Assessing Public Morality and the Necessity of Restrictions on ECHR Rights

McGoldrick, Dominic; DeCock, Marie

Abstract

One does not have to be an animal lover to consider that unnecessary suffering during the ritual slaughter of animals is morally unjustified. The moral objection can arguably be met by legally requiring that animals be stunned before being subjected to ritual slaughter. However, such requirements have been challenged by religious believers as being an unjustified limitation on their manifestation of their religious beliefs. This article analyses how such legal challenges have been adjudicated in the legal orders of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights. After outlining the ECtHR’s approach to restrictions based on public morality, this article focuses on the compatibility with Article 9 ECHR of restrictions on animal slaughter for religious reasons. It then considers (i) how the ECtHR assesses the necessity of such restrictions, particularly its approach to general measures; (ii) the requirement that restrictions be the least restrictive measures; (iii) restrictions being applied to only part of a State’s territory; and (iv) the wider implications of justifying such restrictions on the basis of public morality. The article concludes by briefly reflecting on (i) consistency and coherence between the two European Legal Orders, and (ii) analogous issues under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966).

Citation

McGoldrick, D., & DeCock, M. (in press). Assessing Public Morality and the Necessity of Restrictions on ECHR Rights. European Human Rights Law Review,

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Nov 28, 2024
• Deposit Date: Dec 2, 2024
• Journal: European Human Rights Law Review
• Print ISSN: 1361-1526
• Electronic ISSN: 1361-1526
• Publisher: Sweet and Maxwell
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Public URL: https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/42786700