D2 assess the effectiveness of the chosen legislation and Code of practice or charter in promoting diversity.
Tashima denied to adopt a kid.
Tashima a 26 year old young African American Muslim who grew up in foster care herself decided to adopt a child and be able to change someone’s life. When she filled the forms and was visited by family services that monitor people to see if they are able to be a foster parent the lady asked her if she allows pork in her household and tashima replied no. A few weeks later tashima was surprised when she got a letter from the company saying that she was denied due to the fact that she didn’t allow pork in her house. News reporter went to investigate this matter and when they interviewed the company they said it was not about the pork but because “she was very obstinate and very unyielding when it came to her position about the pork. We require a high level of flexibility with our foster parents the issue is with the inflexibility not with the pork.” Tashima believes her application was denied due to her faith and culture. This was a discriminatory act and they needed to go back to their race relations act. Strength.
Tashima has a right to believe in her faith live in her own life style. The human rights act allows every individual to express who they are through religion, culture etc. this was a clear discrimination which is not allowed by the anti-discrimination act that’s set for all public services. Their code of practice sets out the standards that should be met by their employers and employees and the legislations they are all expected to be flowing.
Tashima was denied to adopt any children and they turned down her application because of the expectations of flexibility the company was expecting from all their adoptive parents.
The adopting agency won this case because they defended them self’s with the fact that this was not a discriminatory act or breaking of the human
rights act but rather set policy they had in their company for all their adoptive parents which tashima was not able to meet.
Stephen was a black British man from Eltham, south east London, who was murdered in a racist attack while waiting for a bus on the evening of 22 April 1993 Witnesses said he was attacked by a gang of white youths chanting racist slogans. Lawrence had spent the day of Thursday 22 April 1993 at Blackheath Bluecoat School. After school, he went to Lewisham to look around shops. After this, he travelled by bus to an uncle’s house. He was joined there by Dwayne Brooks, and they played video games until leaving in the late evening. After realising that the bus on which they were travelling would get them home late, they decided to change buses on Well Hall Road. Lawrence walked along Well Hall Road to Dickson Road to see if he could see a bus coming. Brooks was still on Well Hall Road, At this point, Brooks saw a group of five or six white youths on the opposite side of the street. At 10:35 pm, he called out to ask whether Lawrence saw the bus coming. Brooks claimed that he heard one of Lawrence’s assailants saying: “What, what, nigger?” as they all quickly crossed the road and circled Lawrence, who then received two stab wounds to a depth of about 5 inches (13 cm) on both sides of the front of his body, in the chest and arm. Brooks began running, and shouted for Lawrence to run to escape with him. They both ran in the direction of Shooters Hill, though Lawrence collapsed and bled to death after running 130 yards. His case was dropped at the time and this against the human rights as there was no justice.
Human rights act was followed and the police took an action to investigate this criminal behaviour as well as arresting all the suspects a month later. However charges were dropped at the time due to insufficient evidence. Family again reopened the case in 1994 but again there was no evidence. In 2005 the law changed which again reopened this case with the criminal justice act 2003.
The Stephen Lawrence case was left for so long with no justice being served and no suspects being arrested in over 16 years which is a really long time. This was due to having no clear evidence that the suspects named at the time were the murderess of this innocent young boy.
Despite having all these years of injustice and reopening this case a few times, police made arrest to the two main suspects of the murder after a court appeal where they were sentenced to a minimum of 15 years and two months in prison following the criminal justice act 2003 and the human rights act where it allows to serve justice to people regardless of colour and race.