br>religious minori-<br>ties?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>1<br>N/A||Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Arts. 9(g), 13(5)|No|
|Is there a provision<br>that guarantees<br>equality before the<br>law?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Paras. 1,<br>2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>4<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 6|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Arts. 12, 13(1)|Yes<br>Constitution of Vietnam<br>(2013), Art. 16 Para. 1|
|If yes, does it ex-<br>plicitly mention<br>religious minori-<br>ties?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Paras. 1,2|No|No||Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 13(5)|No|
|Is customary law<br>recognized as a<br>valid source of law?<br>No||Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>2 Para. A Sec. II<br>No||No|Yes|Judicature and Applica-<br>tion of Laws Act (1920),<br>Art. 11 (1)|No|
|If yes, is customary<br>law invalid if it vio-<br>lates provisions on<br>nondiscrimination<br>or equality?<br>Not<br>applica-<br>ble<br>(N/A)||Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>2 Para. A Sec. II<br>N/A||N/A|Yes|Judicature and Applica-<br>tion of Laws Act (1920),<br>Art. 11 (3)|N/A|
|Is personal law<br>recognized as a<br>valid source of law?<br>No||No|No||No|No||No|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 50
|If yes, is personal<br>law invalid if it vio-<br>lates provisions on<br>nondiscrimination<br> <br>N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|or equality?|||||||||
|Under National Legislation:|||||||||
|Is there a law on<br>nondiscrimination?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004)|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación(2003)<br>No||Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994)|No||No|
|If yes, does it pro-<br>vide protection<br>from discrimina-<br>tion on religious<br>grounds?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>1 Sec. III<br>N/A||Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 1(b)|N/A||N/A|
|Are there any oth-<br>er laws that pro-<br>tect religious<br>minorities from<br>discrimination?<br>Yes<br>Political Rights|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Arts 162 Para 1, 172<br>Para. 1<br>Labor Code (1992),<br>Art. 8 Para. 3<br>National Education Act<br>(1991), Art 4.<br>Religious Denomina-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 4<br>Para. 4|<br> <br>Yes|Ley de Asociaciones<br>Religiosas y Culto Públi-<br>co (1992)<br>Yes|Penal Code (1962), Art.<br>431-1, Art 431-2<br>Dahir n 1-79-186<br>portant publication du<br>Pacte international<br>relatif aux droits<br>économiques, sociaux et<br>culturels et du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits civils et politiques<br>(1979), Art. 27|Yes<br>Criminal Code (1881),<br>Art. 137|No||Yes<br>Ordinance No. 21/2004<br>(2004) on Belief and<br>Religion, Art. 1<br>Decree 92/2012/ND-CP<br>(2012) on detailed regu-<br>lations and enforcement<br>measures|
|Is there a provision<br>that guarantees<br>freedom of opinion<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 39 Para. 1|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Arts.<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 25|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 7|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 18|Yes<br>Constitution of Vietnam<br>(2013), Art. 25|
|and exression?|||6 7||||||
|p <br>Do laws and/or regulations|relatingto anyof these cate|gories|,<br>differ between religious minorities|and the majority?|||||
|Obtaining citizen-<br>ship?<br>No|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 25 Para. 1|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>30 Para. A<br>No|Code de la nationalité<br>moracaine (1958), Art. 9|No<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1<br>Netherlands Nationality<br>Act(2010), Art. 3|<br> <br>No|Tanzania Citizenship Act<br>(1995), Arts. 4–6|No<br>Nationality Law (2008),<br>Art. 2 Para. 2|
|Registering birth?<br>No|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 25 Para. 3|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>4.<br>No|Loi n°37-99 relative à<br>l'état civil (2002), Art. 16|<br>No<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1|<br>No|Births and Deaths Regis-<br>tration Act (1920), Art.<br>11|No<br>Decree 158/2005/ND-<br>CP on Civil Status Reg-<br>istration and Manage-<br>ment (2005), Artt. 13–<br>16|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 51
|Obtaining a pass-<br>port?|No|Bulgarian Personal<br>Documents Act (1999),<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>4. Reglamento de<br>Pasaportes y del Docu-<br>mento de Identidad y<br>Viaje(2011), Art. 14<br>No|Décret n°2-08-310 in-<br>stituant le passeport<br>biométrique (2008), Art.<br>1|No<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1|<br>No|Tanzania Passports and<br>Travel Documents Act<br>(2002), Art. 12|No<br>Decree No. 136/2007<br>ND-CP 17 on Vietnam-<br>ese Citizens' Exit and<br>Entry (2007), Art. 8|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Obtaining an ID<br>card?|No|Bulgarian Personal<br>Documents Act (1999),<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>4<br>No|Loi n° 35-06 (2007) in-<br>stituant la carte natio-<br>nale d'identité<br>électronique, Art. 1|No<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1|<br>No|Registration and Identifi-<br>catino of Persons Act<br>(1986), Arts. 8, 9|No<br>Decree No.<br>05/1999/ND-CP 3 on<br>the People's Identity<br>Card (1999), Artt. 3|
||||||||||<br>Para. 2 and 4|
|Do laws and/or re|gulations|relatingto freedom of mov|ement|differ between religious minorities|and the majority?|||||
|In moving within<br>the country?|No|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 35|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>11<br>No|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc, Art. 24<br>Dahir n 19-68 portant<br>ratification et publication<br>de la convention<br>internationale sur l'élim-<br>ination de toutes les<br>formes de discrimination<br>raciale( 1969), Art. 5<br>Para. d.1|<br> <br> <br>No<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1<br>Directive 2004/38/EC<br>of the European Parlia-<br>ment and of the Coun-<br>cil (2004), Art. 3|<br>No|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 17(1)|No<br>Contitution of Vietnam<br>(2013), Art. 23|
|In leaving and re-<br>turning to the<br>country?|No|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 35|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>11<br>No|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art 5. Para. d.1|No<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 1<br>Directive 2004/38/EC<br>of the European Parlia-<br>ment and of the Coun-<br>cil(2004)Arts 4 5|<br>No|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 17(1)|No<br>Contitution of Vietnam<br>(2013), Art. 23|
|Are NGOs thatpr|omote t|he interests of religious min|orities:|||, . ,||||
|Permitted under<br>the law?|Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 2 Paras. 1–<br>2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>9 Ley Federal de<br>Fomento a las Activida-<br>des realizadas por Or-<br>ganizaciones de la<br>Sociedad Civil (2004),<br>Art. 5, Sec. XIII<br>Yes|Dahir 1-58-376 régle-<br>mentant le droit d'asso-<br>ciation (1958), Art. 2|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 8<br>Civil Code, Book 2<br>(1972), Art. 2:285|<br>Yes|Non-Governmental Or-<br>ganizations Act (2002),<br>Art. 2|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>12/2012/ND-CP on reg-<br>istration and manage-<br>ment of operation of<br>nongovernmental organ-<br>izations in Vietnam,<br>(2012), Art. 3 Para. 1<br>Decree No. 30 on so-<br>cial and charity funds<br>(2012), Art. 2|
|If yes, are the<br>NGOs subject to<br>limitation by the<br>state on the basis<br>of national securi-<br>ty,public order,|Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 3 (2)|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades real-<br>izadas por Organi-<br>zaciones de la Sociedad<br>Civil (2004), Art. 30<br>Yes|Dahir 1-58-376 régle-<br>mentant le droit d'asso-<br>ciation (1958), Art. 3|Yes<br>Civil Code, Book 2<br>(1972), Art. 2:20|Yes|Non-Governmental Or-<br>ganizations Act (2002),<br>Art. 14(1)|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>12/2012/ND-CP on reg-<br>istration and manage-<br>ment of operation of<br>nongovernmental organ-<br>izations in Vietnam,|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 52
|morality, or other<br>grounds?<br>Representation in the Three Branches of Government(Legislative, Executive, andJudiciary)<br>Does the law:|||(2012), Art. 4<br>Decree No. 30 on so-<br>cial and charity funds<br>(2012), Art. 7.1|
