CYIL vol. 10 (2019)

HARALD CHRISTIAN SCHEU CYIL 10 ȍ2019Ȏ of the problem was that an energy company placed electricity meters at a height of six to seven meters in a city district inhabited predominantly by Roma people. The aim of the measure was to prevent manipulation of electricity meters and unauthorized consumption. However, unlike in other districts and towns, the consumers did not have access to visible checks of their electricity meters. In this case of CEZ Bulgaria , the CJEU dealt with the issue of stereotypes and prejudices in the context of the possible reversal of the burden of proof. As the burden of proof is to pass from the claimant to the defendant only if certain criteria are met, 33 the CJEU found that the existence of ethnic stereotypes or prejudices shall be taken into account as a relevant fact. Indeed, it was possible to conclude from the various arguments put forward by CEZ Bulgaria in the main proceedings that the disputed placement of the electricity meters was based on the assumption that the unauthorized withdrawals and manipulations of the electricity meters were mainly committed by Bulgarian citizens of Roma origin. Thus, it was an ethnic stereotype. Interestingly, the CJEU in this context examined whether this stereotype was true when it considered that CEZ Bulgaria did not submit sufficient evidence proofing the alleged manipulations. Actually, CEZ Bulgaria had only asserted that these manipulations were common knowledge. In Luxembourg case law, ethnic minority stereotypes still play a smaller role than gender stereotypes. However, like in other areas of EU anti-discrimination law, the regulation and promotion of gender equality can serve as a model and inspiration. As the issue of gender equality goes beyond this paper, we can briefly summarize that the CJEU has begun to recognize the link between stereotyping of women on the basis of traditional roles and prohibited discrimination. However, the CJEU’s approach to gender stereotypes cannot be described as consistent. 34 The political debate shows some potential for a conceptual approach towards stereotypes when, for example, the European Parliament in a resolution of 2018 35 criticized the stereotypical images of the female body in the media and concluded that this stereotyping may have a negative effect on combating violence against women. Taking stereotyping as a form of violence is certainly a logical step if discrimination itself is considered a form of violence. However, the question is how much does such a radical approach make it possible to distinguish between negative and positive, true and false stereotypes and whether the same standard should apply to private entities and public authorities. 4. Conclusions The fight against stereotypes has not yet been integrated directly into the text of the main international human rights treaties or treaties on the protection of minorities. In the case law of the European courts, references to the problem of stereotyping are quite rare. From the 33 Article 8 of Directive 2000/43 provides that “Member States shall take such measures as are necessary, in accordance with their national judicial systems, to ensure that, when persons who consider themselves wronged because the principle of equal treatment has not been applied to them establish, before a court or other competent authority, facts from which it may be presumed that there has been direct or indirect discrimination, it shall be for the respondent to prove that there has been no breach of the principle of equal treatment”. 34 For more details, see TIMMER, A. Gender Stereotyping in the case law of the EU Court of Justice. European Equality Law Review , 2016, č. 1, pp. 37-46. 35 European Parliament Resolution of 17 April 2018 on gender equality in the media sector in the EU (2017/2210(INI)).

104