El controlador Feedback

The normative model is similar to the rational connection model in that courts look for a rational connection between legislative class and permissible state objective. The difference is that, in the normative model, the legislative classification should not only be reasonable but should also be normatively justifiable in light of human dignity and respect.152 This model seeks to identify unfair legislative differentiation, by demanding that legislation not be stereotypical and not negatively affect a person’s character. If legislation bears a rational connection to a governmental

61

interest, a person can demonstrate unfair discrimination by proving that the “grounds for discrimination is based on attribute or characteristics which have the potential to impair the fundamental human dignity of the persons as a human being.”153 The test for unfairness is “focused on the impact of discrimination on the claimant and similarly situated people.”154

The fundamental driving force of the normative model of equality is to create a platform where human beings can be treated fairly, with respect and dignity, and having recourse to the law when the need arises. It speaks to the issue of separate rights to people and equal treatment for differently situated people, as well as an equal entitlement that is generated because of separate and distinct situations.155 _{It means that the normative model stresses more on the concept of human}

dignity rather than equality. Each person is entitled to certain rights because he or she is human. The normative equality model prevents governments from intruding on citizens’ fundamental rights, liberties, and equal protection. That is, all persons are equal before the law, regardless of their backgrounds. Therefore, all human beings are entitled to privacy, dignity, and equal treatment.

The normative model of equality focuses on differential treatment between categories of people and legislative classification to trigger the court’s review. Therefore, there is no inequality when differently situated persons get similar treatment.156 For example, customary and statutory wives are differently situated regarding legal jurisdiction. If both receive the same treatment in both systems, there is no discrimination; fulfilling the purpose of identifying prohibited bases of legislative differentiation.157 The normative equality model pursues the elimination of

153 _{Id. at 76.} 154 _Id.

155 _{Kenneth W. Simons, The Logic of Egalitarian Norms, 80 B.U.L.REV. 693, 706, 714, 720 (2000).} 156 _{Yap, supra note 10, at 78.}

62

discrimination by barring distinction on morally irrelevant grounds and defines the relevant features for differentiating legislative treatment by focusing not only on the ends of the law but also upon how to achieve its objectives.158

The difficulty with this model is that it concentrates only on differential treatment and legislative classification.159 As a result, the court becomes powerless to adjudicate cases that are outside of such classification, thereby promoting inequality when differently situated persons are treated similarly—although this may not be plausible in the application. Normative right could mean that two persons, though differently situated, are treated equally or given equal entitlement although their rights may be separate. It indicates that being entitled to treatment does not mean that if one person is denied a perceived benefit, they can raise an inequality or discrimination claim because their entitlement may not have a significant connection or be contingent in any way. For example, if two children ask to be taken to a football match and one caught the flu, the parent could decide to make one of three decisions: (1) stay home with both children, (2) take the healthy child to the game, or (3) take both children to the game despite the other child’s health. Each person could assert a claim of their own, but not as an outcome of a comparative right because the circumstances that give rise to the right or benefit are different. The result is that, though two persons are treated equally, they may not have equal rights to “equal treatment but only separate rights to particular treatments.”160 _{Sometimes the treatments that the persons may receive could be}

the same and sometimes not. It raises the idea of comparative rights since there is no standard to determine the differences or sameness between people. Can an individual claim a right because another was accorded the same or is the nature of differences implicit in the normative model since

158 _{Id. at 74-75.} 159 _{Id. at 85.}

63

human dignity is at its core? To understand the comparative nature of normative equality, let us delve into the normative principles that comparative rights propose.

The comparative rights model suggests two normative principles: (1) similarly situated cases should be treated the same and (2) differently situated cases should receive treatment individually.161 In the first instance, persons or groups of the same relevant class can claim the same treatment, that is, if group A received certain treatment, then group B could demand the same treatment. Second, the doctrine of comparative rights enunciates equal treatment based on particular circumstances that equalize the treatment of people who are differently situated and/or that create some relative relationship in treatment by providing equal treatment to differently situated people or giving preferential treatment to a group of people to have some form of equality.162 An affirmative action plan has to be developed in order to meet the objective of achieving equality through comparative rights.

The normative model, like previously discussed models, has limitations that have compelled scholars to investigate alternative models of equality. Treating differently situated persons alike has its advantages and disadvantages. One position could be creating an opportunity for minorities to enjoy the same rights and privileges as the majority. While on the other hand, a disadvantage could be that some people may be forced into an unfavorable situation or condition based on a past court decision. The normative model stresses the eradication of biases and prevents discrimination that bears on human dignity, liberty, respect, and freedom. It creates a platform where humans are treated fairly. On the contrary, the normative model is not triggered when

161 _{Raleigh Hannah Levine & Russell Pannier, Comparative and Noncomparative Justice: Some Guidelines} for Constitutional Adjudication, 14 WM.&MARY BILL RTS.J. 141, 147 (2005).

64

differently situated people get similar treatment. Differentiation outside a classification is equal treatment.