Religious oaths administered by the state in legal or civil proceedings may violate Article 9 (Freedom of Religion) of the European Convention of Human Rights, an EU court has held.A Feb 21 ruling, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg held that a Greek law requiring a lawyer to swear an oath to conform to the law before he was admitted to practice, or to make a statement of conscience if he were an atheist or if his principles forbade him to make an oath, was unlawful.
"The fact that the applicant had to reveal to the court that he was not an Orthodox Christian interfered with his freedom not to have to manifest his religious beliefs,” the court ruled in the case of Alexandridis vs. Greece (application number 19516/2006).
The ruling will either force Greece to “abolish the religious oath or find an alternative by which people will not have to reveal their religious beliefs," the plaintiff’s attorney Panayotis Dimitras of the Greek Helsinki Monitor told the Athens News.
The EU court ruling is the latest incident in a political battle over the place of religion in public life in Greece. In 2006 the Greek Communist Party and the Coalition of the Left (Synaspismos) introduced legislation to abolish religious oaths. The bill was defeated by the ruling New Democracy government with the support of the Greek Orthodox Church.
In 2000 the socialist Pasok government changed Greece’s national identity card, removing information on religion, and permitted witnesses in civil court proceedings to choose whether they make a solemn declaration or take a religious oath. Unsuccessful in Parliament, the left has now turned to the EU for assistance in its push to relegate religion to the private sphere.
In the Alexandridis case, a newly qualified attorney sought to admission to practice before the Athens courts. Upon completion of the statutory forms, the new lawyers are sworn in by the court’s presiding judge. The new lawyer swears his oath with one hand on the Gospels. Those who are not Christian or who object to religious oaths are permitted to make a solemn assertion.
When the plaintiff, Theodoros Alexandridis, was presented to the court to take his oath, he objected to being required to make an affirmative statement that he was not an Orthodox Christian, so as to be excused from making a religious oath.
The EU Court of Human Rights agreed with him, arguing the default position of the state should not be a Christian oath, but a civic affirmation, arguing that the “obligation to openly express [one’s] religious convictions” in state proceedings violates the EU’s definition of freedom of religion.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to either myself or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that I agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Sotto Voce