Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T05:49:56.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gender Constitutional Reform and Feminist Mobilization in Greece and the EU: From Formal to Substantive Equality?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2013

Dia Anagnostou
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Over the past fifteen years, substantive equality and the idea of positive measures to tackle the structural roots of gender inequality have increasingly gained currency in Europe. Focusing on the case of Greece, this article explores the factors that promote constitutional and statutory reforms to promote substantive equality, and examines the effect of such reforms on gender equality rights and policy. It argues that domestic legal and social mobilization by feminists, who participated in transnational networks, were instrumental in the diffusion of the relevant EU and international norms, leading to a shift in the courts’ jurisprudence and to a constitutional amendment recognizing substantive equality. At the same time, the paper also underscores the ambivalent and limited effects of constitutionalizing substantive equality and positive measures in the absence of ongoing actions aimed at raising awareness and pushing for effective implementation.

Résumé

Depuis les quinze dernières années, l’égalité réelle et l’idée de mesures positives pour stopper les racines structurelles de l’inégalité entre les sexes se sont fait de plus en plus sentir en Europe. Le présent article, qui se concentre sur le cas de la Grèce, explore les facteurs qui mettent en avant les réformes constitutionnelles et statutaires afin de promouvoir l’égalité réelle, et examine les effets de telles réformes sur les droits et les politiques en matière d’égalité entre les sexes. Il fait valoir que la mobilisation nationale juridique et sociale des féministes, qui ont participé à des réseaux transnationaux, est essentielle à la diffusion de normes pertinentes européennes et internationales, ce qui conduira à un changement dans la jurisprudence des tribunaux et à une modification constitutionnelle reconnaissant l’égalité réelle. Dans un même temps, cet article souligne aussi les effets ambivalents et limités d’une constitutionnalisation de l’égalité réelle et de mesures positives en l’absence d’actions continues destinées à accroître la sensibilisation et à promouvoir une mise en place efficace.

Keywords

gender equalityconstitutionalismlegal mobilizationpositive measurescourtsfeminist politicségalité entre les sexesconstitutionnalismemobilisation juridiquemesures positivestribunauxpolitiques féministes
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Law and Society / La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société , Volume 28 , Special Issue 2: Gender Equality, Legal Mobilization, and Feminism in a Multilevel European System , August 2013 , pp. 133 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Law and Society Association / Association Canadienne Droit et Société 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 I would like to gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Alexandros-Ioannis Kargopoulos to the case law research, from which this paper draws.

2 See Baines, Beverly and Rubio-Marin, Ruth, eds., The Gender of Constitutional Jurisprudence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).Google Scholar

3 Baines, Beverly, Barak-Erez, Daphne, and Kahana, Tsvi, eds., Feminist Constitutionalism: Global Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012).Google Scholar

4 Irving, Helen, Gender and the Constitution—Equity and Agency in Comparative Constitutional Design (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 32.Google Scholar

5 Williams, Susan H., “Introduction: Comparative Constitutional Law, Gender Equality, and Constitutional Design,” in Constituting Equality—Gender Equality and Comparative Constitutional Law, ed. Williams, Susan H. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 1–25 Google Scholar at 20.

6 Irving, Helen, “More than Rights,” in Constituting Equality—Gender Equality and Comparative Constitutional Law, 75–92.Google Scholar

7 Baines, Beverly, Barak-Erez, Daphne and Kahana, Tsvi, “The Idea and Practice of Feminist Constitutionalism,” in Feminist Constitutionalism: Global Perspectives, 1.Google Scholar

8 Helen Irving, Gender and the Constitution, 166.

9 Baines, Beverly and Rubio-Marin, Ruth, “Introduction—Towards a Feminist Constitutional Agenda,” in The Gender of Constitutional Jurisprudence, 13.Google Scholar

10 Williams, Susan H., “Introduction: Comparative Constitutional Law, Gender Equality, and Constitutional Design,” in Constituting Equality—Gender Equality and Comparative Constitutional Law, 1–25 Google Scholar at 8–9.

11 For this definition of positive action, see International perspectives on positive action measures—A comparative analysis in the EU, Canada, the United States and South Africa (Brussels: European Commission, 2009), 6.

12 For a cogent elaboration of this argument, see Rubio-Marin, Ruth, “A New European Parity-Democracy Sex Equality Model and Why It Won’t Fly in the U.S.,” American Journal of Comparative Law 60/1 (Winter 2012): 99–126.Google Scholar

13 Diaz, Mercedes Mateo and Millns, Susan, “Parity, Power and Representative Politics: The Elusive Pursuit of Gender Equality in Europe,” Feminist Legal Studies 12 (2004): 279–302 Google Scholar at 291.

