European Court of Human Rights
9 June 2020
Facts
The two applicants are Israeli nationals of Jewish faith detained in prison. The prison authorities refused to provide them with kosher meals complying with the precepts of their religion. The applicants complained to the national court which accepted their complaints and ordered the prison authorities to ensure that the applicants could receive kosher meals on a daily basis and in sufficient quantity to meet their personal needs, to distribute the meals under the same conditions as for other prisoners, and to arrange for their storage for days on which they could not be delivered.
Complaint
They complained of an infringement of their freedom of religion and relied on Articles 3 and 14 of the Convention and Article 1 of the Protocol No. 12. They first argued that Romania had not adopted legislation recognising the Jewish religion and laying down the requirements in respect of food. They also complained that they had had to obtain a judicial decision in order to be recognised as being entitled to meals in accordance with the requirements of their religion.
Court’s ruling
The Court rejected the applicant’s complaint and held that the national authorities had complied with their positive obligations. The Court rejected the applicants’ first argument by noting that Romanian national legislation officially recognises Judaism as a faith religion and sets out the procedure for implementing the exercise of the right to freedom of religion in prison. The Court found that the decision whether or not to adopt detailed regulations on the practical exercise of a given religion falls within the margin of discretion of the States. It was also noted that at this time, only eight persons of Jewish faith were detained in Romanian prisons. Moreover, the Court found that the court of first instance had accepted the applicants’ complaints, had decided on a customised solution tailored to the applicants’ specific needs which derogated from the applicable rules. The judgment had been executed by the prison authorities who put in place a whole set of appropriate measures. For all these reasons, the Court found that the domestic authorities had done all that could reasonably be expected of them to respect the applicant’s religious convictions, particularly since kosher meals had to be prepared under special, strict conditions.