Islam in Europe - ECHR Case Law - HASC9

• Anglický název: Islam in Europe - ECHR Case Law
• Zajišťuje: Zahraniční oddělení (22-ZO)
• Fakulta: Právnická fakulta
• Platnost: od 2022
• Semestr: letní
• Body: 0
• E-Kredity: 5
• Způsob provedení zkoušky: letní s.:písemná
• Rozsah, examinace: letní s.:0/2, Zk [HT]
• 4EU+: ne
• Virtuální mobilita / počet míst pro virtuální mobilitu: ne
• Stav předmětu: vyučován
• Jazyk výuky: angličtina
• Způsob výuky: prezenční
• Způsob výuky: prezenční
• Poznámka: předmět je možno zapsat mimo plán; povolen pro zápis po webu
• Garant: doc. PhDr. Marta Chromá, Ph.D.; Sean Davidson, J.D.
• Vyučující: Sean Davidson, J.D.; doc. PhDr. Marta Chromá, Ph.D.

Anotace

čeština

Poslední úprava: Sean Davidson, J.D. (24.01.2024)

This course focuses on analysing and assessing decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in various
cases involving the free religion and free expression rights of Muslims in Europe. These cases require judges to
perform the often difficult task of determining where the border may lie in cases of free religion under the European
Convention on Human Rights, which was drafted by the Council of Europe in 1950.
The topic of the free religion rights of Muslims has become particularly important in recent years, and most of the
cases studied in this course are quite recent, including the 2014 decision in the case of the French veil prohibition
(S.A.S. v. France). This course covers cases in a number of contexts, including the free religion rights of students in
primary and secondary schools as well as the rights of believers in public.
In this course, students are encouraged to critically analyse the reasoning of the European Court of Human Rights
in the cases studied, and there is a particular focus on the proportionality test, as well as the implications of its
application. In addition, students are introduced to comparisons with cases decided by American high courts to
gain better understanding of different reasoning used in different jurisdictions.
The objectives of this course are: 1) to deepen students’ understanding of how the free religion rights of Muslims
are protected by the European Court of Human Rights; 2) to deepen the students’ understanding of the
interpretation of freedom of expression and religion; 3) to provide a deep insight into current issues concerning the
definition of human rights in Europe; 4) to provide students the tools to compare and assess various approaches to
reasoning free religion cases; 5) to aid students in acquiring and exercising sophisticated legal English vocabulary
and grammar.

angličtina

Poslední úprava: Sean Davidson, J.D. (24.01.2024)

Annotation:

This course focuses on analysing and assessing decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in various cases involving the free religion and free expression rights of Muslims in Europe. These cases require judges to
perform the often difficult task of determining where the border may lie in cases of free religion under the European Convention on Human Rights, which was drafted by the Council of Europe in 1950.

The topic of the free religion rights of Muslims has become particularly important in recent years, and most of the cases studied in this course are quite recent, including the 2014 decision in the case of the French veil prohibition (S.A.S. v. France). This course covers cases in a number of contexts, including the free religion rights of students in primary and secondary schools as well as the rights of believers in public.

In this course, students are encouraged to critically analyse the reasoning of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases studied, and there is a particular focus on the proportionality test, as well as the implications of its
application. In addition, students are introduced to comparisons with cases decided by American high courts to gain better understanding of different reasoning used in different jurisdictions.

The objectives of this course are: 1) to deepen students’ understanding of how the free religion rights of Muslims are protected by the European Court of Human Rights; 2) to deepen the students’ understanding of the interpretation of freedom of expression and religion; 3) to provide a deep insight into current issues concerning the definition of human rights in Europe; 4) to provide students the tools to compare and assess various approaches to reasoning free religion cases; 5) to aid students in acquiring and exercising sophisticated legal English vocabulary and grammar.

Požadavky ke zkoušce

čeština

Poslední úprava: Sean Davidson, J.D. (24.01.2024)

In case distance learning is required by government, we will have our lessons via Zoom.

