Abstract
This chapter analyzes the interplay between religious rules and State law from the angle of legal pluralism, discussing how State recognition of religious rules can affect the degree of legal diversity that is available to citizens. This issue is approached through an examination of religious law, that is rules that are considered to be different from secular rules, particularly in those legal traditions that have been more strongly influenced by the Christian religion. As the latter rules are frequently identified with State law, religious laws are regarded as a challenge to the State monopoly of law. First, the chapter defines what is meant by religious rules; second, it examines the tensions between religious and secular rules; and finally discusses the different strategies and tools implemented and used by States to govern these tensions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The evolution of Belgium from a unitary State into a federation, mentioned in the chapter written by Louis-Léon Christians and Adriaan Overbeeke in this book, is an example of this process.
- 2.
See the next section.
- 3.
The ambiguity of the notion of “religious rules” is also noted by Paulo Adragão and Anabela Leão (see pp. 305–07) with reference to Portuguese law.
- 4.
For a discussion of the different meanings of the expression “religious law” see Sandberg (2011, pp. 170–82).
- 5.
Consequently, in compliance with Canon 22, the 1983 Code of Canon law refrains from regulating inheritance and refers on this matter to State laws as long as they are not contrary to divine law.
- 6.
Consequently, in a number of countries with a Muslim background, State laws make reference to Islamic law for the regulation of inheritance. See Rohe (2015, pp. 263–66).
- 7.
See Mazzola (p. 234): “En ce qui concerne les normes religieuses, la nature confessionnelle de celles-ci dépend, en général, de l’autorité d’où elles proviennent, c’est-à-dire que le caractère confessionnel de l’autorité législative donne la substance à la règle religieuse, quel que soit le contenu de celui-ci”. See also Augsberg-Korioth (2016, p. 179) where, speaking of the self-determination of religious groups by means of religious rules, the latter are defined as “rules which derive from religious authorities and form a set of rules strictly separated from the law of the state”: while “they mostly concern religious items”, they “do not necessarily have a direct religious content”. In the same vein see Martinez-Torrón (2016, pp. 358–59), Adragão and Leão (2016, pp. 305–07, with some nuances), Wolfgang Wieshaider (2016, pp. 80–81), and Fathally (2016, p. 315).
- 8.
It does not come as a surprise, then, that in countries such as Colombia, where the Catholic religion has had a strong influence on the development of the State legal system, the relationship between the State and the Catholic Church (and to a lesser degree also with other religious organizations) “is understood as a relationship between autonomous legal systems”, so that Canon law is seen as “a legal system independent from the State” (Prieto 2016, p. 139). However, as correctly noted by Coriden (1991, p. 47) State laws and concordats are important sources of Canon law.
- 9.
See Holm-Oliva (2016, p. 380).
- 10.
See Chew Li Hua (2016, p. 253).
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
As it happens in a number of countries, including Belgium, Austria and Italy.
- 15.
An experiment that, to my knowledge, has been carried out nowhere in the world.
- 16.
Reis 2016, p. 120. Also Christians and Overbeeke (2016, p. 93) note that “«religious rules» are often (and even wrongly) referred to norms coming only from recognized religion”, while “the judiciary seems to be reluctant to take into account religious “rules” affirmed by non-recognized churches or traditions”.
- 17.
Mainly based on the fact that, in this scenario, traditional religions would provide the yardstick to assess the religious nature of new religious doctrines or practices.
- 18.
For an analysis of this change see Ferrari 2006, pp. 625–639.
- 19.
The State-supported creation of representative organizations of “moderate Islam” in many European countries is an example of this strategy. See Laurence (2012).
- 20.
An echo of this conception can be found in Maoz (2016, p. 215) where he refers to the clashes between State and religious organizations due to the fact that the latter “regard their powers as emerging from God Almighty”.
- 21.
See the Apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis 22 May 1994, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/1994/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_19940522_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html, n. 4.
- 22.
- 23.
The new centrality acquired by the tension between individual and collective freedom of religion is underlined by Casanova (2012, pp. 140–41).
- 24.
On the minority rights system governing the Muslim community of Thrace see Akgönül 2009, pp. 279–292.
- 25.
Although “for the Sikh and Hindus communities there are also State recognised bodies that administer the affairs of these communities” (Jamal 2016, p. 330).
- 26.
