Breaches of Freedom of Religion and Belief, Discrimination and Intolerance
This section deals with direct institutionalized discrimination caused by two-tiered systems, with discrimination and intolerance caused by state anti-cult policies and with the passive or active complicity of some actors in abuses by state and non-state actors. Most patterns of relationships between state and religions in Europe take the shape of a two-tiered or multi-tiered system in which religious entities ranked in the upper category have either privileges or more rights than those ranked in a lower category. These inequalities enshrined in laws or in constitutions inevitably lead to various forms of institutionalized discrimination. State actors (legislative and executive powers) creating or upholding and operating two-tiered or multi-tiered systems, which are in essence discriminatory, are either supported by or under pressure of religious non-state actors (one or more dominant religions) and can count on the passive complicity of a supra-state actor, the European Union.[i]
State financing of religions is a major source of institutionalized discrimination. In some countries, only a limited number of religions is subsidized by the state with the income tax of all citizens. [ii] In other countries,[iii] the state finances a small number of religions with the income tax of their faithful according to their personal choice whilst other religions cannot enjoy state financial support and the income tax of their members can only be allotted to the state. This means the state contributes to the financial viability and development of some religions but not of others. Religious classes in public schools only concern recognized religions, and not always all of them. When no exemption possibility exists,[iv] ethics classes are the only “choice” left to Jehovah’s Witnesses, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists,[v] etc.
In countries with a two-tiered or a multi-tiered system, chaplaincies in hospitals, in the army, in prisons and other institutions are limited to state-sponsored religions. In countries where there are state anti-cult policies, tax exemption on property[vi] and access to public media are denied to minority religions called “cults,” access to positions as civil servants is made impossible to members of “cults”[vii] and courts mostly rule against members of “cults” in child custody issues related to divorce cases. Despite their numerous discriminatory aspects, the two-tiered and multi-tiered systems are tolerated and are not questioned at the political level in the European Union.
[i] Update of this footnote/ Some provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam of May 1, 1998 state that the relations between states and religions or belief systems in the European Union remain under the authority of the member states.
[ii] In Greece, one religion (Orthodox Church); in Belgium, six religions and secular humanism.
[iii] In Spain, the choice is between the Catholic Church or the state and in Italy, between “admitted religions” and the state.
[iv] This is the case in the Federal Kingdom of Belgium, in French-speaking public schools (Wallonia and Brussels) but not in Dutch-speaking public schools (Flanders).
[v] Ethics taught in such classes is said to be “non-faith-based” but it usually reflects the secular humanist ideology which a number of religious movements, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, consider incompatible with their own ethical principles. Ethics teachers are secular humanists, agnostics and atheists.
[vi] In Belgium, the tax department denied the group Sukhyo Mahikari an exemption from property taxes on its places of worship on the grounds that it is on the so-called “list of cults”. This group is officially registered as a religious association in Spain. Unpublished material collected during an interview of one the leaders of Sukyo Mahikari by Human Rights Without Frontiers in 2001.
[vii] In Conscience et Liberte, No. 58/ 1999, Louis-Leon Christians, lecturer at the Catholic University of Louvain and member of the Belgian ‘Sect Observatory’, wrote an article entitled Liberte d’opinion en droit europeen : observations belges (II) – Les limitations (Freedom of Thought in European Law: Belgian Observations II – Limitations). On p. 10, footnote 1, he wrote: “Some Belgian municipalities have made it a requirement for candidates for positions as civil servants to swear a statement that they do not belong to a ‘harmful sectarian organization.” (My translation from French)