|---|---|---|---|
|Mandate quotas<br>for religious mi-<br>norities in parlia-<br>ment?<br>No<br>No<br>No|No|No|No|
|Does the lawprohibit an individual belongingto a religious minorityfrom:||||
|Holding ministerial<br> <br>No<br>No<br>No|No|No|No|
|posts?||||
|Enforcement of Antidiscrimination Laws and Policies||||
|Does the law:||||
|Require the judici-<br>ary to receive<br>training in the ap-<br>plication of existing<br>antidiscrimination<br>laws dealing with<br>religious minori-<br>ties?<br>No<br>Yes<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>20, Para. XL, 34, Para.<br>IV<br>No|No|No|No|
|Require the police<br>to receive training<br>in the application<br>of existing antidis-<br>crimination laws<br>dealing with reli-<br>gious minorities?<br>No<br>Yes<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>20, Para. XL, 34, Para.<br>IV<br>Ley General del Sistema<br>Nacional de Seguridad<br>Pública (2009), Art. 40,<br>Secs. I, IV<br>No|No|No|No|

53 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Establish a special-<br>ized body tasked<br>with receiving<br>complaints for vio-<br>lations of human<br>rights (Human<br>Rights Committee,<br>Ombudsman, etc.)?<br>Yes|Ombudsman Act<br>(2003),<br>Art. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 40|Yes<br>Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los<br>Derechos Humanos<br>(1992), Art. 2: Comisión<br>Nacional de los<br>Derechos Humanos.<br>ALSO,<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminacio (2003), Art.<br>16: Consejo Nacional<br>para Prevenir la Dis-<br>criminación (not a gen-<br>eral human rights body,<br>but specialized in dis-<br>crimination)<br>Yes|Dahir n 1-11-19 portant<br>création du Conseil na-<br>tional des droits de<br>l'Homme (2011)<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Artt. 19, 161, and 164|Yes|Institute for Human<br>Rights Act, Sec. 1<br>Institute for Human<br>Rights (formerly Equal<br>Treatment Commis-<br>sion)|<br> <br>Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 129(1)<br>Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Gov-<br>ernance Act (2001), Art.<br>6(1)(b)|No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|If yes, does such<br>body hear com-<br>plaints of religious<br>discrimination?<br>Yes|Ombudsman Act<br>(2003)<br>Art. 19 Para. 1<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 48 Para. 2|Yes<br>Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los<br>Derechos Humanos<br>(1992), Art. 3<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003),<br>Arts. 1, Para. III, 43<br>No|Dahir n 1-11-19 portant<br>création du Conseil na-<br>tional des droits de<br>l'Homme (2011), Artt. 1,<br>3, and 4|Yes|Institute for Human<br>Rights Act (2011), Secs.<br>3(a), 10(1)|Yes|Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Gov-<br>ernance Act (2001), Arts.<br>6(1)(b), 28(1)(c)|<br>N/A|
|Is there a budget<br>allocation for the<br>operation of such<br>body/bodies?<br>Yes|Ombudsman Act<br>(2003),<br>Art. 7<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 40 Para. 3|<br>Yes<br>Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>102 Para. B<br>Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los<br>Derechos Humanos<br>(1992), Arts. 2, 7<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Disci-<br>minación (2003), Art. 16<br>(regarding CONAPRED,<br>not the Ombudsman)<br>Yes|Dahir n 1-11-19 portant<br>création du Conseil na-<br>tional des droits de<br>l'Homme (2011), Art. 55|Yes|The Ministry of Justice<br>has the main responsi-<br>bility for the Institute's<br>budget. The budget is<br>regulated in the Annual<br>Budgets Act and not in<br>the Netherlands Insti-<br>tute for Human Rights<br>Act.|Yes|Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Gov-<br>ernance Act (2001), Art.<br>29|N/A|
|LABOR|Bulgaria|Mexico|Morocco||Netherlands||Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Equalityin Accessingthe La<br>Does the law:|bor Force||||||||
|Prohibit individuals<br>belonging to reli-<br>gious minorities<br>from obtaining<br>employment in<br>specific sectors?<br>No|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 4|No<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III<br>No|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9 and Art. 478<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|No|Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 19<br>Para. 3<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)(b)|<br>No|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 22 (1)<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act (2004), Art.<br>7(1)|<br> <br>No<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 5 Pa-<br>ra. 1, Art. 8 Para. 1|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 54
|Prohibit discrimi-<br>nation on religious<br>grounds in re-<br>cruitment in the<br>public sector?|Yes|Labor Code (1992) Art.<br>8 Para. 3<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 12<br>Civil Servants Act<br>(1999), Art. 7 Para. 6|<br> <br>Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III<br>Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 3, 133<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9 and Art. 478<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|<br>Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 22 (2)<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act (2004),<br>Arts. 7(1), 7(4)(g)|<br>Yes<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 5 Pa-<br>ra. 1<br>Law on Public Employ-<br>ees, (2010) Art. 21 Pa-<br>ras. 1, 5<br>Decree No.<br>22/2008QH12 on Ca-<br>dres and Civil Servants<br>(2008), Art. 38 Paras. 1,<br>4|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Prohibit discrimi-<br>nation on religious<br>grounds in re-<br>cruitment in the<br>private sector?|Yes|Labor Code (1992) Art.<br>8 Para. 3<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 12 Para. 1|<br>Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III<br>Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 3, 133<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9 and Art. 478<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|<br>Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)<br>The exception is Equal<br>Treatment Act (1994),<br>Sec. 5 (3)|<br>Yes|Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Art. 7(4)(g)|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 8 Pa-<br>ra. 1|
|Prohibit an em-<br>ployer from asking<br>about an individu-<br>al’s religion during<br>the recruitment<br>phase?|Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 12 Para. 1|No|No||No|No||No|
|Prescribe equal<br>remuneration for<br>work of equal val-<br>ue for individuals<br>belonging to reli-<br>gious minorities?|Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 14 Para. 1|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>123 Para. VII<br>Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 56<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9 and Art. 478|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)(e), (h)|<br>Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 23 (1)<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Art. 7(10)|<br>Yes<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Arts. 5<br>Para. 1 (a), 8 Para. 1, 90<br>Para. 3<br>Ordinance No. 21/2004<br>(2004) on Belief and<br>Religion, Art. 8 Para. 1|
|Prohibit discrimi-<br>nation on religious<br>grounds in the<br>dismissal of em-|Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Art. 172 Para. 1<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),|<br>Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 3, 133<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9, Art. 36, Para. 5|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 5 (1), 8|Yes|Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Arts. 7(4)(g), 37(3)(b)(iii)|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 8 Pa-<br>ra. 1|
|loees?||<br>Arts 20–21||||||||
|py <br>Access to Remedy<br>Does the law allow|an emp|.<br>loyee to bringa claim for em|ploym|ent discrimination on religiousgrou|nds?|||||
|In the public sec-<br>tor?|Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 50, 71|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 43<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Arts. 9, 41|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 10, 12 (2)|Yes|Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Arts. 7(4)(g), 37(3)|Yes<br>Law on Public Employ-<br>ees, Art. 30, Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13<br>Labor Code (2012), Art.<br>3 Para. 7, and 194 Para.<br>6|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 55
|If there is a law,<br>does it prohibit<br>retaliation by the<br>employer for<br>bringing a com-<br>plaint or participat-<br>ing in any manner<br>in an employment<br>discrimination pro-<br>ceeding?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 5, additional pro-<br>visions, Sec. 1 (3)|No|No provisions could be<br>located<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 36, Para. 4|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 8(a)|No|No provisions could be<br>located|No<br>No provisions could be<br>located|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|In the private sec-<br>tor?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 50 (administrative<br>protection)<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 71 (judicial protec-<br>tion)|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 43<br>No|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Arts. 9, 41|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 10, 12 (2)|Yes|Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004),<br>Arts. 7(4)(g), 37(3)|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 3 Pa-<br>ra. 7, and 194 Para. 6|
|If there is a law,<br>does it prohibit<br>retaliation by the<br>employer for<br>bringing a com-<br>plaint or participat-<br>ing in any manner<br>in an employment<br>discrimination pro-<br>ceeding?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 5, additional pro-<br>visions, Sec. 1 (3)|No|No provisions could be<br>located<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 36, Para. 4|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 8(a)|No|No provisions could be<br>located|No<br>No provisions could be<br>located|
|Does the law:|||||||||
|Shift the burden of<br>proof for antidis-<br>crimination claims<br>from the employee<br>to the employer?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 9|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 784<br>No||Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (1)|Yes|Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act (2004), Art.<br>7(8)(a)|<br>No<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 192<br>Para. 2(a)<br>Civil Proceeding Code<br>(2012), Art. 79 Para. 1|
|Allow class action<br>lawsuits for em-<br>ployment discrimi-<br>nation on religious<br>grounds?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 71 Paras. 2, 3<br>Civil Procedure Code<br>(2007), Art. 379 Para. 1|<br>Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 697<br>Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 549|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (2)|No||Yes<br>Civil Proceeding Code<br>(2012), Art. 31 Para. 2<br>(a)|
|EDUCATION|Bulgaria||Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands||Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Participation in Education|||||||||
|Does the lawprohibit discri|mination in school admissio|n on r|eligiousgrounds in:||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 56
|Primary education?<br>Yes|National Education Act<br>(1991), Art. 4 Para. 2<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>3<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31 Dahir n<br>19-68 portant ratifica-<br>tion et publication de la<br>convention internatio-<br>nale sur l'élimination de<br>toutes les formes de<br>discrimination raciale<br>(1969), Art. 5<br>Dahir n 1-79-186<br>portant publication du<br>Pacte international<br>relatif aux droits<br>économiques, sociaux et<br>culturels et du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits civils et politiques<br>(1979), Art. 13|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7 (1)(c)<br>Primary Education Act<br>(1981), Art. 46 Para. 2|Yes|Education Act (1978),<br>Art. 56(2)<br>Law of the Child Act<br>(2009), Art. 5(2), 8(2)|<br>Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11 on Edu-<br>cation Law (2005), Art.<br>10|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Secondary educa-<br>tion?<br>Yes|National Education Act<br>(1991), Art. 4 Para. 2<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>3<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31 Dahir n<br>19-68 portant ratifica-<br>tion et publication de la<br>convention internatio-<br>nale sur l'élimination de<br>toutes les formes de<br>discrimination raciale(<br>1969), Art. 5<br>Dahir n 1-79-186<br>portant publication du<br>Pacte international<br>relatif aux droits<br>économiques, sociaux et<br>culturels et du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits civils et politiques<br>(1979), Art. 13|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7 (1)(c)<br>Secondary Education<br>Act (1963), Art. 42<br>Para. 2|Yes|Education Act (1978),<br>Art. 56(2)<br>Law of the Child Act<br>(2009), Art. 5(2), 8(2)|<br>Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11 on Edu-<br>cation Law (2005), Art.<br>10|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 57
|Tertiary education?<br>Yes<br>Does the lawprescribequo|Higher Education Act<br>(1995), Art. 4<br>tas for individuals belonging|Yes<br>to reli|Constitución Políticade<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>3<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9<br>Yes<br> gious minorities in:|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31 Dahir n<br>19-68 portant ratifica-<br>tion et publication de la<br>convention internatio-<br>nale sur l'élimination de<br>toutes les formes de<br>discrimination raciale(<br>1969), Art. 5<br>Dahir n 1-79-186<br>portant publication du<br>Pacte international<br>relatif aux droits<br>économiques, sociaux et<br>culturels et du Pacte<br>international relatif aux<br>droits civils et politiques<br>(1979), Art. 13|<br> <br>Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7 (1)(c)|Yes|Education Act (1978),<br>Art. 56(2)|<br>Yes<br>Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11 on Edu-<br>cation Law (2005), Art.<br>10|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Primary education?<br>No||No|No||No|No||No|
|Secondary educa-<br>tion?<br>No||No|No||No|No||No|
|Tertiary education?<br>No||No|No||No|No||No|
|<br> <br>FightingMarginalization in E<br>Does the law mandate the|ducation<br>adoption of measures aimed|<br>at sen|<br>sitizingthe students to theprinciple|s of nondiscrimination and|<br>equalityin:||||
|Primary education?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 35 Paras. 1, 3<br>National Education Act<br>(1991) Art. 15 Para. 2|<br> <br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>3 Para. 4<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Arts. 7,<br>8, 33<br>No||Yes<br>Primary Education Act<br>(1981), Art. 46|No||No|
|Secondary educa-<br>tion?<br>Yes<br>Does the law:|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 35 Paras 1, 3.<br>National Education Act<br>(1991), Art. 15 Para. 2|<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>3 Para. 4<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Arts. 7,<br>8, 33<br>No||Yes<br>Secondary Education<br>Act (1963), Art. 42|No||No|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 58
|Mandate the revi-<br>sion of national<br>textbooks in pri-<br>mary and second-<br>ary education to<br>eliminate discrimi-<br>natorylanguage?<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art 35 Paras. 1, 3|Yes|Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Arts. 8,<br>12 Para. III<br>No||No|No||No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Mandate the train-<br>ing of school<br>teachers in primary<br>and secondary<br>education on anti-<br>discrimination of<br>religious minori-<br>Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art 35 Paras. 1, 3|Yes|Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Arts. 8,<br>12 Para. III<br>No||No|No||No|
|ties?<br>Does the law allow individu|als belongingto religious m|inoritie|s to show signs of religious affiliatio|n in:|||||
|Primary education?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art 37 Para. 1<br>Religious Denomina-<br>tions Act (2002), Arts.<br>5, 6|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>24<br>Ley de Asociaciones<br>Religiosas y Culto Públi-<br>co(1992), Arts. 1, 2<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 3|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 23<br>Para. 3|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania,<br>Art. 19|No|
|Secondary educa-<br>tion?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 37 Para. 1<br>Religious Denomina-<br>tions Act (2002), Arts.<br>5, 6|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>24<br>Ley de Asociaciones<br>Religiosas y Culto Públi-<br>co(1992), Arts. 1, 2<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 3|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 23<br>Para. 3|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania,<br>Art. 19|No|
