ANNEX 2

TEMPLATE 3: Medium-sized article for the "Wroclaw Commentaries"

NOTE: This template provides a rough idea of envisaged content; if necessary, you can
adapt it to better suit your keyword. Additional templates exist for institutional keywords as
well as for larger articles!
Please write/insert text into the boxes on the right side! The overall length of this
article should not exceed 2-3 columns, i.e. 100-150 lines or 5-7500 letters (without
spaces!) in the format below (Times New Roman 10 pt.).
References are to be specified in Section 6 and should be summarized in the text as:
[KUOPILA, 2000] for court cases or (Scovazzi, 2013) for literature. We don't have
footnotes! Please use official shortcuts for journals, conventions or institutions, which
will later be added to a List of Abbreviations. Suggested links to other potential
keywords should be indicated like this: >> Discrimination.
As regards content and style of the text, we would like to refer to the concept of the Wroclaw
Commentaries:
Most of the keyword entries of the Wroclaw Commentaries review the relationship between
culture, human rights and policies, state practices or societal attitudes. While the Handbook
approaches issues mostly from a legal point of view, interdisciplinary elements are also part of
the methodology. Entries will normally focus on the cultural (vis-a-vis e.g. the political,
economic or social) dimension of human rights however, in some cases this dimension may
still have to be fully developed. Clearly, the concept of the Wroclaw Commentaries relies on
authors who are able to present and discuss their topic with an open mind, being both precise
as regards references and conclusions as well as intelligible for readers coming from different
professional fields.
Please remember that the Handbook will also provide comprehensive introductory
articles covering the main subject areas (cf. Outline). Therefore, you can fully
concentrate on your keyword issue(s)! Once completed, save the article as a WORD
doc, using the keyword and your name, like in this example: Roma-Chainoglou.doc, then
send it to wroclaw@arcultmedia.de
Title (Keyword): Fundamentalism (Religious F.)
Author: Montserrat Gas-Aixendri
Initials (e.g. K.Ch.): M.G.A.
Mail @ / Telephone (for editorial contacts, will not be published!!): mgas@uic.es / +34 618
942 645
GUIDE (will not be published!) YOUR TEXT
Abstract: Religious F. is a movement characterised by a return to
Abstracts should not exceed the limit of up to four fundamental principles or sacred religious texts. It indicates
sentences or 8 lines or 400 letters! unwavering attachment to a set of irreducible beliefs and often
(Advice: Write the abstract and insert relevant implies intolerance toward other understandings. Most
catchwords below only after the regular article has religious traditions have fundamentalist interpretative
branches. In its non-academic usage F. is often employed as a
been written!)
synonym for violent extremism.

