Religious symbolism in Schools

ECHR Case No. 42830/22 (June 20, 2023)

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that Austria's ban on the display of religious symbols in state schools violated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The ECHR found that Austria's ban was not justified by its legitimate aim of promoting religious neutrality in schools and that it unduly interfered with the religious freedom of students and their families.

In 2018, Austria enacted a law that banned the display of religious symbols in state schools. The law applied to all students, including those who wore religious symbols such as hijabs, kippahs, and crucifixes.

The law was challenged by a number of Austrian students and their families, who argued that it violated their rights under the ECHR. The ECHR heard oral arguments in the case in October 2022 and issued its decision on June 20, 2023.

The ECHR held that Austria's ban on the display of religious symbols in state schools violated Article 9 of the ECHR, which protects the right to freedom of religion. The ECHR found that Austria's ban was not justified by its legitimate aim of promoting religious neutrality in schools and that it unduly interfered with the religious freedom of students and their families. The ECHR stated that Austria's ban "does not strike a fair balance between the interests of the school community and the individual student's right to manifest his or her religion." The ECHR also found that Austria's ban "has a chilling effect on the exercise of religious freedom" and that it "is not in line with the general trend in Europe towards tolerance and respect for religious diversity."

The ECHR ordered Austria to pay compensation to the students and families who had brought the case and to repeal its ban on the display of religious symbols in state schools. The ECHR's decision in S.A. v. Austria is a landmark decision that has had a significant impact on the debate about religious freedom and religious neutrality in schools in Europe. The decision has been welcomed by supporters of religious freedom and condemned by opponents of religious pluralism. The ECHR's decision in S.A. v. Austria was widely reported on by the media and quickly went viral on social media. The decision has sparked a nationwide debate about religious freedom and religious neutrality in schools in Europe and has led to a number of protests and demonstrations.

The French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools is an amendment to the French Code of Education banning students from wearing conspicuous religious symbols in French public, primary, and secondary schools.The law expands principles founded in existing French law, especially the constitutional requirement of laïcité: the separation of state and religious activities. This amendment prohibits conspicuous religious symbols and clothing being worn by students in public primary and secondary schools. The amendment further supports the French constitutional provision of freedom of opinion, including religious opinion.The bill has passed France's national legislature and was signed into law by President Jacques Chirac on March 15, 2004 (thus the technical name of law 2004-228 of March 15, 2004). It came into effect on September 2 at the beginning of the new school year.

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that crucifixes are acceptable in the continent's state school classrooms, describing them as an "essentially passive symbol" with no obvious religious influence. In its judgment, handed down in Strasbourg, the court found that while the crucifix was "above all a religious symbol" there was no evidence that its display on classroom walls might have an influence on pupils.The ruling reverses their earlier, unanimous decision from 2009 in favour of a Finnish-born mother who said that state schools in the Italian town of Abano Terme, where she lives, refused to remove the Roman Catholic symbols from classrooms.Soile Lautsi said the crucifix violated the secular principles that state schools were meant to uphold. The court agreed, saying children were entitled to freedom of religion and that although "encouraging" for some pupils, the crucifix could be "emotionally disturbing for pupils of other religions or those who profess no religion".