A FAIR BALANCE BETWEEN THE RIGHT TO RELIGIOUS MANIFESTATION AND THE FREEDOM TO CONDUCT A BUSINESS IN THE CASES OF HEADSCARVES BAN IN PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT?

Abstract

The contribution questions the preliminary rulings given by the CJEU in Achbita and Wabe and Müller Cases that define the corporate neutrality policies banning wearing of religious clothes in private employment as indirect discrimination. The contribution argues that such corporate neutrality policies, though applied to all employees in the same way, constitute in fact direct discrimination for the devout followers of orthopraxis religions, such as Islam, Judaism and Sikhism, provide preference to employer’s freedom to conduct a business and economic interests over the employee’s right to religious manifestation and social rights, put the right to religious manifestation at the bottom of the hierarchy of grounds of discrimination and cause to economic and social exclusion of such minority employees, notwithstanding the European values.

Keywords

• Corporate Neutrality Policy
• Right to Religious Manifestation
• Freedom to Conduct a Business
• Direct or Indirect Discrimination
• Social and Economic Exclusion

Özel İşyerinde Başörtüsü Yasaklarına İlişkin Davalarda Dini İfade Hürriyeti ile Teşebbüs Hürriyeti Arasında Adil Bir Denge Söz Konusu mu?

Öz

Makale bazı kadın işçilerin özel işyerlerinden işyeri tarafsızlık politikası kuralları gereği başörtüsü takmaları gerekçesiyle çıkartılması neticesinde Avrupa Birliği Adalet Divanı’nın Achbita, Wabe ve Müller gibi kararları üzerinden söz konusu işyeri tarafsızlık politikasının dolaylı ayrımcılık oluşturduğuna dair içtihadını eleştirel olarak analiz etmektedir. Makale esasen sözkonusu özel işyeri politikası çerçevesinde konulan kuralların, yeknesak uygulansa bile, İslam, Yahudilik ve Sihizm gibi bazı orthopraxis din mensupları açısından doğrudan ayrımcılık teşkil ettiğini, işverenin teşebbüs hürriyeti ile economic çıkarlarını, işçilerin dini ifade hürriyeti ve sosyal haklarına tercih ettiğini, ayrımcılık kategorisi içerisinde din ifade özgürlüğünü en tabanda korunmaya layık bir ayrımcılık kategorisine sürüklediğini, AB değerlerine aykırılık teşkil edecek şekilde azınlık din mensuplarının ekonomik ve sosyal dışlanmasına yol açtığını savunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İşyeri Tarafsızlık Politikası
• Din ve İnanç İfade Hürriyeti
• Teşebbüs Hürriyeti
• Doğrudan veya Dolaylı Ayrımcılık
• Sosyal ve Ekonomik Dışlanmışlık

Kaynakça

1. Alidadi, Katayoun. “Faith, Identity and Participation in the Workplace a Comparative Legal Study on the Role of Religion and Belief in Individual Labour Relations and Unemployment Benefits Litigation”. Ph.D Dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 2015.
2. Brems, Eva and Jogchum Vrielink. “Floors or Ceilings: European Supranational Courts and Their Authority in Human Rights Matters” in Human Rights with a Human Touch. Liber Amicorum Paul Lemmen, editors K Lemmens et al. 271- 302. Chicago : Intersentia, 2019.
3. Collins, Hugh. “Justice for Foxes: Fundamental Rights and Justification of Indirect Discrimination” in Foundations of Indirect Discrimination Law, editors Hugh Collins and Tarunabh Khaitan, 249 – 278. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2018.
4. Everson, Michele and Rui Correia Gonçalves. “Article 16 Freedom to Conduct a Business” in The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary, editors Steve Peers, Tamara Hervey, Jeff Kenner and Angela Ward, 437–464. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2021.
5. Havercort- Speekenbrink, Sarah. European Non-Discrimination Law – A Comparison of EU law and the ECHR in the Field of NonDiscrimination and Freedom of Religion in Public Employment with an Emphasis on the Islamic Headscarf Issue. Cambridge: Intersentia, 2012.
6. Lörcher, Klaus. “Interpretation and Minimum Level of Protection” in The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the Employment Relation, editors Filip Dorssemont, Klaus Lörcher, Stefan Clauwaert and Mélanie Schmitt, 81-100. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2019.
7. Pastor, Relano Eugenia “Religious Discrimination in the Workplace: Achbita and Bougnaoui” in EU AntiDiscrimination Law Beyond Gender, editors Uladzislau Belavusau and Kristin Henrard, 183–202. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2018.
8. Petkoff, Peter. “Religious symbols between forum internum and forum externum” in Law and Religion in the 21st century: Relations between States and Religious Communities, editors Rinaldo Cristofori, Silvio Ferrari, 297 – 304. London: Routledge, 2010.