|Tertiary education?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 37 Para. 1<br>Religious Denomina-<br>tions Act (2002), Arts.<br>5, 6|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos<br>Mexicanos (1917), Art.<br>24<br>Ley de Asociaciones<br>Religiosas y Culto Públi-<br>co(1992), Arts. 1, 2<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 3|Yes<br>Constitution of the<br>Kingdom of the Neth-<br>erlands (2008), Art. 23<br>Para. 3|Yes|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania,<br>Art. 19|Yes<br>Constitution of Vietnam<br>(2013), Art. 24|
|PROPERTY|Bulgaria||Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands||Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Access to Land<br>Do laws and/or regulations|relatingto anyof these tran|saction|s differ between religious minoritie|s and the majority?|||||
|Obtain a title of<br>land (e.g., for the<br>purposes of trans-<br>fer or sale)?<br>No||No|No||No|No||No|
|Lease land?<br>No||No|No||No|No||No|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 59
|License land?|No||No|No||No|No||No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Obtain a mort-<br>gage?|No||No|No||No|No||No|
|Inherit land?|No||No|Yes|Loi n°70-03 portant<br>Code de la Famille|No|No||No|
|Contractual Capac<br>Do laws and/or re|ity, Own<br>gulations|ershipand Private Businesse<br>relatingto anyof these tran|s<br>saction|s differ between religious minoritie|<br>(2004), Art. 2<br>s and the majority?|||||
|Sign a contract?|No||No|No||No|No||No|
|Register a compa-<br>ny?|No||No|No||No|No||No|
|Transfer a private|No||No|No||No|No||No|
|business?||||||||||
|PUBLIC SERVICES<br>||Bulgaria||Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands||Tanzania|Vietnam|
|AND SOCIAL<br>PROTECTION<br>Public Services Pro<br>Does the lawproh|vided by<br>ibit discr|the Government<br>imination against individuals|belong|ingto religious minorities in accessi|ng:|||||
|Health care?|Yes|Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Art. 37<br>Health Act (2004), Art.<br>85|Yes|Ley General de Salud<br>(1984), Art. 77 bis 36<br>Paras. VII, XX<br>Ley del Seguro Social<br>(1995), Arts. 214–217,<br>238<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XX<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–<br>(c)|No||Yes<br>Decree No.<br>40/2009/QH12 Law on<br>Medical Examination and<br>Treatment (2009), Art. 9<br>Para. 1|
|Social housing?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991) , Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para. 1, 37<br>Social Assistance Act<br>(1998), Art. 3|<br>Yes|Ley General de Vivienda<br>(2006), Art. 3<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XXI<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–<br>(c)|No||No|
|Electricity?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para. 1, 37 En-<br>ergyAct(2003), Art. 31|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XXII<br>Ley de la Industria Elec-<br>trica (2014), Art. 50<br>No||Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–<br>(c)|No||No|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 60
|Water supply?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para. 1, 37|<br>Yes|Ley Federal para Pre-<br>venir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XXII<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–<br>(c)|No||Yes<br>Decree No.<br>15/2012/L/CTN Law on<br>Water Resources<br>(2012), Art. 3 Para. 5|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Microcredits?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para. 1, 37|<br>Yes|Ley para la Transparen-<br>cia y el Ordenamiento<br>de los Servicios Financi-<br>eros (2007), Arts. 4 bis<br>3 Para. III, 17<br>Yes|Loi 18-97 relative au<br>micro-crédit (1999), Art.<br>6|<br>Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(d)|No||No|
|Subsidized health<br>insurance?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para. 1, 37|<br>Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. VII<br>Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31|Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–<br>(c)|No||Yes<br>Decree No. 23/2008/L-<br>CTN Law on Health<br>Insurance (2009), Art.<br>11 Para. 4|
|Social pensions?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para. 1, 37|<br>Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XX<br>No||Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–<br>(c)|No||No|
|Child benefits?|Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against Dis-<br>crimination Act (2004),<br>Arts. 4 Para. 1, 37<br>Social Assistance Act<br>(1998)Art 3|<br>No|No||Yes<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–<br>(c)|No||No|
|Public Services Pro<br>Does the law allow|vided by<br>civil so|, .<br>Civil Society<br>cietyorganizations(CSOs)t|oprovi|de social services specificallyto ind|ividuals belongingto religiou|s minorities including:||||
|Vaccination?|Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38<br>Health Act (2004), Art.<br>222.|<br>Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades real-<br>izadas por Organi-<br>zaciones de la Sociedad<br>Civil (2004), Art. 5 Pa-<br>ras. I, V, XI<br>Yes|Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Consti-<br>tution of the Kingdom<br>of The Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP on<br>registration and man-<br>agement of operation of<br>nongovernmental organ-<br>izations in Vietnam<br>(2012), Art. 4|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 61
|Water?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes<br>Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades real-<br>izadas por Organi-<br>zaciones de la Sociedad<br>Civil (2004), Art. 5<br>Paras. I, V, XI<br>Yes|Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Consti-<br>tution of the Kingdom<br>of The Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP on<br>registration and man-<br>agement of operation of<br>nongovernmental organ-<br>izations in Vietnam<br>(2012), Art. 4|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Sanitation?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes<br>Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades real-<br>izadas por Organi-<br>zaciones de la Sociedad<br>Civil (2004), Art. 5<br>Paras. I, V, XI<br>Yes|Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Consti-<br>tution of the Kingdom<br>of The Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP on<br>registration and man-<br>agement of operation of<br>nongovernmental organ-<br>izations in Vietnam<br>(2012), Art. 4|
|Family planning?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes<br>Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades real-<br>izadas por Organi-<br>zaciones de la Sociedad<br>Civil (2004), Art. 5<br>Paras. I, V, XI<br>Yes|Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Dahir 1-<br>58-376 réglementant le<br>droit d'association<br>(1958), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Consti-<br>tution of the Kingdom<br>of The Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by Non-<br>Governmental Organiza-<br>tions Act (2002), Art. 2|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP on<br>registration and man-<br>agement of operation of<br>nongovernmental organ-<br>izations in Vietnam<br>(2012), Art. 4|
|Does the law:||||||||
|Impose funding<br>limitations on<br>CSOs on the pro-<br>vision of such ser-<br>No||No<br>No||No|No||No|
|vices?||||||||
|Taxation||||||||
|Does the law:||||||||
|Allow tax deduc-<br>tions for donations<br>to NGOs that<br>promote the inter-<br>ests of religious<br>minorities?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 4<br>Corporate Income Tax<br>Act (2006), Art. 31|<br>Yes<br>Ley del Impuesto sobre<br>la Renta (2013), Arts.<br>79<br>Yes|Loi n. 24-86 instituant<br>un impôt sur les sociétés<br>(1986), Art. 7 Para. 9 (b)|<br>Yes<br>Law on Giving Act,<br>Geefwet (2012), Art. 8|Yes|Not explicitly but should<br>be covered by the In-<br>come Tax Act (2004),<br>Art. 16(1)|No|
|HATE CRIMES<br>AND HATE<br>SPEECH<br>Hate Crimes Legislation|Bulgaria|Mexico|Morocco|Netherlands||Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Does the law:||||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 62
|Criminalize hate<br>speech?|Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Art. 162 Para. 1|No|Codigo Penal Federal<br>(1931), Art. 149 Ter<br>refers to the crime of<br>"discrimination"<br>Yes|Code Pénal (1962), Art.<br>308-5 referring only to<br>incitement of hate dur-<br>ingsport events|Yes|Criminal Code (1881),<br>Art. 137c<br>No|Yes|Criminal Code (1999),<br>Art. 87 Para. 1(b)|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Criminalize hate<br>crimes?|Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Arts. 162–165|No|No||No|No|No||
