Universal Periodic Review

This UPR tool reflects the global recommendations made to Austria by all countries world-wide during the Universial Priodic Review process (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council and their current status of implementation. The League coordinates a significant part of Austrian civil society in the UPR process. 

The recommendations can be filtered in the menu below by human rights topics, SDGs, proponent states etc. also a search function is available. 

 

We welcome your comments and suggestions at upr@liga.or.at.


Search category
Filter options
Filter by tag…

Progress: No progress

Continue to harmonise the national legislation against discrimination in order to ensure protection from all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of age, religion and belief, as well as sexual orientation and gender identity

Proponent:

Croatia


Republic of Croatia

Croatia


Republic of Croatia

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

It should be noted that in Austria, both the development and implementation of measures to combat discrimination have been driven forward in close cooperation with various civil society organisations. However, it must be noted that the public discourse often focuses on so-called „immigrant anti-Semitism“ and thus accuses people with migration experience from Turkey and Arabic-speaking countries in particular of anti-Semitism across the board. However, there is a lack of clear responsibility at federal level to combat anti-Black racism, anti-Muslim racism and racism in general. Few concrete measures have been taken so far. There is a lack of targeted awareness-raising measures that address discrimination against people with disabilities and limited abilities as well as aspects of self-empowerment and human rights. There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination. When it comes to access to goods and services, federal law (which is applicable in the majority of all cases) only provides protection against discrimination on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender – but not on the basis of age, religion and belief or sexual orientation. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection.    There is no explicit legal protection against intersectional discrimination and discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression or gender characteristics. The anti-discrimination laws and the respective equality bodies at federal and state level are organised very differently, which makes access to justice more difficult.
Those affected by discrimination usually have to take legal action individually. The amounts of damages awarded in practice are low and there is a lack of effective statutory minimum compensation and injunctive relief. A collective action as a collective legal protection instrument only exists in cases of discrimination on the basis of disability.
The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html   As part of the government plan 2025-2029, the federal government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see government plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).
There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination.    There have recently been selective amendments to the law against age discrimination, for example in the area of lending. However, there is still no comprehensive ban on discrimination in access to goods and services on the basis of age, religion and belief and sexual orientation (protection exists in federal law, which in the majority of cases only applies on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection. The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection (see government programme: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).   In summary, civil society appeals to the federal government to pursue a policy that focuses on the promotion rather than the restriction of fundamental and human rights. The involvement of civil society expertise is considered essential (see Open Letter: https://archiv2022.asyl.at/de/info/news/offenerbriefandiebundesregierung/index.html). While there are political strategies against anti-Semitism, there is no comparable approach to anti-Muslim racism. Instead, measures are taken that lead to prejudgements against people perceived as Muslim. The establishment of the Documentation Centre for Political Islam and Operation Luxor reinforce a general suspicion of Muslims and lead to people withdrawing from social discourse, a reduction in diversity of opinion and restrictions on participation. Freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly can be restricted on the basis of membership of a particular group, which has a negative impact on basic democratic principles (Website of the Federal Chancellery – Documentation Centre for Political Islam: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/nachrichten-der-bundesregierung/2020/integrationsministerin-raab-dokumentationsstelle-politischer-islam-nimmt-arbeit-auf.html).   As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).In July 2021, the „anti-terror package“ was passed in Austria, but this raised concerns from civil society organisations and UN experts. In particular, it was feared that the paragraph on „religiously motivated extremist connections“ could stigmatise Muslims (see Terrorism Prevention Act – TeBG (849 d.B.): https://www.parlament.gv.at/gegenstand/XXVII/I/849).   Despite concerns, law enforcement agencies used facial recognition technologies without a clear legal basis, resulting in potential discrimination against gender and ethnic minorities and interference with the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Racial profiling by the police continued to be practised and effective mechanisms to investigate these practices were lacking (see Human Rights Situation in Austria 2022, Amnesty International Austria: https://www.amnesty.at/themen/menschenrechte-in-oesterreich/menschenrechtslage-in-oesterreich-2022-amnesty-jahresbericht/). The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities entered into force in Austria on 1 July 1998 in order to protect and promote the rights of national minorities. The current report of the Secretariat of the Framework Convention emphasises that Austria is continuing its efforts to safeguard the rights of national minorities. Despite a significant increase in funding for national minorities to almost 8 million euros in 2021 and the adoption of new laws to combat hate speech and violent hate crimes, challenges remain, particularly in minority language education and in the area of mutual respect and intercultural dialogue.   In contrast, there is no clear responsibility at federal level to combat anti-black racism, anti-Muslim racism and racism in general. Little action has been taken, particularly with regard to awareness-raising measures against discrimination against people with disabilities and limited abilities, as well as promoting self-empowerment and human rights. 

