Pretorius, J. L.Ngwena, Charles Gideon.2015-10-012015-10-012010-122010-122010-12http://hdl.handle.net/11660/1311English: Disabled people constitute a historically disadvantaged and marginalized group that experiences discrimination in the workplace among other socio-economic sectors. In this thesis, my focus is on searching for an inclusive type of equality that could inform the interpretation and application the equality clause in the South African Constitution. My aim is neither to arrive at a mathematically constructed abstract type of equality, nor to produce a blueprint of equality that puts finality on the debate on equality. Rather, it is to engage with equality discursively with a view to contributing towards an ongoing development of a juridical as well as philosophical path for constructing the normative architecture of a type of equality that is more responsive to the equality needs of disabled people. The spotlight is on developing a type of equality that is normatively inclusive and transformative as to be capable of sufficiently meeting the quest for political, and more crucially, economic recognition of disabled people. I use a repertoire of analytical techniques to explore and appraise the inclusiveness and responsiveness of contemporary approaches to equality. At a more general level, the discourse employs comparative analysis. However, whilst comparative analysis in this thesis includes comparing and contrasting the equality jurisprudence of different jurisdictions, and in this instance, comparing and contrasting South Africa with Canada and the United States, it is, nonetheless, a relatively small part of my comparative discourse. It is not the primary sense in which the thesis develops a comparative discourse. The greater part of my discourse employs a comparative approach to mean comparing and contrasting the underpinning moral compasses of formal equality and substantive equality with a view to revealing the capacities of each type of equality to be responsive to the equality aspirations of disabled people. Over and above comparative analysis, I use, in the main, the historicity of apartheid, the social model of disability, and feminist theory and practices as analytical techniques for interrogating the responsiveness of notions of formal equality and substantive equality. From insights drawn mainly from the social model of disability and feminism, I construct disability method as a syncretic and legal method for interrogating the normative sufficiency of equality laws and praxis. Disability method is the study’s principal interpretive method for ensuring that the appraisal of pertinent laws, policies or practices is always conscious of the status of disabled people as a disadvantaged and vulnerable historical community, and the imperative of transforming erstwhile culturally, and even more crucially, economically oppressive norms. I contend throughout the study that law does not carry inherently neutral values that, as a matter of course, allow for searching for alternative paradigms of equality. Ultimately, it is the social construction of disability that holds the key to interrogating equality norms in a serious manner and not merely restating what the legislature and the judiciary proclaim about disability and equality. In this sense, by way of clarifying the methodological and philosophical orientation of this study, it bears stressing that the analytical approach that it adopts differs markedly from conventional legal discourses that only use an ‘internal critique’, as it were, to critically evaluate legal norms by using norms derived from law in order to determine whether the law is living up to the standards which it professes to hold and whether the justice promised by those standards is being dispensed evenly across all social groups. Though ‘internal critique’ is part of how some of the arguments in this study are framed, it is only a small part. The greater part of my equality discourse derives from external critique. It derives from appraising the law using ethical or social values that are external to the law but which I argue ought to shape the law. Using disability method, and drawing from the thesis of a heterogeneous civic public sphere, I situate the normative ethical framework for substantive equality within a type of participatory democracy in which equality is constructed dialogically and not unilaterally or hegemonically. I treat equality as a component of democratic ethics that result not from a given centre but from an egalitarian dialogue between disabled people and enabled people. I argue for inclusive heterogeneous equality as the operative equality template for eradicating disablism in an imagined participatory democracy in which respect for pluralism and the eradication of dominance and subordination among social groups are core foundational ethics.Afrikaans: Gestremde persone vorm ‘n histories benadeelde en gemarginaliseerde groep wat diskriminasie in die werkplek as sosio-ekonomiese sektor ervaar. In hierdie proefskrif word op die soeke na ‘n inklusiewe vorm van gelykheid gefokus wat die interpretasie en toepassing van die gelykheidsklousule in die Suid-Afrikaanse grondwet inhoud kan gee. Die oogmerk is nie om ‘n abstrakte matematiesgekonstrueerde vorm van gelykheid te ontwikkel of om ‘n bloudruk vir gelykheid daar te stel wat veronderstel is om die debat oor gelykheid tot ‘n einde te bring nie. Dit