|If there is a law,<br>does it define hate<br>crime as a substan<br>tive offense?|<br>-<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Arts. 162, 172|N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law,<br>does it define hate<br>crime as an aggra-<br>vating circum-<br>stance?|<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Arts. 116, 131 Para. 1<br>Sec. 12|N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law,<br>does it define reli-<br>gious identity as a<br>protected charac-<br>teristic?|Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Arts. 162, 131 Para 1.<br>Sec. 12, 416–419|N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law,<br>does it protect<br>property?|Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Art. 162 Para. 2, 163|N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law,<br>does it extend to<br>victims by associa-|No||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|tion?<br>Awareness Raising<br>Does the law:|and Trai|ning on Hate Crimes||||||||
|Require govern-<br>ment agencies to<br>collect data on<br>hate crimes com-<br>mitted on religious|<br>Yes|Judiciary System Act<br>(2007), Arts. 377–384|N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|<br>grounds?<br>Does the law man|<br>date train|ings of the following profes|sionals|on recognizingand identifyinghate|crimes?|||||
|Paramedics?|No||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|Police officers?|No||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|Prosecutors?|No||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|Judges?|No||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||
|Social workers?|No||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A|N/A||

63 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Other?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Services to Victims<br>Does the law man|of Hate<br>date the|Crimes<br>provision of anyof the follo|wingservices to victi|ms of hate crimes:||||
|Legal assistance<br>(including asylum<br>applications)?|Yes|Legal Aid Act (2005),<br>Arts. 21, 22<br>Asylum and Refugees<br>Act(2002), Art. 20|<br>N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Shelter/housing?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Forensic or medi-<br>cal examinations?|Yes|Law on Support and<br>Financial Compensation<br>to Crime Victims<br>(2006), Art. 8|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 64
# _LGBTI Survey_

|INSTITUTIONS<br>The Constitution and Nationa<br>Under the Constitution:<br> <br>|Bulgaria<br>l Legislation<br>||Mexico<br>||Morocco<br>|Netherlands<br>|Tanzania<br> <br>||Vietnam<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Is there a general<br>nondiscrimination<br>clause?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 1|No|Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|Yes<br>Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Arts. 9(g),<br>13(1)(2)|Yes|Constitution of Vi-<br>etnam (2013) Art. 5<br>Para. 2|
|If yes, does it explicitly<br>mention sexual orien-<br>tation as a protective<br>status?<br>No||Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 1|N/A|No||No|No||
|If yes, does it explicitly<br>mention gender iden-<br>tity as a protective<br>status?<br>No||No||N/A|No||No|No||
|Is there a provision<br>that guarantees equali-<br>ty before the law?<br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Paras. 1,<br>2|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 4|Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 6<br>Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1|Yes<br>Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Arts. 12, 13(1)|Yes|Constitution of Vi-<br>etnam (2013) Art. 16<br>Para. 1|
|If yes, does it explicitly<br>mention LGBTI indi-<br>viduals?<br>No||No||No|No||No|No||
|Under national legislation:||||||||||
|Is there a specific law<br>on nondiscrimination?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004)|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliiminar la Dis-<br>criminación(2003)|No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994)|No|No||
|If yes, does it provide<br>protection from dis-<br>crimination on sexual<br>orientationgrounds?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 4 Para. 1|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>1|N//A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 1(b)|N/A|N/A||
|If yes, does it provide<br>protection from dis-<br>crimination on gender<br>identity grounds?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 4 Para. 1,<br>Additional Provisions,<br>Sec. 1, Subsection 17|No||N/A|No||N/A|N/A||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 65
|Are there any other<br>laws that protect<br>LGBTI individuals<br>from discrimination?<br>Yes<br>Political Rights|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Art. 8 Para. 3<br>National Education Act<br>(1991)<br>Higher Education Act<br>(1995)<br>Labor Code (1992)<br>Health Act(2004)|<br> <br> <br> <br>No||No||Yes|Criminal Code (1881),<br>Art. 137|No|No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Is there a provision<br>that guarantees free-<br>dom of opinion and<br> <br>Yes|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 39 Para. 1|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Arts. 6, 7|Yes|Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 25|Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 7|Yes<br>Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 18|Yes<br>Constitution of Vi-<br>etnam (2013), Art. 25|
|expression?<br>Do laws and/or regulations re<br> <br>|lating to any of these cate<br>|gories d<br>|iffer between LGBTI individ<br>|uals an<br>|d the rest of the populatio<br>|n?<br>||<br>|<br>|
|Obtaining citizenship?<br>No|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 25 Para. 1|No|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 30<br>Para. A|No|Code de la nationalité<br>moracaine(1958), Art. 9|<br>No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1<br>Netherlands Nationality<br>Act(2010), Art. 3|No<br>Tanzania Citizenship Act<br>(1995), Arts. 4–6|No<br>Nationality Law<br>(2008), Art. 2 Para. 2|
|Obtaining a passport?<br>No|Bulgarian Personal<br>Documents Act (1999),<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|<br>No|Constitución Politica de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 4<br>Reglamento de<br>Pasaportes y del Docu-<br>mento de Identidad y<br>Viaje(2011), Art. 14|<br>No|Décret n°2-08-310 in-<br>stituant le passeport<br>biométrique (2008), Art<br>1|.<br>No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 1<br>No restriction or differ-<br>ent treatment could be<br>found on the Passport Act|<br> <br>No<br>Tanzania Passports and<br>Travel Documents Act<br>(2002), Art. 12|No<br>Decree No. 136/2007<br>ND-CP 17 on Viet-<br>namese Citizens' Exit<br>and Entry (2007), Art.<br>8|
|When applying for a<br>passport, are there<br>only two options,<br>“male" or "female”?<br>Yes|Regulations for Issuing<br>of Bulgarian Personal<br>Documents, Appendix<br>2|Yes|Secretaria de Relaciones<br>Exteriores, Formato de<br>solicitud de pasaporte.<br>Reglamento de<br>Pasaportes y del Docu-<br>mento de Identidad y<br>Viaje (2011), Art. 16|Yes|Décret n°2-08-310 in-<br>stituant le passeport<br>biométrique (2008),<br>Formulaire de demande<br>du Passeport Biométri-<br>que|<br>No|Passport/identity card<br>application, item 1.7|Yes<br>Tanzania Passports and<br>Travel Documents Act<br>(2002), First Schedule|Yes<br>Circular No.<br>07/2013/TT-BCA<br>(2013) amending and<br>supplementing the<br>issuance, amendment,<br>and supplementation<br>of ordinary passports<br>granted in the country,<br>form X01|
|When applying for an<br>ID card, are there<br>only two options,<br>“male" or "female”?<br>Yes|Regulations for Issuing<br>of Bulgarian Personal<br>Documents, Appendix<br>2|Yes|Ley General de Institu-<br>ciones y Procedimientos<br>Electorales (2014), Art.<br>156|<br>Yes|Loi n°35-06 instituant la<br>carte nationale d'identité<br>électronique (2007), Art<br>3|<br> <br>.<br>No|Passport/identity card<br>application, item 1.7|Yes<br>Registration and Identifi-<br>cation of Persons Act<br>(1986), Art. 9(b)(v)|Yes<br>Circular 05; Decree<br>No. 05/1999/ND-CP 3<br>on the People's Identi-<br>tyCard(1999), Art. 2|
|Does the law:||||||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 66