Progress: No progress

Harmonize at all levels anti-discrimination legislation to protect all persons regardless of age, religion or belief, sexual orientation and gender identity

Proponent:

Denmark


Kingdom of Denmark

Denmark


Kingdom of Denmark

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

It should be noted that in Austria, both the development and implementation of measures to combat discrimination have been driven forward in close cooperation with various civil society organisations. However, it must be noted that the public discourse often focuses on so-called „immigrant anti-Semitism“ and thus accuses people with migration experience from Turkey and Arabic-speaking countries in particular of anti-Semitism across the board. However, there is a lack of clear responsibility at federal level to combat anti-Black racism, anti-Muslim racism and racism in general. Few concrete measures have been taken so far. There is a lack of targeted awareness-raising measures that address discrimination against people with disabilities and limited abilities as well as aspects of self-empowerment and human rights. There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination. When it comes to access to goods and services, federal law (which is applicable in the majority of all cases) only provides protection against discrimination on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender – but not on the basis of age, religion and belief or sexual orientation. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection.    There is no explicit legal protection against intersectional discrimination and discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression or gender characteristics. The anti-discrimination laws and the respective equality bodies at federal and state level are organised very differently, which makes access to justice more difficult.
Those affected by discrimination usually have to take legal action individually. The amounts of damages awarded in practice are low and there is a lack of effective statutory minimum compensation and injunctive relief. A collective action as a collective legal protection instrument only exists in cases of discrimination on the basis of disability.
The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html   As part of the government plan 2025-2029, the federal government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see government plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).
There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination.    There have recently been selective amendments to the law against age discrimination, for example in the area of lending. However, there is still no comprehensive ban on discrimination in access to goods and services on the basis of age, religion and belief and sexual orientation (protection exists in federal law, which in the majority of cases only applies on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection. The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection (see government programme: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).   In summary, civil society appeals to the federal government to pursue a policy that focuses on the promotion rather than the restriction of fundamental and human rights. The involvement of civil society expertise is considered essential (see Open Letter: https://archiv2022.asyl.at/de/info/news/offenerbriefandiebundesregierung/index.html). While there are political strategies against anti-Semitism, there is no comparable approach to anti-Muslim racism. Instead, measures are taken that lead to prejudgements against people perceived as Muslim. The establishment of the Documentation Centre for Political Islam and Operation Luxor reinforce a general suspicion of Muslims and lead to people withdrawing from social discourse, a reduction in diversity of opinion and restrictions on participation. Freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly can be restricted on the basis of membership of a particular group, which has a negative impact on basic democratic principles (Website of the Federal Chancellery – Documentation Centre for Political Islam: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/nachrichten-der-bundesregierung/2020/integrationsministerin-raab-dokumentationsstelle-politischer-islam-nimmt-arbeit-auf.html).   As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).In July 2021, the „anti-terror package“ was passed in Austria, but this raised concerns from civil society organisations and UN experts. In particular, it was feared that the paragraph on „religiously motivated extremist connections“ could stigmatise Muslims (see Terrorism Prevention Act – TeBG (849 d.B.): https://www.parlament.gv.at/gegenstand/XXVII/I/849).   Despite concerns, law enforcement agencies used facial recognition technologies without a clear legal basis, resulting in potential discrimination against gender and ethnic minorities and interference with the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Racial profiling by the police continued to be practised and effective mechanisms to investigate these practices were lacking (see Human Rights Situation in Austria 2022, Amnesty International Austria: https://www.amnesty.at/themen/menschenrechte-in-oesterreich/menschenrechtslage-in-oesterreich-2022-amnesty-jahresbericht/). The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities entered into force in Austria on 1 July 1998 in order to protect and promote the rights of national minorities. The current report of the Secretariat of the Framework Convention emphasises that Austria is continuing its efforts to safeguard the rights of national minorities. Despite a significant increase in funding for national minorities to almost 8 million euros in 2021 and the adoption of new laws to combat hate speech and violent hate crimes, challenges remain, particularly in minority language education and in the area of mutual respect and intercultural dialogue.   In contrast, there is no clear responsibility at federal level to combat anti-black racism, anti-Muslim racism and racism in general. Little action has been taken, particularly with regard to awareness-raising measures against discrimination against people with disabilities and limited abilities, as well as promoting self-empowerment and human rights. 

