A CPTRG research event
28-29 May 2015
Laws and rules in liberal democracies are sometimes interpreted in such a way as to specifically accommodate the convictions of religious groups. In the UK for example, Christians have claimed a right not to work on Sundays, Sikhs are permitted to wear ceremonial daggers (kirpan) in public, Jews and Muslims are exempted from animal slaughter legislation, Rastafarians have claimed that smoking cannabis is a manifestation of their religion and Muslim women have claimed a right to wear headscarves and even face veils at work in contravention of uniform codes. Religious accommodation raises the difficult question of how, if all citizens are equal in a liberal democracy, some citizens can justly be exempted from laws and rules. Besides political theorists and academic lawyers, courts and tribunals in the UK have wrestled with religious accommodation issues for several decades. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has determined numerous cases, most recently the landmark UK case Eweida and others (2013). There is also considerable debate on religious accommodation issues in public policy circles. The Equality and Human Rights Commmision (EHRC), for example, has a research theme dedicated to the issue and intervened on behalf of the applicants in Eweida and others.
This workshop explored the following questions:
1. What is the normative and legal basis for religious accommodation? It has been argued for on the grounds of freedom of conscience, freedom of associations, the value of integrity and self-respect, equality of oppportunity and non-discrimination. Do some of these different concepts support distinct forms of accommodation?
2. How can religious accommodation be justified to citizens in a pluralistic society consisting of many different kinds of religious believers as well as atheist and agnostic citizens, some of whom have to bear the cost of accommodating their fellow citizens\' religious convictions?
3. Do arguments for accommodation favour some religions over others? Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives individuals a qualified right to manifest their religion or belief. What sorts of non-religious beliefs might are sufficiently weighty and serious to merit accommodation? How about pacificism, communism or environmentalism?
4. What do disputes about religious accommodation tell us about the place of religious minorities in the UK? Can accommodation serve the goal of civic inclusion, or does it encourage religious and cultural separatism? What is the relationship between religious accommodation and other political issues involving religion such as faith schools, faith-based welfare provision or laws against hate speech?
5. Does the UK have a distinctive approach to accommodation issues compared with the rest of Europe? How far is the approach of UK courts to legal accommodation consistent with the human rights and nondiscrimination law of the ECtHR?
Participants
Mr Mohammed Aziz (Faithwis)
Dr Jonathan Boyd (Institute for Jewish Policy Research)
Dr Alex Brown (University of East Anglia)
Mr Rakib Ehsan (Royal Holloway, University of London (PhD candidate))
Dr Maria Paola Ferretti (Darmstadt University, Germany)
Prof. Peter Jones (University of Newcastle)
Prof. Cécile Laborde (University College London)
Dr Sune Laegaard (Roskilde University, Denmark)
Dr Lois Lee (University College London)
Prof. Maleiha Malik (Kings College London)
Prof. Tariq Modood (University of Bristol)
Dr David Perfect (Equality and Human Rights Commission)
Dr Roland Pierik (Amsterdam University, the Netherlands)
Ms Caroline Roberts (University of Bristol (PhD candidate))
Dr Russell Sandberg (University of Cardiff)
Dr Jonathan Seglow (Royal Holloway, University of London)
Dr Andrew Shorten (University of Limerick, Ireland)
Dr Simon Thompson (University of West of England)
Prof. Nathan Widder (Royal Holloway, University of London)
Prof. Robert Wintemute (Kings College London)
