RELATIONS BETWEEN STATE AND RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS IN INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LEGAL ACTS

Via Latgalica ◽  
2009 ◽  
pp. 51
Author(s):  
Ivans Jānis Mihailovs
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Military Service ◽  
The State ◽  
Religious Organizations ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Religious Activities ◽  
The Impact

Religion is one of the most important social regulators influencing the relations in the society and the choice (action) of an individual in the concrete situation, sacralize definite behaviour and standards, or quite vice versa – disavow them (sin), regulate the relations among people and the relations between human and the highest power (God), in separate cases allowing to overcome legal and ethical dilemmas, to act or refrain from action. Each religion exists in a definite community (society), therefore, the religious norms affect the life of community members and thus also the state, culture, and rights. Nowadays the impact of rights on religion, religious organizations as communities of believing persons, their organization, administration and activity is impossible to deny. This study is an attempt to offer a review on the regulation of the relations betweens state and religious organizations in international and European legal acts. Analysis of the legal aspects of the relations between state and religious organizations allow the conclusion that the freedom of religion has a fundamental basis which today determines the relations/attitude of the state with/to religion and religious organizations. The principle of freedom of religion as an integral part of human rights is respected and implemented in states where the church is fully or partly separated (segregated) from the state as well as in states where there is state church. This principle has been acknowledged also by the European Union and the European Council leaving the implementation details to the Member States themselves. The principle of freedom of religion comprises two principal aspects: person’s individual choice to not/belong to some religion and to not/participate in religious activities, and state’s responsibility is to respect, within the framework of the law, the freedom of activities of religious organizations. Implementation of the principle of freedom of religion is burdened by manifold interpretation of the notions “religion” and “belief”; by the necessity to consider this principle commensurate with other human rights and freedoms; by the vagueness of the limits of this principle. In this context, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights is essential, in interpreting correspondingly the principle of freedom of religion provided for in Article 9 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, particularizing the understanding of this principle in the relations between the state and religious organizations. Present-day practice, at least in the public sphere, facilitate a tolerant attitude and observance of the specific character of religious belonging in various social relations (work, contacts with state administration, military service) etc. Nevertheless, disregarding several implementation problems of the principle of freedom of religion, equality should be observed in the relations between the state and religious organizations, establishing precise limits of cooperation and supervision, which is a precondition for the existence of a legal secular state.

scholarly journals The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 – Ten Years On

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-96
Author(s):  
Ronagh JA McQuigg
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
General Level ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 has now been in force in Ireland for ten years. This article analyses the Act itself and the impact which it has had on the Irish courts during the first decade of its operation. The use of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Irish courts prior to the enactment of the legislation is discussed, as are the reasons for the passing of the Act. The relationship between the Act and the Irish Constitution is examined, as is the jurisprudence of the Irish courts towards the interpretative obligation found in section 2(1), and the duty placed upon organs of the State by section 3(1). The article ends with a number of observations regarding the impact which the Act has had on the Irish courts at a more general level. Comparisons will be drawn with the uk’s Human Rights Act 1998 throughout the discussion.

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.

21. Applications: prisoners’ rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 433-447
Author(s):  
Howard Davis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Self Test ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Domestic Law

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. It discusses European Convention law and relates it to domestic law under the HRA. Questions, discussion points, and thinking points help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress and knowledge can be tested by self-test questions and exam questions at the chapter end. This chapter considers the application of Convention rights in the field of prisoners’ rights; the impact of Convention rights on prisoners in the UK is considered. Prisoners remain within the protection of the European Convention on Human Rights, though the application of these rights will take their position into account. Prisoners’ rights include not only rights to the non-arbitrary loss of liberty (Article 5) and rights to fair procedures (Articles 5 and 6), but also not to be disproportionately denied the rights and freedoms in Articles 8–11. Imprisonment deprives individuals of their liberty and, therefore, is a public function for which the state is responsible under the Convention. The controversy over prisoners’ right to vote is discussed in Chapter 25.

