In order to establish a completely neutral working environment, a public administration may decide to prohibit the wearing of religious symbols in the workplace, ruled the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in a judgment handed down on Tuesday 28 November (case C-148/22).
In Belgium, a municipal employee whose managerial duties do not involve contact with users of the public service is challenging the fact that the municipality of Ans had prohibited her to wear an Islamic headscarf at work, a decision that allegedly infringes her freedom of religion. Having amended its employment regulations, the municipality now prohibits all forms of proselytism in the workplace, as well as the wearing of overt religious symbols.
Referred to by the Labour Court of Liège, the CJEU interprets the Directive (2000/78) on equal treatment in employment and occupation. It ruled that a public authority’s policy of establishing a completely neutral working environment from a religious point of view could be justified by a legitimate aim.
Equally justified, the Court adds, is the policy of a public administration which authorises, in a general and indiscriminate manner, the wearing of visible signs of philosophical or religious convictions, including in contacts with users, or prohibits the wearing of such signs in situations involving contact with citizens.
According to the Court of Justice, a Member State and any infra-State body, has a margin of discretion in designing the neutrality of the public service which it intends to promote in the workplace, depending on its own context. This objective must be pursued consistently and systematically, and the measures adopted must be limited to what is strictly necessary. It is up to the national courts to verify compliance with these requirements.
In 2022, the Court ruled that a company may prohibit the visible wearing of religious, philosophical or spiritual symbols, provided that the measure is applied in a general and indiscriminate manner (case C-344/20 - see EUROPE 13042/29).
To see the Court’s ruling: https://aeur.eu/f/9tv (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)