How is the prohibition of discrimination applied?
The prohibition of discrimination prevents unjustified differential treatment based on a protected characteristic and may require relevant differences to be recognized.
Scope of rights and proportionality review
Direct discrimination is explicit different treatment, while indirect discrimination arises when an apparently neutral rule disproportionately disadvantages a group. Sex, race, disability, religion, age and similar grounds are examined contextually. A comparator and link between treatment and ground are identified. Fundamental-rights and digital-law analysis separates legality, legitimate aim, necessity and proportionality. Usefulness alone is insufficient; less restrictive alternatives and the balance between individual burden and public interest must be examined. Purpose limitation, data minimization, accuracy and limited retention apply throughout the data life cycle. Novel technology does not remove existing rights safeguards.
Digital practice, remedies and accountability
Different treatment may be justified by a legitimate aim and proportionate means, though some grounds require very weighty reasons. Harassment, failure to accommodate and instructions to discriminate may also be covered. Statistics, correspondence, practice examples and reasons can be combined as evidence. Organizations should be able to explain what data they process, for what purpose and legal basis, for how long, and document access controls and safeguards. Data-subject requests, regulatory or court applications and content objections may follow different procedures and deadlines. Preserve the full URL, date, request record and response as well as screenshots. Because rules and authority decisions develop over time, current official guidance should be read with the facts of the case.