scholarly journals Jehovah’s Witnesses as Extremists: The Russian State, Religious Pluralism, and Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-157
Author(s):  
Zoe Knox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Pluralism ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Traditional Values ◽  
Religious Minority ◽  
Jehovah’S Witnesses ◽  
Jehovah's Witnesses ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Norms

This article examines the Russian Supreme Court’s 2017 decision to ban Jehovah’s Witnesses as “extremists.” The decision will bring Russia’s anti-extremism law before the Council of Europe via the European Court of Human Rights. The article considers why this particular religious minority group became a test case by examining the unique beliefs and practices of Witnesses and their history of episodic conflict with the state. It also highlights the role of the Orthodox Church in shaping attitudes, popular and political, toward religious pluralism in Russia. In the Putin era, an increasingly illiberal rhetoric about totalitarian cults and traditional values connected nontraditional faiths to national security threats, a link made clear in the Putin regime’s promotion of spiritual security. Overall, the article argues that the 2017 ban signals the repudiation of European human rights norms by Russian governmental authorities, lawmakers, and religious elites.

scholarly journals MENGKAJI POLITIK HUKUM KEBEBASAN BERAGAMA DAN BERKEYAKINAN DI INDONESIA

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muktiono Muktiono
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Religious Minority ◽  
National Legal System ◽  
International Human ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Human Rights Norms

Indonesia has entered the era of human rights characterized by increasingly massive domestication of the international human rights norms in national legal system. In such a situation, in fact, the rights to freedom of religion and of belief for minorities have not received their benefits and instead they become victims. This Article seeks to investigate how it can happen by using the legal politics analysis as perspective. Legal politics here will focus on how the governments of several regimes in Indonesia have used their legislation and policy to regulate matters relating to the rights to freedom of religion and belief. In addition, it will also see how the Constitutional Court contributed to this issue by influencing the legal politics as this Court is the sole authority in interpreting the constitutional right to the freedom of religion and belief thereby affecting its normation and implementation. Key words:  Religious minority group, human rights, legal politics of Indonesia

Normative fault-lines of trans-national human rights jurisprudence: National pride and religious prejudice in the European legal space

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 469-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
DANIEL AUGENSTEIN
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Cohesion ◽  
Religious Pluralism ◽  
Religious Diversity ◽  
National Level ◽  
Religious Minority ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Space ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThe article explores the relationship between religious pluralism and national-majoritarian models of social cohesion in European human rights jurisprudence. Comparing the German, French and British interpretation of the ‘social cohesion limitation’ of freedom of religion it contends that, at the national level, concerns for social cohesion are fuelled by attitudes towards religious diversity that range from indifference to intolerance and that are difficult to reconcile with the normative premises of religious pluralism in a democratic society. The second section of the article traces the relationship between religious pluralism and social cohesion in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The analysis suggests that the diversity of national-majoritarian approaches to social cohesion in Europe prevents the Court from ensuring an effective trans-national protection of religious pluralism. The third section turns to the controversial Lautsi judgments of the European Court of Human Rights to place the Court’s approach to religious minority protection in the context of trans-national judicial politics in the European legal space. The concluding section suggests an alternative approach to religious pluralism and social cohesion that vindicates religious diversity and does justice to the counter-majoritarian telos of human rights protection.

scholarly journals Jehovah’s Witnesses and Blood Transfusions: An Analysis of the Legal Protections Afforded to Adults and Children in European/English Human Rights Contexts

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 368-389
Author(s):  
Clayton Ó Néill
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Blood Transfusions ◽  
Jehovah’S Witnesses ◽  
Related Case ◽  
Jehovah's Witnesses ◽  
European Court ◽  
Adults And Children ◽  
The Will

Abstract This article considers the degree to which the religious beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses are given consideration in European and English courts. Adults’ refusal of blood transfusions is examined within the context of European human rights jurisprudence. A focus is also placed on the position of Jehovah’s Witness children who refuse blood transfusions in the specific context of English medical law due to the prevalence of related case law in this jurisdiction. It is argued that the European Court of Human Rights has given appropriate protection to the will-rights of competent adult Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions. The position of children is somewhat different, and it is suggested that the courts should give greater consideration to the rights of competent children to manifest their religious beliefs.

