İslam, Adalet ve Önyargı: Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin Dini Sembol Yaklaşımını Yeniden Düşünmek
Abstract
Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin (AİHM) dini sembollere yönelik yaklaşımı, temel haklar ve özgürlükler yerine öznel önyargılarla şekillendirildiği gerekçesiyle eleştirilmektedir. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’ne (AİHS) ve evrensel hukuk normlarına bağlı olunmasına rağmen, İslam dinini içeren davalarda AİHM tarafından “Avrupa kültürel mirası”, “ortak geçmiş ve gelecek tasavvuru”, “aktif ve pasif nesne” ile “kırılganlık” gibi soyut ve kültürel değer yüklü kavramlara başvurulduğu görülmektedir. Bu seçici yaklaşım sonucunda, Mahkeme tarafından İslam’a ilişkin dini semboller orantısız biçimde kısıtlanmış ve önyargılı bir tutum sergilenmiştir. Örnek davaların analizinde, AİHM kararlarında orantılılık ilkesinden uzaklaşıldığı; adalet ve tarafsızlık ilkelerinin zayıflatıldığı tespit edilmektedir. Verilen tartışmalı kararlar aracılığıyla, İslamofobi ile ilişkilendirilebilecek bir yaklaşımın benimsendiği ve Mahkeme’nin, evrensel hukuk normlarından uzaklaşarak kültürel ve toplumsal önyargılarla şekillenen bir kurum hâline geldiği sonucuna varılmaktadır.
Keywords
Dini semboller özgürlükler İslamfobi AİHM İslâm Hıristiyanlık
References
- Atasagun G, Religious Symbols in Divine Religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), doctoral thesis, Selçuk University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Philosophy and Religious Sciences, Department of History of Religions, Konya 1996.
- Aydeniz H, “Religious Symbols, A Traditionalist Approach to the Symbol's Loss of Meaning and Its Effects (Renê Guênon Example), EKEV Akademi Magazine, No. 15, No. 48 (Summer 2011)
- Lings M, Simge and Kökenörnek Oluşum Anlamı Üzerine, Trans. Süleyman SAHRA, Ankara, Hece Publications, Ankara, 2003.
- Berger L, “Why Maurice Bloch's Work on 'Religion' Is Nothing Special but Is Central,” Religion and Society: Advances in Research, 1 (2010).
- Edt. Boyle K & Sheen J, Freedom of Religion and Belief: A World Report, 1st Edition, Routledge, London 2013.
- Erdoğan M, İnsan Hakları Teorisi ve Hukuku, Orion: Ankara, 2007.
- European Court of Human Rights, "Case of Eweida and Others v. the United Kingdom," HUDOC database. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
- European Court of Human Rights Annual Report (2013), Overview of Key Cases.
- Evans, C. (2014). Freedom of Religion Under the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford University Press.
- Hill M Q, "Religious Freedom in European Employment Law: Eweida and Others v. United Kingdom," Ecclesiastical Law Journal, Volume 15, Issue 2, May 2013.
- İnanç S Z/Çetin S, “Avrupa’nın Kendine Dönen Silahı: Dışlayıcılık ve Ayrımcılık”, SDE Analiz, Aralık, 2011.
- Kardaş R, “Symbol”, Turkish Encyclopedia (I-XXXIII), National Education Printing House, Ankara, 1980.
- Kılıç S, Symbolic Language in Islam, İnsan Publications, Istanbul, 1995.
- Kimpel B. F, The Symbols of Religious Faith, New York, 1954.
- Koca S. K, “The Relationship between Culture and Symbol in General Lines”, SAU Science and Literature Magazine, 2010-II.
- Küçük T. S, “Fransız Eğitim Sisteminde Dini Sembollerin Kullanılması”, Ankara Barosu Dergisi, Yıl: 68, Sayı: 2010/1.
- Küçük A, “AB Üyesi Bazı Ülkeler İle ABD ve Türkiye’de Din Eğitim ve Öğretiminin Hukukî Çerçevesi”, Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, C. 14, S. 55, Yaz: 2009.
- Legal Basis: European Convention on Human Rights, Articles 9 and 14, and Article 2 of Protocol No. 1.
- Orsi R. A, Religious Studies, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2012.
- Önder A, “Hurûf-u Mukatta’a I”, İslami İlimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2019/1.
- Özcan M, Avrupa’da Tesettür Tartışmaları, Köprü Dergisi, Güz 2003, S. 84.
- Rowntree L. B./Conkey M. W, “Symbolism and Cultural Landscape,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 70, No. 4.
- Shchimmel A, “What is the Function of Symbol in Religion?”, AÜ Faculty of Theology Journal, Ankara 1954, Vol. III.
