Christians do not have the right to wear crosses openly at work, ministers are set to argue in a landmark case at the European Court of Human Rights.
But the move will set the coalition government on a collision course with its own equality quango, The Equality and Human Rights Commission, which plans to put forward the view that workers should have legal protection if they wish to display tokens of their religious faith at work.
The Strasbourg court is due to start considering the cases of Nadia Eweida and Shirley Chaplin this spring. They hinge on whether human rights legislation protects an individual’s right to wear a cross or crucifix at work under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Eweida, a British Airways check-in clerk, was suspended from work in 2006 after refusing to take off the cross she wore at work. Chaplin, on the other hand, was barred from working on wards by Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust following 31 years of service after refusing to hide hers.
Both women argue that they were discriminated against and that their human right to ‘manifest’ their religion had been breached.
According to a document seen by The Sunday Telegraph, however, the coalition government has for the first time been forced to clarify its stance on the issue.
Ministers intend to argue that it is not a “requirement” of the Christian faith to wear a cross and, therefore, the situation does not fall under the remit of Article 9. As a result, employers are entitled to ban staff from wearing such symbols and to sack people who insist on doing so.
But lawyers for the two women claim that the government is setting the bar too high and that ‘manifesting’ religion includes undertaking activities that are not a “requirement of faith”. This means that they are protected by human rights legislation.
They also argue that Christians are given less protection than members of other religions who have been granted special status to wear garments or symbols such as the Sikh turban or Muslim hijab.
