Equbusiness book VERSION 28SEPT2023 - Flipbook - Page 89
highlights the importance of gender diversity, but also underscores the role of the state in ensuring gender
diversity.
Articles 2 and 4 of the Quota Act mandate that at least one-third of board members must be of a different gender
than the majority. However, while encouraging female representation on corporate boards, the law ensures that
the language used is gender-neutral and does not show favoritism towards any particular gender, which is a
similar approach to most of the other EU members. The legislation seems to prioritize fostering gender diversity
on corporate boards over exclusively promoting women9s inclusion. This suggests an essential approach to gender
diversity, where the ultimate goal is to create a fair and inclusive corporate culture that values diversity in all its
forms. Article 2 also provides a method for determining the exact number of genders represented on boards. The
application of this solution necessitates rounding off the figure to the closest integer.
Within the realm of sanctions, Belgian regulators have chosen an effective approach. Article 2 of the Quota Act
establishes a noteworthy provision stipulating that if the number of members of a particular gender does not
meet the minimum requirement set forth by the Act, then the next director appointed shall be of the
underrepresented sex. In the event that such an appointment is not made, the appointment should be
considered null and void. This legal mechanism serves as a means of ensuring that gender diversity is actively
promoted and maintained within the relevant organizational structures. Also, in the event of non-compliance the
subsequent General Meeting is obliged to constitute the board of directors. According to article 4 of the Quota
Act, in the event of non-compliance with the quota, all benefits, whether financial or otherwise, related to the
directors9 duties shall be suspended. These benefits shall be reinstated if the composition of the Board of
Directors complies with the minimum gender diversity requirements. Any organization must adhere to these legal
provisions. As a result, it can be argued that the Belgian government has taken significant measures to ensure
gender diversity in its policies and practices. The implementation of these measures reflect a commitment to
uphold the principles of gender equality and non-discrimination.
7.4.1.7. TURKEY
As an aspirant to European Union membership, Turkey offers a distinctive case study in its approach to gender
equality within corporate governance. While not bound directly by European Union legislation, Turkey shares
overarching principles with the EU, rendering gender diversity and equality pivotal subjects for both the Turkish
government and society. However, unlike certain EU member states, Turkey has refrained from enacting direct
legislative mandates prescribing gender quotas with sanctions for women or men on corporate boards.
The initial regulatory foray into gender equality on Turkish corporate boards transpired with the formulation of
Corporate Governance Rules in 2012. This mandated that all Turkish listed companies incorporate a minimum of
one woman on their boards, echoing the German paradigm advocating for a foundational representation of
women in corporate governance. In 2014, an amendment to the Corporate Governance rules introduced a
voluntary target for each company, requiring them to aim for a minimum number of women on their boards, set
at not less than 25%. This target mandated companies to establish a deadline to achieve this objective. Notably,
while this regulatory framework lacked punitive sanctions, it compelled companies to articulate their progress
toward gender diversity in their official annual reports.
This regulatory narrative mirrors a soft-law approach, mandating a minimum 25% quota exclusively for listed
companies. In alignment with the Spanish model referenced earlier, Turkish legislation does not heavily hinge
upon punitive measures to engender gender diversity within corporate echelons. Instead, it seeks to cultivate an
awareness. Nevertheless, the efficacy of this approach stands questioned, particularly in light of its limited
success in augmenting the participation of women in Turkish corporate management and boardrooms.
While the peculiarities of the Turkish corporate structure undoubtedly contribute to this nuanced outcome, the
absence of stringent sanctions and the reliance on a non-mandatory corporate governance rule present notable