9. Schiek, Dagmar. “Indirect Discrimination” in Cases, Materials and Text on National, Supranational and International Non-Discrimination Law, editors Dagmar Schiek, Lisa Waddington, and Mark Bell, 323-375. Oxford : Hart Publishing, 2007.
10. Veneziani, Bruno. “Article 16 – Freedom to Conduct a Business” in The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the Employment Relation, editors Filip Dorssemont, Klaus Lörcher, Stefan Clauwaert and Mélanie Schmitt, 351–368. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2019.
11. Vickers, Lucy. Religious Freedom, Religious Discrimination and the Workplace, 2nd edition. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2016.
12. Alkiviadou, Natalie. “Freedom of religion: lifting the veils of power and prejudice”. The International Journal of Human Rights 24, Iss.5 (2020): 509-530.
13. Baldi, Girogia. “Re-conceptualizing Equality in the Work Place: A Reading of the Latest CJEU’s Opinions over the Practice of Veiling”. Oxford Journal of Law and Religion 7, Iss.2 (2018): 296–312.
14. Baldwin, Erik, Ryan Long, Willie Mack, Anja Matwijkiw, Bronik Matwijkiw, Anna Oriolo. “The Burqa Ban: Legal Precursors for Denmark, American Experiences and Experiments, and Philosophical and Critical Examinations”. International Studies Journal 15, no.1 (2018): 157-206.
15. Bell, Mark. “Leaving Religion at the Door? The European Court of Justice and Religious Symbols in the Workplace”. Human Rights Law Review 17, (2017): 784–796.
16. Bribosia, Emmanuelle et Isabelle Rorive, “Affaires Achbita et Bougnaoui: entre neutralité et préjugés”. Revue trimestrielle des droits de l'homme (2017).
17. Brkan, Maja. “The Concept of Essence of Fundamental Rights in the EU Legal Order: Peeling the Onion to its Core”, European Constitutional Law Review 14, Iss. 2 (2018): 332 – 368.
18. Cloots, Elke. “Safe harbour or open sea for corporate headscarf bans? Achbita and Bougnaoui”. Common Market Law Review 55, Iss.2 (2018): 589 – 624.
19. Corsalini, Matteo. “Religious Freedom, Inc: Business, Religion and the Law in the Secular Economy”. Oxford Journal of Law and Religion 9, Iss.1 (2020): 28–55.
20. Eduardo Gill-Pedro, Eduardo. “Whose Freedom is it Anyway? The Fundamental Rights of Companies in EU Law”. European Constitutional Law Review 18, Iss. 2 (2022): 183 – 206.
21. Hambler, Andrew. “Neutrality and Workplace Restrictions on Headscarves and Religious Dress: Lessons from Achbita and Bougnaoui”. Industrial Law Journal 47, Iss.1 (2018): 149–164
22. Hennette-Vauchez, Stéphanie. “Equality and the Market: the unhappy fate of religious discrimination in Europe”. European Constitutional Law Review 13, Iss.4 (2017): 744 – 758.
23. Howard, Erica. “Headscarves and the CJEU: Protecting fundamental rights and pandering to prejudice”. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 29, Iss. 2 (2022): 245–262.
24. Howard, Erica. “Headscarves return to the CJEU: Unfinished business”. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 27, Iss.1 (2020): 10-28.
25. Howard, Erica.“Islamic Head Scarves and the CJEU: Achbita and Bougnaoui”. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 24, Iss. 3 (2017): 1-19.
26. Jolly, Schona. “Religious discrimination in the workplace: the European Court of Justice confronts a challenge”. European Human Rights Law Review 22, Iss. 3 (2017): 308-314.
27. Loenen, Titia.“In Search of an EU Approach to Headscarf Bans: Where to go After Achbita and Bougnaoui?”. Review of European Administrative Law 10, no.2 (2017): 47-73.