Strategies Among Young Jehovah’s Witnesses in Compulsory School in Sweden, Age 13–15, a Case Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pernilla Liedgren ◽  
Lars Andersson
Keyword(s):  
World View ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Jehovah’S Witnesses ◽  
Value System ◽  
Jehovah's Witnesses ◽  
A Value ◽  
Standing Up ◽  
Primary School Age ◽  
Mainstream Culture

This study investigated how young teenagers, as members of a strong religious organization, dealt with the school situation and the encounter with mainstream culture taking place at school during the final years in Swedish primary school (age 13–15 years). The purpose was to explore possible strategies that members of a minority group, in this case the Jehovah’s Witnesses, developed in order to deal with a value system differing from that of the group. We interviewed eleven former members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses about their final years in compulsory Swedish communal school. The ages of the interviewees ranged between 24 and 46 years, and the interviewed group comprised six men and five women. Nine of the eleven interviewees had grown up in the countryside or in villages. All but two were ethnic Swedes. The time that had passed since leaving the movement ranged from quite recently to 20 years ago. The results revealed three strategies; Standing up for Your Beliefs, Escaping, and Living in Two Worlds. The first two strategies are based on a One-World View, and the third strategy, Living in Two Worlds, implies a Two-World View, accepting to a certain extent both the Jehovah’s Witnesses outlook as well as that of ordinary society. The strategy Standing up for Your Beliefs can be described as straightforward, outspoken, and bold; the youngsters did not show any doubts about their belief. The second subgroup showed an unshakeable faith, but suffered psychological stress since their intentions to live according to their belief led to insecurity in terms of how to behave, and also left them quite isolated. These people reported more absence from school. The youngsters using the strategy Living in Two Worlds appeared to possess the ability to sympathize with both world views, and were more adaptable in different situations.

Religious Pluralism and State- Centric Legal Spaces in Europe

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-54
Author(s):  
Kyriaki Topidi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Religious Pluralism ◽  
Legal Pluralism ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
European Court ◽  
Starting Point

Multiculturalism is continuously and relentlessly put to the test in the so- called West. The question as to whether religious or custom- based legal orders can or should be tolerated by liberal and democratic states is, however, by no means a new challenge. The present article uses as its starting point the case of religious legal pluralism in Greece, as exposed in recent European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case- law, in an attempt to explore the gaps and implications in the officially limited use of sharia in Western legal systems. More specifically, the discussion is linked to the findings of the ECtHR on the occasion of the recent Molla Sali v. Greece case to highlight and question how sharia has been evolving in the European legal landscape.

‘A Risk of Irreparable Damage’: Interim Measures in Proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 313-336
Author(s):  
Pamela McCormick
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
European Court ◽  
To Come ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Interim Measures ◽  
Irreparable Damage

Abstract Interim measures can be indicated by most international decision-making bodies which monitor compliance with human rights norms to the parties involved in the proceedings before them, in order to prevent the commission of any irreversible actions which would either preclude the proper examination of a complaint or render the final judgment meaningless. The availability of interim measures is an essential feature of any effective judicial system, particularly where fundamental rights are at stake. They play a particularly important role in proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights (‘the Court’). The volume of requests for an indication of interim measures received by the Court each year is substantial and increasing. This presents the Court with a number of legal and practical problems. This chapter examines the circumstances in which an indication of interim measures may be made, as well as the consequences of non-compliance with such an indication, although it is acknowledged that the incidence of non-compliance is low. With its recent case law, the Court has brought the existence of interim measures to the attention of a wider audience, which is desirable as only such an awareness will render the protection of Convention rights practical and effective rather than theoretical and illusory, a stated goal of the Court. However, such a wider awareness will in turn increase the volume of requests again, making it likely that the Court will in years to come have to make significant changes to the scope of requests for interim measures, as well as to its practices and procedures for considering such requests.

scholarly journals Searching for the Legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights: The Neglected Role of ‘Democratic Society’