|Require the assigned<br>gender on the pass-<br>port to match the<br>expression of one’s<br>gender?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Personal<br>Documents Act (1999)<br>Yes|Secretaria de Relaciones<br>Exteriores, Formato de<br>solicitud de pasaporte.<br>Reglamento de<br>Pasaportes y del Docu-<br>mento de Identidad y<br>Viaje(2011), Art. 16|Yes|Formulaire de demande<br>du Passeport Biométri-<br>que<br>No|Civil Code, Book 1<br>(1970), Art. 1:28|Yes<br>Passport Application<br>Form|Yes<br>Decree 158/2005/ND-<br>CP on Civil Status<br>Registration and Man-<br>agement (2005), Art.<br>38 Para. 4|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Require gender-<br>reassignment surgery<br>for intersex children<br>in order to receive a<br>birth certificate?<br>N/A|No applicable provi-<br>sions could be located<br>N/A|No applicable provisions<br>could be located|N/A|No applicable provisions<br>could be located<br>N/A|No applicable provisions<br>could be located|N/A<br>No applicable provisions<br>could be located|No<br>Decree 158/2005/ND-<br>CP 27 (December<br>2005) on Civil Status<br>Registration and Man-<br>agement, Art. 38 Para.<br>4|
|Allow an individual to<br>obtain a new ID card<br>or passport after gen-<br>der reassignment?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Personal<br>Documents Act (1999),<br>Art. 9 Para. 1 Regula-<br>tions for Issuing of Bul-<br>garian Personal<br>Documents Art 20<br>Yes|Reglamento de<br>Pasaportes y del Docu-<br>mento de Identidad y<br>Viaje (2011), Art. 16|<br>N/A|No applicable provisions<br>could be located<br>Yes|Civil Code, Book 1<br>(1970), Art. 1:28|N/A<br>No applicable provisions<br>could be located|Yes<br>Law No.<br>60/2014/QH13 on<br>Civil Status (2014),<br>Art. 3 Para. 2(c)|
|Are NGOs thatpromote the|, .<br>interests of LGBTI individuals:|||||||
|Permitted under the<br>law?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 2 Para. 1<br>and Art. 2 Para. 2<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 9<br>Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Sec. XIII|<br>N/A|Yes|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 8<br>Civil Code, Book 2<br>(1972), Art. 2:285|<br>N/A|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>12/2012/ND-CP on<br>registration and man-<br>agement of operation<br>of nongovernmental<br>organizations in Vi-<br>etnam (2012), Art. 3<br>Para. 1<br>Decree No. 30 on<br>social and charity funds<br>(2012), Art. 2|
|If yes, are the NGOs<br>subject to limitation<br>by the state on the<br>basis of national secu-<br>rity, public order, mo-<br>rality, or other<br>grounds?<br>Yes<br>Representation in the Three B<br>Does the law:|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 3 (2)<br>Yes.<br>ranches of Government (Legislat|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 30<br>ive, Executive, and Judiciary)|N/A<br>|Yes|Civil Code, Book 2<br>(1972), Art. 2:20|N/A|Yes<br>Decree No.<br>12/2012/ND-CP on<br>registration and man-<br>agement of operation<br>of nongovernmental<br>organizations in Vi-<br>etnam, (2012), Art. 4<br>Decree No. 30 on<br>social and charity funds<br>(2012), Art. 7.1|
|Mandate quotas for<br>LGBTI individuals in<br>parliament?<br>No|No||No|No||No|No|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 67
|Does the lawprohibit LGBTI|individuals from:||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Holding ministerial<br>No||No||No|No||No|No|
|posts?|||||||||
|Enforcement of Antidiscrimin<br>Does the law:|ation Laws and Policies||||||||
|Require the judiciary<br>to receive training in<br>the application of ex-<br>isting antidiscrimina-<br>tion laws dealing with<br>sexual orientation<br>and/or gender identi-<br>ty?<br>No||Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>20, Para. XL, 34, Para. IV|N/A|No||N/A|No|
|Require the police to<br>receive training in the<br>application of existing<br>antidiscrimination<br>laws dealing with sex-<br>ual orientation and/or<br>gender identity?<br>No||Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>20 Para XL, 34, Para. IV<br>Ley General del Sistema<br>Nacional de Seguridad<br>Pública (2009), Art. 40,<br>Secs. I, IV|N/A|No||N/A|No|
|Establish a specialized<br>body tasked with re-<br>ceiving complaints for<br>violations of human<br>rights (Human Rights<br>Committee, Om-<br>budsman, etc.)?<br>Yes|Ombudsman Act<br>(2003),<br>Art. 2.<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 40.|Yes|Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los Derech-<br>os Humanos (1992), Art.<br>2: Comisión Nacional de<br>los Derechos Humanos<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>16: Consejo Nacional<br>para Prevenir la Dis-<br>criminación (not a gen-<br>eral human rights body,<br>but specialized in dis-<br>crimination)|<br>Yes|Dahir n 1-11-19 portant<br>création du Conseil na-<br>tional des droits de<br>l'Homme (2011)<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Artt. 19, 161 and 164<br>Yes|Institute for Human<br>Rights Act, Sec.1<br>Institute for Human<br>Rights (formerly Equal<br>Treatment Commission)|<br> <br>Yes<br>Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 129(1)<br>Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Govern-<br>ance Act (2001), Art.<br>6(1)(b)|<br>No|
|If yes, does such body<br>hear complaints of<br>discrimination against<br>LGBTI individuals or<br>those perceived as<br>such?<br>Yes|Ombudsman Act<br>(2003),<br>Art. 19. Para. 1<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 48 Para. 2|Yes|Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los Derech-<br>os Humanos (1992), Art.<br>3<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Arts.<br>1 Para. III, 43|No|Yes|Institute for Human<br>Rights Act (2011), Secs.<br>3(a), 10 (1)|No|N/A|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 68
|Is there a budget allo-<br>cation for the opera-<br>tion of such body?<br>Yes|Ombudsman Act<br>(2003),<br>Art. 7<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 40 Para. 3|<br>Yes<br>Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 102<br>Para. B<br>Ley de la Comisión<br>Nacional de los Derech-<br>os Humanos (1992),<br>Arts. 2, 75<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Disci-<br>minación (2003), Art. 16<br>(regarding CONAPRED,<br>not the Ombudsman)|<br> <br>Yes|Dahir n 1-11-19 portant<br>création du Conseil na-<br>tional des droits de<br>l'Homme (2011), Art. 55<br>Yes|The Ministry of Justice has<br>the main responsibility for<br>the Institute's budget. The<br>budget is regulated in the<br>Annual Budgets Act and<br>not in the Netherlands<br>Institute for Human<br>Rights Act.|<br> <br> <br>Yes|Commission for Human<br>Rights and Good Govern-<br>ance Act (2001), Art. 29|N/A|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|LABOR|Bulgaria|Mexico||Morocco|Netherlands||Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Equalityin Accessingthe Labo<br>Does the law:|r Force||||||||
|Prohibit LGBTI indi-<br>viduals from obtaining<br>employment in specif-<br>ic sectors?<br>No|Labor Code (1992),<br>Art. 8 Para. 3<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12|<br>No<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III|No|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9 and Art. 478<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31<br>No|Constitution of the King-<br>dom of the Netherlands<br>(2008), Art. 19 Para. 3<br>Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)(b)|<br>No|Constitution of the Unit-<br>ed Republic of Tanzania<br>(1977), Art. 22 (1)<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act, (2004), Art.<br>7(1)|<br> <br>No<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 5<br>Para. 1, Art. 8 Para. 1|
|Prohibit discrimina-<br>tion in recruitment in<br>the public sector?<br>Yes|Labor Code (1992),<br>Art. 8 Para 3<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12 Para. 1|<br>Yes<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III Ley<br>Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133|Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9 and Art. 478<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31<br>Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)|No||Yes<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Arts. 5<br>Para. 1, 38 Paras 1, 4|
|If yes, is sexual orien-<br>tation included?<br>Yes|Labor Code (1992),<br>Art. 8 Para. 3<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12 Para. 1,<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|<br>Yes<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III Ley<br>Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133|No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 1 (1)(b)|N/A||No|
|If yes, is gender identi-<br>ty included?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12 Para. 1,<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|No|No|No||N/A||No|
