Processing discrimination cases in post-socialist countries: Multiple and intersectional discrimination through the eyes of legal practitioners in Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia

Abstract

This article focuses on how discrimination cases in general, and multiple and intersectional discrimination cases in specific, are approached by legal practitioners in civil law countries, focusing on three post-socialist countries––Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia. The article presents empirical findings from semi-structured interviews showing how legal practitioners approach three equality law institutions: shifting of the burden of proof, comparator and contextualisation. The research findings suggest that challenges for multiple and intersectional discrimination claims persist despite the generally well developed legal framework. There is a general reluctance to accept the shifting of the burden of proof, and there is no established understanding or practice of when the burden is shifted, which hints to a nonunified practice. There is an insistence on a comparator, which burdens intersectional discrimination claims. There is a general disregard of the synergistic effects arising in intersectional discrimination cases and a tendency for disjointing intersectional claims. Thus, while the letter of the law may not be an obstacle for multiple and intersectional claims to be fully heard and properly addressed, the legal practice is.