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALAIN ZYSSET
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Democratic Society ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract:In this article, I argue against the claim that the practice of the European Court of Human Rights cannot be reconciled with the democratic-procedural standards by which state parties, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, decide about the content and scope of human rights norms. First, I suggest drawing the attention to the neglected balancing exercise of the review process, in which the Court has to determine whether a violation is nevertheless ‘necessary in a democratic society’. Second, I shed light on the role that ‘pluralism’ plays in the balancing (with particular emphasis on Articles 8–11). Third, I argue that Thomas Christiano’s egalitarian argument for democracy can best illuminate the Court’s reliance on pluralism.

scholarly journals Non-Universal Arguments under the European Convention on Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-126
Author(s):  
Tilmann Altwicker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Individual Freedom ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Institutional Legitimacy ◽  
Difference Making ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Made In

Abstract It is popular to view international human rights law as universal. In a normative sense, human rights universality refers to certain qualities of human rights norms. These qualities have long been under attack, most recently by what is called here human rights nationalism. The main point made in this article is that some of the criticism levelled against normative human rights universality can be accommodated through interpretation. To this end, non-universality of human rights is judicially created (argumentative non-universality). This article offers an analysis of argumentative non-universality in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It shows that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) operationalizes argumentative non-universality through a conception of asymmetric protection, by using context as a difference-making fact and by allowing, in certain cases, for a decentralized interpretation of rights under the ECHR. As argued here, resorting to argumentative non-universality sometimes makes sense because non-universality takes seriously the fact that individual freedom is, to some extent, socially and politically conditioned. Furthermore, non-universality allows for reasonable interpretive pluralism, and it contributes to the institutional legitimacy of the ECtHR. In conclusion, the ECtHR is, rightly so, an ‘interpreter of universality’ (as quoted by Judge Pinto de Albuquerque) as it is an interpreter of the non-universality of convention rights.

Islamophobia and the ECtHRA Test Case for Positive Subsidiarity for the Protection of Europe’s Long-term Migrants?

2021 ◽  
pp. 196-216
Author(s):  
Eva Brems
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Test Case ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Minority Religion ◽  
The Face

A reflection on the human rights of migrants in Europe cannot avoid the issue of racism. Resistance to immigration in Europe is fuelled to a large extent by resistance to the ‘otherness’ of migrants. More specifically, the ‘otherness’ that is most central to today’s debates on migration and integration in Europe is Islam. Thus, racism is commonly expressed as Islamophobia, and Islamophobia is both expressed in, and fuelled by, rights-restrictive rules that specifically target Islamic practices. The focus of the analysis in this chapter is on the messages the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is sending to national authorities regarding their approaches to multicultural conflicts over Islamic minority practices. This is situated in the framework of ‘positive subsidiarity’. It is argued that, even when the margin of appreciation is a wide one, the Court has a responsibility to offer guidance to states parties on three levels: substantive, procedural, and discursive. The chapter then explores the messages sent by the Court to states parties in the field of the restriction of Islamic minority practices. First it does so by comparing what is widely considered the Court’s ‘worst practice’ in this field—the face veil cases—with its ‘best practice’ in a different, but comparable field—the ‘gay propaganda’ cases. After that, the chapter continues the analysis on the basis of a broader case law corpus that includes all cases regarding the accommodation of Islamic practice in countries in which Islam is a minority religion.

scholarly journals The European Court of Human Rights in National Struggles around Religion and Education

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (S1) ◽  
pp. S134-S150
Author(s):  
Dia Anagnostou ◽  
Liviu Andreescu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indirect Effects ◽  
Religious Pluralism ◽  
Religious Values ◽  
European Court

AbstractThis paper analyzes comparatively the indirect effects of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments related to religion and education in four countries: Greece, Italy, Romania, and Turkey. It examines whether and how ECtHR jurisprudence on religion and education influences the views and the strategies deployed by various categories of actors. Do religious, secularist, minority, and other actors invoke these judgments and their normative principles in their discourse and mobilization strategies to promote religious pluralism or conversely religious values, in education? How are the norms that are enunciated in these judgments perceived by a diverse array of nationally situated actors who mobilize in this domain?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document