Torna alla ricerca
CGUE – Conclusioni dell’avv. generale Tamara Capeta, 13.2.2025, C-417/23.
| | |Discriminazione per razza e origine etnica – art. 19 TFUE – ambito di applicazione - direttiva 2000/43/CE – nozione di origine etnica – omogeneità del gruppo svantaggiato – irrilevanza – percezione soggettiva – rilevanza – trattamento svantaggioso per gli “immigrati e loro discendenti provenienti da pesi non occidentali” – discriminazione diretta per origine etnica – sussiste
Nell’esaminare la questione dell’eventuale contrasto con la direttiva 2000/43 della legislazione urbanistica danese che limita al 40% la quota massima di alloggi pubblici nelle aree popolate da oltre il 40% di “immigrati e loro discendenti provenienti da pese non occidentali” occorre tenere conto: a) che l’art. 19 TFUE, attribuendo all’Unione una competenza a combattere le discriminazioni nell’ambito di applicazione del diritto dell’Unione, comporta che le scelte operate dagli Stati membri, siano limitate - anche per quanto rigurada ambiti non rientranti nelle competenze dell’Unione, come nel caso degli alloggi pubblici - dall’obbligo di rispettare il principio di non discriminazione per origine etnica sancito dalla predetta direttiva; b) la nozione di “origine etnica”, non richiede che il gruppo svantaggiato sia connotato da una omogeneità di caratteristiche (culturali, religiose, ecc.) essendo sufficiente che detto gruppo, per quanto eterogeneo, sia caratterizzato dalla origine etnica dei suoi appartenenti, come appunto accade quando ci si riferisca ai “paesi non occidentali”; inoltre nella identificazione del fattore rileva anche la percezione soggettiva, cioè che un determinato gruppo sia avvertito come diverso e “altro” rispetto a quello maggioritario. Conseguentemente, occorre affermare che il termine «origine etnica» deve essere interpretato nel senso che ricomprende un gruppo di persone definite «immigrati e loro discendenti provenienti da paesi non occidentali» e che un regime che utilizzi tale nozione per individuare i quartieri dove il numero di alloggi pubblici deve essere contenuto sotto il 40%, costituisce discriminazione diretta e non può essere giustificato dalla finalità di favorire la distribuzione su più quartieri dei “migranti non ooccidentali”.
Discrimination based on race and ethnic origin – Article 19 TFEU – Scope of application – Directive 2000/43/EC – Notion of ethnic origin – Homogeneity of the disadvantaged group – Irrelevance – Subjective perception – Relevance – Disadvantageous treatment for \'immigrants and their descendants from non-Western countries\' – Direct discrimination based on ethnic origin – Exists
In examining the issue of potential conflict with Directive 2000/43 regarding the Danish urban planning legislation that limits the maximum share of public housing to 40% in areas populated by more than 40% of \'immigrants and their descendants from non-Western countries,\' it is necessary to take into account: a) that Article 19 TFEU, by attributing to the Union the competence to combat discrimination within the scope of Union law, means that the choices made by the Member States are limited – even for areas not falling within the Union\'s competences, such as public housing – by the obligation to respect the principle of non-discrimination based on ethnic origin as established by the aforementioned directive; b) the notion of \'ethnic origin\' does not require that the disadvantaged group be characterized by homogeneity of characteristics (cultural, religious, etc.), it is sufficient that the group, despite being heterogeneous, is defined by the ethnic origin of its members, as is the case when referring to \'non-Western countries\'; furthermore, the subjective perception is also relevant in identifying the factor, i.e., whether a specific group is perceived as different and \'other\' compared to the majority group. Consequently, it must be stated that the term \'ethnic origin\' should be interpreted to include a group of people defined as \'immigrants and their descendants from non-Western countries,\' and that a regime using this notion to identify the neighborhoods where the number of public housing units must be kept below 40% constitutes direct discrimination and cannot be justified by the aim of promoting the distribution of \'non-Western migrants\' across more neighborhoods.
In examining the issue of potential conflict with Directive 2000/43 regarding the Danish urban planning legislation that limits the maximum share of public housing to 40% in areas populated by more than 40% of \'immigrants and their descendants from non-Western countries,\' it is necessary to take into account: a) that Article 19 TFEU, by attributing to the Union the competence to combat discrimination within the scope of Union law, means that the choices made by the Member States are limited – even for areas not falling within the Union\'s competences, such as public housing – by the obligation to respect the principle of non-discrimination based on ethnic origin as established by the aforementioned directive; b) the notion of \'ethnic origin\' does not require that the disadvantaged group be characterized by homogeneity of characteristics (cultural, religious, etc.), it is sufficient that the group, despite being heterogeneous, is defined by the ethnic origin of its members, as is the case when referring to \'non-Western countries\'; furthermore, the subjective perception is also relevant in identifying the factor, i.e., whether a specific group is perceived as different and \'other\' compared to the majority group. Consequently, it must be stated that the term \'ethnic origin\' should be interpreted to include a group of people defined as \'immigrants and their descendants from non-Western countries,\' and that a regime using this notion to identify the neighborhoods where the number of public housing units must be kept below 40% constitutes direct discrimination and cannot be justified by the aim of promoting the distribution of \'non-Western migrants\' across more neighborhoods.