Prohibition of discrimination as a principle of social security in the context of ensuring sustainable well-being

Autori/Curatori Karina V. Gnatenko, Oleg M. Yaroshenko, Hanna V. Anisimova, Sofiia O. Shabanova, Andrey M. Sliusar
Anno di pubblicazione 2021 Fascicolo 2020/2 suppl. Lingua Inglese
Numero pagine 15 P. 173-187 Dimensione file 130 KB
DOI 10.3280/RISS2020-002-S1013
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Ensuring equal rights and opportunities in modern society allows us to ensure its development without involving additional regulatory functions of the state. In this regard, it is relevant to determine the limits of discrimination, to isolate them from personal rights and to identify potential state regulation in this area. The authors of the article consider the issue not only as the basis for building mandatory functions in the field of social security, but also as a tool for the uniform distribution of so-cial security factors. For this, an analysis was performed, which uses the mecha-nism of the initial analysis of equality and on this basis the limits that require legis-lative consolidation are determined for the use of restrictive mechanisms. The arti-cle discusses the definition of equality and, accordingly, the restriction of rights in the generic concept and highlights the foundations of regulation and the restriction of inequality at the level of fundamental documents of the state. Social protection is presented as a component of a developed society that can provide its members with basic needs, starting with material basic benefits and ending with the ability to freely achieve well-being. The authors also consider compensation mechanisms. Practical significance is determined by the fact that mechanisms for ensuring equal opportunities are identified and principles for regulating the sufficiency of social security are formed for citizens who experience discriminatory influence both from the state and from individual citizens.

Keywords:Human rights, democracy, equality, functions of the state, legal principle

  1. Allan T. R. S. (2014). Freedom, Equality, Legality. In: Silkenat J. R., Hickey Jr J. E. and Barenboim P. D., eds., The Legal Doctrines of the Rule of Law and the Legal State (Rechtsstaat). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  2. Andrade Neto J. (2018), A Charter of Rights with Wide Scope. In: Borrowing Justification for Proportionality: On the Influence of the Principles Theory in Brazil. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  3. Angelo Corlett J. (2009). Global Justice. In: Race, Rights, and Justice. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
  4. Brunkhorst H. (2013). Cosmopolitanism as Evolutionary Advantage: Can Political Equality Be Globalized?. In: Erman E. and Näsström S., eds., Political Equality in Transnational Democracy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
  5. Byk J.C. (2019). The european convention on biomedicine and human rights: A pragmatic ambition. Journal de Medecine Legale Droit Medical, 62(1): 5-11.
  6. Dorfman A. (2012). Reasonable care: Equality as objectivity. Law and Philosophy, 31(4): 369-407.
  7. Douglas H. and Finnane M. (2012). Equality Before the Law. In: Indigenous Crime and Settler Law: White Sovereignty after Empire. London: Macmillan Education UK.
  8. Francioni F. (2018). Global Justice, Equality and Social Inclusion: What Kind of “Modernization” of International Law?. In: Pisillo Mazzeschi R. and De Sena P., eds., Global Justice, Human Rights and the Modernization of International Law. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  9. Frick M.-L. (2019). The Idea of Human Rights in Global Contexts: The Equality Dimension. In: Human Rights and Relative Universalism. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  10. Hendry J. and Tatum M. L. (2016). Human Rights, Indigenous Peoples, and the Pursuit of Justice. Yale Law and Policy Review, 34(2): 351-386.
  11. Hjorth R. (2014). Equality without Sovereignty. In: Equality in International Society: A Reappraisal. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  12. Kiikeri M. (2001). Comparative Law in European Legal Adjudication. In: Comparative Legal Reasoning and European Law. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
  13. Kronfeldner M. (2017). The Politics of Human Nature. In: Tibayrenc M., Ayala F., ed., On Human Nature: Biology, Psychology, Ethics, Politics, and Religion. Amsterdam: Academic Press.
  14. Lucy W. (2011). Equality under and before the law. University of Toronto Law Journal, 61(3): 411-465.
  15. Miethlich B. and Oldenburg A.G. (2019). Employment of persons with disabilities as competitive advantage: An analysis of the competitive implications. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Business Information Management Association Conference, IBIMA 2019: Education Excellence and Innovation Management through Vision 2020, IBIMA, Granada.
  16. Nijman J. E. and Werner W. G. (2013). Legal Equality and the International Rule of Law. In: Nijman J. E. and Werner W. G., eds., Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2012: Legal Equality and the International Rule of Law – Essays in Honour of P.H. Kooijmans. Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.
  17. Sepielli A. (2013). The law’s ‘majestic equality’. Law and Philosophy, 32(6): 673-700.
  18. Shah P. (2015). Is Caste Already Part of UK Equality Law?. In: Against Caste in British Law: A Critical Perspective on the Caste Discrimination Provision in the Equality Act 2010. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  19. Singh S. (2016). The Fundamental Rights of States in Neoliberal Times. Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, 4(3): 461-466.
  20. Smith Dorrill J., Schindel M., Christensen T., Ortbahn K. and Bethards J. (2018). Partnership Law. SMU Annual Texas Survey, 4: 307-325.
  21. Yereskova T.V., Mazuryk O.V., Aleksandrova O.S., Tymofieieva H.V. and Zavadskyi V.N. (2020). Uncertainty as a regular feature of modern Ukrainian society. Teorija in Praksa, 57(3): 928-946.
  22. Yessilov A.B. and Kalashnikova N.P. (2015a). Technology of social work with elderly migrants: International experience and Kazakhstan practice. Advances in Gerontology, 5: 322-326.
  23. Yessilov A.B. and Kalashnikova N.P. (2015b). Technology of social work with elderly migrants: international experience and Kazakhstan practice. Advances in gerontology = Uspekhi gerontologii/Rossiĭskai︠a︡ akademii︠a︡ nauk, Gerontologicheskoe obshchestvo, 28(2): 360-365

Karina V. Gnatenko, Oleg M. Yaroshenko, Hanna V. Anisimova, Sofiia O. Shabanova, Andrey M. Sliusar, Prohibition of discrimination as a principle of social security in the context of ensuring sustainable well-being in "RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA'" 2 suppl./2020, pp 173-187, DOI: 10.3280/RISS2020-002-S1013