 

Islam in Europe – ECHR Case Law

Sean Davidson                                                                     

Course Objectives: 1) to analyse how free religion rights are interpreted by the ECtHR; 2) to consider issues concerning margin of appreciation and subsidiarity in light of the Convention; 3) to provide useful context to compare and assess various approaches to reasoning free religion cases, in both ECtHR dissenting opinions and decisions from various jurisdictions; 4) to develop skills of reasoning and critical analysis, especially through arguing and deciding cases in moot court exercises.

Course Requirements: Obtain at least 55/100 assessment points (see below)

Final Marks:  

(A-E, Erasmus students)  A: 91-100       B: 82-90        C: 73-81        D: 64-72       E: 55-63

(1-3, regular curriculum students)     1: 89-100         2: 75-88          3: 55-74 

                      

 

Final Mark Assessment:      

·         Moot Court assignment: 50%   Final Exam: 50%

 

 Course Program:

Week 1: course introduction

·         European Court of Human Rights

·         Margin of appreciation

·         Balancing free expression and religion

Week 2: Balance between freedom of expression and respect for religious beliefs

·         E.S. v. Austria (calling Muhammad a paedophile)

·         Sekmadienis Ltd. v. Lithuania (religious symbols in advertising)

·         Otto Preminger Institut v. Austria (offensive film)

Week 3: Wearing religious symbols in public places

·         S.A.S. v. France  (French face concealment ban)

Week 4: Teachers wearing religious symbols in schools

·         Dahlab v. Switzerland  (primary school teacher wearing headscarf)

·         Kurtulumus v. Turkey  (university teacher wearing headscarf)

·         German Constitutional Court case BvR 471/10 (ban on state school teachers wearing headscarves)

Week 5: discussion on covid restrictions and vaccination mandates - consider Vavricka v. Czech Republic 

Week 6: ungraded Moot Court activity on hypothetical case

Week 7: Rights of parents in schools, including exemptions 

·         Lautsi v. Italy  (crucifix in classrooms)

·         Osmanoglu and Kocabas v. Switzerland  (exemption from mixed gender swimming lessons)

Week 8:Additional cases concerning rights of parents and children

·         Folgero and Others v. Norway  (exemption from religious instruction)

·         male circumcision case in Germany

Week 9:  graded Moot Court exercise

Week 10: Religion at work, and requirements for citizenship

·         religion and the workplace (Eweida and Others v. UK, Ebrahimian v. France)

·         citizenship handshake case

                      

 

angličtina

Poslední úprava: Sean Davidson, J.D. (24.01.2024)

Exam:

-Two hour essay exam (analysis of cases and open essay prompts) Course Requirements: Obtain at least 55/100 assessment points (see below) Final Marks:   (A-E, Erasmus students)  A: 91-100       B: 82-90        C: 73-81        D: 64-72       E: 55-63 (1-3, regular curriculum students)     1: 89-100         2: 75-88          3: 55-74  Assessment Criteria for Marks: Moot Court Activity: 35% Final Written Exam: 60%

Preparation for classes: 5%

Sylabus

čeština

Poslední úprava: Sean Davidson, J.D. (24.01.2024)

In case distance learning is required by government, we will have our lessons via Zoom.

 

Islam in Europe – ECHR Case Law

Sean Davidson                                                                     

Course Objectives: 1) to analyse how free religion rights are interpreted by the ECtHR; 2) to consider issues concerning margin of appreciation and subsidiarity in light of the Convention; 3) to provide useful context to compare and assess various approaches to reasoning free religion cases, in both ECtHR dissenting opinions and decisions from various jurisdictions; 4) to develop skills of reasoning and critical analysis, especially through arguing and deciding cases in moot court exercises.