Progress: No progress

Ensure equal protection from all forms of discrimination, including by harmonizing and strengthening the scope of anti-discrimination laws in particular with respect to religion and belief and sexual orientation and gender identity

Proponent:

Netherlands


Kingdom of the Netherlands

Netherlands


Kingdom of the Netherlands

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

In Austria, a number of different laws regulate protection against discrimination at state and federal level. This makes the enforcement of the law complex in some cases, protection is not standardised and – contrary to numerous calls in the UPR process and in numerous other monitoring processes on human rights conventions – there are significant gaps in protection: 1. in terms of access to goods and services in the private sector, federal law (which is applicable in the majority of all cases) only provides protection against discrimination on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender – but not on the basis of age, religion and belief and sexual orientation. This fact has been criticised for years by numerous civil society organisations and equality actors as a lack of levelling up.
2) Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education.
3. there is also a lack of comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection.
In addition, the law contains provisions on the reversal of the burden of proof, which makes it easier for the person affected to prove discrimination, as well as provisions for possible claims for damages and compensation (see Equal Treatment Act, GIBG Federal Law Gazette I No. 66/2004: https://ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=20003395&FassungVom=2022-02-10). The Introductory Act to the Administrative Procedure Acts (EGVG) provides a legal basis for dealing with racist refusal of admission in Austria. According to this law, both victims and witnesses of racist discrimination can report such incidents. Police officers are obliged to forward these reports to the competent district administrative authority. The procedure under the EGVG is free of charge for the person making the report. The reporting person or organisation, such as ZARA or the Litigation Association, are not informed of the outcome of the proceedings and have no direct party status. In addition, the EGVG does not provide for compensation for the person discriminated against. Instead, offenders can be fined up to 1,090 euros, an amount that has not been evaluated for years. In the event of repeated violations of the EGVG, the trade authority can theoretically withdraw the trade licence. ZARA supports those affected by discrimination through various measures, including letters of intervention to the establishments concerned, legal advice and referral to other legal bodies such as the Equal Treatment Ombudsman’s Office or the Litigation Association. The aim is to find an out-of-court solution or to take legal action to enforce the rights of victims of discrimination. These legal and supportive measures are crucial to strengthening protection against racial discrimination in Austria and dealing with cases of discrimination appropriately (see Racism Report 2022: https://assets.zara.or.at/media/rassismusreport/ZARA-Rassismus_Report_2022.pdf). 
There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination. When it comes to access to goods and services, federal law (which is applicable in the majority of all cases) only provides protection against discrimination on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender – but not on the basis of age, religion and belief or sexual orientation. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection.    There is no explicit legal protection against intersectional discrimination and discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression or gender characteristics. The anti-discrimination laws and the respective equality bodies at federal and state level are organised very differently, which makes access to justice more difficult.
Those affected by discrimination usually have to take legal action individually. The amounts of damages awarded in practice are low and there is a lack of effective statutory minimum compensation and injunctive relief. A collective action as a collective legal protection instrument only exists in cases of discrimination on the basis of disability.
The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html   As part of the government plan 2025-2029, the federal government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see government plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).
While there are political strategies against anti-Semitism, there is no comparable approach to anti-Muslim racism. Instead, measures are taken that lead to prejudgements against people perceived as Muslim. The establishment of the Documentation Centre for Political Islam and Operation Luxor reinforce a general suspicion of Muslims and lead to people withdrawing from social discourse, a reduction in diversity of opinion and restrictions on participation. Freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly can be restricted on the basis of membership of a particular group, which has a negative impact on basic democratic principles (Website of the Federal Chancellery – Documentation Centre for Political Islam: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/nachrichten-der-bundesregierung/2020/integrationsministerin-raab-dokumentationsstelle-politischer-islam-nimmt-arbeit-auf.html).   As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).In July 2021, the „anti-terror package“ was passed in Austria, but this raised concerns from civil society organisations and UN experts. In particular, it was feared that the paragraph on „religiously motivated extremist connections“ could stigmatise Muslims (see Terrorism Prevention Act – TeBG (849 d.B.): https://www.parlament.gv.at/gegenstand/XXVII/I/849).   Despite concerns, law enforcement agencies used facial recognition technologies without a clear legal basis, resulting in potential discrimination against gender and ethnic minorities and interference with the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Racial profiling by the police continued to be practised and effective mechanisms to investigate these practices were lacking (see Human Rights Situation in Austria 2022, Amnesty International Austria: https://www.amnesty.at/themen/menschenrechte-in-oesterreich/menschenrechtslage-in-oesterreich-2022-amnesty-jahresbericht/). The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities entered into force in Austria on 1 July 1998 in order to protect and promote the rights of national minorities. The current report of the Secretariat of the Framework Convention emphasises that Austria is continuing its efforts to safeguard the rights of national minorities. Despite a significant increase in funding for national minorities to almost 8 million euros in 2021 and the adoption of new laws to combat hate speech and violent hate crimes, challenges remain, particularly in minority language education and in the area of mutual respect and intercultural dialogue.   In contrast, there is no clear responsibility at federal level to combat anti-black racism, anti-Muslim racism and racism in general. Little action has been taken, particularly with regard to awareness-raising measures against discrimination against people with disabilities and limited abilities, as well as promoting self-empowerment and human rights. 

