Wearing religious symbols at work in the ECtHR’s judgments
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21985605 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Piotr Sadowski (0000-0002-2422-8793, Nicolaus Copernicus University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Pages | 99-126 |
| Publication date | 2021-11-23 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Toruńskie Studia Polsko-Włoskie (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2083-1986 • E-ISSN: 2391-7865 |
| Publisher | Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika/Nicolaus Copernicus University (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.12775/tsp-w.2020.007 |
| OpenAlex | W3161659272 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 2 |
Freedom of speech and freedom of conscience and religion are essential human rights which are protected, among others, by the ECHR. The number of the European Court of Human Rights’ decisions on wearing religious symbols (in a form of a Christian cross, a Muslim veil or a headscarf) at work remains small. Nevertheless, some interpretation guidelines can be identified in particular on how to ensure that an interference with Article 9 of the 1950 Convention has to be proportionate and “necessary in a democratic society”. Owing to a lack of European-wide consensus on states’ approach to religion, a state exercises a wide margin of appreciation. Nevertheless, a state always has to take into account rights of the others, in particular those who are dependent on (e.g. patience at hospital) employees or are prone to an impact of employees (e.g. pupils and students). Thus, dress codes confirming a secular nature and religious neutrality of a State not always violates Article 9 of the ECHR. Rules apply mainly to public bodies, but a state liability may also be found to private company’s cases. Details of each employment contract and of the employee’s conduct have to be always analysed. The dress code rules applied to man and women and irrespective to their religion, so the Court has not declared it to be discriminatory because of sex or religion of employees
Conscience · Convention · Democracy · Establishment Clause · First amendment · Freedom of Religion · Human rights · International human rights law · Margin of appreciation · Neutrality · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Supreme court · Law · Religious Freedom and Discrimination
| Highly cited | No |
|---|