3 - 5 Catchwords: Literalism / Integrism / Fanaticism / Intolerance /

Format example: Roma / Sinti / 'Travellers' /
Mobility
1. Short definition / explanation of keyword-
related issue(s), possibly exemplified by one or
two cases.
Length: Up to 12 lines or 600 letters!
Please note the suggested lines for this section of the
article! If you need more space, try to save a
corresponding number of lines in other parts of the
article or contact your Managing Editor.
2. Core messages from European / other legal
instruments (in your interpretation).
Length: Up to 24 lines or 1200 letters!
Note: This section should address keyword-issues in
the light of European and/or international
conventions, where relevant. However, it could also
take up selected national specificities, e.g. in
constitutions and laws, as well as political
declarations, empirical evidence, etc. to illustrate
problems.
Religious movement or point of view characterised by a
return to fundamental principles or sacred religious texts. It
indicates unwavering attachment to a set of irreducible beliefs
and often implies intolerance toward other interpretations. The
expression was first used to describe an organised Evangelical
movement in the United States in the early 1900s that
opposed Protestant liberalism. The term has been generalised
to similar movements within Judaism, Islam and Hinduism
(Armstrong 2000). F. can apply to any religious group
stressing strict observance of religious principles and a literal
interpretation of sacred texts. In its non-academic usage F. is
often employed as a synonym for violent extremism.
In the interpretation of religious dogmas, F. is covered by the
freedom of thought, conscience and religion (art. 9 HRC),
which protects individuals and religious groups. Religious
organisations in the exercise of their autonomy have the right
to set limits to the exercise of religious freedom by their
members within religious institutions (Doe, 2011).
In the West, the discussion around fundamentalism is focused
not on the legitimacy of fundamentalist religious stances, but
on its intention to impose a given religious view in the
political and civil sphere and the resulting questioning of the
principle of secularism intrinsic to the democratic State. It can
become a threat to the democratic State in the guise of
religious totalitarianism.
The secular nature of the State should not imply an anti-
religious attitude. Secular ideals and the separation between
church and state are meant to preserve religions against
political interference as much they are intended to safeguard
the political sphere from religious intrusion. Secularism and
secular values are understood as protective of fundamental
values, including religion, not opposed to them (Bauman &
Weingarten, 2006).
3. The essence of court rulings, especially of the
ECtHR, or decisions of other competent bodies.
Length: Up to 24 lines or 1200 letters!
Note: If the issue has not yet been directly addressed
by the ECtHR, other courts or competent decision
making bodies, this section could be shorter. However,
it could explore potential links to decisions made in
related fields or refer to such links made in documents
of parliaments, NGOs and other stakeholders.
4. Prevailing and important dissenting/minority
opinions in the literature.
Length: Up to 24 lines or 1200 letters!
Note: If the issue is not yet covered properly in the
literature, this section could be shorter. However, you
could also consider references to statements of
stakeholders or policy makers.
In Europe and in particular in Turkey, the only signatory of the
European Convention with a Muslim majority, the religious F.
that has been questioned is primarily Islamic.
In its rulings on cases involving article 9, the ECtHR has
largely been faithful to the principles of liberal secularism. The
Court has frequently emphasised the States role as the neutral
and impartial organiser of the exercise of various religions,
faiths and beliefs, and stated that this role is conducive to
public order, religious harmony and tolerance in a democratic
society.
The practice and argumentation in the Refah Partisi case and in
the Leyla Sahin case, therefore, conflict not only with the
liberal tradition regarding individual displays of religious
identity in the public sphere, but also with the liberal tradition
of respecting a certain legal autonomy for religious groups, a
principle that has otherwise been supported by the Court
REFAH PARTISI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY 2003, Grand
Chamber and LEYLA SAHIN v. TURKEY, 2005. These
rulings follow political criteria more than legal ones, given the
risk that F. may impose religious norms to regulate certain
areas of civil life (Martnez-Torrn, 2009).
F. is generally seen as a reaction to secularisation and
modernisation (Bruce, 2008). In its non-academic usage F. is
often employed as a synonym for violent extremism. Some
academic definitions include the willingness to use violence as
a defining characteristic of F. (Heitmeyer, Mller & Schrder,
1997). This usage, however, does not reflect the most common
academic conceptions, which define F. as a set of religious
