Limiting Permissible Limitations: How to Preserve the Substance of Religious Freedom

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION Religion & Human Rights Pub Date : 2020-04-23 DOI:10.1163/18710328-bja10001
Heiner Bielefeldt
{"title":"Limiting Permissible Limitations: How to Preserve the Substance of Religious Freedom","authors":"Heiner Bielefeldt","doi":"10.1163/18710328-bja10001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The question of how to draw legitimate limits to the content and exercise of human rights has caused many controversies, not only in academic debates, but also in human rights practice. Governments often invoke limitation clauses linked to human rights provisions as a broad allowance to impose restrictions. However, the main function of those clauses is actually to limit the scope of permissible limitations. This chapter takes freedom of religion or belief as a test case to illustrate the role of limitation clauses. Moreover, from an adequate understanding of limitation clauses, the popular “balancing” semantics deserves serious criticism, since it obfuscates the task to preserve the substance of human rights guarantees even in situations of normative conflict.","PeriodicalId":42092,"journal":{"name":"Religion & Human Rights","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18710328-bja10001","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion & Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18710328-bja10001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The question of how to draw legitimate limits to the content and exercise of human rights has caused many controversies, not only in academic debates, but also in human rights practice. Governments often invoke limitation clauses linked to human rights provisions as a broad allowance to impose restrictions. However, the main function of those clauses is actually to limit the scope of permissible limitations. This chapter takes freedom of religion or belief as a test case to illustrate the role of limitation clauses. Moreover, from an adequate understanding of limitation clauses, the popular “balancing” semantics deserves serious criticism, since it obfuscates the task to preserve the substance of human rights guarantees even in situations of normative conflict.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
限制允许的限制:如何保护宗教自由的实质
如何对人权的内容和行使进行合法限制的问题不仅在学术辩论中,而且在人权实践中都引起了许多争议。各国政府经常援引与人权条款相关的限制条款,作为施加限制的广泛许可。然而,这些条款的主要功能实际上是限制允许的限制范围。本章以宗教或信仰自由为测试案例,说明限制条款的作用。此外,从对限制条款的充分理解来看,流行的“平衡”语义值得认真批评,因为它混淆了即使在规范冲突的情况下也要维护人权保障实质的任务。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊最新文献
Religious Conscience or Religious Freedom? The Difference between Official Constitutional Norms and Actual Legal Restrictions in Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia Navigating the Tensions: Women’s Rights, Religion and Freedom of Religion or Belief Women’s Reproductive Rights and the Legacy of Religion in Ireland: The Eighth Amendment and Its Repeal Human Rights, Islam, and Debates around CEDAW Introduction: Women’s Religious Freedom and Freedom of Religion or Belief
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1