28. Oliver, Peter. “Companies and Their Fundamental Rights: A Comparative Perspective”. 64 International and Comparative Law Quarterly (2015): 661- 696.
29. Robin-Olivier, Sophie. “Fundamental Rights as a New Frame: Displacing the Acquis”. European Constitutional Law Review 14, Iss. 1 (2018): 96 – 113.
30. Rosas, Allan. “Balancing Fundamental Rights in EU Law”. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 16, (2014): 347 – 360.
31. Vickers, Lucy. “Religious Freedom: Expressing Religion, Attire, and Public Spaces”. Journal of Law and Policy 22, Iss. 2 (2014): 591-611.
32. Vickers, Lucy.“Achbita and Bougnaoui: One Step Forward and Two Steps Back for Religious Diversity in the Workplace.” European Labour Law Journal 8, Iss. 3 (2017): 1–26.
33. Weiler, Joseph. “Case Comment : Je Suis Achbita!”. European Journal of International Law 28, Iss.4 (2017): 989–1018.
34. Council of the European Union, “Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation”, 27 November 2000, OJ L 303, 02/12/2000 P. 0016 – 0022.
35. Brems, Eva. “European Court of Justice Allows Bans on Religious Dress in the Workplace”, IACL-AIDC Blog (2017). Last visited: the 8th of September, 2022. https://blog-iacl-aidc.org/test-3/2018/5/26/analysis-european-court-of-justice allows-bans-on-religious-dress-in-the-workplace.
36. Đermana, Šeta. “Forgotten Women: The Impact of Islamophobia on Muslim Women”. European Network Against Racism, 2016. Last visited the 12th of July 2022. https://bit.ly/3p1PQyH.
37. ENAR, Amnesty International and European Network against Racism. “Wearing the Headscarf in the Workplace Observations on Discrimination Based on Religion in the Achbita and Bougnaoui Cases”, October 2016. Last visited: the 12th of September, 2022. https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/EUR0150772016ENGLISH.P DF.
38. FRA, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. “Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey: Muslims – Selected Finding”, 2017. Last visited the 12th of July, 2022. https://bit.ly/2KBABgY.
39. Ouald-Chaib, Saila and Valeska David. “European Court of Justice keeps the door to religious discrimination in the private workplace opened. The European Court of Human Rights could close it”, 27 March 2017. Last visited: the 12th of September, 2022. https://strasbourgobservers.com/2017/03/27/european-court of-justice-keeps-the-door-to-religious-discrimination-in-the-private-workplace opened-the-european-court-of-human-rights-could-close-it/.
40. Peers, Steve. “Headscarf Bans at Work: Explaining the ECJ Rulings”, EU Law Analysis (2017). Last visited: the 1st of September, 2022. http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2017/03/headscarf-bans-at-work-explaining ecj.html.
41. Sharpston, Elanor. “Shadow Opinion of former Advocate-General Sharpston: headscarves at work (Cases C-804/18 and C-341/19)”. Last visited: the 7th of July, 2022. http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2021/03/shadow-opinion-of former-advocate.html. Steijns, Monique. “Achbita and Bougnaoui: Raising more Questions than Answers”, Eutopia Law (2017). Last visited: the 1st of September, 2022. https://eutopialaw.wordpress.com/2017/03/18/achbita-and-bougnaoui-raising more-questions-than-answers/.