See the UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, 1992. However this Declaration, after affirming in Art. 1 that States have the obligation to protect the existence and identity of minorities, in the following provisions falls back on the traditional notion that only individuals can be right-holders.
- 27.
The examination of the case-law both of the UN Human Rights Committee and of the European Court of Human Rights confirms that “when religious minorities face discrimination and persecution as a group […] their case is addressed under the “freedom of religion or belief” umbrella in international human rights and not under minority rights” (Ghanea 2008, p. 309).
- 28.
For a description of the system of personal law concerning marriage and family in South Africa see van der Vyer (2012, pp. 200–218).
- 29.
The Malay legal system includes both options: while Muslim citizens cannot conclude a valid civil marriage, as they do not have the option to choose secular laws when the matter falls within the jurisdiction of the shari’a courts (see Adil and Ahmad 2016, p. 269), non-Muslim citizens can perform a religious or a civil marriage. On this point see also Thio (2008, p. 79).
- 30.
In Israel “all religious courts have exclusive jurisdiction in matters of marriage and divorce of members of their respective communities” while “in other matters of personal status some courts enjoy exclusive jurisdiction while others exercise concurrent jurisdiction with the Civil Courts” (Maoz 2016, p. 212). In Malaysia Shari’a courts enjoy exclusive jurisdiction (see Art. 121 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia 2016).
- 31.
For an overview of the legal systems of the European Union countries see European Consortium for Church and State Research (2014).
- 32.
The borders of this jurisdiction are sometimes uncertain and disputed. See Adragão and Leão (2016, pp. 305–06).
- 33.
See infra, at the end of this section. For a discussion of autonomous and semi-autonomous orders in relation to religious issues see Sandberg (2015, pp. 10–11).
- 34.
For some consideration on this process of legal secularization see Ferrari 2014, pp. 25–40.
- 35.
This point is nicely made by Sophie van Bijsterveld (2016, p. 282), who underlines the connections between secularization, equal treatment, and freedom of religion: “The Dutch legal system excludes a system of legal pluralism based on religion. That would be contrary to the constitutional norm of equal treatment regardless of religion or belief. Secular law is the law applicable to all; this law guarantees freedom of religion. Being subject to religious law always includes an element of choice”.
- 36.
Adragão and Leão (2016, p. 295) underline that “the constitutional and democratic State of western matrix […] considers State and religion as “differentiated sphere”, autonomous and separated” (n. 3). The impact of this distinction on the building of the modern public sphere as a secular entity is underlined by Asad (2003).
- 37.
In the past, when confessional States were widespread in Europe, States were largely in control of these temporal matters but had the obligation to manage them through provisions that respected the principles of the State religion. In this sense such provisions could not be regarded as secular rules, at least according to the meaning this expression has in contemporary language.
- 38.
This is particularly evident in countries with a common law tradition: see Sandberg (2011, pp. 183–84).
- 39.
See, among others, Martinez-Torrón (2016, pp. 368–69), van Bijsterveld (2016, pp. 285–86), Adragão and Leão (2016, pp. 304–05). Sometimes these exemptions are very specific, like the English law allowing Sikh construction workers to wear a turban rather than a hard-hat (see Holm-García Oliva 2016, p. 384).
- 40.
For a discussion of conscientious objection (and its difference from exemption from legal obligations of general applicability) see Martínez-Torrón (2015).
- 41.
For a detailed examination of the Arbitration Act 1996 and of the limits it places on the adjudication power of religious courts, see Sandberg (2011, pp. 184–88). More generally on Muslim arbitration bodies in Britain see Bowen (2013, pp. 129–45). See also Wieshaider (2016, pp. 86–88). For a general overview of the law in force in the European Union countries, see European Consortium for Church and State Research (2014).
- 42.
This same author thinks that personal law systems can still fulfil a positive role if some conditions are met: “Le pluralisme des statuts personnels, du moment où il ne met pas en danger l’état politique et tout ce qui intéresse l’ordre public en général, pourrait représenter, de ce point de vue, une garantie de paix sociale dans une société pluriculturelle et/ou pluriconfessionnelle” (ibid., p. 22).
- 43.
Adragão and Leão (2016, p. 299), refer to the “default system” constituted in Portugal by legal provisions “available for citizens who do not want to be subjected to religious norms”.
- 44.
For a description of the process of interiorization and privatization of religion see Danchin 2011, p. 663 ff.
