Conflicts between human rights : it does really make a difference -- Defining conflicts between human rights -- Defusing and minimizing conflicts between human rights -- Difficulties in balancing human rights -- Theoretical challenges to balancing human rights -- Practical obstacles to balancing human rights
In: Céline Romainville et al. (eds.), Human Rights in Pandemic Times: Political Exceptionalism, Social Vulnerability and Restricted Freedoms (Larcier, 2022)
AbstractWhen adjudicating religious disputes, constitutional courts often resort to a particular discursive register. The notions 'tolerance' and 'respect' are an integral part of this religion-specific constitutional register. But what do judges mean when they deploy the language of tolerance and respect? And what substantive role, if any, do both notions play in the constitutional interpretation of religious freedom? This article seeks to answer these conceptual and substantive questions by comparing constitutional case law on religious freedom from India, Israel and the United States. It also provides linkages to ongoing processes of (alleged) constitutional retrogression in the three jurisdictions.
In E.S. v. Austria, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that a criminal conviction for making disparaging comments about the Prophet Muhammad, intimating in particular that he was a pedophile, did not violate the speaker's right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
In: This is an Author's Original Version of an article published by Oxford University Press in Human Rights Law Review (2017) on 10 July 2017, DOI: 10.1093/hrlr/ngx016
In: This is an Author's Original Version of an article published by Oxford University Press in Human Rights Law Review (2013), DOI: 10.1093/hrlr/ngt020
In: This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published in Eva Brems and Janneke Gerards (eds), Shaping rights in the ECHR: the role of the European Court of Human Rights in determining the scope of Human Rights (Cambridge University Press, 2013)
In: This is an Accepted Manuscript version of an article published in American University International Law Review (2011), 183-236. Available online under a Digital Commons License.
In: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Gender Studies (2009) on 15 Jul 2009, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09589230902812455