Religious Symbols in Educational Institutions: Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-149
Author(s):  
Ivana Radačić
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
The State ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Religious Symbols ◽  
Islamic Headscarf ◽  
European Court ◽  
Political Controversy

Abstract The issue of religious symbols in educational institutions has been a source of vigorous legal and political controversy. Two types of cases have been litigated before the European Court of Human Rights: those concerning the wearing of the Islamic headscarf in schools and universities, and those concerning the presence of the crucifix in school classrooms. In this article, I shall analyse these cases, assessing how the Court balances different rights and State interests, focusing in particular on the Court’s interpretation of the principles of neutrality/secularism and of gender equality. I shall criticise the Court’s deference to the State, arguing that it should more strictly supervise how States respect human rights. Respect for human rights requires that the States respect individual’s religious freedoms, be autonomous from the religion and safeguard the principle of plurality. While the Court has proclaimed these principles, it has failed to apply them in these cases.

Muslim Reformists, Female Citizenship, and the Public Accommodation of Islam in Liberal Democracy

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Fadel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Equality ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Gender Hierarchy ◽  
Normative Justification

AbstractThe European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), in a trilogy of cases involving Muslim claimants, has granted state parties to the European Convention on Human Rights a wide margin of appreciation with respect to the regulation of public manifestations of Islam. The ECHR has justified its decisions in these cases on the grounds that Islamic symbols, such as the ḥijāb, or Muslim commitments to the shari‘a — Islamic law — are inconsistent with the democratic order of Europe. This article raises the question of what kinds of commitments to gender equality and democratic decision-making are sufficient for a democratic order, and whether modernist Islamic teachings manifest a satisfactory normative commitment in this regard. It uses the arguments of two modern Muslim reformist scholars — Yūsuf al-Qaraḍāwī and ‘Abd al-Ḥalīm Abū Shuqqa — as evidence to argue that if the relevant degree of commitment to gender equality is understood from the perspective of political rather than comprehensive liberalism, doctrines such as those elaborated by these two religious scholars evidence sufficient commitment to the value of political equality between men and women. This makes less plausible the ECHR's arguments justifying a different treatment of Muslims on account of alleged Islamic commitments to gender hierarchy. It also argues that in light of Muslim modernist conceptions of the shari‘a, there is no normative justification to conclude that faithfulness to the shari‘a entails a categorical rejection of democracy as the ECHR suggested.

Proselytism and Ostentation: a Critical Discourse Analysis of the European Court of Human Rights’ Case Law on Religious Symbols

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 162-188
Author(s):  
Giulia Evolvi ◽  
Mauro Gatti
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Critical Discourse Analysis ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Critical Discourse ◽  
Religious Symbols ◽  
European Court ◽  
Over Time

Abstract This article focuses on the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) case law about religious symbols (N=27) from 2001 to 2018, exploring the following questions: What discourses does the ECtHR employ in cases about religious symbols? How do ECtHR’s discourses about religious symbols evolve in time? The data is innovatively analyzed through critical discourse analysis and leads to two findings: first, the ECtHR tends to endorse ‘Christian secularism,’ considering Christian symbols as compatible with secularism but not Muslim symbols; second, ECtHR discourses occasionally become more favorable to Muslim applicants over time, but the evolution of case law is not linear.

scholarly journals Religious Expertise: Russian Experience

2013 ◽  
pp. 154-164
Author(s):  
Katerina Elbakyan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Religious Organizations ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
European Court

In modern Russia, one often hears about the claims of state bodies to certain religious organizations, mainly related to the so-called “religious minorities”. The result is judicial precedents, when individual religious organizations are forced, often repeatedly, to appeal to the courts of various instances, including the European Court of Human Rights, in order to solve their problems. Sometimes, on the contrary, the state makes charges against religious organizations.