- 45.
The remark that State cooperation with religions is selective and privileges some of them over the others is recurring in the chapters of this book devoted to national countries: see for example Wieshaider (2016, p. 89).
References
Adil, Mohamed Azam Mohamed and Nisar Mohammad Ahmad. 2016. The status and implementation of Islamic law in Malaysia. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Adragão, Paulo and Anabela Leão. 2016. Portugal: Religious rules and state law. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Akgönül, Samim. 2009. Le statut personnel des musulmans de Grèce. Vestiges ottomans et réalités contemporaines. In Les statuts personnels en droit comparé. Evolutions récentes et implications pratiques, ed. Marc Aoun. Leuven: Peeters.
Aoun, Marc (ed.). 2009. Les statuts personnels en droit comparé. Evolutions récentes et implications pratiques. Leuven: Peeters.
Asad, Talal. 1993. Genealogies of religion. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
Asad, Talal. 2003. Formations of the secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Augsberg, Ino and Korioth, Stefan. 2016. The interplay between state law and religious law in Germany. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Azria, Régine, and Hervieu-Léger, Danièle (eds.). 2010. Dictionnaire des faits religieux. Paris: PUF.
Bastian, Jean-Pierre, and Messner, Francis (eds.). 2007. Minorités religieuses dans l’espace européen. Approches sociologiques et juridiques. Paris: PUF.
Bijsterveld, Sophie. 2016. Religious rules and the law of the Dutch state. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Bowen, John R. 2013. Sanctity and Shariah: Two Islamic modes of resolving disputes in today’s England. In Religion in disputes: Pervasiveness of religious normativity in disputing processes, ed. Franz von Benda-Beckmann, Keebet von Benda-Beckmann, Martin Ramstedt, and Bertram Turner. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bradley, Gerard V. (ed.). 2012. Challenges to religious liberty in the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bradney, Anthony. 2010. Some skeptical thoughts about the academic analysis of law and religion in the United Kingdom. In Law and religion: New horizons, ed. Norman Doe and Russell Sandberg. Leuven: Peeters.
Brooks, Thom. 2008. The global justice reader. Oxford: Blackwell.
Casanova, José. 2012. Globalization and the free exercise of religion worldwide. In Challenges to religious liberty in the twenty-first century, ed. Gerard V. Bradley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cavanaugh, William T. 2009. The myth of religious violence. Secular ideology and the roots of modern conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chew Li Hua, Nurjaanah. 2016. Legal pluralism and conflicts in Malaysia: The challenge of embracing diversity. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Christians, Louis-Léon, and Overbeeke, Adriaan. 2016. Religious rules and principles in Belgian Law. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Coertzen, Pieter. 2016. Religion and the constitutional experience of South Africa. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Coriden, J.A. 1991. An introduction to Canon law. New York: Paulist Press.
Danchin, Peter. 2011. Islam and the Secular Nomos of the European Court of Human Rights. Michigan Journal of International Law 42: 663–747.
De Tonnerre, Clermont. 1789. Speech on religious minorities and questionable professions. Available at https://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/284/.
Doe, Norman, and Sandberg, Russell (eds.). 2010. Law and religion: New horizons. Leuven: Peeters.
European Consortium for Church-State Research. 1994. The legal status of religious minorities in the countries of the European Union. Thessaloniki/Milano: Sakkoulas-Giuffrè.
European Consortium for Church and State Research. 2014. Religious jurisdictions and pluralisation of legal adjudication. The emergence of religious parallel jurisdictions in Europe (forthcoming).
Facchi, Alessandra. 2007. Customary and religious law: Current perspectives in legal pluralism. Jura Gentium. Available at http://www.juragentium.org/topics/rights/en/facchi.htm.
Fathally, Jabeur. 2016. L’application Des Règles Religieuses Dans Le Système Juridique Du Québec. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Ferrari, Silvio. 2002. Lo spirito dei diritti religiosi. Ebraismo, cristianesimo e islam a confronto. Bologna: il Mulino.
Ferrari, Silvio. 2003. The legal dimension. In Muslims in the enlarged Europe. Religion and society, ed. Brigitte Maréchal, Stefano Allievi, Felice Dassetto, and Jørgen Nielsen, 437–478. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
Ferrari, Silvio. 2006. Nationalism, patriotism and religious belief in Europe. University of Detroit Mercy Law Review 83: 625–639.