Progress: No progress

Guarantee the recognition, protection and defense of minorities’ rights in the country, as well as adopt legislation against discrimination on the basis of religion, age, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity

Proponent:

Costa Rica


Republic of Costa Rica

Costa Rica


Republic of Costa Rica

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination. When it comes to access to goods and services, federal law (which is applicable in the majority of all cases) only provides protection against discrimination on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender – but not on the basis of age, religion and belief or sexual orientation. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection.    There is no explicit legal protection against intersectional discrimination and discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression or gender characteristics. The anti-discrimination laws and the respective equality bodies at federal and state level are organised very differently, which makes access to justice more difficult.
Those affected by discrimination usually have to take legal action individually. The amounts of damages awarded in practice are low and there is a lack of effective statutory minimum compensation and injunctive relief. A collective action as a collective legal protection instrument only exists in cases of discrimination on the basis of disability.
The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html   As part of the government plan 2025-2029, the federal government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see government plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).
There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination.    There have recently been selective amendments to the law against age discrimination, for example in the area of lending. However, there is still no comprehensive ban on discrimination in access to goods and services on the basis of age, religion and belief and sexual orientation (protection exists in federal law, which in the majority of cases only applies on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection. The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection (see government programme: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).   In summary, civil society appeals to the federal government to pursue a policy that focuses on the promotion rather than the restriction of fundamental and human rights. The involvement of civil society expertise is considered essential (see Open Letter: https://archiv2022.asyl.at/de/info/news/offenerbriefandiebundesregierung/index.html). While there are political strategies against anti-Semitism, there is no comparable approach to anti-Muslim racism. Instead, measures are taken that lead to prejudgements against people perceived as Muslim. The establishment of the Documentation Centre for Political Islam and Operation Luxor reinforce a general suspicion of Muslims and lead to people withdrawing from social discourse, a reduction in diversity of opinion and restrictions on participation. Freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly can be restricted on the basis of membership of a particular group, which has a negative impact on basic democratic principles (Website of the Federal Chancellery – Documentation Centre for Political Islam: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/nachrichten-der-bundesregierung/2020/integrationsministerin-raab-dokumentationsstelle-politischer-islam-nimmt-arbeit-auf.html).   As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).In July 2021, the „anti-terror package“ was passed in Austria, but this raised concerns from civil society organisations and UN experts. In particular, it was feared that the paragraph on „religiously motivated extremist connections“ could stigmatise Muslims (see Terrorism Prevention Act – TeBG (849 d.B.): https://www.parlament.gv.at/gegenstand/XXVII/I/849).   Despite concerns, law enforcement agencies used facial recognition technologies without a clear legal basis, resulting in potential discrimination against gender and ethnic minorities and interference with the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Racial profiling by the police continued to be practised and effective mechanisms to investigate these practices were lacking (see Human Rights Situation in Austria 2022, Amnesty International Austria: https://www.amnesty.at/themen/menschenrechte-in-oesterreich/menschenrechtslage-in-oesterreich-2022-amnesty-jahresbericht/). The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities entered into force in Austria on 1 July 1998 in order to protect and promote the rights of national minorities. The current report of the Secretariat of the Framework Convention emphasises that Austria is continuing its efforts to safeguard the rights of national minorities. Despite a significant increase in funding for national minorities to almost 8 million euros in 2021 and the adoption of new laws to combat hate speech and violent hate crimes, challenges remain, particularly in minority language education and in the area of mutual respect and intercultural dialogue.   In contrast, there is no clear responsibility at federal level to combat anti-black racism, anti-Muslim racism and racism in general. Little action has been taken, particularly with regard to awareness-raising measures against discrimination against people with disabilities and limited abilities, as well as promoting self-empowerment and human rights. {Minderhieten-Diskriminierung}

