Legal Methods in the Schools - Report Example

Legal Method Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Compare R. (on the application of Playfoot) v Governing Body of Millais School [2007] H.R.L.R. 34 with R. (on the application of Begum) v Denbigh High School Governors [2006] UKHL 15 3 Compare Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishops Lecture - Civil and Religious Law in England: A religious Perspective, 7/2/8 with Lon L. Fullers Law as an Instrument of Social Control and Law as Facilitation of Human Interaction, Bingham Young University Law Review 1975 5 Begum and Playfoot Show the Law Can Successfully Resolve Disagreements over the Acceptable Boundaries of Public Professions of Faith 7 References 11 Compare R. (on the application of Playfoot) v Governing Body of Millais School [2007] H.R.L.R. 34 with R. (on the application of Begum) v Denbigh High School Governors [2006] UKHL 15 This essay is related with two cases, that deals the issue of freedom of religion. The aim of this study paper is to highlight the issues and compare the various aspects of these two cases. Key Issue In case of ‘R. (on the application of Playfoot) v Governing Body of Millais School [2007] H.R.L.R. 34, Playfoot, a student had worn a purity ring at school due to her own religious beliefs as a Christian. On the contrary, the school had certain policies regarding wearing of jewellery. As an effect this she was not allowed to wear the ring. Thus, she has claimed that the school had violated her human right along with the freedom of religious belief under the Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights’1. On the other hand, in R. (on the application of Begum) v Denbigh High School Governors [2006] UKHL 15 the school has clear policy related to its uniform codes which prohibited wearing of clothes other than slawar-Kmeez. Despite the uniform policy of the school in place, Begum a Muslim girl has used religious attire namely Jilbab at her school as a school uniform. Correspondingly, the school had debarred Shabina Begum against the breach of the school uniform policy. Thus, she claimed that the school had violated her human right of religious belief articulated under the ‘Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights’2. Comparison In both the cases, it has been observed that the high court had given the judgments in favour of the school. In the case of Playfoot’s, the Administrative Court had declared that wearing the ring is not linked with the belief of chastity before marriage. Apart from this the High Court claimed that in order to maintain the Christian faith, unmarried girls does not require of wearing rings. Rather, the Court mentioned that the uniform policy of the school was prescribed clearly by the school and she has the option to attend other school that facilitated her wearing of purity ring. Moreover, the court had given the judgment in the favour of the school and stating that Playfoot could have manifested her faith towards her religion in numerous other ways rather than just holding on to the purity ring that violated the uniform norms of the school3. On the other hand, in case of in case of Begum, the High Court had given the decision in favour of the school. The court had agreed with the multiple facts as provided by the school committee regarding its governmental heads. Moreover, it has been observed that Islamic community had agreed with the Governors of Denbigh High School regarding the dress code of the Islamic women. Moreover, the incorporation of dress code by the school was aimed at promoting cultural diversification equality. Thus, the court stated that the school has not breached the provisions articulated under the Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights’ and hence the court’s decision was made in favour of the school4. Compare Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishops Lecture - Civil and Religious Law in England: A religious Perspective, 7/2/8 with Lon L. Fullers Law as an Instrument of Social Control and Law as Facilitation of Human Interaction, Bingham Young University Law Review 1975 Objective The objective of this section is to compare between Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishops Lecture - Civil and Religious Law in England: A religious Perspective, 7/2/8 with Lon L. Fullers Law as an Instrument of Social Control and Law as Facilitation of Human Interaction, Bingham Young University Law Review 1975. Overview Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishops Lecture, discusses about Civil and Religious Law’ from the ‘religious perspective. Archbishops highlighted the secular law of the England with regard legal provisions of faith group. In this lecture, Archbishops emphasized towards the Islamic religious group. Moreover, Archbishops focused specifically towards the religious freedom of an individual5. On the contrary, Lon L. Fuller discussed about the ‘Law as an Instrument of Social Control and Law as Facilitation of Human Interaction’. In this article, Fuller highlighted the evil behaviour of people in order to make out peace in the England6. Discuss It has been observed that Dr Rowan Williams had recognized that civil and religious law have been initiating challenges in the domestic society of the England. According to Dr Rowan Williams, Islamic groups have been involved in several religious conflict issues. . Dr Rowan Williams asserted that Muslim communities have been seeking for freedom to live under the ‘Sharia law’. Moreover, Dr Rowan Williams revealed that most of the people believe that incorporation of ‘Sharia law’ would promote brutal treatment towards female, ‘forced marriage’ and cruel physical punishments7. On the other hand, Lon L. Fuller had focused on human right in order to maintain peace in the society. Thus, Fuller had suggested to the citizens for trying to maintain effective communication among the various religion in order to avoid the existing limitations of the society. Apart from this, through the help of this article, Fuller has strived to improve human behaviour in order to avoid the violent behaviour such as murder and other physical violence’s in the domestic society of England. Finally, Fuller had also argued that through maintaining the regulated and restricted interactional process, people within the society could promote peace8. Begum and Playfoot Show the Law Can Successfully Resolve Disagreements over the Acceptable Boundaries of Public Professions of Faith The provided legal cases display the cases of religious attire in the context of educational institution. Throughout this discussion, multiple instances have been shown regarding how the legal context was utilized against both the religious obligations provided in the