 |
ECtHR ruling regarding religion box on IDs draws mixed reactions
Işık, whose request was rejected by the Turkish court, applied to the ECtHR, which on Feb. 2 ruled 6-1 that Turkey had violated Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which covers the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. In its ruling, the court reiterated that the freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs had a negative aspect, namely an individual’s right not to be obliged to disclose his or her religion or to act in a manner that might enable conclusions to be drawn as to whether or not he or she held such beliefs.
Pir Sultan Abdal Cultural Association Chairman Fevzi Gümüş, an Alevi who welcomed the ECtHR ruling, said listing religions on IDs, as a result of the corrupt perception of secularism in Turkey, gives the state the opportunity to interfere in the private lives of citizens.
“The relation between a religion and an individual is a private one and it does not support the interest of the state as well as third parties. The state forcing its citizens to declare their religious beliefs and its listing of religion on citizens’ IDs is an apparent violation of the individuals’ rights. The state has to be in equal distance to all religions and should not force people to make their religious beliefs public,” explained Gümüş.
He also warned that listing religions on IDs may lead to discrimination against those who are not from society’s most widely-accepted religion. “In this respect, no religion should be listed on IDs. This is the most correct way,” said Gümüş.
The ECtHR ruling received support from some theologians while it was found inappropriate by others, who said the removal of religion box from IDs in line with the ECtHR ruling would damage one’s belongingness to their religion.
Professor İlhami Güler, an academic at the theology faculty of Ankara University, said it would be a necessary and right move to eliminate the religion box from IDs that force people to list their religions.
“The situations where the IDs are used are ones irrelevant to one’s religion. There is no need to let anyone know about one’s religion in the places IDs are used,” he said.
Former Religious Affairs Directorate head Tayyar Altınkulaç partly agreed and said listing religions on IDs was actually a violation of the 24th article of the Turkish Constitution, which says nobody can be forced to identify their religions. He suggested that it would be better to make listing religion on IDs optional and said that perhaps just those people who want their religion to be listed on their IDs can do so while those who do not want it on their IDs can leave that box empty.
When asked about his view regarding the ECtHR ruling, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said the exclusion of the religion box on IDs would not make any difference. “Here, I do not see the ECtHR ruling as abnormal. The religion box may be removed from IDs, this is not a big thing,” Erdoğan said.
On the other hand, theologian Yavuz Ünal, a member of the Directorate of Religious Affairs’ High Commission said he does not find the complete removal of the religion box from the IDs a meaningful idea, noting that the existence of religious information on one’s ID reveals a person’s belongingness to a religion.
Ünal ruled out the argument that existence of this information on IDs would lead to any discrimination against individuals.
“After all, I find it meaningless to make this issue a subject of polemics,” Ünal indicated.
Star daily columnist İbrahim Kiras sees the other side of the coin and says the views of those who want the inclusion of the religion field on IDs should be also taken into consideration.
“There are people in this society who see and accept religion as a social institution. For these people, religion is an identity before all, and how these people will react to the removal of the religion field from their IDs should also carry some importance. But there is no one asking these people about their views,” complains Kiras.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AMANDA PAUL |  |
||
| Ukraine: a lost country | |||
| MÜMTAZER TÜRKÖNE |  |
||
| The 52nd anniversary of May 27 | |||
| ABDULLAH BOZKURT |  |
||
| Turkey and Mexico: Distant yet so close | |||
| BERİL DEDEOĞLU |  |
||
| Yemen and beyond | |||
| ARZU KAYA URANLI |  |
||
| On Memorial Day a few words to make your day memorable | |||
| ABDÜLHAMİT BİLİCİ |  |
||
| Google kidnaps Gül! | |||
| CUMALİ ÖNAL |  |
||
| Critical months for Egypt | |||
| DOĞU ERGİL |  |
||
| Qualities of power | |||
| İHSAN YILMAZ |  |
||
| The Egyptian elections, Islam and Islamists | |||
| EMRE USLU |  |
||
| Operational errors | |||
| MARKAR ESAYAN |  |
||
| There is need for a new initiative | |||
| JOOST LAGENDIJK |  |
||
| Europe can’t have it all. Or can it? | |||
| HASAN KANBOLAT |  |
||
| Are Russian tourists being discouraged from visiting Turkey? | |||
| MELİH ARAT |  |
||
| Handmade | |||
| KLAUS JURGENS |  |
||
| Back to the ’80s | |||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
