Within orthodox-protestant schools in The Netherlands there is growing diversity and uncertainty about internal religious, cultural and social norms. Though orthodox-protestant schools are among the strongest semi-autonomous social fields, where it is difficult for equal treatment law to pervade, this growing diversity and uncertainty about internal norms can make this pervasion possible. The uncertainty about the meaning of the exception clause in equal treatment legislation for the appointment policy of religious schools also affects this.
Because of the uncertainty about the meaning of the exception clause the position of the school board was strengthened in comparison to the employee, even though the intention of the equal treatment law was the opposite. At a later stage the clarification of the anti-discrimination norm by changing the exception clause has strengthened the position of the employee. Though this is only possible when religious, cultural and social norms are changing. In that case orthodox-protestant schools, as semi-autonomous fields, are more open for the effects of this legal norm.
Uncertainty about the meaning of the requirement of a consistent appointment policy has led both to tightening as well as relaxation of the policy. In the first place tightening or relaxation of policies depends on the development of religious, cultural and social norms within different school denominations. Thus, uncertainty about internal norms works both contrary as well as strengthening to uncertainty about equal treatment legislation.

Het Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens (EHRM of Hof) heeft in de periode van september 2019 tot en met augustus 2020 weer diverse uitspraken gedaan over gezondheidsrechtelijke onderwerpen. Veel uitspraken borduren voort op of geven een nadere uitleg aan zaken waarover het Hof zich eerder heeft gebogen. Tegelijkertijd komt uit de uitspraken van afgelopen jaar het beeld naar voren dat het Hof in toenemende mate belang hecht aan de beschermingsplicht van de overheid, in het bijzonder bij gedetineerden, psychiatrische en verstandelijk beperkte patiënten en personen die anderszins kwetsbaar zijn.

Whether homosexual teachers can work at an orthodox Protestant school in The Netherlands is regularly subject of societal debate. The Equal Treatment Law (1994) prohibits discrimination on the ground of homosexual orientation. How this works out in practice differs per denomination (type of school) and shifts over time in the direction of increasing acceptance. Within orthodox Protestant schools room is increasing to come out of the closet. Within certain schools there is increasing room for homosexual relationships, although opinions within these schools often differ and hence may also lead to conflict.

This article critically examines the prospects of restorative justice in Brussels from the perspective of urban youth work. The insights issue from action research on the topic of ‘radicalisation’. The authors develop two arguments. The first tempers restorative optimism. It shows how restorative interventions are not necessarily the most adequate response to tensions and conflicts in urban settings. The second argument points out that resistance from urban youth workers regarding the implementation of restorative interventions should not be seen as a regrettable obstacle for academics who are eager to experiment with these interventions. Such a resistance can lead to new insights and fresh opportunities to radically rethink Restorative Justice. One of the ideas that the article brings to the surface comes down to this. In a city like Brussels, characterised by superdiversity, and clearly marked by social inequalities, academic researchers only gain credibility in initiating restorative interventions if they undeniably denounce these inequalities and fully express their engagement for social justice.

The judgment ‘NGK/Gort’ from the Supreme Court of the Netherlands (04-10-2019, ECLI:NL:HR:2019:1531) gives an important explanation about the church-state relation in general and the ecclestiacal service law-position concerning the pastor in particular. The legal starting point is not in civil law, but in church law. This is the consequence of the right of selfregulation (autonomy) of the church and the non-interference from the state, as recognized by article 2:2 Dutch Civil Code and article 9 jo. 11 ECHR. This principle stands against normal civil mandatory law, for example labor law. It will only be overruled in exceptional cases by civil law of fundamental nature. Than a judicial consideration is necessary taking into account the fundamental rights of the church and the opposant.

Confessional secrecy is inviolable under Catholic canon law, and violations of it are severely sanctioned. Some people see this secret as an obstacle to the legal process in society and advocate a limitation in its use. This article argues that this form of confidentiality also can be defended in civil law because of the protection of spiritual care. Confessional secrecy is analyzed here and compared with forms of official secrecy that are recognized in society. Finally, there is a plea for a clear legal framework for the application of this confessional secret by Catholic priests.

The election defeat of the Christian coalition in 1905 is partly caused by contradictions in its own circle. Many orthodox members of the Dutch Reformed Church resented Prime Minister Abraham Kuyper for having legally regulated the position of the Free University at Amsterdam, but had done nothing for the rights of the Dutch Reformed Church in the theological faculties at the universities of the state. The reformed theologian Hoedemaker even aroused a preference for a liberal rather than an anti-revolutionary candidate. Kuyper’s party lost nine seats, the coalition lost three seats to the majority.

Volgens de Raad van State zou de rechtsstaat in Nederland niet wezenlijk in gevaar zijn, zou de balans tussen de instituties die invulling moeten geven aan de rechtsstaat (wetgever, bestuur en rechter) tot nu toe verzekerd zijn en zou er voldoende draagvlak onder de bevolking bestaan. Daarom zou er ook geen reden zijn voor een ‘alarmerende toon’. Deze stellingen worden nauwelijks onderbouwd, staan maatschappelijk ter discussie en miskennen dat Nederland geen eiland is, maar onderdeel uitmaakt van een meergelaagde internationale rechtsorde. Het beeld dat de Raad daarbij heeft van de scheiding der machten behoeft dringend bijstelling.

