Compliance gaps and the failed promises of religious freedoms

Despite a recent trend toward the judicialization of religious freedom (JRF), both historical experience and theoretical considerations suggest ‘dejudicialization’ is likely at some point. Yet, dejudicialization has provoked a little comment, and even less theorization, among social scientists studying religious freedom. This article conceptualizes the dejudicialization of religious freedom (DRF) in institutionalist terms, examines the structural forces that have facilitated JRF, and considers whether and how they may be waning in recent years. We argue conditions favorable toward dejudicialization in general, and DRF more specifically, are already emerging; highlight recent developments consistent with such a turn; and develop a typology of the forms that DRF may take.

Section: Weakening Structural Supports For Judicializationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dejudicialization of religious freedom?

Mayrl

Venny

2021

“…Yet, guarantees of RF are often unrealized. Empirical studies find that state support for religion is an important reason for low levels of RF even in democracies (Fox, 2020;Kettell, 2013;Mataic and Finke, 2019). Kunkler (2018) argues this is because state support for religion can lead to a bureaucratization of religion where religious institutions such as religious departments and courts are incorporated into the government (see also Finke, 2013;Grim and Finke, 2011;Henne, 2016: 4;Toft et al, 2011).…”

Section: Why Is Religious Freedom Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What is religious freedom and who has it?

Fox

2021

Religious freedom (RF) is important because it is posited to be a central element of liberal democracy and as having multiple additional benefits including increased security and economic prosperity. Yet, it is also a disputed concept and many liberal democracies restrict the freedoms of religious minorities. This study uses the Religion and State (RAS) dataset to examine the extent of RF in 183 countries based on six definitions of RF. The author examines whether religious minorities are restricted in a manner that the majority is not, regulation of the majority religion, and imposition of precepts of the majority religion on a country’s population. He finds that very few countries, including liberal democracies, meet any standard for RF, even when one allows for ‘loose’ standards where some violations of RF are allowed.

“…The same collections have shown the chasm between promise and practice has widened over the past few decades. Free elections, an independent judiciary and reduced societal discrimination against religion are associated with a reduced chasm; yet, the gap between the state's constitutional promises of religious freedom and the actual practices remains (Mataic and Finke, 2018).…”

Section: Résumémentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling state promises and practices: Constitutional promises and discrimination against religious minorities

Finke

Mataic

2021

Self Cite

Research on religious freedom has found a vast chasm between constitutional promises and state practices, with constitutional promises being a poor predictor of the state’s support of religious freedom. This research changes the focus from religious freedom to religious equality. We propose that constitutional promises of religious equality will be associated with less discrimination against minority religions and we explore the relationships governance and the promises of religious equality hold with religious discrimination. We find that promises of religious equality are associated with less discrimination. When exploring the interactions between promises of equality and our governance measures, we find constitutional promises of religious equality largely erase the differences in religious discrimination between countries with and without free elections and an independent judiciary. Yet, the reduced discrimination against minority religions does not suggest that the state removes restrictions on minority religions, only that they are equal with other religions.