scholarly journals How to Strengthen Protection of (Religious) Minorities and Cultural Diversity under EU Law: Some Lessons from Human Rights Protection System

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 864
Author(s):  
Marcella Ferri
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Religious Minority ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Face ◽  
Religious Clothing

The paper is split into two parts. The first part starts with the analysis of Views adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee on Yaker and Hebbadi v. France cases concerning the French Act prohibiting the concealment of the face in public. These Views are then compared with the judgment S.A.S. v. France delivered by the European Court of Human Rights on a similar case. This comparison shows that the principle of non-discrimination and, in this vein, intersectional discrimination play a critical role in assuring the effective protection of Muslim women wearing religious clothing. Analysis of S.A.S. is completed by highlighting the most relevant weaknesses of religious minority protection in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. Some references are also made to freedom of religious clothing in the workplace, underling the critical role that can be played in this regard by the duty of reasonable accommodation. The second part identifies the most significant shortcomings characterizing the protection of religious minorities under European Union law. In conclusion, this paper tries to highlight which lessons can be learnt from the human rights system—examined in the first part—in order to strengthen minority protection in the EU.

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 Integration reasoning at the ECtHR: Challenging the boundaries of minorities’ citizenship

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-74
Author(s):  
Kristin Henrard
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Migrant Background ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

This contribution zooms in on a particularly disconcerting development in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, that is visible in several recent cases brought by religious minorities with a migrant background, in which the Court accepts – in the name of (requirements for) integration – far-reaching restrictions on the rights of these religious minorities with a migrant background to be respected in their own religiously inspired way of life. The Court furthermore glosses over a context of Islamophobia and related stereotypes, thus failing to identify and counter instances of discrimination on grounds of religion. The article argues that the ECtHR in these cases not only drifts away from the counter-majoritarian core of human rights protection, turning several of its steady lines of jurisprudence favourable to (the effective protection of) minorities’ fundamental rights on their head, but also allows States to basically push religious minorities with a migrant background out of the public space/public schools, in the name of social integration – an integrated society. Ultimately, States are contesting the substantive citizenship of religious minorities with a migrant background and the Court, unfortunately, enables them to exclude and marginalise these religious minorities with a migrant background. The Court thus disregards the foundational value of the right to equal treatment for the human rights paradigm, and moves away from an equal and inclusive citizenship. Put differently, the Court enables governments to dress up Islamophobic, exclusionary agenda’s with a human face, thus challenging the boundaries of citizenship in the name of ‘integration’.

Recognizing Religious Minority Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugenia Relaño Pastor
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Diversity ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Religious Communities ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Religious Minority ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Group Rights ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
European Court

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not contain any provision on minorities, and neither has the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) considered the notion of minority rights when dealing with claims involving religious minorities. This contribution aims to show how the Court addresses the rights of religious minorities through the concepts of ‘religious diversity’ and ‘pluralism’. In order to overcome the historical tension between individual rights versus group rights, the author offers a theoretical typology on religious minority rights that combines rights- holders with individual and group interests and takes into consideration UN human rights texts on minorities and the freedom of religion, as well as the ECHR and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. By applying the three categories of the above- mentioned typology— individual differentiated rights to members of minorities, group- differentiated rights, and special interest group rights— to the Court’s jurisprudence on members of religious minorities and religious communities, the author concludes that while the ECtHR has systematically reiterated its commitment to pluralism, it has partly failed to grant protection to religious diversity, particularly, when ‘uncomfortable’ religious diversities are the stake.

scholarly journals On Aims, Means, and Unintended Consequences: The Case of Molla Sali

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 859
Author(s):  
Effie Fokas
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Religious Communities ◽  
Religious Minority ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
Minority Community ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
European Court ◽  
Muslim Minority

This contribution speaks to this Special Issue’s guiding question of how the approach to freedom of religion and minority protection can be combined to foster the protection of religious communities and their members by examining a particular European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case that provokes a contrasting question: ‘What happens when provisions for religious minority protection lead to the violation rather than protection of members’ rights?’ That case is Molla Sali v. Greece (2018), in which the ECtHR addressed the claim of a member of a Muslim minority community whose membership in that community subjected her—involuntarily—to the authority of sharia law over inheritance matters. The case serves as a foundation from which to explore the ECtHR’s engagements with the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, an exploration which helps bring to the fore the problems around the concept of ‘voluntary’ opting into identification with a minority identity when the latter entails some form of disadvantage. Women, in particular, due to family and peer pressures, are vulnerable to such disadvantage in contexts such as that from which the case of Molla Sali arises. Thus, the case invites discussion of various ways in which individual and group rights may come into conflict and considers minority rights specifically in relation to other human rights.