Freedom of Religion in the Workplace

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Nedim Begović
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
European Court

Abstract The article analyses the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on accommodation of Islamic observances in the workplace. The author argues that the Court has not hitherto provided adequate incentives to the states party to the European Convention on Human Rights to accommodate the religious needs of Muslim employees in the workplace. Given this finding, the author proposes that the accommodation of Islam in the workplace should, as a matter of priority, be provided within a national legal framework. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, this could be achieved through an instrument of contracting agreement between the state and the Islamic Community in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Functions of compensation for human rights violation in international and national judicial decisions

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-101
Author(s):  
Dmitry Kuznetsov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
National Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Responsibility

When establishing human rights violations committed by the state, should it be violation of internationally protected rights or constitutional rights, the violator is obliged to compensate for the harm caused. In the meantime, neither international sources, nor national legal acts and case law answer the question whether the obligation to compensate is exhausted by the compensation awarded in accordance with a decision of an international judicial body or such a payment has punitive nature, and the state keeps the obligation to compensate the damage within the frameworks of national proceedings. Following the first part of opening remarks the second part of the article studies universal international law approach towards the state obligation to compensate for human rights violations, it reviews positions of the International Court of Justice, the model established in international customary law of international responsibility. The third part discusses the compensation mechanism of the European Court of Human Rights and a number of cases where the Russian Federation was the respondent state. The forth part considers national regulation of the Council of Europe states and case law thereof. The author argues that the established international case law in respect of awarding compensations for human rights violations is too restrictive – it does not take into account a complex nature of this phenomenon which includes both correction of the individual applicant situation (restitution of the pre-existed situation) and prevention of similar situations in the future. It is concluded that awarding the compensation by an international body primarily constitutes a measure of international responsibility whereas consideration by a national court is a more effective means of restitution of the applicants rights and that the national court shall not deny consideration of applicants claims due to the fact that they have already been awarded compensation by the international judicial body including the European Court of Human Rights.

Separation of Powers and Alternative Dispute Resolution before the European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-271
Author(s):  
Cedric Jenart ◽  
Mathieu Leloup
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Level ◽  
European Court

Alternative dispute resolution procedures before the European Court of Human Rights – The state agent, a member of the executive branch, tasked with representing the respondent state – Judicial and legislative branches of the respondent state limited or bound by concessions by the state agent – Convention framework effectively increases the power of the executive branch to the detriment of the other branches of government in the respondent state – Tension with national separation of powers – Possible solutions on a national and international level

Women Bishops: Equality, Rights and Disarray

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Clucas ◽  
Keith Sharpe
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
The State ◽  
Recent History ◽  
Equality Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ordination Of Women ◽  
The Church

In this article we discuss the recent history of the failed draft Bishops and Priests (Consecration and Ordination of Women) Measure, situating this within the broader context of the ordination of women and debates around the Equality Act exceptions for an organised religion. We aim to provide an account of the ways in which equality rights have been implemented in the relevant law; how the Church of England is responding to these rights; and how broader society understands the importance of gender equality and reacts to Synod's rejection of the draft Measure. We analyse these with reference to theories of heteronormativity and scholarship of human rights. In doing so, we aim to explain what is happening in the Church of England and broader society, and draw some conclusions about the current opportunities open to the Church and the state in matters of rights and equality.1

scholarly journals Fault, knowledge and risk within the framework of positive obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-620
Author(s):  
Vladislava Stoyanova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Main Argument ◽  
European Court ◽  
Normative Considerations

AbstractThe European Court of Human Rights has consistently reiterated that positive obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights arise when state authorities know or ought to have known about the risk of harm. This article attempts to describe and assess the role of state knowledge in the framework of positive obligations, and to situate the Court’s approach to knowledge about risk within an intelligible framework of analysis. The main argument is that the assessment of state knowledge is imbued with normative considerations. The assessment of whether the state ‘ought to have known’ is intertwined with, first, concerns that positive obligations should not impose unreasonable burden on the state and, second, the establishment of causal links between state omissions and harm.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document