juridical/news

'Legalise the obligation to equality'

In order to proactively combat discrimination and racism within the public sector, the cabinet must establish a legal equality obligation.

Wouter BoonstraMay 20, 2025

The government's current approach is too reactive and fails to combat institutional discrimination. The introduction of a legal Public Sector Equality Duty (GPS), like the United Kingdom and Ireland, makes existing proactive obligations for the government concrete to combat discrimination and promote equal treatment and opportunities.

First movers

This is what the State Commission against Discrimination and Racism writes in a letter of advice to the cabinet today. Because the introduction of such legislation can take a long time, the committee adds that government agencies can already get started with the Public Service Discrimination Test. “We need leaders who are already taking it up,” Joyce Sylvester, chairman of the committee, told Internal Governance. She points to the municipality of Arnhem, Customs and DUO who did a pilot with the test and already want to use the instrument. “These are role models, first movers. Other organizations should think: I'm in line with that. As a government agency, you cannot afford not to do it. As an organization, you must stay alert to equal treatment and also trust people and thus go along with this development and lead the way. '

Accountable

Sylvester calls this time for the committee an “intensive and urgent period”. “We issued reports and looked at the nature, extent and causes of discrimination and racism in the Netherlands. They appear to be deeply entrenched and widespread; there is a pattern. The risk of discrimination is high. It is intense when you realize that the number of reports of discrimination has doubled in 2024. In times of polarization and in the current climate, it is important to make proposals to eliminate discrimination. 'With the advice to work on the Public Sector Equality Duty, the State Commission points out to the government that it is an example for society to account for the elimination of discrimination and racism. “You have to be able to count on the government, no matter what kind of origin you have,” Sylvester summarizes. An equality obligation means that organizations must set goals and must monitor and report. “You are transparent and accountable and do that structurally. And in the United Kingdom and Ireland, the national human rights institute oversees it.”

Surely it is shocking that the government itself is not yet subject to the Equal Treatment Act?

Legally enshrine

It is important to enshrine the duty of equality in law, says Sylvester. “Our government relies on self-regulation and loose policy measures. But, for example, just diversity training courses or spending an afternoon talking to each other won't get you there. It is very important that you give direction and take measures to prevent incidents, which are therefore structural, so that you do not fall behind the facts. 'Laying down the equality obligation by law is an entire legal process, she knows. But this is also a financial issue. Repairing the benefits affair costs 9 billion and must be paid by taxpayers. So lay down the obligation that organizations always take into account the importance of equality and have the hygiene to initiate that cultural change and to eliminate discrimination and racism. '

Proactive approach

Institutional and indirect discrimination are more difficult to recognize and address, says the opinion. Sylvester points out that it has crept into the systems. “Ethnic profiling by KMAR, risk identification in systems for granting benefits, SyRI. It's ingrained in algorithms. Groups are systematically disadvantaged. Sometimes unintentionally and unconsciously, but it only comes to light when the harm has already happened and that has enormous effects on people. 'The advice says that only a passive ban, which victims can rely on afterwards, is insufficient to identify and prevent (institutional and indirect) discrimination by the government early. In addition to a ban, a more proactive approach is needed, such as international law and Article 1 Constitution require, but that proactive approach is still insufficient in the Netherlands. “Something does happen, but it's too informal. As a government, you should react much more strongly and be more proactive about it. Not only taking matters up after international legislation, but also putting your own legislation in order. It is shocking that the government itself is not yet subject to the Equal Treatment Act. '

No longer looking away

The British and Irish Public Sector Equality Duty the committee sees it as a good example in Europe. “They don't wait for something big like a benefits affair, are proactive, have their legislation in order and are thinking about how they can prevent discrimination and racism in their actions. We rely on international legislation, but have a duty to show the Dutch population that we also want to regulate this properly. 'Belgium has also made significant progress, Sylvester knows. “They have the third lowest gender gap in the OECD countries. Our neighbors are our role models. The Dutch government should also take a step forward here instead of recovery operations afterwards. 'Each country is developing at its own pace. “We have this pace. That's not an accusation, but now that we know how deeply entrenched discrimination and racism is in the Netherlands, we also have a duty to do something about it and stop looking away. '

The government cannot afford to exist outside society

Correct preconditions

Specific legal requirements require support, leadership, budget, training, time and good guidance, says the advice. The question is whether all of that is present. But Sylvester states: “Where there is a will, there is a way. If the government does not actively work on equal treatment, more scandals may follow and it will lose its legitimacy and support. That's the worst thing that can happen in a democratic rule of law. The government cannot afford to exist outside society. 'An effective introduction of the equality obligation requires the right preconditions, such as money, capacity, data collection and leadership. “I'm certainly confident in the latter. More and more leaders have grown up in a diverse society. Of course, there are also blind spots among current leaders. Discrimination and racism sometimes also take place unconsciously. That's why we made a lot of work on our progress reports, so that you become unconscious. And then people are willing to do something about it. If you're not aware of it, nothing happens. '

Stone in the pond effect

Sylvester mentions three crucial building blocks of some variants of the equality obligation, which the committee will develop in a subsequent report in September: regulation, accountability and supervision. “You have to see these building blocks in conjunction. If all three are equally adequate, effective and in balance, it will be a driving force, just like the women's quota has worked. 'She expects resistance, because it often involves changes, but has confidence in the process towards “standardization,” such as a fireworks ban or the anti-smoking policy. “Discrimination and racism have an impact on people. It leads to low school advice, inability to find an internship or job and a backlog in the housing market and in health care. That hurts people themselves, but also society as a whole, because people lose faith in the government and each other. 'The committee hopes for a “stone in the pond effect”. “Ultimately, there will be legislation and enforcement and future generations will say: we don't want this anymore. If we get serious about it, I really hope that discrimination and racism are much less common and experiences, such as our latest report “Time and Again”, will be a thing of the past. This is a historic opportunity to take a step forward in emancipation. '