Stephanie is the head of a real estate agency and has recently hired Selma and Younes, two young Muslim employees. Selma wears a headscarf and Younes prays at his workplace, which doesn’t bother Stephanie or violate company regulations. However, Selma and Younes have recently been in conflict with Vincent, who accuses them of ‘proselytizing’. He informs Stephanie, who is unsure what to think: can the actions of her new recruits be considered proselytizing?

What does the law say?

Proselytism is defined as the attitude of people seeking to convert others to their faith. By extension, proselytism refers to the zeal deployed to rally people to a religion or dogma. A proselytizing attitude is therefore characterized by positive and concrete actions, not just by observing certain religious precepts, for example by distributing holy books in public spaces, engaging in discussions between different people, or other forms of promotion.

Belgian law regulates the issue of proselytism mainly with regard to religious freedom. The Belgian Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and belief in its Article 19, which states that “Freedom of worship, its public practice, and freedom to demonstrate one’s opinions on all matters are guaranteed, except for the repression of offenses committed when using these freedoms”. “

Let us also recall Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.“

Thus, proselytism concerns freedom of expression, freedom of conscience, and religious freedom.

In its judgment Kokkinakis v. Greece of May 25, 1993, t he European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that proselytism, as the sharing or spreading of religious beliefs, is protected by Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, unless it is accompanied by pressure or abusive tactics. This judgment also clarifies the interpretation of Article 9 of the ECHR regarding proselytism. It can be prohibited, in accordance with Article 9 paragraph 2, in the event that:

• A legal norm is provided for this purpose,
• It pursues a legitimate objective,
• And it is necessary in a democratic society.

In this case, the Court found a violation of Article 9 because it considered that penalizing the act of discussing religion and giving books to a person in their home is not necessary and even disproportionate.

The same court establishes limits to this principle, distinguishing between proselytism that is protected by Article 9 of the ECHR and active or abusive proselytism that can be sanctioned. In the judgment Larissis and Others v. Greece of the ECHR of February 24, 1998,
The ECHR confirmed that abusive proselytism, particularly by state agents in positions of authority, can be restricted to protect the rights of others.

In Belgium, there are norms aimed at pursuing such objectives. For example, proselytism is prohibited in public schools, under Article 24 of the Constitution establishing neutral education and, more specifically for French-speaking education, by a decree of March 31, 1994 defining the neutrality of Community education (see practical sheet).

As for religious practice itself, such as wearing a headscarf or praying in the workplace, it cannot be considered as abusive proselytism per se and also falls under freedom of worship. Vincent therefore has no grounds to reproach such practices by Selma and Younes, as long as the work regulations do not specify anything in this regard.

In summary, although proselytism is allowed in Belgium insofar as it falls under religious freedom, freedom of expression, and freedom of conscience, it must respect the limits imposed by law, such as respect for the rights of others, non-coercion, and absence of disruption to public order. A balance is struck between the freedom to promote a belief and other freedoms. However, there is a distinction between religious practices and proselytizing attitudes, and the fact that an employee wears a distinctive sign or prays in the workplace does not in itself constitute a harmful, abusive, or coercive proselytizing attitude.

What should I do?

• Engage in dialogue early on to end any misunderstandings.
• Communicate the legislation in force as well as relevant court decisions.
• Initiate an internal procedure within your organization to amicably settle potential conflicts.
• Refer the matter to the union delegation, the Committee for Prevention and Protection at Work (CPPT) or any other workers’ representative in your structure in case of disputes.
• Contact UNIA to report discrimination.
• Contact the legal service of Equitas who will accompany you at each step.

APPLICABLE REFERENCES

• Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
• Articles 19 and 24 of the Belgian Constitution.
• Law of May 10, 2007 to combat certain forms of discrimination.
• CJEU March 14, 2017: Asma Bougnaoui and Association de défense des droits de l’homme (ADDH) v Micropole SA.
• CJEU March 14, 2017: Achbita v G4S Secure Solutions.
• CJEU 15 July 2021, IX and MJ v Wabe and MH Müller Handels GmbH.
• ECHR May 25, 1993 Kokkinakis v. Greece
• ECHR, Larissis and Others v. Greece, February 24, 1998
• United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
• ILO Convention No. 111 concerning Discrimination (Employment and Occupation).
• Council Directive 2000/78/EC of November 27, 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation.
• Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (Recast Directive).