歧视可以“间接”吗?——对间接歧视可责性问题的分析  

Can Discrimination Be “Indirect”? An Analysis of the Culpability of Indirect Discrimination

作　　者：金韬 Jin Tao

机构地区：[1]宁波大学法学院

出　　处：《法制与社会发展》2021年第6期51-67,共17页Law and Social Development

基　　金：司法部法治建设与法学理论研究项目“隐性就业歧视的法律规制研究”(20SFB3002)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：间接歧视离我们对歧视的日常理解较远,我们应将后果而非意图作为认定间接歧视的标准。禁止间接歧视在司法实践中遭遇了诸多挑战,这主要是因为我们难以说明这类歧视的可责性。"侵权法解释"和"分配正义解释"提供了两种不同的责任基础,但是它们都是片面的。"双层可责性理论"则提供了一幅完整的关于间接歧视可责性的图像,它能同时说明个体层面的可责性和结构层面的可责性。这两个层面的可责性以群体身份为连接纽带,间接歧视的可责性在两个层面之间双向动态循环,最终根源于群体之间不公正的社会结构。在间接歧视的情境中,尽管行为人同等对待了不同群体的成员,但是群体之间的不平等依然会导致相关行为产生具体损害。同时,受歧视者遭到的损害也进一步彰显并加固了不公正的社会结构。可责性问题与责任归属问题密切相关,由行为主体承担间接歧视的责任既是合理的,也是符合理性的。Indirect discrimination, with consequences rather than intent as the standard for determining discrimination, is far from our ordinary understanding of discrimination. The prohibition of indirect discrimination has suffered many challenges in judicial practice, mainly rooted in the difficulty of articulating the culpability of it. The "tort law interpretation" and the "distributive justice interpretation" attempt to provide two different bases of culpability, but none is the appropriate answer. The "two-tier theory of culpability" provides a complete picture of the culpability of indirect discrimination, which includes both individual-level and socio-structural-level. With group identity as the link, culpability is two-way circled within both levels. The root of culpability comes from the unjust social structure between groups. Although indirect discrimination ostensibly treats different groups equally, the unequal social structure produces concrete harms. At the same time, the harms suffered by the discriminated person further manifests and reinforces the unjust social structure. The issue of culpability is closely related to the issue of attribution of responsibility, and it is both reasonable and rational to hold the actor responsible for indirect discrimination.

关 键 词：间接歧视 歧视意图 可责性 反歧视法 

分 类 号：D920.4[政治法律—法学]