Van oudsher is in Nederland het vaccinatiebeleid bij jonge kinderen gebaseerd op vrijwilligheid. Onder meer naar aanleiding van een dalende vaccinatiegraad wordt er in toenemende mate voor gepleit in het vaccinatiebeleid elementen met een verplicht karakter op te nemen. Dit zien we ook terug in een wetsvoorstel dat de Tweede Kamer in februari 2020 aanvaardde. In deze bijdrage wordt de discussie over vrijwillig versus verplicht in kaart gebracht en besproken.

In this article we elaborate on the place of religion in the workplace. Does the individual freedom of religion imply that employers must always accommodate the religious claims of employees or can they boast a number of arguments allowing them to legitimately limit that freedom? And, conversely, do employers not also have a right to freedom of religion and a right to formulate certain religious expectations for their employees? In this contribution, we deal with these and related questions from a legal-philosophical perspective. The overall aim is to illustrate the extent to which univocal answers are jeopardized because of conceptual ambiguities. We first make a normative distinction between two strategies (i.e. difference-blind approach and difference-sensitive approach) and subsequently illustrate and elaborate on how and why these strategies can lead to different outcomes in legal cases. We illustrate the extent to which a contextual and proportional analysis can be a way out in theoretical and practical conundrums.

This is the second part of the revised translation of ‘Understanding sharia in the West’ that was published in the Journal of Law, Religion and State 2018, 6, p. 236-273. The first part of the translation appeared in Tijdschrift voor Religie, Recht en Beleid 2019, 3, p. 17-31.

Do religious motives result in greater freedom of action? This question cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. First of all, a distinction must be made between conduct that falls within the scope of the right to freedom of religion as opposed to other conduct. This distinction in turn needs some qualification. The aforementioned right can, after all, be restricted. The conduct in question could moreover fall within the purview of another fundamental right, as a result of which persons without religious motives are entitled to invoke another fundamental right. All these distinctions will be reviewed in this article. Special attention will be given to religiously motivated statements condemning homosexuality and the religiously motivated refusal to have children vaccinated.

Op 4 oktober 2019 wees de Hoge Raad een belangwekkend arrest op het snijvlak van het rechtspersonenrecht, arbeidsrecht en kerkelijk recht. De zaak betreft het ontslag van een predikant die werkzaam was in een kerkgenootschap. De juridische kernvraag in cassatie is: welk recht is van toepassing op de rechtspositie van deze voorganger? Is dat het civiele arbeidsrecht, het kerkelijke dienstrecht of een samenloop van beide? De Hoge Raad biedt duidelijkheid op het grensvlak van kerk en staat.

Restrictions imposed by the state on the exercise of religion are always the result of a weighing of interests by a judge, an administrative body or a legislator. This weighing of interests is strongly influenced by the context within the exercise of religion take place. In this article four different spheres are distinguished: the internal religious sphere, the public sphere, the sphere of private institutions and the government sphere. The particular relationship that these spheres have with neutrality characterizes the balancing of interests. This explains and justifies why wearing religious clothing may be restricted in some situations and not in others.

The Dutch social-liberal party D66 was founded in 1966, in the aftermath of the pillarisation (on religious grounds) of Dutch society. The founders of D66 wanted to ‘blow up’ the pillarised political system. They strongly took distance from religions that were in their views oppressing. A certain anti-religion attitude was a part of the DNA of the party. For decades it was ‘bon ton’ to criticise religion. A turning point has recently been observed by the writer. There is still a discomfort in relation to religion, but this discomfort is more related to not-knowing than being against. The writer pleads for going beyond the discomfort. Religion – in the broad sense of the word – has a lot to offer to society. We indeed can’t live without binding stories, places that are loaded with meaning and festivities that reminds ourselves of who we are and who we would want to be. Finally the modernity and religion can strengthen each other: where modernity is skilled in criticising religion, the Christian religion can make a contribution by criticising modernity.

Sinds enige tijd werkt de Afdeling advisering van de Raad van State met aangescherpte dicta, en worden ook adviezen over initiatiefvoorstellen met een dictum afgesloten. In deze aflevering van RegelMaat worden de eerste adviezen nieuwe stijl onder de loep genomen.

Al jaren daalt in Nederland de vaccinatiegraad, waardoor ziekten als mazelen en de bof opnieuw dreigen de kop op te steken. Om dit tegen te gaan zijn recent in de Nederlandse politiek twee meer verplichtende maatregelen voorgesteld. Dit artikel analyseert de juridische mogelijkheden en onmogelijkheden van deze voorstellen, met name in de context de van de grondrechten waarmee ze zouden kunnen botsen: artikel 2 EVRM (recht op leven), artikel 8 EVRM (onaantastbaarheid van het lichaam) en/of artikel 9 EVRM: (vrijheid van godsdienst en levensovertuiging) en het daaruit volgende Nederlandse gelijkebehandelingsrecht.

The decision of the Court that Muslims from the Greek province of West Thrace can choose in matters of family law between civil or Islamic law, is not surprising. However, much can be said about the way in which the Court came to that conclusion. Because in doing so it uses principles and considerations that show a lack of insight in the status and functioning of a unique legal system, namely that of interpersonal law, or the coexistence on equal basis of several family laws. Similarly, the Court seems biased towards Islamic family law, which it consistently refers to as ‘sharia’. A critical discussion of this judgment is therefore appropriate.