Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||自願性原則作為解決宗教團體自主權與個人基本權之衝突的途徑──評歐洲人權法院Fernández Martínez v. Spain之判決|
The Principle of Voluntariness as a Solution to the Conflicts Between the Autonomy of Religious Organizations and Individuals’Fundamental Rights: An Analysis of the Decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Fernández Martínez v. Spain
|Keywords:||自願性原則;宗教團體自主權;個人基本權;私生活受尊重權;權益衡量;歐洲人權法院;Fernández Martínez v. Spain;宗教聘僱爭議;忠誠義務;政教關係|
The Principle of Voluntariness;The Right to Autonomy of Religious Organizations;Individuals’Fundamental Rights;Right to Respect for Private Life;Balancing of Rights;The European Court of Human Rights;Fernández Martínez v. Spain;Employment Disputes Within Religious Organizations;Duties of Loyalty;State-Religion Relations
|Issue Date:||2022-04-08 10:21:47 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract:||本文係以歐洲人權法院於二○一四年所作成之Fernández Martínez v. Spain判決為基礎，來探討「自願性原則」在解決宗教團體自主權與個人基本權之衝突上的功能與限制。歐洲人權法院在該判決中，將原告自願接受向著天主教會之忠誠義務的事實，視為權益衡量中的關鍵因素。除了說明自願性原則在該判決中所扮演的角色，本文亦檢視針對此一原則的三個重要批判。本文主張，特別在涉及宗教聘僱爭議的案件中，唯有當該爭議是發生於私領域中，當事人自願接受宗教團體基於信仰所制定之內部規範，當事人之職位對宗教團體使命之實踐具重大的重要性，以及宗教團體所作成的決定具備宗教性理由等條件皆同時具備時，在權益衡量上宗教團體自主權相較於個人基本權才具有優先性。|
The purpose of this essay is to explore the function and limits of the principle of voluntariness in solving the conflicts between the right to autonomy of religious organizations and individuals’fundamental rights through examining the decision made by the European Court of Human Rights in Fernández Martínez v. Spain in 2014. In this decision, the fact that the applicant voluntarily accepted a higher duty of loyalty towards the Catholic Church was regarded by the Court as a key factor in balancing the competing rights. In addition to explaining the role played by the principle of voluntariness in this decision, this essay also examines three important critiques of the principle.The author argues that, particularly in cases involving employment disputes within religious organizations, only when the following four conditions are met can the right to religious autonomy take priority over individuals’fundamental rights: (1) the controversy occurs in the private sphere; (2) the employee voluntarily accepts internal regulations laid down by the religious organization in accordance with religious beliefs; (3) the job performed by the employee contributes significantly to the fulfillment of the religious mission of the organization; and (4) the personnel decision of the religious organization was made on the basis of religious reasons.
|Relation:||法學評論, 167, 1-76|
|Appears in Collections:||[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.