Zoekresultaat: 12 artikelen

x
Jurisprudentie

Het Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens en nationale integratiedebatten

Zwitserse verplichting tot gemengd zwemmen in het primair onderwijs geoorloofd

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 1 2017
Trefwoorden vrijheid van godsdienst, Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens (EHRM), Integratie, Pluralism, Islam
Auteurs Prof. dr. Sophie van Bijsterveld
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In a unanimous decision, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has accepted the refusal of an exemption of compulsory mixed swimming lessons for elementary school girls in Switzerland. The exemption was requested by the parents of the two girls as the requirement to let their daughters participate in those lessons was contrary to their religious conviction. The author discusses the decision in the light of national debates on integration and subscribes its outcome. Specific attention is paid to the ECtHR’s interpretation of the legitimacy of the aim of the Swiss authorities and the role of the numerical presence of Islam in the underlying Swiss court’s ruling which is upheld by ECtHR.


Prof. dr. Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is hoogleraar Religie, recht en samenleving aan de Radboud Universiteit te Nijmegen.
Artikel

Access_open ‘Dissenting opinions’ in religiezaken voor het Europees Hof (II)

De gewone kamer

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 1 2016
Trefwoorden dissenting opinions, Godsdienstvrijheid, margin of appreciation, EVRM
Auteurs Prof. dr. Sophie van Bijsterveld
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    What divides the ECtHR in religion cases? Study of dissenting opinions in religion cases of the ECtHR sheds a light on dividing lines within the ECtHR and deepens our understanding of the methods of reasoning of the ECtHR itself. Following an analysis of dissenting opinions in religion cases in the rulings of the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR, this article focuses on the Chamber. As in the previous analysis, a clear pattern in the dividing lines is brought to light. This article discusses and evaluates this finding.


Prof. dr. Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is hoogleraar Religie, recht en samenleving aan de Radboud Universiteit te Nijmegen.
Artikel

Access_open ‘Dissenting opinions’ in religiezaken voor het Europees Hof (I)

De Grote Kamer

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 3 2015
Trefwoorden dissenting opinions, freedom of religion, margin of appreciation, ECHR
Auteurs Prof. dr. Sophie van Bijsterveld
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Religion cases of the European Court of Human Rights are much commented on. A systematic analysis of dissenting opinions in religion cases, however, does not exist. Such analysis can shed light on dividing lines within the ECtHR and deepen our understanding of the methods of reasoning of the ECtHR itself. This article contains analysis of dissenting opinions in the rulings of the Grand Chamber in religion cases. The analysis shows a pattern in the dividing lines. Contrary to the prior expectation, the margin of appreciation as such forms no such dividing line. The article discusses and evaluates the findings.


Prof. dr. Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is hoogleraar Religie, recht en samenleving aan de Radboud Universiteit te Nijmegen.

    In its ruling of June 12, 2014, the European Court on Human Rights (Grand Chamber) concluded that no violation of the right to private life and family life under the European Convention of Human Rights had taken place in the case of the non-renewal of an employment contract of a Roman Catholic teacher of religion and ethics. The reason for this non-renewal was the withdrawal of the required ecclesiastical approval of the teacher. According to the European Court, church autonomy prevailed in this case over the right to private life and family life of the teacher, a married priest with five children and an active member of an organization promoting voluntary celibacy. This contribution analyses and discusses the ruling of the ECHR, also in the light of the main dissenting opinion. It supports the Court’s conclusion, but criticizes some of its reasoning. It also states that regardless of the extent of church autonomy, a clear and correct procedural approach to employment issues also does honour ecclesiastical authorities.


Prof. dr. Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is bijzonder hoogleraar Religie, rechtsstaat en samenleving aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Zij is redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid.

Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is bijzonder hoogleraar Religie, rechtsstaat en samenleving aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Zij is redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid.s.c.vbijsterveld@uvt.nl.
Artikel

Access_open Een vergeten episode uit de schoolstrijd: de ontdekking van ‘openbaar’ en ‘bijzonder’ onderwijs

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 3 2013
Trefwoorden openbaar onderwijs, bijzonder onderwijs, schoolstrijd, Grondwet, vrijheid van onderwijs/ onderwijsvrijheid
Auteurs Sophie van Bijsterveld
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The battle over the school system is one of the liveliest chapters in Dutch constitutional history. It resulted, in 1848, in the constitutional acknowledgement of a dual system of education: education provided by public authority (‘public education’) and private education (practically synonymous with confessional education); and, in 1917, in the constitutional guarantee of public funding for the latter on the same footing as the former.
    The battle over the school system is usually described as a battle for freedom of private, confessional education from the start. This article shows that prior to this, in the first stage of this battle, the concept of ‘private education’ itself had to be invented and that the concept of ‘public education’ had to develop a different meaning. Public education, the notion used in the Constitutions of 1814 and 1815, originally meant education in schools in contrast to house education. It was this broad concept of education that was entrusted to the care of government and, therefore, not free. This article focuses on the first half of the 19th century. On the basis of original sources it traces the fascinating process of the birth of these new categories, that determine the Dutch education system up to now.


Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is bijzonder hoogleraar Religie, rechtsstaat en samenleving aan de Universiteit van Tilburg en redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid. s.c.vbijsterveld@uvt.nl.
Artikel

Access_open De staat als ‘neutral organiser of religions’?

Een analyse van de rechtspraak van het Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens (II)

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 2 2013
Auteurs Sophie van Bijsterveld
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This is the second part of an analysis of the use of the qualification of the state as ‘neutral and impartial organiser of religions’ by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the first part of which appeared in the previous issue of this Journal. This part sets off with a discussion of the use of the qualification of the state as ‘neutral and impartial organiser of religions’ in cases concerning the place of religion in education. Subsequently, a variety of cases is dealt with that challenge restrictions on religious liberty set by the state or restrictions by third parties tolerated by the state. Finally, this contribution offers an overarching reflection on the use by the ECtHR of the qualification of the state as ‘neutral and impartial organiser of religions’ in its case law. It concludes that this qualification, which has no explicit treaty basis, is an inadequate standard for use at the international level and that the ECtHR itself is hardly ‘neutral’ in its application of the standard.


Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is bijzonder hoogleraar Religie, rechtsstaat en samenleving aan de Universiteit van Tilburg en redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid. s.c.vbijsterveld@uvt.nl.
Artikel

Access_open De staat als ‘neutral organiser of religions’?

Een analyse van de rechtspraak van het Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens (I)

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 1 2013
Trefwoorden religie, godsdienstvrijheid, EVRM, secularisme, neutraliteit, Europees Hof voor de rechten van de mens
Auteurs Sophie van Bijsterveld
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Since 2001 the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) regularly applies the normative characterization of the state as a ‘neutral and impartial organiser of religions’ in its cases. This qualification has no explicit basis in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Where does it come from, how does the ECtHR understand this, in which type of cases does the ECtHR use it and with which result? This essay analyses the use of this qualification by the ECtHR and aims to provide an answer to these questions. It asserts that the qualification of the state as ‘neutral and impartial organiser of religions’ is an inadequate standard and examines wether it may harbor other normative dimensions that are important in the relation between state and religion. After introducing the first case in which the ECtHR used this qualification, the first part deals with cases concerning conflicts within and between churches, equal treatment of religious groups in multi-tiered church and state systems, and pupils in public schools wearing religious garb. The second part will appear in the next issue of this Journal and continues with an analysis of cases concerning the place of religion in education, and various alleged interferences of religious liberty. It concludes with a reflection on the use by the ECtHR of the qualification of the state as ‘neutral and impartial organizer of religious’.


Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is bijzonder hoogleraar Religie, rechtsstaat en samenleving aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Zij is redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid. s.c.vbijsterveld@uvt.nl.

    The SGP does not allow women to stand for election for general representative political bodies. This position is based on the biblically inspired conviction that the exercise of such elected functions is against the vocation of women, since men and women have different roles in society. The European Court of Human Rights considers this position unacceptable in the light of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (obligation of the states to hold free elections) taken together with Article 14 (right to equal treatment in the enjoyment of Convention rights and freedoms). In a unanimous decision the Court considered the application manifestly ill-founded and, therefore, declared it inadmissible. By doing so, the European Court fails to deal with the real issues at hand and fails to consider the specifics of the case. The mere fact that the highest civil court and the highest administrative court in the Netherlands reached contrary conclusions regarding the human rights dimension of the case already should have led the European Court to deal with case substantively.


Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is bijzonder hoogleraar Religie, rechtsstaat en samenleving aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Zij is redactielid van Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid. s.c.vbijsterveld@uvt.nl.

Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is bijzonder hoogleraar Religie, rechtsstaat en samenleving aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Zij is redactielid van Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid. s.c.vbijsterveld@uvt.nl.

Sophie van Bijsterveld
Prof. dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is hoogleraar Religie, Rechtsstaat en Samenleving aan de Faculteit Geesteswetenschappen van de Universiteit van Tilburg en redactielid van Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid.
Jurisprudentie

Access_open Het passief kiesrecht, de staat en de SGP

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid, Aflevering 2 2010
Trefwoorden godsdienstvrijheid, verenigingsvrijheid, SGP, passief kiesrecht
Auteurs Sophie van Bijsterveld
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The SGP (Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij) is a Dutch political party based on a religious denomination, a particular form of Reformed Christianity. The party has been represented in Parliament since 1918. As a result of its religious views, which extends to issues of male – female roles in society, it does not allow women to be elected in a general representative body on its behalf. This was challenged in court by a number of special interest organizations. The organizations were not successful in their suit against the SGP for reasons of inadmissibility. However, they were successful in terms of admissibility and of substance in their suit against the Dutch State. In April 2010, the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that the Dutch State acted unlawfully by tolerating the fact that the SGP excludes women as candidates for elections on its behalf. The State was regarded as violating the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (the CEDAW), notably Article 7 under a and c. It ordered the State to take effective measures which, at the same time, restrict the SGP’s fundamental rights (freedom of religion and association)as least as possible. This contribution discusses the Supreme Court ruling.


Sophie van Bijsterveld
Dr. S.C. van Bijsterveld is hoofddocent aan de Faculteit Geesteswetenschappen van de UvT en redactielid van het Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.