Abstract

For the last two decades the human rights discourse has been increasingly used across the world – one could argue that there has even been a globalization of human rights. This discourse has also been intrinsically linked to positivism, enlightenment and secularism. It is with this in mind that this article looks at how religious Muslim individuals and groups in France and Turkey have been appropriating the human rights discourse and its national, regional and international legal channels to challenge state secular policies and redefine the relationship between religion and the state. By looking into two specific case studies – the work of the Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF) and the Merve Kavakci case v. Turkey presented at the Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) – I investigate if groups and individuals have found through the use of this ‘authorized narrative’ a space where they can propose a new plural ethos that can better co-exist with their piety. This is a space where they can offer a more plural and de-centralized vision of secularism. To complement this analysis, I also highlight some of the possible paradoxes found within the human rights discourse – paradoxes that might enlighten us on the challenges of using such a discourse, particularly to ask for the right to display publicly one's religion. In other words, I attempt to shed some light on whether the use of a rights-based discourse by religious rights groups and individuals can help resolve democratically disputes between the religious and the secular – encouraging perhaps the democratization of secularism in specific contexts.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call