Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Article 9, ECHR question

Just doing some reading on human rights law, particularly article 9 and the case of R(on the application of Playfoot) v Millais School Governing Body (2007).

I wanted to know if a specific manifestation of one's faith has to be 'intimately linked' (playfoot) to their beliefs so as to be protected by Article 9, OR should the extent of this linkage be dealt with at the stage of proportionality of any interference with that right?

Any relevant thoughts are welcome. Thank you

Reply 1

Democracy2013

The point in religion is whether X is essential for the operation of that religion to benefit from relevant human rights. In that case, X was a purity ring so the court had to decide whether a purity ring was essential for the religion to operate. The religion concerned was Christianity, and a purity ring was not any part of traditional or customary Christianity rather the purity ring is a modern use by certain churches, ie the Born Again' movements, not shared by the churches in general. Alternatively, a purity ring is not essential for the Christian religion, neither is a cross for that matter. Human rights are important, but these rights are based on essential things.

In any event, freedom religion is not a right as such it more a privilege as the state has qualified right to interrupt any convention rights including religion in certain circumstances. The school raised the argument about jewellery but this is a side issue.