During the 2000s, the European Union has witnessed a significant change in terms of integration policies for immigrants. This book intends to address the relationship between, on the one hand, cultural diversity resulting from migration, and, on the other hand, social cohesion and social justice within Western societies. In order to do this, the authors examine what can be described as two contradictory trends in recent public policies towards foreign people or people with a foreign origin. A book that aims to provide a trans-disciplinary analysis of the construction of “otherness” in North America and Europe. EXTRAIT In October 2010, in a very polemic context on immigration and immigrant integration, the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, announced that Germany was to be considered a multicultural failure, words that were soon echoed by the Belgian Prime Minister Yves Leterme. A few months later, the British Prime Minister David Cameron and the French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced the failure of multiculturalism in almost identical terms. These sensational statements, which by and large avoid defining the concept of multiculturalism, are based on a reaffirmation of “Western values” and strengthening of national identity. These statements express the need to review the policies on integration of immigrants, in the sense that they should be more active and voluntarist, more organized by the state and more supported by the EU. In the background, one can see fear for Islamic extremism, but also the idea that the nation states can put some obligations on immigrants, and that for a too long time we have been focusing on “those who arrive”, rather than on “the society that welcomes them”. These speeches are situated in a politico-legal context that in recent years was characterized by an ambivalent attitude towards diversity in Europe. On the one hand, we have seen accusations of racial, ethnic and religious discrimination, based on antidiscrimination legislation boosted by a strong European equality legal framework. On the other hand, we have seen denouncements of the perceived risk posed by Islam in Europe. These policy statements are also a result of numerous publications, often widely discussed in the media that outline the dangers of Islam in Europe (especially in the Netherlands). These political positions have also led to political decisions demonstrating the lack of legitimacy of Islam in Europe, such as the ban on building minarets in Switzerland or the Burqa bans adopted in the name of protecting national values and the “living together”, notably in France and Belgium (2011).

During the 2000s, the European Union has witnessed a significant change in terms of integration policies for immigrants. Countries like Sweden and the Netherlands, who were both pioneers of multicultural policies in Europe both significantly limited such policies in the late 1990s.

Dans le monde juridique belge, le revirement de jurisprudence, entendu comme un instrument au service d'une politique jurisprudentielle, a été le plus souvent ignoré, voire nié, en raison d'une conception étroite, légaliste et exagérément dogmatique du droit. Même si le pouvoir créateur de la jurisprudence a, depuis longtemps, été observé, il n'en continue pas moins à susciter malaise et faux-fuyant. Dans cette optique, le revirement de jurisprudence servirait tout au plus à corriger les " erreurs de droit ", en d'autres termes à rétablir une application exacte de la loi. Une comparaison de l'activité de la Cour de cassation avec celle de la House of Lords relativise fortement cette vision traditionnelle. Elle permet de prendre toute la mesure des critères auxquels la juridiction suprême de Belgique fait appel pour maîtriser le changement dans sa jurisprudence. Sans ignorer certaines particularités qui séparent la pratique de l'overruling de celle du revirement de jurisprudence, l'ouvrage établit, sur la base d'une analyse empirique minutieuse, leur étroite parenté qui se manifeste à cinq égards : le respect de principe des décisions antérieures, le rôle périphérique joué par l'erreur de droit, la fonction de catalyseur attachée à l'absence de paix juridique, la similitude des raisons justificatrices du changement et l'existence de freins à l'évolution du droit par la voie jurisprudentielle. Sur le plan du droit belge, l'ouvrage met en lumière l'existence d'une doctrine du précédent à la Cour de cassation, couplée à une véritable théorie du revirement de jurisprudence. De manière plus générale cette étude de droit comparé contribue à éroder la distinction traditionnelle entre systèmes de common law et de droit civil, laquelle est classiquement fondée sur le principe du précédent judiciaire obligatoire dans les premiers alors qu'il n'aurait pas droit de cité dans les seconds. L'ouvrage s'adresse à tous ceux qui s'interrogent sur la nature véritable de notre système juridique, sur la manière dont la règle de droit s'élabore et se transforme, ainsi que sur le rôle de la fonction juridictionnelle et son exercice dans une démocratie.

In both the United States and Canada, the concept of reasonable accommodation first emerged in equality law as a means of handling religious diversity. It was then applied to other grounds of discrimination, most notably disability. In the European Union, the evolution of antidiscrimination law is following a different path: a duty of reasonable accommodation was for the first time established by the 2000 Employment Equality Directive (or Directive 2000/78/EC) but only with respect to disability. Nonetheless, the question whether a right to reasonable accommodation can be derived from the prohibition of discrimination based on religion laid down by the same Directive, or, alternatively, whether such right should be recognized in future European legislation is becoming increasingly salient.

Recoge: 1. A general approach to conflicts between the principle of non-discrimination and concurrent fundamental rights. 2. Special cases of conflicts between the right to equality and other fundamental rights.

This paper emphasizes the key role played by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in the current developments in Internet content regulation. At present, no common international standards govern free speech limits on the Internet. Racist speech constitutes the most controversial issue between Europe and the US. The enforcement of domestic law online has recently led to surprising court rulings in several European countries, putting transatlantic ISPs under pressure. The paper provides a detailed account of three of these cases: the early German CompuServe case, the famous French Yahoo! case and most recently the French J'accuse! case. Both European and American legislators have endeavored to provide ISPs with “safe havens” (limitations of liability) and tentative procedural solutions like “notice and take down”. These new regimes and their likely effects on ISPs are presented and discussed. It is suggested that, despite the lack of common standards, the combination of the American and the European provisions would strongly incite transatlantic ISPs to take down racist material. This, however, also risks affecting other controversial data, otherwise subject to free speech protection. The danger of a massive scheme for private censorship is compelling.

This edited volume addresses the construction of identity classifications underlying the new forms of inclusion and exclusion that are to be found in contemporary Europe. Its scope covers practices of categorization and of resistance, both by majority groups.