Conflicts between religion or belief and other protected groups

Peter Reading

Director of Legal Policy

Equality and Human Rights Commission, Britain

Overview

This presentation will cover :

• An overview of the Equinet Law in Practice Working Group Report on Religion or Belief

• The areas where conflict arise • Several key cases involving the Equality Bodies and

principles applied to resolving conflicts• Some emerging conclusions

Equinet report on religion or beliefThe Report will:

- Outline the legal framework for protection from religious discrimination and freedom of religion under EU Equality law and article 9 ECHR

- Outline the ways in which issues of religious discrimination and freedom of religion are developing across employment, education, provision of goods and services, public functions such as police, and public spaces

- Analyze the cases based on two categories:

1. Religious discrimination/ manifestation claims generally

2. Religious discrimination/ manifestation claims where conflicts arise

Equinet report on religion or belief

1. Religious discrimination/ manifestation claims generally

- Requests for adjustments in employment based on religious practices or belief (working hours, dress codes)

- Religious clothing in schools

- Refusal to provide a service (eg public security issues and Muslim dress)

2. Religious discrimination/ manifestation claims where conflicts arise

- Sexual orientation

- Children

- Gender

Types of Conflicts: sexual orientation

1. Employment

- Employee refuses to perform a task because of religion or belief which does or may discriminate against groups on grounds of sexual orientation

- Genuine occupational requirements exception relating to religion: Employment Directive 2000/78/EC

2. Provision of goods and services

- Service provider refuses to provide a service on grounds of sexual orientation

Types of Conflicts: sexual orientation

1. Employment

Position of registrars of marriages and civil partnerships

Ladele v Islington Borough Council Court of Appeal (UK)

Registrar refused to perform civil partnerships for same sex couples on grounds of religious beliefs

Claim of religious discrimination and breach of article 9 ECHR

Held: was indirect discrimination on grounds of religion but was justified, no breach of article 9

Factors: public position of registrar, could not perform key part of role, may result in discrimination against gay people (chilling effect)

Types of Conflicts: sexual orientation

1. Employment

Position of registrars of marriages and civil partnerships

Civil Registrar case Dutch Equal Treatment Opinion 2008-40 (Netherlands)

Man applied to become registrar, position required person to perform same sex marriages and partnerships. Man said he could not on grounds of religion and claimed indirect religious discrimination

Held: was indirect discrimination but justifiedFactors: was proportionate response, not merely asking for change in

way service provide but complete exemption regarding a group, constitutes sexual orientation discrimination

Types of Conflicts: sexual orientation

1. Employment

- Genuine occupational requirements exception relating to religion: Employment Directive 2000/78/EC

Supreme Court Case 247 1 (8 June 2005) (Hungary)

Declaration by Calvinist University that cannot educate and recruit for employment of pastors and teachers of religion homosexuals

Sexual orientation discrimination claimSupreme Court held it was proportionate to exclude

homosexuals from theological educationQuestionable decision: not likely to comply with Employment

Directive which prevents use of exception to justify discrimination on other grounds

Types of Conflicts: sexual orientation

2. Provision of services

Hall and Preddy v Bull and Bull (UK)

Bed and Breakfast owned by Christian religious couple, refused to provide room to homosexual couple as they were not married.

Homosexual couple claimed sexual orientation discrimination. Religious couple claimed would be a breach of their article 9 rights.

Held: either direct or indirect sexual orientation discrimination, no breach of article 9

Types of Conflicts: children

Arises in employment, education and service provision

Unlike sexual orientation cases which usually involve discrimination, child cases usually concern the protection of their best interests and of their right to education

HALDE decision No 2006-242 (France)Youth leaders contract was terminated, work involved leisure and

sporting activities for promotion of social integration of autistic children

Claimant arrived at work wearing a veil and refused to go swimming with the children.

Was indirect religious discrimination but justified on grounds of need to ensure safety of children using pools

Types of Conflicts: children

Williams v Secretary of State for Education and Employment [2005] 2 WLR 590

Parents claimed that legislation that prohibited corporal punishment in schools interfered with their ability to manifest their article 9 right to freedom of religion.

House of Lords found that the interference with their rights was justified to protect the rights of children from physical abuse

Types of Conflicts: gender

Arise in situations primarily of employment and education

Refusal to perform task with a woman

Supreme Court KKO:2010:74 (Finland)Refusal of male priest to hold religious service with female priest

on grounds of religious belief.Held: was direct sex discrimination. Article 9 can be limited to

protect the rights of others

Types of Conflicts: gender

Refusal to shake hands with persons of opposite sex: CGB 7 November 2006, 2006-221 (Netherlands)

Musilm female teacher stated on religious grounds she no longer wished to shake hands of men was suspended.

Claim of indirect religious discrimination and breach of article 9.CGB Held: was legitimate aim of having practice of shaking hands

to promote respectful manners but was not proportionate, are different ways to be respectful in a diverse school.

Court of Appeal held: was indirect religious discrimination but was justified. Not shaking hands could be seen as confrontational, straining relations, weight to be given to having uniform rules

Emerging Conclusions

1. Most conflict cases are determined on the basis of indirect religious discrimination claims as they generally relate to neutral practices that have a disproportionate impact on religious groups

2. Actual or potential discrimination or abuse of the human rights of other protected groups will be key to determining whether there is a legitimate aim and if so whether its proportionate

3. In sexual orientation conflict cases, claims of sexual orientation discrimination my also arise and be established

4. The concept of making adjustments for religious belief are unlikely to be reasonable where they would or may result in discrimination against other groups

Emerging Conclusions

5. Article 9 claims are generally unlikely to succeed where there are conflicts as the right to manifest your belief can be limited to protect the rights of others

6. There is a need for the extension of EU Equality law beyond the employment sector for religion or belief, sexual orientation, children

7. The Religion or Belief exception in the Employment Directive may be being inappropriately applied to permit sexual orientation discrimination and a reference from a Member State may help clarify

8. It may be helpful for Equality Bodies and the European Commission to produce practical guidance on how to balance conflicting rights.