Sexual harassment in workplace policies and legal procedures, which are strongly affected by the patriarchy that exists in the legal system, mistreat millions of victims annually. Through the implementation of the WPR Analysis on the Code of Conduct in Public Services on preventing […] sexual harassment in the workplace of the Republic of Cyprus and on C. v. Romania ECtHR case (application no. 47358/20), this thesis aims to present the problems representations, the taken-for-granted knowledge, the stereotypes and the origins of the patriarchal-biased labour policies and legal procedures concerning sexual harassment in the workplace. Along with the use of the legal feminist theory, this thesis presents that in these procedures the problems are represented to be the lack of training among employees and the victims’ behaviors. This results in the marginalization and mistreatment of the victims (women, trans, non-binary, homosexuals, even men) by these patriarchal affected procedures while it is illustrated how gender and sexual orientation are determinative to these male-biased procedures.

For a long time, the situation of refugees and asylum seekers has been a source of concern for EU Member states. While different European countries' policies and practices have received much scrutiny, the discourses they produce are less visible in academia. This study thus explores the policy decisions and laws behind the EU’s responses to the refugee crises of 2015 and 2022 by comparing Syrian refugees to Ukrainian refugees in order to understand the distinction in treatment. Through a postcolonial perspective, this study employs a Mediated Discourse Analysis that presents a mainly conventional discourse of refugees and asylum seekers in the context of policies and laws. The analysis found a strong influence of ‘Eurocentrism’ through exclusionary policies, implying a continued concept of 'othering' and the 'myth of differences' as the underlying reason for different asylum policies and laws affecting the right to seek asylum.

This thesis examines how the ‘terrorist’ label affects those that are labelled by this designation, particularly with reference on a subsequent choice to use violence in the context of an ethno-nationalist conflict. Drawing on the PKK as a case study, the study asks: what effect did the labelling of the PKK as a ‘terrorist organisation’ by the Turkish government have on the use of violence by Kurds in the Turkish-Kurdish ethno-nationalist conflict? The invocation of the label terrorist in any conflict often means both the labeller and the labelled are predisposed to use violence. This study argues that this process of labelling leads the labeller and the labelled to frame one another as an existential threat. To date, the effects of using the label ‘terrorist’ in an ethno-nationalist conflict context remain relatively understudied in both social and political sciences. The period under analysis extends from 1992 to 2015, corresponding to the period during which the Turkish government continuously designated the PKK as ‘terrorist’. In conflict discourse, belligerents use demeaning labels against each other to gather support, legitimacy or simply to increase combatants’ morale. The study argues that the label terrorist is a constituent element of the conflict. The Turkish government uses the label terrorist as a tool to securitise the Kurdish-Turkish ethno-nationalist conflict. The Turkish government’s labelling of the PKK as ‘terrorist’ places the Kurdish issue in the broader framework of securitisation, a theory in International Relations. While securitising the Kurdish issue has bestowed more powers to the Turkish government to combat violence described as ‘terrorist’, the resolution of the ethno-nationalist conflict became increasingly more complex leading to protracted waves of violence. Analysing data collected through semi-structured qualitative interviews with Kurds from Turkey, the study reveals that the impact of the label terrorist is far more complex than previously assumed in the existing academic literature. The specific effects of the label terrorist on any given conflict, however, are the subject of an empirical question to be settled through rigorous research. Drawing on the Labelling Theory of Deviance fathered by Howard S. Becker and complemented by discourse analysis, this study finds that the application of the label terrorist against the PKK increases the perception of victimization among its wider Kurdish community. Secondly, the research demonstrates that the invocation of the label terrorist against the PKK places the group’s actors and sympathizers in a situation that makes it harder for them to engage in peaceful means of resolving the conflict. The interplay between these two consequential effects of victimisation and political exclusion leads to the conclusion that there is an indirect relationship between designating an ethno-nationalist armed group ‘terrorist’ and the choice to use violence.