頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 從德國聯邦憲法法院「頭巾判決」論學校的宗教中立=Principle of Religious Neutrality in Public Schools: From the "Kopftuch-Urteil" Decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany |
---|---|
作者 | 許育典; 周敬凡; Hsu, Yue-dian; Chou, Jing-fan; |
期刊 | 國立臺灣大學法學論叢 |
出版日期 | 20061100 |
卷期 | 35:6 民95.11 |
頁次 | 頁117-168 |
分類號 | 581.2325 |
語文 | chi |
關鍵詞 | 宗教自由; 宗教中立原則; 宗教寬容原則; 頭巾判決; 公立學校; 宗教信息; 政教分離; 基本權限制; 基本權衝突; 比例原則; Freedom of religion; Principle of religious neutrality; Principle of religious charity; Kopftuch-urteil; Public schools; Religious messages; Separate of church and state; Limitations of fundamental rights; Conflicts of fundamental rights; Principle of proportionality; |
中文摘要 | 德國聯邦憲法法院在其「頭巾判決」中,探討國的宗教中立原則,是否會因為公立學校中的教師在課堂中穿戴頭巾(或其它宗教服飾)而被違反。做為實踐國家公權力的一環,公立義務學校及其教師,都必須受到宗教中立原則的拘束;然而,該原則以不同的方式及程度拘束二者:前者因此必須提供一個多元的學習環境,原則上必須對於各式各樣的宗教訊息保持寬容與開放;後者不得藉著履行其教職義務之便,偏頗於任合宗教信仰而影響學生的宗教信仰。此外,身為公職人員的教師,一方面受到基本權的保護,此與一般人民無異;另一方面,教師的基本權,相對於一般人民,會因為其-包括宗教中立義務在內的-教職義務而受到特別的限制。然而,教職義務必須確實根據教職的目的,而加諸在教師身上;以教職義務限制教師的基本權,也必須符合比例原則。以教師在課堂或學校中穿戴宗教服飾的案例而言:一來,由於各種宗教服飾及非宗教服飾同時存在於學校之中,學校原則上因此成為一個開放而多元的空間,便不違反公立學校所應遵守的宗教中立原則;再者,只要教師在面對學生時,能夠中立地處理具體宗教問題或傳達宗教訊息,那麼便無必要限制教師穿戴宗教服飾,否則便是過度地限制教師的宗教信仰;此外,教室中懸掛的十字架與教師身上的宗教服飾,雖然同樣是傳達宗教信息的宗教標誌,但二者間仍有重要差別不容混淆。因此,允許教師在課堂中穿戴宗教服飾,並不會導致國家違反宗教中立原則的後果。如果要在宗教中立義務之外,(再次)考量學生及家長的消極宗教自由,並以此限制教師的宗教自由,此時由於二者同為憲法所保護的基本權,而形成基本權的衝突。要解決此一衝突,仍然必須藉由此比例原則,求取最適當的平衡,並盡可能地讓相關當事人得以實現其其基本權。毫無理由地限制甚至完全排除其中任何一方的宗教自由,都是違憲。 |
英文摘要 | In its "Kopftuch-Urteil" decision, the Federal Constitutional court of Germany confronted the issue of whether the principle of religion neutral will be violated when a Muslim teacher of a public school wears a head scarf (or any other religious clothes). As entities exercising governmental authorities, public schools and their teachers are subject to the principle of religion neutral. However, there is a distinction to be drawn between public schools and their teachers in fulfilling their duties. The formers are required to maintain a diversified learning environment which in principle is open and tolerable to all kinds of religious messages. The latters are not allowed to discriminate against or in favor of any religion in class. Besides, a teacher in a public school is a public functionary, though nevertheless a national as well. On one hand, he or she as a national is under the constitutional guarantees of fundamental rights. On the other hand, he or she as a public functionary is subject to limitations of his or her fundamental rights, including the principle of religion neutral. However, such limitations shall be imposed upon public school teachers in accordance with the nature of their public functionary roles and be subject to the principle of proportionality. Take the above mentioned case for example. When different religious and non-religious clothes are all allowed at the same time in a school, this school will be deemed as an open, diversified and religion neutral environment and there is no issue of violation of the principle of religion neutral. Moreover, as long as a public school teacher provides students neutral religious information and neutrally handles religious problems among students, there is no need to prohibit him or her from wearing religious clothes as it may be in contravention to his or her fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality. The constitutional court decision of "Kopftuch-Urteil" illustrated a conflict of fundamental rights when considering the principle of religion neutral and the passive religious freedom of the students and their parents. This conflict can only be solved by means of considering all the conflicting fundamental rights of everyone in this situation and under the principle of proportionality. An optimal solution here will never be reached when the fundamental rights of an interested party are limited arbitrarily in order to protect other parties' fundamental rights. This will lead to the violation of the principle of proportionality and the constitution. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。