Secularity v pluralism v secularism

Question 1

meaning of S P AND S

SCHAFF

Answer 1

• Secularity: a form of passive secularism where the state does not associate itself with a particular religion nor impose anything.
• Secularism: wall of separation – assertive
• Pluralism: approach to religion that is tolerant of various religious beliefs or lack thereof.

SCHAFF:
secularity
1. positive liberty (berlin)
2. Avoids the identification of state with particular religion
3. Merely a concept
4. Less ambitious5.
5. US

Secularism:
1. Negative liberty (berlin)
2. Ideological position promoting secular order.
3. Positive ideology
4. Assertive
5. France/ Turkey

Question 2

6 cases

and i scholar

Answer 2

• Kokkinakis v Greece
• Dahlab v Switzerland – hijab
• Sahim v turkey – Islamic headscarf on university
• Dogru v France – PE with Islamic headscarf
• Lautsi v Italy – head scarf but for purpose of protecting democratic pluralism
• Bayatyan v Armenia* (calo remark) – Jehova witness imprisoned for refusing military service. Implied threat to democracy.
• Calo’s overall remarks: pluralism and HR/// Commitment of ECHR to secularism with a restricted meaning of pluralism that locks it within the bounds of secular political narrative. EASILY SACRIFICED!
• Turkey and France: conventional understanding of secularism

Question 3

kenya: 4 cases

Answer 3

• Jesse Kamau v AG – conservative/ literal interpretation of s.66 of the repealed COK. Relied on foreign cases to define secularism in Kenya (WRONG)
• A.32 and A.27 and A. 21 and A. 8 and A.24
• R v head teacher, KHS – BAD CASE LAW
• Seventh day Adventist v minister of education; COA saved it saying it was against the principle of reasonable accommodation for SDA going to school on Saturday.
• Methodist church in kenya v mohammed fugicha; COA is good but SC bad. However, JB ojwang dissent is good.
• Mukami Wangai