A Critical Evaluation of ECHR Article 9 Jurisprudence: Selective Protection of Identity?
PLEASE CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FULL DISSERTATION
My name is Lucy Heenan, I am 22 and I am from Northern Ireland. I chose to write about this topic because I thought it would be interesting to investigate the ongoing conversation about religious dress and symbols in Europe. In particular, I was curious to see whether there is a tendency on the part of the European Court of Human Rights to offer favourable outcomes to cases involving dress and symbols associated with Christianity, a religion closely affiliated with Europe’s own traditions and cultures, than Islamic dress and symbols, with the veil being the focus of my dissertation. From my research, I learned that there is in fact a reluctance on the part of the Court to award protection to the wearing of the veil by Muslim women and an eagerness to protect Christian dress and symbols. What surprised me the most when evaluating the judgments was that in some instances the Court actively bent its reasoning to provide these outcomes, resulting in what are, in my view, inconsistent judgments. This pro-Christian, anti-Muslim bias has resulted in a selective protection of identity in Europe.
-Lucy Heenan, Author
Introduction
This dissertation will consider Article 9 jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. Article 9 guarantees the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the right to manifestation of religion. This dissertation will focus on Article 9 jurisprudence revolving around manifestation of religion through dress and symbols. It will evaluate whether there is a trend in the case law for the Court to be selective in awarding its protection to individuals in respect of this aspect of Article 9.
