09/07/2025 16:30
- 17:30
HALL: Personalentwicklung Seminar Room
Proponent:
Nakashima H.,
Shibata S.,
Yamamoto K.
Chair:
Shibata S.
Speaker:
Shibata S.,
Yamamoto K.
State involvement in religious education has changed significantly over time. During the Middle Ages, European schools were tied to churches, with religious education overseen by the church, which also served as a community hub. In the 19th and 20th centuries, countries like France and the Soviet Union, influenced by atheistic and rationalist ideologies, removed religious education from school curricula, promoting state ideologies instead.
After World War II, European nations emphasized religious freedom, affirming parents' rights to educate their children according to their beliefs. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) states in Article 26 that "parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children," highlighting parental primacy. Similarly, the Council of Europe's 1951 report affirmed parents' rights to guide their children's education, free from state interference.
Recently, this framework has shifted. Modern human rights philosophy increasingly emphasizes the "individual," sometimes over the family. Consequently, state intervention in parental religious education has grown, often justified by protecting children's rights. For instance, in Osmanoglu and Kocabas v. Switzerland (2017), the European Court of Human Rights prioritized "social integration" over a parent's request to exempt their daughter from co-ed swimming classes, arguing it prevented "social exclusion."
In Japan, similar trends have emerged. In 2022, the Child and Family Policy Bureau issued "guidelines" stating that parents limiting children's school participation or friendships for religious reasons could be deemed abusive. While protecting children's rights is essential, respecting family autonomy and parents' rights in religious education remains crucial.
This panel will explore how legal systems balance parental rights and children's rights from a comparative law perspective.