- Temperman J, Religious Symbols in The Public School, The Lautsi Papers: Multidisciplinary Reflections on Religios Symbols in The PublicSchool Classroom (Edt: Jeroen Temperman), IDC Publishers and Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Netherlands, 2012.
- Yavuz Ö. F, “The Symbolic Value of the Concepts of Sacred Space, Time and Things in the Quran”, Milel and Nihal, Journal of Faith and Culture Mythology Research, Issue 3, No. 1-2, December 2005-June 2006.
- The court decisions and internet sources
- Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, Series A no. 94 and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263.
- https://perspektif.eu/2023/02/03/basortusu-yasagi-berlin-tarafsizlik-yasasini-acilen-degistirmeli.
- http://www.inhak.adalet.gov.tr/ara/karar/eweidavd.pdf.
- Joint Concurring Opinion of Judges Rozakis and Vajic; Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tulkens.
- Case of Lucia DAHLAB v. Switzerland, Application no. 42398/98.
- Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom, 26 November 1991, Series A no. 216, p. 35, § 73, and The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1).
- Van Raalte v. the Netherlands, 21 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997- I.
- Case of Lautsi And Others v. Italy, Applican no. 30814/06., KT. 18 Mart 2011.
- http://www.ihb.gov.tr/dosyagoster.ashx?id=318.
- Folgerø and Others v. Norway, 29 June 2007, § 84.
- Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 1, of 4 April 2001, “The Aims of Education”.
- Case of Lautsi And Others v. Italy, Applican no. 30814/06, par. Dissenting Opinion Of Judge Malinverni Joined By Judge Kalaydjieva.
- Supreme Court of Canada, Ross v. New Brunswick School District no. 15.
- German Constitutional Court, BVerfGE 93, I I BvR 1097/91, judgment of 16 May 1995, § C (II) (1).
- Swiss Federal Court, ATF 116 Ia 252, Comune di Cadro, judgment of 26 September 1990, § 7; Case of Lautsi And Others v. Italy, Applican no. 30814/06, par. Dissenting Opinion Of Judge Malin- verni Joined By Judge Kalaydjieva.
- Association Ligue des Musulmans de Suisse ve Diğerleri - İsviçre Davası (66274/09) ve Ouardiri - İsviçre Davası (65840/09); Baechler - İsviçre Davası (66270/09), Koella Naouali - İsviçre Davası (1317/10), Al-Zarka - İsviçre Davası (9113/10),
- Application nos. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10, and 36516/10), European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 15 January 2013.
- http://www.inhak.adalet.gov.tr/tematik/dusunceler/din_ozgurlugu.pdf.
ISLAM, JUSTICE AND PREJUDICE: RETHINKING THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS’ APPROACH TO RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS
Abstract
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has been criticized on the grounds that its approach to religious symbols is shaped not by fundamental rights and freedoms, but by subjective biases. Despite being bound by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and universal legal norms, it has been observed that in cases involving Islam, the ECtHR invokes abstract and culturally loaded concepts such as “European cultural heritage,” “shared past and future vision,” “active and passive object,” and “fragility.” As a result of this selective approach, religious symbols associated with Islam have been disproportionately restricted and a biased attitude has been exhibited by the Court. The analysis of relevant cases reveals a departure from the principle of proportionality in ECtHR judgments, along with a weakening of the principles of justice and impartiality. Through these controversial rulings, it is concluded that an approach potentially associated with Islamophobia has been adopted, and that the Court has been transformed into an institution shaped by cultural and societal prejudices, drifting away from universal legal standards.
References
- Atasagun G, Religious Symbols in Divine Religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), doctoral thesis, Selçuk University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Philosophy and Religious Sciences, Department of History of Religions, Konya 1996.
- Aydeniz H, “Religious Symbols, A Traditionalist Approach to the Symbol's Loss of Meaning and Its Effects (Renê Guênon Example), EKEV Akademi Magazine, No. 15, No. 48 (Summer 2011)
- Lings M, Simge and Kökenörnek Oluşum Anlamı Üzerine, Trans. Süleyman SAHRA, Ankara, Hece Publications, Ankara, 2003.
- Berger L, “Why Maurice Bloch's Work on 'Religion' Is Nothing Special but Is Central,” Religion and Society: Advances in Research, 1 (2010).
- Edt. Boyle K & Sheen J, Freedom of Religion and Belief: A World Report, 1st Edition, Routledge, London 2013.
- Erdoğan M, İnsan Hakları Teorisi ve Hukuku, Orion: Ankara, 2007.
- European Court of Human Rights, "Case of Eweida and Others v. the United Kingdom," HUDOC database. Available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int.
- European Court of Human Rights Annual Report (2013), Overview of Key Cases.
- Evans, C. (2014). Freedom of Religion Under the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford University Press.
- Hill M Q, "Religious Freedom in European Employment Law: Eweida and Others v. United Kingdom," Ecclesiastical Law Journal, Volume 15, Issue 2, May 2013.