|Prohibit discrimina-<br>tion in recruitment in<br>the private sector?<br>Yes|Labor Code (1992),<br>Art. 8 Para. 3<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12 Para. 1|<br>Yes<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III Ley<br>Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133|Yes|Code du Travail (2011),<br>Art. 9 and Art. 478<br>Constitution du Roy-<br>aume du Maroc (2011),<br>Art. 31<br>Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)|No||Yes<br>Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Art. 8<br>Para. 1, Art. 5 Para. 1|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 69
|If yes, is sexual orien-<br>tation included?<br>Yes|Labor Code (1992),<br>Art. 8 Para. 3<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12 Para. 1,<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|<br>Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. III<br>Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133|No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 1 (1)(b)|N/A|No||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|If yes, is gender identi-<br>ty included?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12 Para. 1,<br>Art. 4 Para. 1|No||No|No||N/A|No||
|Prohibit an employer<br>from asking about an<br>individual’s sexual<br>orientation or gender<br>identity during the<br>recruitmentphase?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 12 Para. 2|No||No|No||No|No||
|Prescribe equal remu-<br>neration for work of<br>equal value for LGBTI<br>individuals?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 14 Para. 1|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 123<br>Para. VII<br>Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 56|<br>No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 5 (1)(e), (h)|No|Yes|Decree No.<br>10/2012/QH13 Labor<br>Code (2012), Arts. 5<br>Para 1 (a), 8 Para. 1 ,<br>90 Para. 3|
|Prohibit the dismissal<br>of employees on sex-<br>ual orientation or<br>gender identity<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 21|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 3, 133|No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 5(1), 8|No|No||
|grounds?<br>Access to Remedy<br>Does the law allow an employ|ee to bringa claim for em|ployme|nt discrimination on sexual|orientation orgend|er identity grounds:|||||
|In the public sector?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 50, 71.|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 43|<br>N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 10, 12 (2)|N/A|No||
|If yes, is the employee<br>required to prove loss<br>or injury?<br>No|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 9|No|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 784|N/A|No|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (1)|N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law, does<br>it prohibit retaliation<br>by the employer for<br>bringing a complaint<br>or participating in any<br>manner in an em-<br>ployment discrimina-<br>tionproceeding?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 5, addi-<br>tional provisions, Sec. 1<br>(3)|<br>No|No provisions could be<br>located|N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 8(a)|N/A|No|No provisions could<br>be located|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 70
|In the private sector?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Arts. 50, 71.|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Arts. 2, 3, 133<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir la Discriminación<br>(2003), Art. 43|<br>No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 10, 12 (2)|No|No||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|If yes, is the employee<br>required to prove loss<br>or injury?<br>No|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 9|No|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 784|N/A|No|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (1)|N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law, does<br>it prohibit retaliation<br>by the employer for<br>bringing a complaint<br>or participating in any<br>manner in an em-<br>ployment discrimina-<br>tionproceeding?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Arts. 5, addi-<br>tional provisions, Sec. 1<br>(3)|<br>No|No provisions could be<br>located|N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 8(a)|N/A|No|No provisions could<br>be located|
|Does the law:||||||||||
|Shift the burden of<br>proof for antidiscrimi-<br>nation claims from the<br>employee to the em-<br>ployer?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discriminatation Act<br>(2004), Art. 9|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 784|No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (1)|Yes<br>Employment and Labour<br>Relations Act (2004), Art.<br>7(8)(a)|No||
|Allow class action<br>lawsuits for employ-<br>ment discrimination<br>claims based on sexual<br>orientation or gender<br>identity grounds?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 71 Paras.<br>2, 3 Civil Procedure<br>Code (2007), Art. 379<br>Para. 1|Yes|Ley Federal del Trabajo<br>(1970), Art. 697|No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 10 (2)|No|No||
|EDUCATION|Bulgaria||Mexico|Morocco||Netherlands|Tanzania||Vietnam|
|Participation in Education<br>Does the lawprohibit discrim|ination in school admission|on se|xual orientationgrounds in:|||||||
|Primary education?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Arts. 4 Para. 1,<br>29 Para 2.|Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 3<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9|<br> <br>N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7 (1)(c)|N/A|No||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 71
|Secondary education?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Arts. 4 Para. 1,<br>29 Para. 2<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 3<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9|<br> <br>N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7 (1)(c)|N/A|No||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Tertiary education?<br>Yes<br>Does the law:|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 4, Para. 1<br>Higher Education Act,<br>Art. 4<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 3<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Art. 2<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9|<br> <br>N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Sec. 7 (1)(c)|N/A|No||
|Mandate the creation<br>of an action plan to<br>combat bullying<br>against LGBT stu-<br>dents, or those per-<br>ceived as such?<br>No|Yes|Anti Bullying policy im-<br>plemented|No|Yes|Antibullying policy imple-<br>mented|No|No||
|<br>FightingMarginalization in Edu<br>Does the law mandate the ad|cation<br>option of measures aimed at sens|itizingthe students to thepr|inciples of nondiscri|mination and equalityin|:||||
|Primary education?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 35 Paras.<br>1, 3<br>National Education Act<br>(1991), Art. 15 Para. 2<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 3<br>Para. 4<br>Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Arts. 7, 8,<br>33|<br>No|Yes|Primary Education Act<br>(1981), Art. 46|No|Yes|Decree No.<br>38/2005/QH11 on<br>Education Law (2005),<br>Arts. 5 Para. 1, 7 Para<br>2.|
|Secondary education?<br>Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 35 Paras.<br>1, 3<br>National Education Act<br>(1991), Art. 15 Para. 2<br>Yes|Constitución Política de<br>los Estados Unidos Mex-<br>icanos (1917), Art. 3<br>Para. 4 Ley<br>General de Educación<br>(1993), Arts. 7, 8, 33|No|Yes|Secondary Education Act<br>(1963), Art. 42|No|Yes|Law No.<br>38/2005/QH11 Educa-<br>tion Law(2005), Arts.<br>5 Para. 1, 7 Para 2.|
|Does the law:|||||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 72
|Mandate the revision<br>of national textbooks<br>in primary and sec-<br>ondary education to<br>eliminate discrimina-<br>tory language (e.g.,<br>homophobic or tran-<br>sphobic language)?|Yes|Final Provisions of the<br>Ordinance on Informa-<br>tive Notebooks, Text-<br>books, and Handbooks,<br>Art. 12, Para. 3 in rela-<br>tion to § 4<br>Yes|Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Arts. 8,<br>12 Para. III, 42|No|No||No|No|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Mandate the training<br>of school teachers in<br>primary and second-<br>ary education on anti-<br>discrimination of<br>LGBTI students, or<br>those perceived as<br>such?|No|Yes|Ley General de Edu-<br>cación (1993), Arts. 8,<br>12 Para. III, 42|No|No||No|No|
|Include courses on<br>sex education in an<br>LGBTI-inclusive man-<br>ner?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|PROPERTY||Bulgaria|Mexico||Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Access to Land<br>Do laws and/or regulat|ions re|latingto anyof these transactions|differ between LGBTI indi|viduals an|d the rest of thepopulation?||||
