Comparison of the Equality and Participation Rights in the Constitutions of Turkey, China and Germany

Essay from the year 2014 in the subject Law - Public Law / Constitutional Law / Basic Rights, grade: 1.00, Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH, course: Introduction to Law, language: English, abstract: This section of our analysis will be devoted to the cross comparison of Turkish, German and Chinese constitutions¿ coverage and interpretations of the equality and participation rights. Following the similar methodological line with the ¿Freedom of Speech and Expression¿ and ¿Division of Power¿ sections, this section will first provide an understanding of where and how these selected countries stand on the parameters of equality and participation rights.

The focus of our discussion will then shift to our trilateral constitutional comparison and how they differ from each other in terms of wording, sequence and the emphasis. The drawn ¿picture¿ of equality and participation rights will then be framed by taking advantage of well-known court cases from these countries. After the court-case application phase, the section will consequently exhibit the findings related to the trilateral comparison.
Equality and participation rights are two particular concepts which are applicable to various dimensions of social sciences. Having law as our natural focus, the discussion about the equality will mainly focus on equality before law. In his ¿Critique of the Gotha Program¿, Karl Marx defines this focus with following words; ¿Equality before the law is a basic right in the constitutions of democratic countries, and its content appears in all conventions on human rights¿(Marx, 1875). In terms of equality, the gender and minority equality/inequality will be the main points of concern.
Along with this, the importance of political participation rights will also be stretched throughout the section. As Fabienne Peter suggests, there is a tendency to exclude political participation rights from the minimal lists of human rights as it does not necessarily affect the survival or some basic life functions (Peter, 2013). Peter opposes to this general tendency ¿I shall argue that the right to political participation, understood as distinct from a right to democracy, should have a place even on minimalist lists¿ (Peter, 2013). Parallel to Peter¿s insistence on necessity of being sharp about the rights for political participation, our section will majorly focus on the defined parliament compositions, voting and candidacy rights andelectoral threshold enforcements.