The End of the EU Equal Treatment Directive: A Blow to Equality or a Chance to Rethink? 

After 17 years, the EU abandons a key anti-discrimination proposal. Where do we go from here?  

It came as a surprise – or did it? After 17 years of stagnation, the European Commission (EC) has decided to withdraw the Equal Treatment Directive proposal, a key piece of legislation closing critical gaps in European anti-discrimination law. The Directive would have strengthened protections against discrimination based on religion, belief, disability, age, and sexual orientation, including for those at the intersections of race and gender. While the European Council and Parliament still need to weigh in, the Commission is unlikely to reverse its decision – particularly under the pressure of Germany’s long-standing opposition.  

A Capitulation to the Growing Far-Right Influence or a Chance to Rethink?

The sudden withdrawal marks a serious setback, undermining years of hard-fought advocacy by equality networks working for this directive’s adoption. As a leading voice in pushing for intersectionality in EU law, the European Network Against Racism has long fought for this progress, only to see it rolled back. If this move signals a capitulation to the growing influence of far-right decision-makers, it should set off alarm bells for everyone fighting for justice and equality. 

Yet, this is also the moment for honest reflection – if we hold up a mirror to this proposal, its shortcomings are hard to miss. While the proposal evolved over the years, it failed to keep pace with new societal challenges and an ever-deepening understanding of systemic injustices. Like much of the EU’s anti-discrimination legislation, it remained stuck on a single-axis approach to equality, failing to account for the compounded impact of multiple forms of discrimination. It fixated on identities rather than the structures of inequality that produce oppression in the first place. Even if it passed, the directive would have struggled to support legal claims of intersectional discrimination, despite the fact that some national courts are already moving ahead, recognising and addressing these claims more swiftly than EU-level legislation. 

Constrained by an Outdated Vision of Equality

If we take a step back, we have to ask: would this directive, in its final form, have truly advanced equality? The hard truth is that it remained constrained by a narrow, outdated vision of anti-discrimination – one that failed to account for how different forms of oppression intersect and reinforce each other. 

It also left significant gaps, most notably the exclusion of third-country nationals, despite the growing use of migration policies to justify racial discrimination. By allowing Member States to uphold restrictions on religious symbols and maintaining weak protections for people with disabilities, young and older people, and LGBTI communities, the directive risked codifying existing injustices rather than challenging them. The fight for equality cannot be about settling for the least controversial option, it must be about demanding the protections that our communities actually need. 

Still, in today’s climate – where equality protections are sliding backwards – the directive could have set a precedent for stronger protections. It was a major opportunity for the EU to lead the way toward a true “Union of Equality:” It wasn’t perfect, but it was a step forward.  

Where Do We Go From Here?

With its withdrawal, the European Commission is now relying on its upcoming roadmap on women’s rights, as well as the LGBTI rights and anti-racism strategies to address gaps in equality law. But roadmaps are not laws, they are political statements with no enforceable protections. For these strategies to be effective, the EU must use them to highlight the urgent need for stronger legislation and concrete action. They must lay the groundwork for bold, intersectional policies that reflect the realities of Europe’s diverse population and address the structural inequalities shaping our future, from AI-driven discrimination to the racial injustices of climate change. Only then can the EU rise to the moment and reaffirm its role as a global leader in social justice – setting a standard for equity and human rights that extends beyond its borders.  

At ENAR, we are not backing down. As we did in the 1990s – when our legal advocacy led to the adoption of the Race Equality Directive – we will continue working in coalitions and will launch a legal task force, gathering ideas to develop a new intersectional legal framework, while strengthening the cooperation between institutions and civil society to push this work forward.  

The EU had a chance to lead on anti-discrimination. Now, it’s up to civil society to demand better. 

---