Fragmentation in the European and Inter-American Human Rights Courts Regarding the Scope of Religious Autonomy: An Analysis of the Use of Sources and Methodologies

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW

Oxford Journal of Law and Religion Pub Date : 2024-07-04 DOI:10.1093/ojlr/rwae022

Gabriela García Escobar

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fragmentation in International Human Rights Law (IHRL) may affect the universality of human rights norms and their legitimacy. This article analyses a recent case of contradiction between the European and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) regarding employment contracts of religious education teachers and the scope of religious autonomy. These courts reached contradictory conclusions on key substantive issues because they used different ways of framing the issue at stake, and different legal sources and interpretative methodologies. The analysis reveals that while the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) relied on the use of comparative law, a test of proportionality, and the margin of appreciation, the IACHR relied mainly on American domestic law and the opinions of two expert witnesses. In this case, the IACHR could learn from the approach of the ECHR to develop a more rigorous legal methodology in order to keep the coherence of the international legal system.

查看原文本刊更多论文

欧洲和美洲人权法院在宗教自治范围方面的分歧：对资料来源和方法使用的分析

国际人权法（IHRL）的支离破碎可能会影响人权准则的普遍性及其合法性。本文分析了欧洲人权法院和美洲人权法院（IACHR）最近就宗教教育教师的雇用合同和宗教自治的范围发生矛盾的案例。这两个法院在关键的实质性问题上得出了相互矛盾的结论，因为它们采用了不同的方式来阐述相关问题，并使用了不同的法律渊源和解释方法。分析表明，欧洲人权法院（ECHR）依赖于比较法的使用、相称性检验和判断余地，而美洲人权委员会（IACHR）则主要依赖于美国国内法和两位专家证人的意见。在这种情况下，美洲人权委员会可以借鉴欧洲人权法院的做法，制定更加严格的法律方法，以保持国际法律体系的一致性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Oxford Journal of Law and Religion LAW-

CiteScore

1.00

自引率

16.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of religion in public life and a concomitant array of legal responses. This has led in turn to the proliferation of research and writing on the interaction of law and religion cutting across many disciplines. The Oxford Journal of Law and Religion (OJLR) will have a range of articles drawn from various sectors of the law and religion field, including: social, legal and political issues involving the relationship between law and religion in society; comparative law perspectives on the relationship between religion and state institutions; developments regarding human and constitutional rights to freedom of religion or belief; considerations of the relationship between religious and secular legal systems; and other salient areas where law and religion interact (e.g., theology, legal and political theory, legal history, philosophy, etc.). The OJLR reflects the widening scope of study concerning law and religion not only by publishing leading pieces of legal scholarship but also by complementing them with the work of historians, theologians and social scientists that is germane to a better understanding of the issues of central concern. We aim to redefine the interdependence of law, humanities, and social sciences within the widening parameters of the study of law and religion, whilst seeking to make the distinctive area of law and religion more comprehensible from both a legal and a religious perspective. We plan to capture systematically and consistently the complex dynamics of law and religion from different legal as well as religious research perspectives worldwide. The OJLR seeks leading contributions from various subdomains in the field and plans to become a world-leading journal that will help shape, build and strengthen the field as a whole.