|Obtain a title of land<br>(e.g., for the purposes<br>of transfer or sale)?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Lease land?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|License land?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Obtain a mortgage?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|Inherit land?|No|No||No|No||No|No|
|PUBLIC SERVICES<br>AND SOCIAL<br>PROTECTION||Bulgaria|Mexico||Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania|Vietnam|
|Public Services Provide|d byth|e Government|||||||
|Does the lawprohibit|discrim|ination based on sexual orientatio|n in accessing:||||||

73 Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity
|Health care?|Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 37<br>Health Act (2004), Art.<br>85|Yes|Ley General de Salud<br>(1984), Art. 77 bis 36<br>Paras. VII, XX<br>Ley del Seguro Social<br>(1995), Arts. 214–217,<br>238<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XX|<br> <br>N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes|Decree No.<br>40/2009/QH12 Law on<br>Medical Examination<br>and Treatment (2009),<br>Art. 9 Para. 1|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Social housing?|Yes|Social Assistance Act<br>(1998), Art. 3<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 37|Yes|Ley General de Vivienda<br>(2006), Art. 3<br>Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XXI|<br>N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|No||
|Electricity?|Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 37<br>Energy Act (2003), Art.<br>31|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XXII<br>Ley de la Industria Elec-<br>trica(2014), Art. 50|<br>No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes|Decree No.<br>28/2004/QH11 Elec-<br>tricity Law (2004), Art.<br>4.2|
|Water supply?|Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 37|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XXII|N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes|Decree No.<br>15/2012/L/CTN Law<br>on Water Resources<br>(2012), Art. 3 Para. 5|
|Microcredits?|Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 37|Yes|Ley para la Transparen-<br>cia y el Ordenamiento<br>de los Servicios Financi-<br>eros (2007), Arts. 4 bis<br>3 Para. III, 17|N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|No||
|Subsidized health in-<br>surance?|Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 37|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. XX|N/A|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|Yes|Decree No.<br>23/2008/L-CTN Law<br>on Health Insurance<br>(2009), Art. 11 Para. 4|
|Social pensions?|Yes|Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 37|Yes|Ley Federal para Preve-<br>nir y Eliminar la Dis-<br>criminación (2003), Art.<br>9 Para. VII|<br>No|Yes|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)|No|No||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 74
|Child benefits?<br>Public Services Prov<br>Does the law allow<br>|Yes<br>ided byC<br>civil socie<br>|Constitution of the<br>Republic of Bulgaria<br>(1991), Art. 6 Para. 2<br>Protection Against<br>Discrimination Act<br>(2004), Art. 4 Paras. 1,<br>37<br>Social Assistance Act<br>(1998), Art. 3<br>ivil Society<br>tyorganizations(CSOs)to<br>|<br> <br>No<br> provid<br>|e social services specifically <br>|No<br>to LGBTI individuals, including:<br>|Yes<br>|Equal Treatment Act<br>(1994), Secs. 7 (1)(b)–(c)<br>|No<br>|No<br> <br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Vaccination?|Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38<br>Health Act (2004) Art.<br>222|<br>Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|Water?|Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|Sanitation?|Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|Family planning?|Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 75
|Health services (psy-<br>chological)?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Health services (phys-<br>iological)?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|Sexual and reproduc-<br>tive health services?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|HIV preventative ser-<br>vices (con-<br>doms/lubricants/pre-<br>exposure prophylaxis,<br>etc.) and information<br>on HIV and vulnerable<br>sexual practices?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|Antiretroviral?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Not explicit but should<br>be covered by Decree<br>No. 12/2012/ND-CP<br>on registration and<br>management of opera-<br>tion of nongovernmen-<br>tal organizations in<br>Vietnam(2012), Art. 4|
|Medications for gen-<br>der-reassignment sur-<br>gery?<br>Yes|Bulgarian Non-Profit<br>Legal Entities Act<br>(2000), Art. 38|Yes|Ley Federal de Fomento<br>a las Actividades realiza-<br>das por Organizaciones<br>de la Sociedad Civil<br>(2004), Art. 5 Paras. I,<br>V, XI|N/A|Yes|Not explicit but should be<br>covered by Constitution<br>of the Kingdom of The<br>Netherlands (2008), Art.<br>8|N/A|Yes<br>Decree 88/2008/ND-<br>CP on Sex Reassign-<br>ment, Arts. 4 Para. 1,<br>7–14|
|Does the law:|||||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 76
|Impose funding limita-<br>tions on CSOs on the<br>provision of such ser-<br>vices?<br>No|No||N/A|No||N/A|No||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|HATE CRIMES AND<br>HATE SPEECH|Bulgaria|Mexico||Morocco|Netherlands|Tanzania||Vietnam|
|Hate Crimes Legislation<br>Does the law:|||||||||
|Criminalize hate<br>speech?<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Arts. 162 Para. 1<br>No|Codigo Penal Federal<br>(1931), Art. 149 Ter<br>refers to the crime of<br>"discrimination"|Yes|Code Pénal (1962), Art.<br>308-5 referring only to<br>incitement of hate dur-<br>ingsport events<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1881),<br>Art. 137c|No|Yes|Criminal Code (1999),<br>Art. 87 Para. 1(b)|
|Criminalize hate<br>crimes?<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Artt. 162–165; Art.<br>172<br>No||No|No||No|No||
|If there is a law, does<br>it define hate crime as<br>a substantive offense?<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Artt. 162–165; Art.<br>172<br>N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law, does<br>it define hate crime as<br>an aggravating circum-<br>stance?<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Art . 116 Para. 11<br>N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law, does<br>it define sexual orien-<br>tation as a protected<br>characteristic?<br>No|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law, does<br>it define gender iden-<br>tity as a protected<br>characteristic?<br>No|N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law, does<br>itprotectproperty?<br>Yes|Criminal Code (1968),<br>Art. 163<br>N/A||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A||
|If there is a law, does<br>it extend to victims by<br>association?<br>No<br>Awareness Raisingand Traini|N/A<br>ngon Hate Crimes||N/A|N/A||N/A|N/A||
|Does the law:|||||||||

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 77
|Require government<br>agencies to collect<br>data on hate crimes<br>committed against<br>LGBTI individuals or<br>those perceived as<br>such?|Yes|Judiciary System Act<br>(2007), Art. 80 Para. 1,<br>Art. 86 Para. 1, Art.<br>382 Para. 3|<br>N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|<br>Does the law mandate<br>|trainin|gs of the following profess|ionals on recognizing <br>|and identifyinghate crimes?<br>||||
|Paramedics?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Police officers?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Prosecutors?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Judges?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Social workers?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Other?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Services to Victims of<br>Does the law mandate|Hate C<br>thepr|rimes<br>ovision of anyof the follow|ingservices to victim|s of hate crimes?||||
|Legal assistance (in-<br>cluding asylum applica-<br>tions)?|Yes|Legal Aid Act (2005),<br>Arts 21, 22<br>Asylum and Refugees<br>Act(2002), Art. 20|<br>N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Shelter/Housing?|No||N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|
|Forensic or medical<br>examinations?|Yes|Law on Support and<br>Financial Compensa-<br>tion to Crime Victims<br>(2006), Art. 8|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|N/A|

Anti-Discrimination Law and Shared Prosperity 78