Blasphemy Laws and Freedom of Expression in Europe
Blasphemy laws and the penalization of religious insults are debated in Europe in relation to freedom of expression, with arguments for and against such laws presented. The purpose, limitations, and definitions of blasphemy are also discussed, along with the role of the U.S. Supreme Court in protecting free speech.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Penalization of blasphemy and Penalization of blasphemy and religious insults as an infringement of religious insults as an infringement of freedom of expression in Europe freedom of expression in Europe IOANNIS IGLEZAKIS, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY
U.S. Supreme Court the state has no legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful to them which is sufficient to justify prior restraints upon the expression of those views. It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine.
The purpose of blasphemy laws To limit the freedom of speech and expression related to blasphemy in order to protect God or a particular religion; To protect the religious feelings of the majority of the population; To protect the religious beliefs of minorities. To preserve peace
Limitations of the right to freedom of expression Article 10 ECHR Treaty The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Definitions Blasphemy: the offence of insulting or showing contempt or lack or reverence for God and, by extension, towards anything considered sacred Religious insult: an insult based to a particular religion or an insult to religious feelings incitement to religious hatred
European Court of Human Rights Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria Wingroe v United Kingdom
Council of Europe -Report of the Committee on Culture, Science and Education of 8 June 2007 permit open debate on matters relating to religion and beliefs and do not privilege a particular religion in this respect, which would be incompatible with Articles 10 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights; penalise statements that call for a person or a group of persons to be subjected to hatred, discrimination or violence on grounds of their religion as on any other grounds; prohibit acts which intentionally and severely disturb the public order and call for public violence by references to religious matters, as far as it is necessary in a democratic society in accordance with Article 10, paragraph 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Venice Commission a. That incitement to hatred, including religious hatred, should be the object of criminal sanctions as is the case in almost all European states, with the exception only of Andorra and San Marino. b. That it is neither necessary nor desirable to create an offence of religious insult (that is, insult to religious feelings) simpliciter, without the element of incitement to hatred as an essential component. c. That the offence of blasphemy should be abolished (which is already the case in most European states) and should not be reintroduced.
Conclusion The need to protect freedom of speech calls for the abolishment of blasphemy laws, with the exception of incitement to religious hatred.
