Damned if they do, Damned if they don't: the European Court of Human Rights and the Protection of Religion from Attack

Res Publica 17 (1):55-73 (2011)
Abstract
The approach of the European Court of Human Rights to cases of religiously offensive expression is inconsistent and unsatisfactory. A critical analysis of the Court’s jurisprudence on blasphemy, religious insult and religious hatred identifies three problems with its approach in this field. These are: the embellishment and over-emphasis of freedom of religion, the use of the margin of appreciation and the devaluing of some forms of offensive speech. Nevertheless, it is possible to defend a more coherent approach to the limitation of freedom of expression under the European Convention of Human Rights, designed to protect religious liberty in a narrower category of cases
Keywords Blasphemy  Religious insult  Religious hatred  Freedom of expression  European Court of Human Rights
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11158-011-9143-5
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 33,167
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Religion, Religions, and Human Rights.Louis Henkin - 1998 - Journal of Religious Ethics 26 (2):229-239.
Equality, Freedom, and Religion.Roger Trigg - 2012 - Oxford University Press.
Environmental Rights in a Welfare State? A Comment on DeMerieux.Chris Miller - 2003 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 23 (1):111-125.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-01-01

Total downloads
56 ( #108,368 of 2,242,253 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #231,807 of 2,242,253 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature