Promoting Peace, En‘forcing’ Democracy he European Court of Human Rights’ Treatment of Islam
Publish place: Human Rights، Vol: 11، Issue: 22
Publish Year: 1395
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: English
View: 294
This Paper With 26 Page And PDF Format Ready To Download
- Certificate
- من نویسنده این مقاله هستم
استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:
شناسه ملی سند علمی:
JR_JHM-11-22_006
تاریخ نمایه سازی: 27 مرداد 1397
Abstract:
Contemporary Europe is undoubtedly a largely secular region where the notion that secularism and ‘progress’ are intertwined has long held sway. Religion in the public sphere is, for m any Europeans, associated with emergent or conservative societies, whereas secularism is equated with modernism and seen as an indispensable component of modern governance. Recently, both domestic and European Court of Human Rights (ECtR) case-law has highlighted the obvious tensions that arise in the manifestation of religion in the European public sphere. While Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights affords everyone the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion (while allowing for certain limitations as imposed by domestic authorities), in matters related to religion, ECtR has adopted a deferential attitude towards domestic authorities in the determination of the parameters of this right. This is reflected in the fact that it was not until 1993, some thirty-five years after the Court commenced operating, that a violation of Article 9 of the Convention was found. The Court’s jurisprudence on the Article is therefore somewhat troubling and nowhere is this m ore aptly illustrated than in the jurisprudence relating to the wearing of the Islamic headscarf. Recent case-law in fact suggests that in that the wearing of the headscarf is viewed both as being incompatible with the principle of gender equality and in direct opposition to the principle of secularism. Through the lens of recent Article 9 jurisprudence, this paper will assess the trends emerging in the European Court’s consideration of Islam . Discussion of relevant cases will include D ahlab v. Switzerland, Karadum an v. Turkey, Leyla Şahinv. Turkey, Refah Partisi(The Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey as well as analysis of cases occurring at the domestic level, most notably the Teacher Headscarf Case of the German Constitutional Court and the English decision of R (on the application of Begum (by her litigation friend, Rahm an)) v. headteacher and Governors of Denbighigh School.
Keywords:
Authors
Edel Hughes
Senior Lecturer at Law & Criminology Research Group, University of East London.