Course Requirements: Obtain at least 55/100 assessment points (see below)

Final Marks:  

(A-E, Erasmus students)  A: 91-100       B: 82-90        C: 73-81        D: 64-72       E: 55-63

(1-3, regular curriculum students)     1: 89-100         2: 75-88          3: 55-74 

                      

 

Final Mark Assessment:      

·         Moot Court assignment: 50%   Final Exam: 50%

 

 Course Program:

Week 1: course introduction

·         European Court of Human Rights

·         Margin of appreciation

·         Balancing free expression and religion

Week 2: Balance between freedom of expression and respect for religious beliefs

·         E.S. v. Austria (calling Muhammad a paedophile)

·         Sekmadienis Ltd. v. Lithuania (religious symbols in advertising)

·         Otto Preminger Institut v. Austria (offensive film)

Week 3: Wearing religious symbols in public places

·         S.A.S. v. France  (French face concealment ban)

Week 4: Teachers wearing religious symbols in schools

·         Dahlab v. Switzerland  (primary school teacher wearing headscarf)

·         Kurtulumus v. Turkey  (university teacher wearing headscarf)

·         German Constitutional Court case BvR 471/10 (ban on state school teachers wearing headscarves)

Week 5: discussion on covid restrictions and vaccination mandates - consider Vavricka v. Czech Republic 

Week 6: ungraded Moot Court activity on hypothetical case

Week 7: Rights of parents in schools, including exemptions 

·         Lautsi v. Italy  (crucifix in classrooms)

·         Osmanoglu and Kocabas v. Switzerland  (exemption from mixed gender swimming lessons)

Week 8:Additional cases concerning rights of parents and children

·         Folgero and Others v. Norway  (exemption from religious instruction)

·         male circumcision case in Germany

Week 9:  graded Moot Court exercise

Week 10: Religion at work, and requirements for citizenship

·         religion and the workplace (Eweida and Others v. UK, Ebrahimian v. France)

·         citizenship handshake case

                      

 

angličtina

Poslední úprava: Sean Davidson, J.D. (24.01.2024)

Syllabus:

Week 1: course introduction ·         European Court of Human Rights ·         Margin of appreciation ·         Balancing free expression and religion Week 2: Balance between freedom of expression and respect for religious beliefs ·         E.S. v. Austria (calling Muhammad a paedophile) ·         Sekmadienis Ltd. v. Lithuania (religious symbols in advertising) ·         Otto Preminger Institut v. Austria (offensive film) Week 3: Wearing religious symbols in public places ·         S.A.S. v. France  (French face concealment ban) Week 4: Teachers wearing religious symbols in schools ·         Dahlab v. Switzerland  (primary school teacher wearing headscarf) ·         Kurtulumus v. Turkey  (university teacher wearing headscarf) ·         German Constitutional Court case BvR 471/10 (ban on state school teachers wearing headscarves) Week 5: discussion on covid restrictions and vaccination mandates - consider Vavricka v. Czech Republic  Week 6: ungraded Moot Court activity on hypothetical case (prohibition of construction of minarets) Week 7: Rights of parents in schools, including exemptions  ·         Lautsi v. Italy  (crucifix in classrooms) ·         Osmanoglu and Kocabas v. Switzerland  (exemption from mixed gender swimming lessons) Week 8:Additional cases concerning rights of parents and children ·         Folgero and Others v. Norway  (exemption from religious instruction) ·         male circumcision case in Germany Week 9:  graded Moot Court exercise Week 10: Religion at work, and requirements for citizenship ·         religion and the workplace (Eweida and Others v. UK, Ebrahimian v. France)

·         citizenship handshake case

Course Goals:

The objectives of this course are: 1) to deepen students’ understanding of how the free religion rights of Muslims are protected by the European Court of Human Rights; 2) to deepen the students’ understanding of the interpretation of freedom of expression and religion; 3) to provide a deep insight into current issues concerning the definition of human rights in Europe; 4) to provide students the tools to compare and assess various approaches to reasoning free religion cases; 5) to aid students in acquiring and exercising sophisticated legal English vocabulary and grammar.

 

Means of communication: 

This course is taught in person.

(In case distance learning is required due to government closure of universities, then Zoom will be used.)

Studijní opory

Poslední úprava: Sean Davidson, J.D. (24.01.2024)

Why Tolerate Religion? Brian Leiter, Princeton University Press (2012) A Secular Europe:  Law and Religion in the European Constitutional Landscape, Lorenzo Zucca, Oxford University Press (2012) Is it Fair to Give Religion Special Treatment?  Andrew Koppelman, Illinois Law Review (2006)