Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T17:04:58.132Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The European Court of Human Rights and Religious Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2008

Peter W. Edge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

2. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Type
Shorter Articles, Comments and Notes
Information
International & Comparative Law Quarterly , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , July 1998 , pp. 680 - 687
Copyright
Copyright © British Institute of International and Comparative Law 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. (1994) 17 E.H.R.R. 397.Google Scholar

2. Translation from idem, para.16 (Commission).

3. Idem, para.67 (Commission).

4. Idem, para.68 (Commission).

5. Idem, para.44.

6. (1994) 19 E.H.R.R. 34 (Ct.).Google Scholar

7. Reproduced in idem, para. 10.

8. Idem, para.62 (Commission).

9. Idem, para.48.

10. Idem, para.49.

11. It should be noted that the Court also referred to more general factors, such as the logic of the Convention, in interpreting State obligations and rights.

12. OttO-Preminger-Institut, supra n.6, at para.47.

13. Idem, para.49.

14. Idem, para.47.

15. (1996) 22 E.H.R.R. C.D. 179 (Cm.).Google Scholar

16. (1994) 20 E.H.R.R. 1 (Ct.).Google Scholar

17. Idem, para.86.

18. Idem, para.87.

19. (1997) 24 E.H.R.R. 1.Google Scholar

20. Idem, para.47.

21. Idem, para.48.

22. Idem (no paragraphing available for separate opinions).

23. Otto-Preminger-Institut, supra n.6, at para.50.

24. Wingrove, supra n. 19, at paras.57, 58, building on Handyside v. United Kingdom, A24 paras.48–49 (1976).Google Scholar

25. (1996) 23 E.H.R.R. 387 (Ct.).Google Scholar

26. Idem, para.44.

27. Idem, para.47, which should be read in the context of para.48.

28. (1994) 18 E.H.R.R. C.D. 133 (Cm.).Google Scholar

29. Consider Reymond, B., “Arcchitectural Patterns of the Relationship between States and Churches”, in Traer, R. (Ed), Religion and Human Rights in Europe (1995), p.15.Google Scholar

30. “The doctrine of the margin of appreciation is applied differentially, with the degree of discretion being allowed to the state varying according to the context”—Harris, D. J. et al. , The European Convention on Human Rights (London; Butterworths, 1995), p.14.Google Scholar

31. See also Logan v. UK, supra n.15.

32. (1997) 24 E.H.R.R. 294.Google Scholar

33. Valsamis, idem, para.31.

34. Consider Gunn, T. J., “Adjudicating Rights of Conscience under the European Convention on Human Rights”, in Vyver, J. D. van der and Witte, J. (Eds), Religious Human Rights in Global Perspectives: Legal Perspectives (1996), p.305 at pp.309–312.Google Scholar