Search
Generic filters

Supported by:

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

Fidesz and Faith: Ethno-Nationalism in Hungary

“The protection of Hungary’s self-identity and its Christian culture is the duty of all state organizations” says one of the new provisions that were adopted on 20 June to change the country’s Fundamental Law of 2011. Besides its potential to limit fundamental rights, what are the possible consequences of this constitutional change, in legal, cultural and political terms? Continue reading >>
10 September 2017

Reconciling Religion: Lessons Learned from the Triple Talaq Case for Comparative Constitutional Governance

The recent case of Shayara Bano v Union of India heard before the Supreme Court of India provide helpful guidance for how a secular democratic regime with a multiplicity of religious, ethnic, and cultural communities can manage constitutional governance with an increasing number of seemingly irreconcilable tensions. Pluralist societies such as Canada and the United States grapple with a variety of delicate balancing acts: in such instance, the need to reconcile accommodation for religious and cultural minorities with the protection of gender rights on the other. Continue reading >>
0
24 August 2017

How not to Divorce Muslim Women in India

The Supreme Court of India has declared the Muslim practice of men divorcing their wife by repeating the word "talaq" three times unconstitutional. Continue reading >>
16 August 2017

Reviewing the recent Ban on Ritual Slaughter in Flanders

Flanders has adopted a ban of religious slaughter without stunning, following the Walloon region that had done the same earlier this year. In analysing the Flemish decree, three critical remarks need to be made in putting the new law into the right legal perspective. Continue reading >>
06 July 2017

Justitias Dresscode: Wie das BVerfG Neutralität mit „Normalität“ verwechselt

Am Dienstagmorgen hat die Erste Kammer des Zweiten Senats einer hessischen Rechtsreferendarin einstweiligen Rechtsschutz gegen ein pauschales Kopftuchverbot verwehrt, das Beamt*innen nach § 45 HBG auferlegt wird. Diese Norm soll auch auf Referendar*innen Anwendung finden. Die Referendarin darf nun keine gerichtliche Sitzungsleitung und keine Sitzungsvertretung für die Staatsanwaltschaft übernehmen. Zudem muss sie aus dem Publikum den Verhandlungen beiwohnen, während ihre Mitreferendar*innen neben der* Richter*in auf der Bank sitzen dürfen. Selten wurden Ausschlusspraktiken räumlich so deutlich gemacht. Continue reading >>
01 June 2017

Triple Talaq before the Indian Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India has to decide a case that has captured India’s political, constitutional and social imagination – a challenge to the constitutional validity of triple talaq, a practice that allows a Muslim man to divorce his wife unilaterally simply by uttering the word “talaq” thrice. Continue reading >>
22 May 2017

Afghanistan’s Constitution between Sharia Law and International Human Rights

Afghanistan’s 2004 constitution is a compromise between liberal internationalists, local clerics and warlords. Apostasy cases are the constitution’s litmus test. Continue reading >>
21 March 2017

Protection with Hesitation: on the recent CJEU Decisions on Religious Headscarves at Work

The CJEU's Achbita and Bougnaoui decisions on workplace bans of Islamic headscarves are disappointing as they are not providing enough guidance to the national courts concerning the criteria that they need to take into consideration in their attempts to find a balance between the rights in conflict. The judgments do not provide any criteria for the admissibility of dress codes other than that they should be neutral and objectively justified. Even those terms though are not analysed by the court in a sufficient manner. Continue reading >>
Go to Top