Page 40 - مجلة الدراسات القضائية
P. 40
one's belief appears to be better pro- the freedom of speech is given higher
tected in the US than in other areas. reverence than religious beliefs, even
For example, the European Court of
where that speech may constitute
Justice ruled that it was permissible
hate speech against a religion or reli-
for a private company to require em- gious group, or other groups.
ployees to dress neutrally, therefore
prohibiting a woman from wearing Supreme Court Justice Benjamin
a headscarf, if that rule "covers any Cardozo declared more than 80 years
manifestation of such beliefs without ago that free speech "is the matrix,
the indispensable condition of near-
distinction."(') On the other hand, the ly every other form of freedom." ln
Supreme Court of the United States
ruled for a Muslim woman wearing Branderburg v Ohio (1969), it was
hijab where the company stated that
ruled that States could not prohibit
her headscarf conflicted with their
employee dress policy. lt was stated advocacy "except where such advoca-
cy is directed to inciting or producing
that: imminent Iawless action and is likely
Title VII gives favored treatment to incite or produce such action."
to religious practices, rather than de-
manding that religious practices be Two years later, the Supreme court
treated no worse than other practic- ruled that part of freedom of speech
includes the right to use certain of-
es.(') fensive words and phrases to convey
political messages (Cohen v. Califor-
Thus, there is a special reverence nia, 403 U.S. 15 ( 1971)). ln a country
for the expression of one's religious as diverse as the United States, the
beliefs. However, it can be argued that protection of these freedoms guaran-
tees people the free exercise of their
1- Judgments in Cases C-157151 Achbita, rights and their right to be different,
so that each community can express
Centrum voor Gelijkheid van kansen en voor themselves in the way that they see
fit.
vracismebestrijding G4S Secure Solutions,
However, how does hate speech
and C-1s8151 Bougnaoui and Association
de d6fense des droits de I'homme (ADDH) fit into this? Hate speech can be
v Micropole Univers, Court of Justice of the
European Union, 14 March 2017, available broadly defined as "speech designed
at: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/uploadl to promote hatred on the basis of
race, religion, ethnicity or national
docs/appl ication I pdf I 2017 03- I cp1 70030en.
pdf
2- Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission v Abercrombie and Fitch
Stores, lnc. No. 14-86. Argued February 25,
201 S-Decided J une 1, 2015
Freedom of Retigion, Limits on Hate Speech, and Promoting Tolerance: A Comparative Study