Progress: No progress

Accept a comprehensive strategy to eliminate all kinds of discrimination on the basis of religion and belief, age, sexual orientation and gender identity

Proponent:

North Korea


Democratic People's Republic of Korea

North Korea


Democratic People's Republic of Korea

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination. When it comes to access to goods and services, federal law (which is applicable in the majority of all cases) only provides protection against discrimination on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender – but not on the basis of age, religion and belief or sexual orientation. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection.    There is no explicit legal protection against intersectional discrimination and discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression or gender characteristics. The anti-discrimination laws and the respective equality bodies at federal and state level are organised very differently, which makes access to justice more difficult.
Those affected by discrimination usually have to take legal action individually. The amounts of damages awarded in practice are low and there is a lack of effective statutory minimum compensation and injunctive relief. A collective action as a collective legal protection instrument only exists in cases of discrimination on the basis of disability.
The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html   As part of the government plan 2025-2029, the federal government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see government plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).
There is still no standardised and comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in Austria. Austrian equality law is still characterised by a discriminatory hierarchy of grounds for discrimination.    There have recently been selective amendments to the law against age discrimination, for example in the area of lending. However, there is still no comprehensive ban on discrimination in access to goods and services on the basis of age, religion and belief and sexual orientation (protection exists in federal law, which in the majority of cases only applies on the basis of disability, ethnicity and gender. Furthermore, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination based on all grounds of discrimination in the area of education. Similarly, there is no comprehensive protection against discrimination in a number of areas of social protection. The current government programme 2025-2029 does not provide for the elimination of these inequalities in discrimination protection (see government programme: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).   In summary, civil society appeals to the federal government to pursue a policy that focuses on the promotion rather than the restriction of fundamental and human rights. The involvement of civil society expertise is considered essential (see Open Letter: https://archiv2022.asyl.at/de/info/news/offenerbriefandiebundesregierung/index.html). While there are political strategies against anti-Semitism, there is no comparable approach to anti-Muslim racism. Instead, measures are taken that lead to prejudgements against people perceived as Muslim. The establishment of the Documentation Centre for Political Islam and Operation Luxor reinforce a general suspicion of Muslims and lead to people withdrawing from social discourse, a reduction in diversity of opinion and restrictions on participation. Freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly can be restricted on the basis of membership of a particular group, which has a negative impact on basic democratic principles (Website of the Federal Chancellery – Documentation Centre for Political Islam: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/nachrichten-der-bundesregierung/2020/integrationsministerin-raab-dokumentationsstelle-politischer-islam-nimmt-arbeit-auf.html).   As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).In July 2021, the „anti-terror package“ was passed in Austria, but this raised concerns from civil society organisations and UN experts. In particular, it was feared that the paragraph on „religiously motivated extremist connections“ could stigmatise Muslims (see Terrorism Prevention Act – TeBG (849 d.B.): https://www.parlament.gv.at/gegenstand/XXVII/I/849).   Despite concerns, law enforcement agencies used facial recognition technologies without a clear legal basis, resulting in potential discrimination against gender and ethnic minorities and interference with the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Racial profiling by the police continued to be practised and effective mechanisms to investigate these practices were lacking (see Human Rights Situation in Austria 2022, Amnesty International Austria: https://www.amnesty.at/themen/menschenrechte-in-oesterreich/menschenrechtslage-in-oesterreich-2022-amnesty-jahresbericht/). The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities entered into force in Austria on 1 July 1998 in order to protect and promote the rights of national minorities. The current report of the Secretariat of the Framework Convention emphasises that Austria is continuing its efforts to safeguard the rights of national minorities. Despite a significant increase in funding for national minorities to almost 8 million euros in 2021 and the adoption of new laws to combat hate speech and violent hate crimes, challenges remain, particularly in minority language education and in the area of mutual respect and intercultural dialogue.   In contrast, there is no clear responsibility at federal level to combat anti-black racism, anti-Muslim racism and racism in general. Little action has been taken, particularly with regard to awareness-raising measures against discrimination against people with disabilities and limited abilities, as well as promoting self-empowerment and human rights. 

Redaktionelle Verantwortung UPR-Tool:

Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte, upr@liga.or.at

Lizenz CC-BY-SA 

Unterstützung durch:

Forschungskooperation mit der Volksanwaltschaft

Förderung des Zukunftsfonds der Republik Österreich

 

Receive the latest news

Abonnieren Sie unseren Newsletter