Ferrari, Silvio. 2013. Constitution et religion. In Traité international de droit constitutionnel. Suprématie de la Constitution, ed. Troper Michel and Chagnollaud v. Dominique III, 437–478. Paris: Dalloz.
Ferrari, Silvio. 2014. The Christian roots of the secular state. In Mapping the legal boundaries of belonging. Religion and multiculturalism from Israel to Canada, ed. René Provost. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ferrari, Silvio (ed.). 2015. Handbook of law and religion. London: Routledge.
Ferrari, Silvio and Pastorelli, Sabrina (eds.). 2012. Religion in public spaces. A European perspective. Farnham: Ashgate.
Fretwell Wilson, Robin. 2012. The Perils of privatized marriages. Marriage and divorce, ed. Nichols A. Joel.
Friedner, Lars. 2014. Religious parallel jurisdiction – Sweden. In Religious jurisdictions. Granada: European Consortium for Church and State Research.
Ghanea, Nazila. 2008. Religious or minority? Examining the realisation of international standards in relation to religious minorities in the Middle East. Religion, State & Society 36(3): 303–325.
Ghanea, Nazila. 2012. Are religious minorities really minorities? Oxford Journal of Law and Religion 1: 57–79.
Graziadei, Michele. 2016. State norms, religious norms, and claims of plural normativity under democratic constitutions. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Gozdecka, Dorota A. 2015. Religious pluralism as a legal principle. In Religion and legal pluralism, ed. Russell Sandberg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hill, Mark. 2007. Ecclesiastical law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Holm, Søren and García Oliva Javier. 2016. Religion and law in twenty-first century England: Tradition and diversity. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Hofri-Winogradow, Adam S. 2010. A plurality of discontent: Legal pluralism, religious adjudication and the State. Journal of Law and Religion XXVI: 57–89.
Hussain, Amina. 2015. Legal pluralism, religious conservatism. In Religion and legal pluralism, ed. Russell Sandberg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jamal, Arif A. 2016. Managing religion through “religious harmony”: The case of Singapore. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Kiviorg, Merilin. 2016. Accomodation of religious rules in Estonian law and practice. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Laurence, Jonathan. 2012. The emancipation of Europe’s Muslims: The State’s role in minority integration. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Maoz, Asher. 2016. The application of religious law in a multi-religion nation state: The Israeli model. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Maréchal, Brigitte, Allievi, Stefano, Dassetto, Felice, Nielsen Jørgen (eds.). 2003. Muslims in the enlarged Europe. Religion and society. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
Martinez Torron, Javier. 2015. Conscientious objections. Protecting freedom of conscience beyond prejudice. Routledge Handbook of Law and Religion, ed. Ferrari Silvio. New York: Routledge.
Martínez-Torrón, Javier. 2016. Striking the balance between religious rules and state law: Spain. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Mazzola, Roberto. 2016. Modifications et Contradictions de la Réalité Socioreligieuse en Italie. Profiles Juridiques et Sociales. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Mehdi, Rubya, Petersen, Hanne, Sand, Reenberg, Gordon, Erik, Woodman Gordon R., (eds.). 2008. Law and religion in multicultural societies. Copenhagen: Diøf.
Modéer, Kjell Å. 2012. Public and private, a moving border: A legal-historical perspective. In Religion in public spaces, ed. Silvio Ferrari and Sabrina Pastorelli. Farnham: Ashgate.
Moller Okin, Susan. 2008. Is multiculturalism bad for women? In The global justice reader, ed. Thom Brooks. Oxford: Blackwell.
Nichols, Joel A. (ed.). 2012. Marriage and divorce in a multicultural context. Multi-tiered marriage and the boundaries of civil law and religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Papadopoulou, Lina. 2014. Religious jurisdictions and the pluralisation of legal adjudication: The emergence of parallel religious jurisdictions in Greece. In Religious Jurisdictions. Vienna: European Consortium for Church and State Research.
Pereira, Jane Reis Gonçalves. 2016. The relationship between religion and state in Brazilian law. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Possamai, Adam, Richardson, James T., Turner Bryan S., (eds.). 2015. The sociology of Shari’a: Case studies from around the World. Heidelberg: Springer.
