Case Summary

In October 2020, the Slovak Republic banned religious services in the context of cultural, social, and sporting events. Exceptions were made only for baptisms and weddings with up to six people including priests and assistants. The measure was prolonged in February 2021. 

The ban on communal worship for all religions was not backed by the Slovakian emergency law. It therefore lacked a clear legal basis, which would be one of the preconditions for a restriction of a basic human right such as freedom of religion.  

In fact, both the European Convention on Human Rights and the Constitution of the Slovak Republic protect freedom of religion as a fundamental right. This explicitly includes the “freedom … to manifest [one’s] religion or belief in worship.” (Article 9 ECHR)

Restrictions lacked a legal basis

Restrictions of fundamental human rights must at least fulfil three criteria: lawfulness, the pursuit of a legitimate aim, and the necessity of the restriction to achieve the aim.  

None of these criteria were fulfilled, argues Figel in his application to the European Court of Human Rights. Since the decreed worship ban had no clear legal basis, it was not justified under Slovak emergency law. Furthermore, no specific and detailed research was presented as to whether the ban on religious gatherings would help to reach the pursued aim, nor whether it was needed across the country. 

The initiative has been backed by a civil society coalition of diverse representatives from the arts, academia, and politics with various faith backgrounds. Bishops and faith leaders also have welcomed the case.  

“Worship bans are religious freedom violations”

“Religious freedom as a basic human right must be given the highest level of protection. Everyone has the right to live according to their convictions. Prohibiting people from doing so is profoundly illiberal and non-democratic. Worship bans are an unfair and disproportionate infringement on the right to religious freedom, as evidenced by the significantly greater flexibility and openness elsewhere in Europe. National judicial decisions Europe-wide (for example in Germany and France) have shown that worship bans are religious freedom violations,” stated Dr. Ján Figeľ, former Special Envoy for freedom of religion and belief outside the EU. 

“We are committed to supporting Dr. Ján Figeľ and his defence of religious freedom. The international legal framework is very clear in its protection of this right as it benefits everyone – people of faith as well as people of no faith. Fundamental freedoms apply to all, and in times of crisis they must be protected rather than weakened,” said Dr. Adina Portaru, Senior Counsel for ADF International. “It is disingenuous to pit religious freedom against safety when both can work in harmony. Communal worship is an essential part of navigating times of crisis for many people, and can be done safely and prudently, in accordance with necessary and balanced restrictions,” Portaru further stated.