scholarly journals Ochrona praw mniejszości narodowych w orzecznictwie Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka oraz Komitetu Praw Człowieka ONZ – analiza porównawcza

2014 ◽  
pp. 7-28
Author(s):  
Grażyna Baranowska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Political Participation ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Case Law ◽  
National Minority ◽  
Minority Protection ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
European Court ◽  
Religious Clothing ◽  
State Schools

The article analyses case law concerning national minority protection in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and UN Human Rights Committee. The protection of national minorities is realized through protecting individual right of persons belonging to minorities. Due to significant amount of cases and given the importance of discussed issues, the analysis is restricted to three topics: names, education and political participation. The case law has set some important standards in those areas. In most of the analyzed aspects the approach of both organs has been the same, for example in regard to names and surnames of persons belonging to national minorities. The research also showed areas in which the case law was not consistent – while examining cases concerning the same French law regarding wearing of religious clothing by students in state schools, the UN Committee, contrary to the Court, found a violation by the state. However, in the vast majority of studied subjects, the jurisprudence of the Court and Committee is very similar and allows to formulate an international standard of national minority protection. Among national minorities indigenous people enjoy in some aspects greater protection than other groups, which is particularly evident in the Committee decisions.

The Internationalization Of Human Rights And The Importance Of Normative Dialogues Between International And National Courts

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Mariane Morato Stival ◽  
Marcos André Ribeiro ◽  
Daniel Gonçalves Mendes da Costa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Differences Of Opinion ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Different Characteristics ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This article intends to analyze in the context of the complexity of the process of internationalization of human rights, the definitions and tensions between cultural universalism and relativism, the essence of human rights discourse, its basic norms and an analysis of the normative dialogues in case decisions involving violations of human rights in international tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and national courts. The well-established dialogue between courts can bring convergences closer together and remove differences of opinion on human rights protection. A new dynamic can occur through a complementarity of one court with respect to the other, even with the different characteristics between the legal orders.

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.

scholarly journals Improving Human Rights Protection on the national and the European Level

2015 ◽  
pp. 36-51
Author(s):  
RUDOLF DUR SCHNUTZ
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Level ◽  
European Level ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Current State ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Venice Commission ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Individual

The recent move towards the individual access to constitutional justice is a progress for protection of human rights in Europe. The explicit purpose of these efforts is to settle human rights issues on the national level and to reduce the number of cases at the Strasbourg Court. Such individual complaints have to be designed in a way that makes them an effective remedy which has to be exhausted before a case can be brought before the European Court of Human Rights. This paper points out the current state of these improvements on the national level in a difficult context on the European level and the recommendations of the Venice Commission in this regard.

scholarly journals Interim measures as human rights protection instruments: to the problem statement

2021 ◽  
pp. 539-544
Author(s):  
Siuzanna Mnatsakanian
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Level ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Core Issue ◽  
Great Practice ◽  
Interim Measures ◽  
Human Rights Violation

Conceptual approaches to defining the nature and the scope of interim measures implementation as an instrument of human rights protection at international and national level are analyzed. The widespread use of interim measures as international standard of urgent respond to alleged violations of human rights has not led to the implementation of the legal institute concerned at the national level. Accordingly, this analysis aimed at defining the grounds of interim measures as human rights protection instrument application to be used by the state as an immediate response to human rights violations and possible violations. European Court of Human Rights has a great practice of interim measures granting. Interim measures are granted by the Court only in clearly defined conditions, namely where there is a risk that serious violations of the Convention might occur. A high proportion of requests for interim measures are inappropriate and are therefore refused. Besides, interim measures are applied upon request of the applicant claiming about alleged violations of his or her human rights. At the national level interim measures should/may be granted upon request of the applicant or by the duty-bearer’s initiative to prevent possible human rights violations. The grounds of interim measures granting should also be defined – the best international practice should be used taking into account the Ukrainian context. Another core issue analyzed is defining duty-bearers – subjects enforced to grant interim to prevent abuse in the sphere concerned. It is obvious that court shall be the only authority to resolve the substantive case of alleged human rights violation. However, public and local authorities shall be enabled to grant interim measures to prevent the possible violations. With this, the scope and the sphere of its application at the national level shall be broader in comparison with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document