RT Article
T1 The principled slope: religious freedom and the European Court of Human Rights
JF Religion, state & society
VO 45
IS 3/4
SP 174
OP 185
A1 Adrian, Melanie
LA English
PB Routledge
YR 2017
UL https://ixtheo.de/Record/157126213X
AB This contribution examines four cases, Dahlab v. Switzerland, Sahin v. Turkey, SAS v. France and Ebrahimian v. France, handed down by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) between 2001 and 2015. The ECtHR has increasingly prohibited women from wearing the headscarf and face veil in public spaces. I argue that the rationale used to support these limitations has progressively moved away from an adjudication of harm and evaluation of the facts, to emphasising general principles and creating vague new legal concepts. This trend is problematic because appealing to general principles lessens the requirement of member states to present a fact-based case that carefully weighs trade-offs on key issues such as religious freedom vis-à-vis diversity and pluralism. This tendency also makes it easier for the Court to expand the already widening application of the margin of appreciation to states.
K1 Dahlab
K1 Ebrahimian
K1 ECtHR
K1 European Court of Human Rights
K1 face veil
K1 Headscarf
K1 Hijab
K1 Islam
K1 Law
K1 margin of appreciation
K1 Muslims
K1 Religious Freedom
K1 Sahin
K1 SAS
K1 Women
DO 10.1080/09637494.2017.1389551