14 Legislated and voluntary quotas vary by the extent to which they are either legally/constitutionally mandated, or optional. See Dahlerup, Drude and Freidenvall, Lenita, “Gender Quotas in Politics—A Constitutional Challenge,” in Constituting Equality, 29–52 Google Scholar at p. 33.

15 See, for instance, the highly controversial decision of Eckhard Kalanke v. Freie Hansestadt-Bremen Case C-450/93; and Marschall v. Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, Case C-409/95.

16 International perspectives on positive action measures, 22–25.

17 The 1975 constitution also stipulated that “all workers, irrespective of sex or other distinctions shall be entitled to equal pay for work of equal value” (Article 22, parag. 1). The Constitution of Greece, as revised by the parliamentary resolution of April 6th 2001 of the VIIth Revisionary Parliament.

18 The pronouncement of a law or executive act as unconstitutional by Greek courts does not automatically lead to its abolishment, but it is expected that the government will proceed with its cancellation and/or replacement. See Iliopoulos-Strangas, Julia and Koutnatzis, Stylianos-Ioannis, “Greece,” in Constitutional Courts as Positive Legislators, ed. Brewer-Carias, Allan R. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 539–573 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 563–4.

19 Chrysa Chatzi, “Diakriseis logo Fylou” [Gender Discrimination], in Ta Dikaiomata stin Ellada 1953–2003 [Rights in Greece 1953–2003], eds. Michalis Tsapogas and Dimitris Christopoulos (Athens: Kastanioti, 2004), 158–169. See also Stamatina Yiannakourou, H Isi Metaxeirisi Andron kai Gynaikon kata to Koinotiko kai to Elliniko Ergatiko Dikaio [Equal treatment of men and women according to Community and Greek Labor Law] (Athens: Sakkoulas, 2008), 148.

20 In 1952, women got the right to vote, and in 1953, the first female Member of Parliament was elected. See Chatzi, “Diakriseis logo Fylou,” 159.

21 The Convention was ratified with Law 46/1975 and entered into force in July 1976.

22 The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women entered into force on 3 September 1981, and it was ratified in Greece by Law N.1342/1983.

23 Law 1329 of 1983.

24 For instance, the old family law (Art. 1387) required women to obtain the consensus of their husband in order to be able to work. See Papageorgiou, Yiota, Eghemonia kai Feminismos [Hegemony and Feminism] (Athens: Typothito, 2004), 324 Google Scholar, 329.

25 For instance, Law 1414/84 provided for the abolition of all forms of discrimination against women in labor relations, including in training, employment, pay, and promotion.

26 Iliopoulos-Strangas and Koutnatzis, “Greece,” 546.

27 Kaboglu, Ibrahim Ozden and Kounatzis, Stylianos-Ioannis G., “The Reception Process in Greece and Turkey,” in A Europe of Rights: The Impact of the ECHR on National Legal Systems, eds. Keller, Helen and Sweet, Alec Stone (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 451–529 Google Scholar at 464.

28 Yiotopoulou-Maragopoulou, Aliki, “H istoriki strofi tou Symvouliou tis Epikrateias pros pragmatiki isotita” [The historic shift of the CoS towards substantive equality], To Syntagma 4 (1998): 785 Google Scholar. See also Charalambos Tsiliotis, “H syntagmatiki provlimatiki tis lipsis thetikon metron gia tin apokatastasi tis isotitas metaksi andron kai gynaikon” [The constitutional issue of adoption of positive measures for the restitution of equality between men and women], To Syntagma 25/2 (1999): 264–95 at 268.

29 Law 1911/1990 (Art. 1, parag. 3).

30 Council of State, case no. 2857-2861/1993.

31 For a discussion see Panos Kapotas, “Gender Equality and Positive Measures for Women in Greece,” 17. Paper presented at the 2nd LSE PhD Symposium on Modern Greece: Current Social Science in Greece, Hellenic Observatory, European Institute, LSE, 10 June 2005.

32 Council of State, Section C, case no. 870/1995.

33 A 1997 Ministerial Order introduced anew restrictive quotas for entry in the various military academies, mainly targeting women and only in one case targeting men (in SAN). Efimeris tis Kyverniseos tis Ellinikis Dimokratias 2, no. 292 (10 April 1997).

34 Service Councils (or departmental boards) are decision-making bodies made up of employees in the public sector and in other legal entities governed by public law.

35 The CoS decision no. 6275/1995 deemed unconstitutional Art. 29 of Law 2085/1992 that required at least one qualified woman to be present in service councils. See Aliki Yiotopoulou-Maragopoulou, “H istoriki strofi tou Symvouliou tis Epikrateias,” 786–87.

