LAW EQUAL TREATMENT OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES OR CHRONIC DISEASES (a personal translation from Dutch in English; this is neither the official text nor the whole text); This law came into force in The Netherlands: December 2003

§ 1. General items 
  
Article 1

Definitions:

a. distinction: direct and indirect distinction, as well as the order to make distinction;

b. direct distinction: distinction between persons based on a existing or supposed handicap or chronic disease;

c. indirect distinction: distinction based on other qualities or behaviour that result in direct distinction.

Article 1a

1. The ban to make distinction according to this law implies a ban to intimidate.

2. The definition of intimidation hereby is: behaviour                                                      - that is connected with handicap or chronic disease as well as with the view or consequence of injuring somebody’s dignity                                                                                         - and that creates a threatening, hostile, insulting, humiliating or hurting environment.

3. Article 3 doesn’t apply to the ban to intimidate.

Article 2

The ban to make distinction implies also that those, to whom this ban addresses, are obliged to make effective adaptations according to the needs unless these adaptations are a disproportionate load.

Article 3

1. The ban to make distinction is not in force if:

a. the distinction is necessary to protect safety or health;

b. the distinction contains an arrangement, norm or practice pursued to create or maintain specific provisions and facilities on behalf of persons with disabilities or chronic diseases;

c. the distinction concerns a specific measure which allows persons with disabilities or chronic diseases to occupy a privileged position in order to remove or diminish actual disadvantages related to the disability or chronic disease and the distinction is reasonable in proportion to that target.

2. The ban to make indirect distinction is not in force if a legitimate goal justifies the distinction and the means to reach the goal are appropriate and essential.

§ 2. Labour  
  
Article 4

Distinction is prohibited in cases of:

a. offering a job and the actions to occupy the vacant job;

b. starting or ending a labour agreement;

c. appointing to be an official and ending the labour agreement of an official;

d. the employment exchange;

e. conditions of employment;

f. giving opportunities to attend education, training etc during or preceding a labour agreement;

g. promotion to a higher office;

h. circumstances of employment.

Article 5

The ban to make distinction implies also the conditions to get a free profession and the access to a free profession as well as the possibilities to exercise the free profession and further unfolding within such a profession.

Article 5a

Distinction is forbidden in situations of membership or involvement in organizations of employers, employees or professional colleagues as well as the benefits of such memberships or involvements. 

§ 3. Vocational education  
  
Article 6

Distinction is forbidden in situations of:

a.  access to and provision of career orientation and careers guidance;

b.  giving access to all kinds of tests, offering of these tests and doing the testing in all education aimed towards labour as well as in situations of closing this type of education.

§ 4. Public transport  
  
later on

§ 5. Legal protection
  
Article 9

1. Ending a labour relation by an employer in defiance of article 4 or because of the circumstance that the employee has lodged an appeal referring article 4 can set aside.

2. treats the term to lodge an appeal

3. treats limitation of a legal claim

4. treats duty of paying for damage

Article 9a

Besides article 9 it is forbidden to injure persons because of the fact that they refer to this law or lend assistance in legal proceedings concerning this law.

Article 10

If a person, thinking that against him distinction is made or has been made as meant in this law, in legal proceedings supplies facts which suggest that the distinction has been made, the other party has to prove she didn’t act against this law.

And if a person, presuming to be disadvantaged contrary to article 2 of this law, in legal proceedings supplies facts which suggest that making effective adaptations is neglected, the other party has to prove she didn’t act against this regulation.

Article 12

The Commission Equal Treatment can investigate if somebody makes of has made distinction as meant in this law, or acted against article 2 of this law.

(This Dutch commission cannot force parties. But the authority of this commission is accepted in 70 % of all pronounces of the commission. And in the other cases a party can take legal proceedings in a court of justice in The Netherlands.)