Prieto, Vicente. 2016. The Colombian legal system: Applicable religious rules. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Provost, René (ed.). 2014. Mapping the legal boundaries of belonging. Religion and multiculturalism from Israel to Canada. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ramstedt, Martin. 2016. Anthropological perspectives on the normative and institutional recognition of religion by the law of the state. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Rivoal, Isabelle. 2010. Minorité religieuse. In Dictionnaire des faits religieux, ed. Régine Azria and Danièle Hervieu-Léger. Paris: PUF.
Rohe, Mathias. 2015. Islamic law in past and present. Leiden: Brill.
Sandberg, Russell. 2011. Law and religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sandberg, Russell (ed.). 2015. Religion and legal pluralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sandberg, Russell. 2016. Conclusion: In pursuit of pluralism. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Shachar, Ayelet. 2015. Law, religion and gender. In Handbook of law and religion, ed. Silvio Ferrari. London: Routledge.
Schanda, Balázs. 2016. Borders of religious autonomy in Hungary. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Thio, Li-Ann. 2008. Religion in the public sphere of Singapore: Wall of division or public square? In Religious diversity and civil society. A comparative analysis, ed. Bryan S. Turner. Oxford: The Bardwell Press.
Thio, Li-Ann. 2012. Relational constitutionalism and the management of religious disputes: The Singapore «Secularism with a Soul» model. Oxford Journal of Law and Religion 1(2): 446 – 469.
Troper, Michel, and Dominique Chagnollaud. 2013. Traité international de droit constitutionnel. Suprématie de la Constitution, v. III. Paris: Dalloz.
Turner, Bryan S. 2008. Religious diversity and civil society. A comparative analysis. Oxford: The Bardwell Press.
Turner, Bryan S. 2016. Legal pluralism: Freedom of religion, exemptions and the equality of citizens. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Turner, Bryan S., and Adam Possamai. 2015. Introduction. Legal pluralism and Shari’a. In The sociology of Shari’a: Case studies from around the World, ed. Adam Possamai, James T. Richardson, and Bryan S. Turner. Heidelberg: Springer.
Twining, William. 2000. Globalisation and legal theory. London: Butterworths.
Twining, William. 2010. Normative and legal pluralism: A global perspective. Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law 20: 473–518.
van der Vyer, Johan D. 2012. Multi-tiered marriage in South Africa. In Marriage and divorce in a multicultural context. Multi-tiered marriage and the boundaries of civil law and religion, ed. Joel A. Nichols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ventura, Marco. 2013. Religion and law in Italy. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer.
Ventura, Marco. 2015. Human rights in religions. In Handbook of law and religion, ed. Silvio Ferrari. London: Routledge.
von Benda-Beckmann, Franz, von Benda-Beckmann, Keebet, Ramsted Martin, and Turner Bertram (eds.). 2013. Religion in disputes: Pervasivity of religious normativity in disputing processes. New York: Palgrave and Macmillan.
Wieshaider, Wolfgang. 2016. Religious rules under Austrian state law. In Religious rules, state law, and normative pluralism – A comparative overview, ed. Rossella Bottoni, Rinaldo Cristofori, and Silvio Ferrari. Cham: Springer.
Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology, vol. 2. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Williams, Rowan. 2008. Civil and religious law in England: A religious perspective. Ecclesiastical Law Journal 10: 262–282.
Woehrling, Jean-Marie. 2007. Les minorités religieuses en droit français. In Minorités religieuses dans l’espace européen. Approches sociologiques et juridiques, ed. Jean-Pierre Bastian and Francis Messner. Paris: PUF.
Woodman, Gordon W. 2008. The possibilities of co-existence of religious laws with other laws. In Law and religion in multicultural societies, ed. Rubya Mehdi, Hanne Petersen, Sand Reenberg, et al. Copenhagen: Diøf.
Zapfl-Helbling, Rosmarie. 2009. La problématique du relativisme culturel ou religieux, en matière de droit fondamentaux dans les Etats membres du Conseil de l’Europe. In Les statuts personnels en droit comparé. Evolutions récentes et implications pratiques, ed. Marc Aoun. Leuven: Peeters.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ferrari, S. (2016). Religious Rules and Legal Pluralism: An Introduction. In: Bottoni, R., Cristofori, R., Ferrari, S. (eds) Religious Rules, State Law, and Normative Pluralism - A Comparative Overview. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 18. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28335-7_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28335-7_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28333-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28335-7
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)