Landmark European court judgment on religious freedoms due

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Guardian

Landmark European court judgment on religious freedoms due

European court of human rights ruling on four cases brought by Christians may force changes in legislation and work practices

Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 15 January 2013 01.00 EST

The extent of religious freedom within the UK – including the right to wear a Christian cross at work – will be defined by a landmark judgment from Strasbourg on Tuesday.

The long-anticipated decision by the European court of human rights (ECHR) will resolve four controversial cases brought by Christians who claim they were discriminated against because of their faith and prevented from exercising their right to freedom of religion. If any of the appeals succeed, they may force a change in UK legislation and work practices.

The challenges have been brought by: Nadia Eweida, a British Airways worker from London; Lilian Ladele, a local authority registrar also from London; Shirley Chaplin, a nurse from Exeter; and Gary McFarlane, a marriage counsellor from Bristol. The latter two are being directly supported by the Christian Legal Centre (CLC).

Eweida and Chaplin's cases relate to the visible wearing of crosses at work. The other two are concerned with protection of Christian conscience in the professional arena.



Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/15/landmark-judgment-cross-religious-freedom

[Judi Lynn]

1. BA worker's rights were infringed by cross ban, European court rules

BA worker's rights were infringed by cross ban, European court rules

Nadia Eweida is awarded €2,000 compensation after being prevented from wearing a cross at work

Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 15 January 2013 04.32 EST

A British Airways check-in worker's right to express her religion was unfairly restricted when she was prevented from wearing a cross at work, the European court of human rights (ECHR) has ruled.

In a landmark judgment defining the limits of religious freedom, Nadia Eweida, a practising Coptic Christian, was awarded €2,000 in compensation by the court in Strasbourg after it ruled against the United Kingdom.

In a majority judgment, the ECHR said: "The domestic authorities failed sufficiently to protect the first applicant's right to manifest her religion, in breach of the positive obligation under article 9 (of the European convention on human rights, which guarantees freedom of thought, conscience and religion)."

But three other Christian applicants – Lilian Ladele, a local authority registrar who also lives in London, Shirley Chaplin, a nurse from Exeter, and Gary McFarlane, a Bristol marriage counsellor – who also claimed they had suffered religious discrimination lost their appeals.

More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/jan/15/ba-rights-cross-european-court

[pampango]

2. Interesting that 47 European countries have agreed to the ECHR's jurisdiction.

The Court was established on the 21 January 1959 by virtue of Article 19 of the European Convention on Human Rights when eight signatories acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Court. The function of the Court is "to ensure the observance of the engagement undertaken" by the contracting states in relation to the Convention and its protocols. The jurisdiction of the Court has been recognised by 47 European states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Human_Rights

From the OP link: "If any of the appeals succeed, they may force a change in UK legislation and work practices."

Hard to imagine the US ever doing something to allowing an international body to have such authority over national policy. Especially since a ruling such as this give people rights that the national government had not recognized.