Browse results

An International Human Rights Analysis
This book investigates the dynamics between international incitement prohibitions and international standards on freedom of religious speech, with a special focus on the potential incitement prohibitions for the protection of the rights of LGBT+ people. To that end, the book seeks to determine if and to what extent sexual orientation and gender identity are protected grounds under international anti-incitement law. Building on that analysis, the book also delves deeper into the particularly controversial and complex issue of religiously-motivated speech against LGBT+ people, a phenomenon engaging both religious speech rights and equality and other rights of LGBT+ people. Drawing on recent international law benchmarking in the area of incitement and complementing this with extensive comparative legal analysis, best practice lessons are presented on how to calibrate free religious expression and the protection of LGBT rights in the pluralist state. Among other findings, the present research rejects a sweeping a priori trump in the form of a ‘scripture defence’ against incitement charges, but rather recommends a context-based risk assessment of speech acts potentially affecting the rights of LGBT+ people.
Challenged Justice: In Pursuit of Judicial Independence is an academic continuation of the previous volumes on judicial Independence edited by Shimon Shetreet, with others: Jules Deschenes, Christopher Forsyth, and Wayne McCormack. All books were published by Brill Nijhoff: Judicial Independence: The Contemporary Debate (1985), The Culture of Judicial Independence: Conceptual Foundations and Practical Challenges (2012), The Culture of Judicial Independence: Rule of Law and World Peace (2014) and The Culture of Judicial Independence in a Globalised World (2016).
This book offers academic articles by distinguished jurists on judicial independence and judicial process in many jurisdictions including indicators of justice and analysis of international Standards on judicial independence and judicial ethics.
This book examines different approaches by which states characterised by federal or decentralized arrangements reconcile equality and autonomy. In case studies from four continents, leading experts analyse the challenges of ensuring institutional, social and economic equality whilst respecting the competences of regions and the rights of groups.
This book argues that a view has taken root in Africa, which equates state-secularism to the aggressive removal of religion from the public sphere or even state ambivalence towards religious affairs. This view arises from a misguided interpretation of the practice of state-secularism particularly in France, Turkey and the US, which understanding is ill-suited for the sub-Sahara Africa’s state-religion because the region boasts of at least three major religious traditions, African religion, Islam and Christianity, and blanket condemnation of public manifestation of religion or ambivalence towards it may offend the natural flourishing of this trinity and more. The contribution holds that most applications of state-secularism in Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda favour the Christian faith, which during its tumultuous experiences in Europe survived the enlightenment, the reformation and like experiences socialised to co-exist with what are now called secular states. Additionally, due to the long history of Christendoms in Europe, Christian principles penetrated the colonial legal systems that were bequeathed to Africa at independence and the sustenance of the colonial legacy means that the Abrahamic faith has an upper hand in the state-religion relations’ contest. The obvious loser is African religion which has suffered major onslaughts since the colonial days.
In: Journal of Law, Religion and State

Abstract

Proposals abound in Israel to address the question of pluralistic access to the Temple Mount and the Western Wall. Each of these proposals has been a source of great controversy. In this article, we propose a Swiftian solution of privatization. We propose that the government of Israel sell the Temple Mount, the Western Wall, and many other holy sites to specific faith groups that will then operate them as private property, with the ability to restrict various rights within them. This proposal is based on a model adopted and implemented in Salt Lake City, Utah, to address various questions regarding access to property purchased by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In: Journal of Law, Religion and State
Author: Karen Barkey

Abstract

This paper analyzes the conditions under which the sharing of sacred sites in Turkey is still possible despite the serious Sunnification campaign of the akp regime. I argue that ideological, cultural, and pragmatic motivations led the Turkish state to refrain from interfering in practices the ruling party deems sacrilegious and distasteful.

In: Journal of Law, Religion and State
Authors: Janosch Prinz and Enzo Rossi

Abstract

In this paper, we put forward a realist account of the problem of accommodation of conflicting claims over sacred places. Our argument takes its cue from the empirical finding that modern, Western-style states necessarily mould religion into shapes that are compatible with state rule. At least in the context of modern states, there is no pre-political morality of religious freedom that states ought to follow when adjudicating claims over sacred spaces. Liberal normative theory on religious accommodation which starts from the assumption of a pre-political morality of religious freedom is therefore of limited value. As an alternative, we suggest that the question of contested sacred places should be settled with reference to the purposes of the state, at least as long as one is committed to the existence of modern states. If one finds the treatment of religion by the state unsatisfactory, our argument provides a pro tanto reason for seeking alternative forms of political organization.

In: Journal of Law, Religion and State
Author: Jocelyne Cesari

Abstract

The main argument of this paper is that the sacred time and space of the nation has displaced the meaning of sacredness of the religious sites, and legitimized the national community. By comparing the Temple Mount and Ayodhya disputes, the paper exposes the tensions between two polarities, sacred/profane and religious/political, which helps explain the influence of national identities on the contested sacredness of religious sites. The competition over the Temple Mount is nested within a “thicker” context of conflicting political claims over Jerusalem and national territory between Jewish groups on one hand and between Jews and Muslims on the other. The Ayodhya disagreement is related to the political tensions between the dominant and the minority religions, which have turned the religious dispute over a holy site into a debate on the sacredness of the national community.

In: Journal of Law, Religion and State
Author: Jonathan Seglow

Abstract

This article explores the neglected topic of the value of sacred places of various religions. The great value that adherents of these religions ascribe to these places cannot account for their public political value, given that the duty to treat such places with respect falls on all citizens, whatever their faith. The article considers and rejects three views regarding the value of sacred places: that they are protected by cultural rights, that damaging them would hurt the feelings of religious believers, and that they are the collective property of religious groups. It then considers the right to religious liberty, which has been argued in recent scholarship on religious accommodation to be best defended through the value of integrity and by honoring one’s religious commitments. Although integrity is too individualistic a concept to explain the value of sacred places directly, the way in which these places embody sacredness here on earth helps enable integrity by showing what one’s commitments are invested in. This view of the value of sacred places can account for the value of non-religious sacred places and for the duty to respect them all.

In: Journal of Law, Religion and State