France / Public Defender of rights/n°2019-148

Country

France

Title

France / Public Defender of rights/n°2019-148

View full Case

Year

2019

Decision/ruling/judgment date

Thursday, July 04, 2019

Incident(s) concerned/related

Discrimination

Related Bias motivation

Religion

Groups affected

Muslims

Court/Body type

National Human Rights Body

Court/Body

Public Defender of Rights

Key facts of the case

Public hospitals provide inpatients in their care facilities with meals for the duration of their stay. 'Y' hospitals allow patients who wish to do so to receive substitute pork-free, alcohol-free, vegetarian, or kosher meals, the distribution for which a public contract has been concluded. However, it was brought to the attention of the Public Defender of Rights that Y does not offer its patients the opportunity to request halal meals. Mr. X, considering that the lack of distribution of halal meals by Y hospitals constitutes discrimination against persons of the Muslim faith, requested the intervention of the Public Defender of Rights.

Main reasoning/argumentation

There is a difference in treatment of Muslim and Jewish patients in hospitals, a Jewish patients have access to all foods that meet their religious requirements, but Muslim patients do not have access to certain foods corresponding to their religious requirements. The existence of an additional cost is not in itself such as to justify a difference in treatment between religions, as this additional cost exists for any distribution of meals based on religious requirements, whatever they may be. Thus, the discrimination on the grounds of religion takes place.

Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?

Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case

Does the difference in treatment of Muslim and Jewish patients in hospitals constitute discrimination on the grounds of religion?

Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case

The Public Defender of Rights recommends that Y take the most appropriate measures to restore equal treatment between patients of different faiths, whether by distributing meals according to the religious requirements of each patient, regardless of their faith, or by offering everyone the possibility to receive only a substitute meal.

Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details

"Alors que les patients de confession judaïque ont accès à tous les aliments répondant à leurs prescriptions religieuses, les patients de confession musulmane n’ont pas accès à certains aliments répondant à leurs prescriptions religieuses. L’existence d’un surcoût n’est pas en soi de nature à justifier la différence de traitement entre les religions, alors même que ce surcoût existe pour toute distribution de repas confessionnels, quels qu’ils soient. Ainsi, en l’espèce, la différence de traitement entre les patients de confession musulmane et les patients de confession judaïque est susceptible de constituer une discrimination fondée sur la religion."

"While Jewish patients have access to all foods that meet their religious requirements, Muslim patients do not have access to certain foods corresponding to their religious requirements. The existence of an additional cost is not in itself such as to justify a difference in treatment between religions, as this additional cost exists for any distribution of meals based on religious requirements, whatever they may be. Therefore, in this case, the difference in treatment of Muslim and Jewish patients in hospitals constitutes discrimination on the grounds of religion."

DISCLAIMERThe information presented here is collected under contract by the FRA's research network FRANET. The information and views contained do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA.