25 July 2024
Freedom to Discuss Religion Between Facts and Opinions
In a recent televised discussion in Turkey, two Youtube-influencers have discussed Sharia law and Muhammad’s marriage with Aisha. This has caused strong reactions on social media. Moreover, after a public statement of the Justice Minister, a criminal investigation has been initiated. I argue that such statements should enjoy the full protection of freedom of expression. However, I criticise the distinction between “statements of fact and value judgements” as introduced by the ECtHR in case E.S. v Austria. Continue reading >>
0 
23 April 2024
The End of a Dream?
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) may have officially declared war on the hijab in 2022, but the Hindu right’s battle strategy has been set in place since at least 2014 when the BJP rose to power under the leadership of Narendra Modi. A tenacious master of populism, the BJP has successfully altered the mainstream Hindu perception of the Muslim as a threat to secularism. Within this imaginary, Muslims are believed to constantly seek exemptions from the secular regulations constraining the Hindu community. Continue reading >>
0
13 October 2022
The Cardinal vs. the Theater
On 11 October 2022, the Czech Constitutional Court published its eagerly-awaited judgment resolving the conflict between religious belief and freedom of artistic expression. The case was initiated by a constitutional complaint of the head of the Czech Roman Catholic Church, Archbishop of Prague, Cardinal Dominik Duka. The complainants alleged that a theater‘s allegorical plays which mocked the catholic church and their belief were blasphemous and violated their constitutional rights, in particular a freedom of religion. Continue reading >>
0
16 March 2022
The Hijab Ban in India has nothing to do with Secularism
In February 2022, educational institutions in the town of Udupi (in Karnataka, India) decided to ban the wearing of Hijabs by Muslim students in a college. This ban is unconstitutional. It is not in line with the principle of secularism and also violates the right to education. Continue reading >>11 March 2022
Repression by Law
China did not need 9/11 to further restrict civil and political rights, but it jumped onto the bandwagon in using the legitimizing force of counterterrorism to intensify its repressive policies. China’s so-called “People’s War on Terror” has had a stifling impact on the ability to practice Islam in China (and especially in Xinjiang) and is, when discussed in the context of counterterrorism and human rights, therefore best be characterized as a significant encroachment of religious freedoms, bringing China’s human rights record to a new low point in the 21th century. Continue reading >>
0
20 July 2021
Pride or Prejudice?
The joined cases IX v Wabe and MH Müller Handels GmbH offered the CJEU a second chance to heed the arguments raised against Achbita and reconsider its decision. Hopes that the Court would be willing to revise Achbita diminished significantly after AG Rantos’s disappointing Opinion in the case. Last week's decision in IX v Wabe to largely uphold Achbita was then also unsurprising, but nevertheless disappointing. Continue reading >>01 March 2021
Preserving Prejudice in the Name of Profit
Few CJEU judgments in recent years have received more criticism than the ‘headscarf judgments’, Achbita and Bougnaoui. In particular the decision in Achbita that private employers can legitimately pursue a policy of neutrality and ban expressions of political, religious, or philosophical belief at work, proved contentious. Two other headscarf cases, IX v Wabe and MH Müller, are currently pending before the CJEU and provide it with an excellent opportunity to do so. However, the first signs are not promising: Last week, Advocate General Rantos delivered his Opinion in these cases, which may be even more unpalatable than the Achbita judgment itself. Continue reading >>13 December 2019
Constitution Before Administration
On 5 December 2019, Italy’s Constitutional Court nullified regional legislation which made it extremely difficult for religious minority groups to set up places of worship. The provisions in question vested the administrative authorities with nearly unfettered discretion in deciding on the approval of applications. The Constitutional Court has now made clear that the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion cannot be circumvented by administrative procedures. Continue reading >>
0
28 May 2019
On Wearing the Kippa in Public – and in Public Service
The kippa, the Jewish skullcap, is again in the news after the admission of Felix Klein, Germany's Commissioner for Jewish Life and the Fight Against Anti-Semitism, that he cannot recommend that Jews wear a kippa everywhere in Germany. The statement has been harshly criticized as an official surrender to antisemitism. Such criticism is woefully misplaced. Klein certainly intended no surrender and was merely recognizing the existing reality. Continue reading >>29 June 2018