- İnanç S Z/Çetin S, “Avrupa’nın Kendine Dönen Silahı: Dışlayıcılık ve Ayrımcılık”, SDE Analiz, Aralık, 2011.
- Kardaş R, “Symbol”, Turkish Encyclopedia (I-XXXIII), National Education Printing House, Ankara, 1980.
- Kılıç S, Symbolic Language in Islam, İnsan Publications, Istanbul, 1995.
- Kimpel B. F, The Symbols of Religious Faith, New York, 1954.
- Koca S. K, “The Relationship between Culture and Symbol in General Lines”, SAU Science and Literature Magazine, 2010-II.
- Küçük T. S, “Fransız Eğitim Sisteminde Dini Sembollerin Kullanılması”, Ankara Barosu Dergisi, Yıl: 68, Sayı: 2010/1.
- Küçük A, “AB Üyesi Bazı Ülkeler İle ABD ve Türkiye’de Din Eğitim ve Öğretiminin Hukukî Çerçevesi”, Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, C. 14, S. 55, Yaz: 2009.
- Legal Basis: European Convention on Human Rights, Articles 9 and 14, and Article 2 of Protocol No. 1.
- Orsi R. A, Religious Studies, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2012.
- Önder A, “Hurûf-u Mukatta’a I”, İslami İlimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2019/1.
- Özcan M, Avrupa’da Tesettür Tartışmaları, Köprü Dergisi, Güz 2003, S. 84.
- Rowntree L. B./Conkey M. W, “Symbolism and Cultural Landscape,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 70, No. 4.
- Shchimmel A, “What is the Function of Symbol in Religion?”, AÜ Faculty of Theology Journal, Ankara 1954, Vol. III.
- Temperman J, Religious Symbols in The Public School, The Lautsi Papers: Multidisciplinary Reflections on Religios Symbols in The PublicSchool Classroom (Edt: Jeroen Temperman), IDC Publishers and Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Netherlands, 2012.
- Yavuz Ö. F, “The Symbolic Value of the Concepts of Sacred Space, Time and Things in the Quran”, Milel and Nihal, Journal of Faith and Culture Mythology Research, Issue 3, No. 1-2, December 2005-June 2006.
- The court decisions and internet sources
- Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. the United Kingdom, 28 May 1985, Series A no. 94 and Schuler-Zgraggen v. Switzerland, 24 June 1993, Series A no. 263.
- https://perspektif.eu/2023/02/03/basortusu-yasagi-berlin-tarafsizlik-yasasini-acilen-degistirmeli.
- http://www.inhak.adalet.gov.tr/ara/karar/eweidavd.pdf.
- Joint Concurring Opinion of Judges Rozakis and Vajic; Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tulkens.
- Case of Lucia DAHLAB v. Switzerland, Application no. 42398/98.
- Observer and Guardian v. the United Kingdom, 26 November 1991, Series A no. 216, p. 35, § 73, and The Sunday Times v. the United Kingdom (no. 1).
- Van Raalte v. the Netherlands, 21 February 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997- I.
- Case of Lautsi And Others v. Italy, Applican no. 30814/06., KT. 18 Mart 2011.
- http://www.ihb.gov.tr/dosyagoster.ashx?id=318.
- Folgerø and Others v. Norway, 29 June 2007, § 84.
- Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 1, of 4 April 2001, “The Aims of Education”.
- Case of Lautsi And Others v. Italy, Applican no. 30814/06, par. Dissenting Opinion Of Judge Malinverni Joined By Judge Kalaydjieva.
- Supreme Court of Canada, Ross v. New Brunswick School District no. 15.
- German Constitutional Court, BVerfGE 93, I I BvR 1097/91, judgment of 16 May 1995, § C (II) (1).
- Swiss Federal Court, ATF 116 Ia 252, Comune di Cadro, judgment of 26 September 1990, § 7; Case of Lautsi And Others v. Italy, Applican no. 30814/06, par. Dissenting Opinion Of Judge Malin- verni Joined By Judge Kalaydjieva.
- Association Ligue des Musulmans de Suisse ve Diğerleri - İsviçre Davası (66274/09) ve Ouardiri - İsviçre Davası (65840/09); Baechler - İsviçre Davası (66270/09), Koella Naouali - İsviçre Davası (1317/10), Al-Zarka - İsviçre Davası (9113/10),
- Application nos. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10, and 36516/10), European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 15 January 2013.
- http://www.inhak.adalet.gov.tr/tematik/dusunceler/din_ozgurlugu.pdf.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Law in Context (Other) |
| Journal Section | KAMU HUKUKU |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | April 17, 2025 |
| Submission Date | November 21, 2024 |
| Acceptance Date | March 21, 2025 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2025 Issue: 74 |
Cite
- Article Files