NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

religious authority certifies it as ‘kosher’. Such certification gives the possibility of being subject to a tax known as slaughter tax or rabbinical tax. In France, the ritual came into conflict with the principle that an animal set to be slaughtered, after being restrained, must first be stunned, that is plunged into a state of unconsciousness in which it is kept until death intervenes, in order to spare it any suffering. However, ritual slaughter is authorised under French law and the approval necessary for the power to authorise slaughterers was granted to the Joint Rabbinical Committee alone. The Court observed that the fact that the exceptional rules designed to regulate the practice of slaughter permit only ritual slaughterers authorised by approved religious bodies does not in itself lead to the conclusion that there has been an interference with the freedom to manifest one’s religion. By this, the Convention body recognised that the right to ritual slaughter is also covered by the right to manifest religion. 795 It concluded that the measure complained of was prescribed by law and pursued a legitimate aim, namely the protection of public health and public order to preserve religious harmony and tolerance in a state. Moreover, having regard for the margin of appreciation particularly with regard to the establishment of the relations between the churches and the state, one cannot consider the measure excessive or disproportionate. There had accordingly been no violation of Article 9 of the Convention. It is of interest that in the present case the Court diverted from the principle of pluralism and allowed a monopoly on provision of the services in question. The difference between commercial and religious purposes of an information was the subject of examination in the case of X. and Church of Scientology v. Sweden . 796 In this case, the applicant church complained of an unjustified interference with its right to express a religious opinion in the context of an advertisement for the sale of an E-meter. The Commission was of the opinion that the concept, contained in the first paragraph of Article 9, concerning the manifestation of a belief, does not confer protection on a religious group’s statements of purported religious beliefs that appear to be selling ‘arguments’ in advertisements of a purely commercial nature. In this connection, the Commission made a distinction between advertisements that are merely ‘informational’ or ‘descriptive’ in character and commercial advertisements offering objects for sale. Once an advertisement enters into the latter sphere, although it may concern religious objects central to a particular need, statements of religious content represent more the manifestation of a desire to market goods for profit than the manifestation of a belief in practice. Accordingly, the Commission concluded that the words used in the advertisement under scrutiny fell outside the proper scope of Article 9. The Commission further noted that the domestic market court did not prohibit the church from advertising the E-meter and did not issue the injunction under penalty of a fine. It chose the least restrictive measure, which was the prohibition of certain wording in the advertisements. Consequently, the injunction against the applicants was not disproportionate to the pursued aim of consumer protection.

795 LINDBLOM, 2005, cited above, p. 175. 796 X . and Church of Scientology v. Sweden (dec.), No. 7805/7 7, 5 May 1979.

148