36 P. Kapotas, “Gender Equality and Positive Measures for Women in Greece,” 18.

37 CoS, Full Court, case no. 1917/1998. This case was referred to the Plenary Session of the CoS, following the CoS section judgment 5646/1996.

38 Yiotopoulou-Marangopoulou, “H istoriki strofi tou Symvouliou tis Epikrateias,” 789–90.

39 Yiotopoulou-Maragopoulou, “H istoriki strofi tou Symvouliou tis Epikrateias,” 788.

40 There were a total of fourteen decisions that the CoS issued on 8 May 1998 (case no. 1933 and case numbers 1917–1929). See Aliki Yiotopoulou-Marangopoulou, “Pros statheropioisi mias sovaris kataktisis—h ousiastiki isotita sto neo syntagma” [Towards ensuring a major achievement—substantive equality in the new constitution], in Agonas tis Gynaikas (2000).

41 Law 2085/1992 (Art. 29) had already been abolished by the time the CoS reviewed this case (it had been replaced by Law 2190/1994, Art. 38, para. 10). However, the CoS went ahead and reviewed the constitutionality of Law 2085/1992.

42 CoS decision 1933/1998 (and 1917/1998) has been subject to numerous analyses and legal commentaries. Indicatively, see Gerapetritis, Yorgos, “Ta thetika metra sto syntagma: to taksidi pros tin ousiastiki isotita” [Positive measures in the constitution: the journey towards substantive equality], in Pente Chronia meta ti Syntagmatiki Anatheorisi, vol.1, ed. Kontiadis, Ksenophon (Athens: Sakkoulas, 2006), 541–71.Google Scholar

43 CoS, Grand Chamber, case no. 1933/1998.

44 Al. Yiotopoulou-Maragopoulou, “H istoriki strofi tou Symvouliou tis Epikrateias pros pragmatiki isotita,” 789–90.

45 Yorgos Gerapetritis, “Ta thetika metra sto syntagma,” 547.

46 Yorgos Gerapetritis, “Ta thetika metra sto syntagma,” 550.

47 Ibid., 547, 558–59.

48 CoS, case numbers 2831, 2832, 2833/2003; also CoS case no. 3185/2003.

49 Law 2910/2001, Article 75.

50 See the text of the important judgment of the CoS Full Court, case no. 365/2006. See also CoS, Full Chamber case no. 1986/2005.

51 CoS, Section C, case no. 2906/2003.

52 See the important judgment of the CoS Full Court, case no. 365/2006.

53 Iliopoulos-Strangas and Koutnatzis, “Greece,” 561.

54 Koukoulis-Spiliotopoulos, Sophia, “Greece: From Formal to Substantive Gender Equality—The leading role of the jurisprudence and the contribution of women’s NGOs,” in Essays in Honour of Alice Yiotopoulos-Marangopoulos, ed. Manganas, A. (Athens: Nomiki Vivliothiki/Bruylant, 2006), 659–700 at 659.Google Scholar

55 Yiotopoulou-Marangopoulou, “H istoriki strofi tou StE pros pragmatiki isotita,” 774.

56 Stratighaki, Maria, “Politikes gia tin isotita ton fylon stin Ellada” [Policies for gender equality in Greece], in Evropaiki Oloklirosi kai Ellada, eds. Maravegias, Napoleon and Sakellaropoulos, Theodoros (Athens: Dionikos, 2006), 279–300 at 280.Google Scholar

57 See Yiotopoulou-Marangopoulou, Aliki, Affirmative Action: Towards Effective Gender Equality (Athens: Sakkoulas/Bruylant, 1998), 92.Google Scholar

58 For an account of the activities and initiatives that the campaign involved, see Yiotopoulou-Marangopoulou, Aliki, “Pros statheropioisi mis sovaris kataktisis—h ousiastiki isotita sto neo syntagma” [Towards ensuring a major achievement—substantive equality in the new constitution], Agonas tis Gynaikas 69 (2000)Google Scholar. See also Yiotopoulou-Marangopoulou, “Dipli Niki—Vouli kai Symvoulio tis Epikrateias apodechontai ousiastiki isotita kai thetika metra yper ton gynaikon” [Double victory—Parliament and CoS accept substantive equality and positive measures in favor of women], Agonas tis Gynaikas 65 (1998): 1–3.

59 Interview, Sofia Koukouli-Spiliotopoulou, Athens, 16 November 2010.

60 Koukouli-Spiliotopoulou, “Greece: From Formal to Substantive Gender Equality,” 664.

61 For an account of all the actions taken, see Koukouli-Spiliotopoulou, “Greece: From Formal to Substantive Gender Equality,” 662–66.