New Trends in Religious Liberty and the European Court of Human Rights

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 266-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Leigh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Education ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religious Affiliation ◽  
The State ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

This article analyses recent trends in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights concerned with the right to freedom of thought, belief and religion (Article 9, European Convention on Human Rights) and the right of parents to respect by the state for their religious and philosophical views in the education of their children (Article 2, Protocol 1).1 These developments include notable decisions concerned with protection from religious persecution in Georgia, with religious education in Norway and Turkey and with the display of crucifixes in state schools in Italy. It is apparent that the European Convention religious liberty jurisprudence increasingly stresses the role of the state as a neutral protector of religious freedom. For individuals religious freedom is now also recognised to include not only the right to manifest their religious belief but also freedom from having to declare their religious affiliation. As the religious liberty jurisprudence comes of age, other significant developments, for example in relation to conscientious objection to military service, can be anticipated.

10. Protection from Slavery and Forced Labour

2020 ◽  
pp. 223-236
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Pamela McCormick ◽  
Clare Ovey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Trafficking ◽  
Military Service ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Forced Labour ◽  
International Conventions ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter, which examines the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights against slavery and forced labour, discusses the provisions of Article 4 and the judgments made by the Strasbourg Court in cases such as human trafficking. It considers the developments concerning human trafficking in cases such as Rantsev, which expanded on the positive obligations placed on the State. The chapter examines how the Court has developed the interpretation of slavery in light of international Conventions on human trafficking and the relationship between human trafficking and forced labour. The chapter also examines the interpretation of forced labour, including in relation to employment, prisoners, and military service.

Dismantling the Dublin System: M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Violeta Moreno-Lax
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Member State ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The Dublin Regulation establishes criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in the European Union by a third-country national. The system is based on the presumption that Member States may be considered ‘safe countries’ for asylum seekers, for which reason transfers from one Member State to another are supposed not to violate the principle of non-refoulement. The fact that all Member States have acceded to the 1951 Refugee Convention and to the European Convention on Human Rights, that they share a pledge to establish a Common European Asylum System comprising harmonized protection standards, and that, as members of the Union, are obliged to respect and protect fundamental rights, constitute the unspoken premises on which the supposition rests. However, the Dublin Regulation does not establish whether the presumption should be considered absolute or rebuttable, and how and when, in the latter situation, it should be deemed refuted in the individual case. How the ‘principle of refutability’ has come into being in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights constitutes the focus of the present analysis. The review of the Strasbourg jurisprudence is accompanied by an assessment of the diverging practices that have proliferated across the EU in this regard. The paper concludes with some reflections on the impact of the M.S.S. judgement on the forthcoming reform of the Dublin system.

scholarly journals European Exceptionalism? — A Response to Alexander Somek'sThe Cosmopolitan Constitution

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 1529-1542
Author(s):  
Signe Rehling Larsen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eurozone Crisis ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legal Regimes ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Eu

AbstractA major contemporary shift in constitutionalism is manifest in that domestic constitutions, to an unprecedented degree, submit themselves to legal regimes and agencies beyond the state. This is epitomized in national courts taking into account foreign precedent within the system of the European Convention on Human Rights and the government of the Eurozone crisis by the executive apparatus of the European Union (EU). Alexander Somek'sThe Cosmopolitan Constitutionis one of the most important monographs that endeavors to conceptualize this contemporary shift in constitutionalism. This response, however, highlights that the EU plays an uneasy role in the tale ofThe Cosmopolitan Constitution.The argument presented is that there are reasons to question the Eurocentrism that posits European post-WWII constitutional developments as the epitome of contemporary global constitutional developments. These reasons relate to the particularity of the European post-WWII political and constitutional experiences and developments. In contrast to what is maintained by Somek, this response argues that contemporary European trends in constitutionalism do not point in the direction of a universal cosmopolitanism but express a distinct European particularity.

17. Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion

2020 ◽  
pp. 461-487
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Pamela McCormick ◽  
Clare Ovey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Conscientious Objection ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
Freedom Of Thought ◽  
Religious Dress

This chapter examines the protection of the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion in the European Convention on Human Rights. It explains the provisions of Article 9 and the definition that has been given to the concepts of ‘religion’, ‘belief’, and the ‘manifestation of religion or belief’. It analyses the decisions made by the Strasbourg Court in several related cases, including those involving proselytism, the wearing of religious dress and symbols, the manifestation of religion and belief by prisoners, the conscientious objection to military service, immigration issues which touch on the freedom of religion, and the recognition and authorisation of religious organisations.

scholarly journals The UK Government’s Covid-19 Response and Article 2 of the ECHR (Title I Dignity; Right to Life, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU)

Laws ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Miroslav Baros
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

The purpose of this article is to assess the impact of the UK government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak from a human rights perspective, particularly its apparent tension with Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in relation to non-Covid-19 patients whose lives were put at risk by not being able to attend appointments and treatments for pre-existing conditions and illnesses. The UK has also rejected the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union with the European Union Withdrawal Act 2018, which will leave the population even more exposed to potential human rights violations. This seems to be a direct consequence of the narrative and slogan employed by the government: “Stay Home; Protect the NHS; Save Lives”. Other potentially threatened categories, the NHS staff and prisoners are also mentioned in the same context. The latter have already launched a judicial review application along the same lines: Article 2 of the ECHR and the due regard duty stemming from the Equality Act 2010. The NHS staff were directly at risk, and evidence was emerging almost on a daily basis that implied authorities’ responsibility for the shortage of personal protective equipment and testing kits. While there have been a number of discussions on other issues in relation to the lockdown and the strategy directly or indirectly impacting human rights, it appears that no discussion on the impact of the strategy for non-Covid-19 patients and other categories from a human rights perspective has taken place. This gap in analyses and literature merits the present analysis.

scholarly journals Theoretical-legal aspects of constitutional regulation of the right to freedom of opinion and religion in Ukraine and the countries of continental Europe

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-20
Author(s):  
Yuriy Kyrychenko ◽  
Hanna Davlyetova
Keyword(s):  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The State ◽  
Religious Organizations ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Religious Activities ◽  
Freedom Of Conscience ◽  
Freedom Of Choice ◽  
Freedom Of Thought ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The article explores the constitutional practice of normative regulation of the right to freedom of thought and religion, enshrined in Art. 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine and in similar norms of the constitutions of the states of continental Europe. The necessity to state the stated norm in the new version is substantiated. It is determined that the right to freedom of worldview and religion, which is enshrined in Art. 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine, relates to civil rights of man and citizen and consists of three basic elements: freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. This right includes the freedom to profess any religion or not to practice any religion, to freely send religious cults and rituals, as well as to conduct religious activities. It is noted that in the states of continental Europe the constitutional and legal regulation of the right to freedom of opinion and religion is implemented differently. Thus, in the constitutions of Andorra, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Armenia, Georgia, Estonia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Romania, San Ma-rino, Serbia, Czech Republic and Montenegro, the analyzed law is enshrined along with other human rights. In other constitutions of European states, the law under study is formulated in a separate article. It is stated that the constitutions of European states use unequal verbal designations of this right. In particular, such terminological expressions as "freedom of conscience and religion", "freedom of cults", "freedom of conscience, religion and other beliefs", "freedom of conscience and religion", "freedom of conscience", "freedom of religion and worship", " freedom of religion ”,“ freedom of choice of religion ”,“ freedom of conscience, religion and worship ”,“ freedom of religion and conscience ”,“ freedom of religious beliefs ”, which differ but have much in common. The expediency of deleting the term “freedom of world outlook” from Part 1 of Art. 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine and the consolidation of the term "freedom of conscience", which in its content, first, covers a broad sphere of spiritual, world-view of human being, and second, acts as the freedom of choice and assertion of the individual in the system of religious coordinates. It is proposed taking into account the European experience of constitutional and legal regulation of the right to freedom of opinion and religion of the provision of Art. 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine shall be read as follows: “Everyone has the right to freedom of conscience and religion. This right includes the freedom to profess any religion or not to practice any religion, to freely send religious or ritual rites alone or collec-tively, to conduct religious activities. The exercise of this right may be restricted by law only in the interests of public order, the health and morals of the population, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Churches and religious organizations in Ukraine are separated from the state and the state education system from the church. No religion can be recognized as binding by the state. Churches and religious organizations are equal before the law. It is forbidden to compel a person to choose and profess any religion or belief, to participate in re-ligious and ritual ceremonies or activities of a religious organization and to receive religious education.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document