attitudes, norms and ideals (Emerson and Hartman, 2006). F. is
generally distinguished from orthodoxy, which reflects the
content of what is believed rather than (as is the case with F.)
the way the beliefs are held (Laythe et al. 2002).
There is also a fundamentalistas opposed to liberal
secularism, which seeks to impose a secular (non-religious)
lifestyle on all individuals entering the public sphere and
advocates a limit to religious expression in public.
Fundamentalist secularism denies religious conviction or belief
any place for expression in the public realm (Westerfield,
2006). The fundamentalist aspect of this approach lies in the
fact that it imposes a secularist way of life on all individuals
when they enter the public domain (Thorson Plesner, 2005).
5. Conclusions, including consequences for issue-
related legal and policy issues or debates.
Length: Up to 24 lines or 1200 letters!
Note: Conclusions should suggest mainly the potential
significance of the above findings for the concrete
issue at stake (or for the wider cultural sphere) and
related policies, pointing out tendencies or solutions
that could be relevant in future conflicts.
6. Key references (including online resources).
Length: Up to 10 references or 24 lines with ca.
1200 letters!
Note: The WRO Commentaries use these formats:
Books: Freestone, David (ed.): The 1982 Law of the Sea
Convention at 30 : successes, challenges and new
agendas, Leiden: Nijhoff (2013)
Articles: Scovazzi, Tullio: "The Law of the Sea
Convention and Underwater Cultural Heritage", in
David Freestone (ed.) The 1982 Law of the Sea
Convention at 30 : successes, challenges and new
agendas, Leiden: Nijhoff (2013)
Websites: www.culturalpolicies.net (accessed 4/2014)
Cases (especially if relevant for conclusions, e.g.
indicating new tendencies or conflicts!):
KUOPILA v. FINLAND (ECtHR 27/04/2000, 27752/95)
Acceptance of diversity is an important principle, which
implies that secularism and any principles and policies based
on secularism ought to be subject to adjustment to
accommodate a wide range of cultural, ethnic and religious
diversity. Secularism should give way to multiculturalism and
accommodation, at least to some extent. Theorists differ
widely as to the preferable degree of accommodation (Bauman
& Weingarten, 2006). Recognition of difference should be
limited insofar as it undermines core political values. In other
words, while accommodation to cultural difference is
desirable, elements of cultures or religions that are oppressive
or dangerous ought not to be accepted in the name of
multicultural accommodation. Europes legislators and policy-
makers, faced with serious challenges in integrating new
minorities, must interpret both their own constitutional duties
and the constitutional limitations on their powers.
Recent incidents like the Sahin case, as well as the passage of
France's religious symbols law in 2004, seem to indicate that
current understandings of secularism are increasingly
relegating religious expression exclusively to the private
sphere (Westerfield, 2006). From this standpoint, the range of
approaches to secularism being developed in European courts
appears questionable (Bauman & Weingarten, 2006).
Armstrong, Karen: The Battle for God. Fundamentalism in
Judaism, Christianity and Islam. New York: Alfred Knopf
(2000); Bauman, Richard W. & Weingarten, Sarah L.M.:
Keeping Religious Fundamentalism under Wraps: The
Clothing Controversy in Selected European Countries, in
Forum Constitutionnel, 15:1 (2006); Bruce, Steve:
Fundamentalism. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity, 2008; Doe,
Norman: Law and Religion in Europe: A Comparative
Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011;
Heitmeyer, Wilhem, Mller, Joachim & Schrder, Helmut,
Verlockender Fundamentalismus [Seductive Fundamentalism].
Frankfurt: Suhrkamp (1997); Emerson, Michael O. &
Hartman, David: The Rise of Religious Fundamentalism, in
Annual Review of Sociology 32:1 (2006); Koopmans, Ruud:
Religious Fundamentalism and Hostility against Out-groups,
in Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41 (2015);
Martnez-Torrn, Javier: La cuestin del velo islmico en la
jurispridencia de Estrasburgo, Derecho y religin 4 (2009);
Westerfield, Jennifer M., Behind the Veil: An American
Legal Perspective on the European Headscarf Debate, in The
American Journal of Comparative Law 54:3 (2006);
Cases: *

* REFAH PARTISI AND OTHERS v. TURKEY (ECtHR 13/02/2003, 41340/98, 41342/98,

41343/98, and 41344/98); LEYLA SAHIN v. TURKEY (ECtHR 10/1/2005, 44774/98)

Please add a very short CV focusing on your current or recent work (up to 60 words and, where available, a
link to a website with more information) that you would like to see in the Handbook and on the Website!

Montserrat Gas-Aixendri is Associate Professor of Law at the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya

(Barcelona, Spain), where teaches Law and Religion. European Law Doctorate (PhD.) by Universidad
Complutense de Madrid. Author of more than forty articles and three books, and editor of three books.
Research interest: religious freedom, migrations, cultural rights and the governance of religious diversity
in European societies.