is eerder ‘n poging om diskursief met gelykheid om te gaan met die oog daarop om tot die voortgaande ontwikkeling van ‘n juridiese sowel as ‘n fislosofiese weg vir die konstruering van die normatiewe argitektuur van ‘n tipe gelykheid by te dra wat meer responsief op die gelykheids-behoeftes van gestremde persone kan reageer. Die soeklig val op die ontwikkeling van ‘n tipe gelykheid wat normatief inklusief en transformatief is ten einde voldoende in staat te wees om aan die uitdagings deur die politiese en veral die ekonomiese erkenning van gestremde persone gestel te kan beantwoord. ‘n Repertoire van analitiese tegnieke word aangewend ten einde die inklusiwiteit en responsiwiteit van kontemporêre benaderings tot gelykheid te ondersoek en te beoordeel. Op ‘n meer algemene vlak word ‘n vergelykende analise in die diskoers benut. Alhoewel die vergelykende analise wat in hierdie proefskrif aangewend word insluit die vergelyking en kontrastering van die regsposisie met betrekking tot gelykheid van verskillende jurisdiksies – in hierdie geval die vergelyking en kontrastering van die Suid-Afrikaanse regsposisie met dié van Kanada en die Verenigde State – vorm dit egter ‘n relatief klein deel van die vergelykende diskoers. Die grootste deel van die diskoers benut ‘n vergelykende benadering wat behels die vergelyking en kontrastering van die onderliggende morele rigtingwysers van formele gelykheid en substantiewe gelykheid met die oogmerk om die onderskeie vermoëns van elke tipe gelykheid om responsief op die gelykheidsaspirasies van gestremde persone te kan reageer, te beoordeel. Benewens die vergelykende analise, word hoofsaaklik die historiese gegewendheid van apartheid, die sosiale model van gestremdheid en feministiese teorie en praktyke as analitiese tegnieke vir die kritiese ondersoek na die resposiwiteit van die konsepte van formele gelykheid en substantiewe gelykheid benut. Uit die insigte wat hoofsaaklik van die sosiale model van gestremdheid en fiminsime verwerf word, word ‘n gestremdheidsmetode gekonstrueer synde ‘n sinkretiese en juridiese metode vir ‘n kritiese ondersoek na die normatiewe aanvaarbaarheid van gelykheidswetgewing en –praktyk. Gestremdheidsmetode is die belangrikste interpretasie-metode in hierdie studie ten einde te verseker dat die beoordeling van spesifieke wetgewing, beleide of praktyke deurentyd bewus bly van die status van gestremde persone as ‘n benadeelde en kwesbare historiese gemeenskap, asook die vi plig om kulturele en - selfs méér belangrik – ekonomies-onderdrukkende norme te transformeer. Deurlopend word geargumenteer dat die reg nie inherent neutrale waardes beliggaam wat voorsiening vir alternatiewe paradigmas van gelykheid maak nie. Ten diepste is dit die sosiale konstruk van gestremdheid wat die sleutel tot die kritiese ondersoek na gelykheidsnorme met die nodige erns benader en nie bloot die standpunte oor gestremdheid en gelykheid van die wetgewer en die regbank napraat nie. Ten einde die metodologiese en filosofiese oriëntasie van die studie duidelik te stel, word beklemtoon dat die analitiese benadering wat benut word in betekenisvolle opsigte verskil van die konvensionele diskoerse. Die konvensionele diskoerse wend slegs ‘n benadering van “interne kritiek” aan ten einde krities regsnorme aan die hand van norme wat van die reg afgelei is te gebruik om te bepaal of die reg voldoen aan die standaarde wat dit verklaar na te streef. Voorts word bepaal of die geregtigheid wat deur sodanige standaarde in die vooruitsig gestel word, indien dit gelyklik oor alle soiale groepe versprei word, haalbaar is. Alhoewel “interne kritiek” deel vorm van die wyse waarop sommige argumente in hierdie studie geformuleer word, vorm dit egter slegs ‘n klein deel daarvan. Die grootste deel van my gelykheidsdiskoers vloei uit eksterne kritiek voort. Dit ontspring aan die beoordeling van die reg aan die hand van etiese of sosiale waardes wat buite die reg staan, maar wat, soos geargumenteer word, die reg behoort te beïnvloed. Deur die toepassing van gestremdheidsmetodiek en die benutting van die standpunt van ‘n heterogene burgerlike publieke sfeer, word die normatief-etiese raamwerk vir substantiewe gelykheid binne ‘n tipe van deelnemende demokrasie, waarin gelykheid dialogies en nie eensydiglik of hegemonies gekonstrueer is, geposisioneer. Gelykheid word as ‘n komponent van demokratiese etiek hanteer wat nie vanuit ‘n bepaalde sentrum vloei nie, maar voortkom uit ‘n egalitêre dialoog tussen onbemagtigde en bemagtigde persone. Daar word ten gunste van ‘n inklusiewe heterogene gelykheid, synde die operatiewe gelykheidstemplaat vir die uitwissing van onbemagtigdheid in ‘n geïdealiseerde deelnemende demokrasie geargumenteer met die oog op die uitwissing van onbemagtigdheid in sodanige demokrasie waar respek vir pluralisme en die uitskakeling van oorheersing en onderdrukking tussen sosiale groepe sleutelgrondleggende etiese waardes vorm.enDisabled peopleEqualityDiscriminationWorkplaceFormal equalitySubstantive equalityFeminismSocial model of disabilityComparative approachPeople with disabilities -- Employment -- Law and legislation -- South AfricaEquality before the law -- South AfricaPeople with disabilities -- Legal status, laws, etc. -- South AfricaDiscrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South AfricaThesis (LL.D. (Constitutional Law and Philosophy of Law))--University of the Free State, 2010ThesisUniversity of the Free State