PART ONE: STATE OBLIGATIONS TO ENACT COMPREHENSIVE ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW PART ONE Caribbean; South and West Asia; Europe; and Australia and New Zealand.67 Those recommendations were accepted by States from diverse legal, social and geographic contexts, ranging from Gabon68 to the Republic of Korea.69 C. Other international processes Beyond the core United Nations human rights conventions, since the turn of the millennium, States have demonstrated growing concern for the need to enact comprehensive anti-discrimination laws through other international commitments. The World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban in 2001 devoted extensive attention to the need to address intersectional discrimination. The Durban Declaration noted that victims of racism and racial discrimination “can suffer multiple or aggravated forms of discrimination based on other related grounds such as sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, social origin, property, birth or other status”.70 The Durban Review Conference, convened in 2009, expressed concern at “the increased instances of multiple or aggravated forms of discrimination” before urging States “to adopt or strengthen … measures to eradicate multiple … discrimination, in particular by adopting or improving … legislation to address these phenomena”.71 States have also recognized the centrality of the rights to equality and non-discrimination to the achievement of sustainable development. The commitment to “leave no one behind” in the 2030 Agenda – accompanied by both a specific goal on reducing inequality and targets requiring equality in many other areas of development – reflect an acknowledgment of the role and relevance of equality and non-discrimination to any conception of sustainable development.72 Notably, target 10.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals explicitly calls on States to “ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by … promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard”.73 This target makes the adoption of comprehensive equality laws a functional necessity within the Sustainable Development Goals framework: properly understood, the requirement to adopt “appropriate legislation” to “ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome” necessitates the adoption of comprehensive equality legislation,74 including positive action measures. In addition, targets in both Goals 5 and 16 explicitly require the adoption of anti-discrimination legislation.75 In guidelines on the subject drafted by the Special Rapporteur on the right to development in 2019, the 67 Afghanistan (A/HRC/42/12, para. 111.12), Albania (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.32), Australia (A/HRC/44/4, para. 140.48), Bangladesh (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.28), Barbados (A/HRC/44/12, para. 156.91), Belgium (A/HRC/43/6, para. 127.48), Botswana (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.37), Brazil (A/HRC/43/6, para. 127.51), Canada (A/HRC/44/9, para. 144.26), Chile (A/HRC/43/10, para. 139.47), Colombia (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.36), Côte d’Ivoire (A/HRC/37/13, para. 152.83), Czechia (A/HRC/44/10, para. 153.59), Denmark (A/HRC/44/4, para. 140.209), France (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.44), Georgia (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.31), Germany (A/HRC/37/15, para. 161.63), Ghana (A/HRC/43/11, para. 146.64), Haiti (A/HRC/37/15, para. 161.64), Honduras (A/HRC/43/10, para. 139.53), Iceland (A/HRC/43/13, para. 123.4), India (A/HRC/37/12, para. 148.34), Iraq (A/HRC/37/15, para. 161.66), Ireland (A/HRC/41/15, para. 139.36), Italy (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.62), Kenya (A/HRC/37/15, para. 161.67), Madagascar (A/HRC/40/13 and Corr.1, para. 78.23), Mexico (A/HRC/44/10, para. 153.52), Montenegro (A/HRC/39/3, para. 115.2), the Netherlands (A/HRC/37/15, para. 161.59), New Zealand (A/HRC/44/8, para. 111.29), Nicaragua (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.33), Norway (A/HRC/44/9, para. 144.25), Portugal (A/HRC/43/8, para. 140.23), Senegal (A/HRC/38/16, para. 108.32), Sierra Leone (A/HRC/37/12, para. 148.32), Slovakia (A/HRC/44/10, para. 153.54), Slovenia (A/HRC/43/8, para. 140.25), Spain (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.29), Sweden (A/HRC/44/14, para. 45.74), Turkey (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.34), Ukraine (A/HRC/38/16, para. 108.31), United States of America (A/HRC/38/9, para. 105.122), Uruguay (A/HRC/44/10, para. 153.57), Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (A/HRC/37/12, para. 148.31) and State of Palestine (A/HRC/37/11, para. 132.35). 68 A/HRC/37/6, para. 118.62. 69 A/HRC/37/11, paras. 132.27–132.29, 132.34–132.35, 132.37–132.40, 132.42 and 132.64–132.65; and A/HRC/37/11/Add.1, paras. 15–16. 70 Durban Declaration, para. 2. 71 Outcome Document of the Durban Review Conference, para. 85. 72 In particular, the achievement of Goals 10 and 16. As discussed elsewhere, equality law provides a means to accelerate progress towards achieving Goals 1, 2, 3 and 4, by providing a legal framework to challenge discriminatory development barriers. See Equal Rights Trust, “No one left behind: an equal rights approach to sustainable development”, submission to the Special Rapporteur on the right to development concerning good practices in respect of the practical implementation of the right to development (London, 2018). 73 Target 10.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals. 74 A/HRC/42/38, paras. 147–148. 75 In particular, target 5.c requires States to “adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality”, while target 16.b requires States to “promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies”. 7