62 Papadopoulou, Lina, “Gynaikeia simmetochi kai dimokrateia: oi posostoseis ypo to phos tis syntagmatikis kai politikis theorias” [Women’s participation and democracy: quotas in the light of constitutional and political theory], Dikaiomata tou Anthropou 32 (2006): 219–74 at 254.Google Scholar

63 Council of the EU recommendation of 13 December 1984 concerning the promotion of positive measures on behalf of women (84/635/EEC, EU L 331, 19 December 1984).

64 Maria Stratigaki, “Politikes gia tin isotita ton fylon stin Ellada,” 285.

65 Katherine Cox, “Positive Action in the EU: From Kalanke to Marschall,” Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 8/1 (1998–1999): 101–142 at 127–29.

66 Ibid., 133–34.

67 CoS, Section C, case no. 2906/2003. Law 2622/1998 (Art. 3, parag. 1) as amended by Law 2838/2000, Art. 1, parag. 2) had reasoned that because the nature of the work and activities involved required special physical and bodily advantages, 90 percent of those recruited would be Greek males and only 10 percent would be women.

68 CoS, Section C, case no. 3121/2002. The CoS argued that the nature and mission of the Marine Border Guard activities are not sufficient to justify the quota disadvantaging women and that the respective executive decision did not clearly specify for which kind of activities gender is presumed to play a decisive role. See also CoS, Section C, case no. 365/2006.

69 Kalliope Lykovardi, “H simvoli tou Synigorou tou Politi stin katapolemisi ton diakriseon logo fylou” [The contribution of the Greek Ombudsman in the fight against gender discrimination]. Paper presented at the conference on Gender Equality Policy at the National, European and International Plane, Athens, 31 March 2006.

70 See CoS Full Court case no. 1986-90/2005. Thirteen judges, though, expressed a dissenting opinion, claiming that the amended constitutional provision Art. 116(2) abolished any possibility for the legislator to derogate from gender equality, except for positive measures. See Gerapetritis,“Ta thetika metra sto syntagma,” 558–59.

71 Law 2713/1999, Article 12(2).

72 CoS, Section C, case no. 622/2004.

73 CoS, Section C, case no. 261/2006.

74 See the important judgment of the CoS Grand Chamber, case no. 365/2006.

75 CoS, Section C, case no. 261/2006. See also CoS, Section C, case no. 1850/2002. See also CoS, Section C, case no. 414/2006; CoS, Section C, case no. 1137/2005.

76 See the detailed report of the Greek Ombudsman (Department of Equality) on “Proypothesis eisagogis ypopsifion stis Stratiotikes Scholes” [Requirements for entry in military academies], 10 April 2009.

77 This is Law 2839/2000 (Art. 6). It stipulated that a minimum of one third of departmental board members in the public sector should belong to each sex.

78 Law 2910/2001, Art. 75, para. 2.

79 Recommendation 96/694/EC. See Koukouli-Spiliotopoulou, “Greece: From Formal to Substantive Gender Equality,” 698.

80 See Lina Papadopoulou, “Gynaikeia simmetochi kai dimokrateia,” 254–55.

81 CoS, case no. 3185/2003. See Kapotas, Panos, “Gender Quotas in Politics: The Greek System in the Light of EU Law,” European Law Journal 16/1 (January 2010): 29–46 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at 32–33.

82 Law 3636/29008, Art. 3. See Koukouli-Spiliotopoulou, Sophia, “Greece,” European Gender Equality Law Review 2 (2008): 57–59.Google Scholar

83 Chappell, Louise, “Interacting with the State—Feminist Structures and Political Opportunities,” International Feminist Journal of Politics 2/2 (2000): 244–75.Google Scholar

84 Galligan, Yvonne, “Bringing Women In: Global Strategies for Gender Parity in Political Representation,” University of Maryland Law Journal on Race, Religion, Gender and Class 6 (2006): 319–36Google Scholar; Krook, Mona Lena, “Quota Laws for Women in Politics: Implications for Feminist Practice,” Social Politics 15/3 (2008): 345–68.Google Scholar

85 Hoskyns, Catherine, Integrating Gender—Women, Law and Politics in the EU (London: Verso, 1996)Google Scholar; Cichowski, Rachel A., The European Court and Civil Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).Google Scholar

86 M. Stratigaki, “Politikes gia tin isotita ton fylon stin Ellada,” 283.

87 Mazur, Amy G. and Pollack, Mark A., “Gender and public policy in Europe: An introduction,” Comparative European Politics 7/1 (2009): 1–11.Google Scholar

88 Mercedes M. Diaz and S. Millns, “Parity, Power and Representative Politics,” 300.