Classical liberalism demands equality before the law for all. [5] Classical liberalism, as adopted by liberals and libertarians, rejects the pursuit of collective rights at the expense of individual rights. [6] Countries may also need to take temporary special measures to overcome past or present discrimination and accelerate the establishment of true equality – and some have taken very effective measures with respect to certain groups. In Rwanda`s 2018 elections, 61% of seats in parliament were won by women. The continued increase in the number of women in parliament was a direct result of Rwanda`s 2003 constitution, which set quotas of 30 per cent of elected women, and the decision of political parties to voluntarily introduce their own quotas for female candidates. Díaz de Valdés believes that, faced with a new constitution, questions could be asked, for example, on how to deal with the prohibition of discrimination against individuals, since „it applies in principle to the State and sometimes to individuals (for example, in industrial relations); Sometimes this is not true (for example, if you choose your wife or friends)“, or how to deal with „extraordinary measures and affirmative action that protect their advocates in the pursuit of substantive equality (not just formal or legal). The typical example is quotas,“ he says. According to the scientist, quotas are „extremely controversial because new discrimination is used to solve a problem of discrimination. The constitution could determine when these measures are acceptable (whether they are temporary and neutral for all groups and not target a single group, etc.). Those who maintain that in parliamentary monarchies the principle of equality before the law does not exist, or exists only in a weakened manner, maintain that any monarchy, however weakened the power of the king and nobles, is itself in contradiction with the principle of equality before the law. Regardless of the differences between the different monarchical systems, the principle does not exist when the law of a country stipulates that certain public functions and the exercise of political power they imply can only be held by some citizens and not by others, simply because of the ancestors of people of ancestry.

The lawyer Luciano Simonetti of Libertad y Desarrollo believes that equality, considered in itself, „is an empty formula“, „a purely relational judgment that does not provide an essential criterion for the comparison of two or more entities and therefore qualifies them as equal or unequal“. It states that our Constitution stipulates that „the criteria for comparison set out therein are particularly abstract – equality in dignity and rights – which is necessary for this principle to be clarified and implemented in various concrete situations requiring specific comparative criteria guaranteeing compliance with the constitutional requirement of equality – or the reduction of permissible criteria“. There are different ways of life in a country. There are already social inequalities and prejudices in the country. Prejudices based on religion, caste, gender. The right to equality places all human beings on an equal footing. This right guarantees everyone that those in power will not discriminate among themselves. There is the certainty that everyone will receive the same conditions. The constitutional lawyer and academic of Catholic and development universities, José Manuel Díaz de Valdés, says that the current constitution includes equality „as a principle, as a duty of the state and as a right of the people.“ As far as the law itself is concerned, it focuses on the prohibition of arbitrary discrimination. It`s not that you can`t make distinctions between people, but if you make a difference in treatment, there must be a reason to do so (for example, you can charge more income tax for those who earn more, but not for those who are taller or thinner).

If there is no such ground, or if it is an illegitimate or unrealistic reason, arbitrary discrimination is prohibited. If approved, Schönsteiner stresses that a new constitution should include recognition of indigenous peoples „in order to make effective their equal enjoyment of rights. It would also be desirable to have an independent institution that explicitly guarantees the implementation of equality and non-discrimination of individuals in terms of the enjoyment of human rights – not only through the judicial system, but also in the adoption of public policies and the allocation of public budgets. In addition, economic and social differences increase political instability and undermine trust in governments, which are increasingly influenced by the happiest. Promoting equal opportunities and raising taxes, especially for the wealthiest classes, would help reduce inequalities. Unlike the principle of equality before the law, we find material egalitarianism or what would correspond to equality by law. This implies the possibility of unequal treatment before the law with the aim of reducing social inequalities. Examples of this material egalitarianism are the redistribution of wealth or positive discrimination.

Article 200 of the Japanese Penal Code, the penalty for parricide, was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Japan in 1973 following the trial in the Tochigi Parricide case for violation of equality before the law. [9] He cites, for example, to record „the victories of the Zamudio law“ in a constitutional text, „because what is written in the constitution makes a difference“.