Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Gay rights group may sue over job equality exemptions

Paul Waugh,Deputy Political Editor
Saturday 24 May 2003 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

New laws allowing religious employers to sack gay staff are facing a possible legal challenge.

The equal rights group Stonewall will convene a meeting of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, the Trades Union Congress, and others next week after advice from human rights lawyers that the law is open to challenge.

The 2003 Employment Equality Regulations were drafted to comply with a European Union directive banning workplace discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or religion. But when the statutory instruments were laid before Parliament this month, they contained exemptions for employers "with an ethos based on religion or belief". One clause states that an exemption applies when an employer acts "to avoid conflicting with the strongly held religious convictions of a significant number of the religion's followers".

Because the regulations are secondary legislation, they do not have to be debated on the floor of the House of Commons and may be subject to only three hours' debate in committee before passing into law.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill, a Liberal Democrat peer and QC, has told the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments he feels the regulations contravene EU law. Robert Wintemute, of the School of Law, King's College London, has advised that the exemptions are unnecessary, could be abused, and were not subject to adequate consultation.

Sasha Deshmukh, parliamentary officer for Stonewall, said the organisation was "very angry",adding: "We are exploring the potential for a judicial review because the wording would appear to contravene the directive itself."

Evan Harris, the Liberal Democrat spokesman on equality issues, said: "It is astonishing that after taking so long, the Government has, at the last minute, caved in to prejudice to such an extent that its proposals risk being struck down by the courts."

But senior government sources argue that while allowing certain exemptions for religious ministers, any attempt at wider discrimination would be subject to an employment tribunal.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in