case. Elaborating the case of Playfoot as the primary part of this discussion Legal Obligation Filed By Playfoot against ‘Millais School Governing Body’ In this legal case, the entire matter was about a girl who insisted towards wearing her purity ring, even after being prohibited by the school. The school acted strictly upon its policy of prohibiting students from wearing any sort jewellery within the school campus with the prime intention of promoting equality among the students. Playfoot considered this as an abuse against her religious faith and thus ended up filing a legal obligation against the school. Playfoot from no point of view considered the fact that the only intention of the school was to promote equality among students rather than hurting their religious sentiments. She claimed it as a violation under the Article 9 of the ‘European Convention on Human Rights’ based on which, every individual has the freedom to manifest thoughts and practice of religious beliefs9. However, the court by taking reference of the statements mentioned under the Article 9 which disregarded the manifestation of religious belief through wearing religious symbols delivered its decision in favour of the school. This also proves the fact that none of the statements mentioned within the Article 9 was violated by the school. In legal terms, certain questions came up depending on which the court’s jury provided the judgment. These questions were, whether the possession of a religious symbol was a mandate for showing one’s respect towards his / her religion. Or it has been just the sole decision and preference of the individuals in terms of wearing those religious symbols10. However, despite of Playfoot’s numerous attempts of proving the school liable for disrespecting her religious sentiments; the court did not consider her obligation as valid which can actually be considered as an appreciable effort made by the court towards preserving the equality and harmony within the school campus. Thus, it gave its judgment in the favour of the school stating that Playfoot could have manifested her faith towards her religion in numerous other ways rather than just holding on to the purity ring that violated the uniform norms of the school. She, on the contrary, was held accountable for violating the identity of the school that was supposed to be followed by all the students within that facility. The base of the court’s decision was structured on certain facts mentioned within the Article 9 of the ‘European Convention on Human Rights’11. As per these facts, possession of a religious symbol for projecting one’s respect and faith towards his /her religion can be an individual’s personal decision or preference and is not a mandate. It can be stated that the claim made by Playfoot against the school held no valid ground for being considered as appropriate As a result, Playfoot was left out with no other option rather than accepting the uniform policy of the Millais School12. This instance, projected how law can effectively tackle the various disagreements that might arise over the acceptance of public professions of faith. Legal Obligation Filed By Begum against the Governing Authorities of Denbigh High School In a similar context, this case elaborates about the legal obligation filed by Begum, a girl from the Islamic community against the governing bodies of the ‘Denbigh high school’. This case also describes about the claim made by Begum on religious grounds where she demanded to be allowed to wear Jilbab as a school uniform that was preferred by the school. Despite of these facts, the decision was provided in favour of the school which can also considered to be entrenched in promoting cultural harmony among the individuals belonging from different community. The school decision in this case had considered its prior efforts in terms of attaining appropriate consultation from the local Muslim Community. Based on the attained consultations, the school decided shalwar kameez as an appropriate uniform for the female students with the intention of promoting equality and diversification within the culture of the educational facility13. This proves that the school fulfilled its responsibilities of meeting the dressing criteria of different cultures and thus cannot be held responsible on any grounds. Begum however, considered the school’s uniform policy as an abuse to her religious sentiments and thus filed a case against the school by taking reference of the Article 9 of the ‘European Convention on Human Rights’. However, the court’s decision aimed towards maintaining the dress code sensitiveness that has been considered appropriate to every Islamic organization. Begum’s claim also included facts regarding the inappropriateness of the shalwar kameez that was provided by the school and thus was considered as an abuse to the statements of the Sharia law by her and her supporters. In this regard, the court completely nullified her claims by taking recommendations regarding the appropriate Islamic dress code from the local Mosques which can be also be held justifiable to a major extent. Begum’s prefer towards considering the jilbab as more culturally oriented attire for her religion did not find any sort of orientation with the actual meaning of the Article 9 along with the recommendations from other Islamic school governing authorities. As a result, the court’s delivered its decision in favour of the school14. Thus the judgment offered in this case also symbolizes their capabilities of the law abiding bodies in terms of resolving the disagreements regarding the public professions of faith15. References Bradney, A. ‘Religion and the Secular State in the United Kingdom’, The social context, 2010, pp. 737-747. British and Irish Legal Information Institute. ‘Judgments - R (on the application of Begum (by her litigation friend, Rahman)) (Respondent) v. Headteacher and Governors of Denbigh High School (Appellants)’ United Kingdom House of Lords Decisions, , 2006, (Accessed 26 August 2014). European Convention on Human Rights. ‘Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms’. ARTICLE 9 Freedom of thought, conscience and religion, 1-30, , 2014 (Accessed 26 August 2014) Fuller, L. L. ‘Law as an Instrument of Social Control and Law as a Facilitation of Human Interaction’. BYU Law Review, 1975, pp. 89-96. McLeod, I. Legal Method. Palgrave Macmillan Limited, US, 2013. House of Lords. ‘Opinions of the lords of appeal for judgment in the cause’. Session 2005–06, 1-41, , 2006 (Accessed 26 August 2014) Williams, R. ‘Archbishops lecture - Civil and Religious Law in England: a religious perspective’, Articles, 2008. Whistler, D. and Hill, D. J. ‘Philosophy of religion and religious communities’, Connected communities, 2013, pp. 1-12. Read More