42. Van den Brink, Martijn. “Pride or Prejudice: The CJEU Judgment in IX v Wabe and MH Müller Handels GmbH”, Verfassungsblog, 20 July 2021. Last visited: the 7 th of August, 2022. https://verfassungsblog.de/pride-or-prejudice/.
43. Vickers, Lucy. “Direct discrimination and indirect discrimination: Headscarves and the CJEU”, OxHRH Blog, 15 March 2017. Last visited: the 7th of September, 2022. http://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/direct-discrimination-and-indirect discrimination-headscarves-and-the-cjeu.
44. Case C-4/73 Nold EU:C:1974:51.
45. Case 222/83 Johnston v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary EU:C:1986:206.
46. Case 170/84 Bilka Kaufhaus v Karin Weber von Harz, EU:C:1986:204.
47. Case C-44/94 R v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Fishermen's Organisations and Others EU:C:1995:325.
48. Case C-273/97 Sirdar v the Army Board and Secretary of State for Defence EU:C:1999:523. Case C-285/ 98 Kreil v Bundesrepublik Germany, EU:C:2000:02, para. 20, (all three are concerned with the sex discrimination).
49. Case C-112/00 Schmidberger, Internationale Transporte und Planzüge v Republik Österreich EU:C:2003:333.
50. Case C-36/02 Omega Spielhallen- und Automatenaufstellungs-GmbH v Oberbürgermeisterin der Bundesstadt Bonn EU:C:2004:614.
51. Case C-41/08 Petersen v Berufungsausschuss fü r Zahnarzte für den Bezirk Westfalen-Lippe EU:C:2010:4.
52. Case C 447/09 Prigge and Others EU:C:2011:573. Case C-617/10 Åklagaren v. Hans Åkerberg Fransson, EU:C:2013:105.
53. Case C-1/11 Interseroh Scrap and Metals Trading EU:C:2012:194. Case C-283/11 Sky Österreich EU:C:2013:28.
54. Case C-426/11 Alemo-Herron and Others EU:C:2013:521; Case C-201/15 AGET Iraklis EU:C:2016:972. Opinion of Advocate General Kokott,
55. Case C-157/15 Achbita EU:C:2016:382.
56. Case C-157/15, Samira Achbita and Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding v G4S Secure Solutions NV, EU:C:2017:203. Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston, Case C-188/15 Bougnaoui EU:C:2016:553. 428
57. Case C-188/15, Asma Bougnaoui and Association de défense des droits de l’homme (ADDH) v Micropole SA EU:C:2017:204.
58. Opinion of Advocate General Wahl, Case C-201/15 AGET Iraklis EU:C:2016:429.
59. Case C-729/18 P VTB Bank v Council EU:C:2020:499, Opinion of Advocate General Rantos, Joined Cases C-804/18 and C-341/19, IX v WABE eV and MH Müller Handels GmbH v MJ EU:C:2021:144. Joined Cases C-804/18 and C-341/19, IX v WABE eV and MH Müller Handels GmbH v MJ EU:C:2021:594.
60. Opinion of the Advocate General Trstenjak, Case C-316/09 MSD Sharp & Dohme GmbH v Merckle GmbH EU:C:2010:712.
61. Opinion of AG Szpunar, Case C-261/20 Thelen Technopark Berlin EU:C:2021:620. Case C-344/20, L.F. v S.C.R.L., Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 27 July 2020.
62. ECtHR Kokkinakis v Greece, App no 14307/88, 25 May 1993. ECtHR Dahlab v Switzerland App. No. 42393/98, 15 February 2001.
63. ECtHR Leyla Şahin v Turkey Appl. no. 44774/98, 10 November.2005.
64. Dissenting opinion of Judge Pinto de Albuquerque in ECtHR 13 July 2012, Case No. 16354/06, Mouvement raëlien suisse v Switzerland.
65. ECtHR Lautsi and Others v. Italy, no. 30814/06, 18 March 2011.
66. ECtHR Eweida and Others v the United Kingdom Appl. Nos. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 and 36516/10, 15 January 2013;
67. Boychuk v H. J. Symons Holdings Ltd (1977) IRLR 395.
68. Employment Appeal Tribunal, UK. Wilson v US West Communications, 58 F.3d 1337 (8th Cir. 1995). United States Court of Appeals