Gli accomodamenti ragionevoli in materia di libertà religiosa tra giurisprudenza della Corte europea e della Corte canadese

Translated title of the contribution: [Autom. eng. transl.] Reasonable accommodations on religious freedom between the jurisprudence of the European Court and the Canadian Court

Marcella Ferri*

*Corresponding author

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

After analysing the features of the duty to reasonable accommodation, applied by the Supreme Court of Canada in relation to religion practises, the article aims to underline that the reasonable accommodation supposes an inclusive notion of State neutrality. This notion, while imposing to State authorities an attitude of impartiality towards religious convictions, does not imply the complete exclusion of religion from the public sphere. The second part of the article focuses on the jurisprudence elaborated by the European Court of Human Rights with regard to the manifestation of religious identity in the workplace. While recognising the principle of non discrimination, the Court seems really hesitant to identify a duty to accommodate in relation to religion practises. According to the thesis argued in the article, this trend is strictly linked with the principles elaborated by the Court on the State neutrality and on the religious pluralism of the public sphere. With special regard to the wearing of religious symbols the Court has been admitting some significant restrictions to the manifestation of religious identity in the public area.
Translated title of the contribution[Autom. eng. transl.] Reasonable accommodations on religious freedom between the jurisprudence of the European Court and the Canadian Court
Original languageItalian
Pages (from-to)307-340
Number of pages34
JournalJUS
Publication statusPublished - 2015
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Diritto internazionale

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '[Autom. eng. transl.] Reasonable accommodations on religious freedom between the jurisprudence of the European Court and the Canadian Court'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this