Other provisions

– The Constitutional Court has prevented a referendum of a local community in Slovene capital Ljubljana on an adoption of particular spatial planning conditions, which has been aimed at prevention of the construction of a mosque, building that is traditional for the profession of the Islamic faith. This aim has been recognised as an intention to limit religious freedom of Muslims. The argument has stated that such a referendum would be inadmissible, since a human right cannot be restricted by a mere intention, but only by the simultaneous protection of rights of others, and in some other cases, defined by the Constitution (CC: U-I-111/04-21, par. 35). The ruling of the Constitutional Court has been initiated by the Major of Ljubljana and Islamic Community in the Republic of Slovenia.

– Church bell ringing is not included among possible sources of environmental noise according to state legislation. Occasional disputes in public nevertheless arise, mainly due to the expanding of residential settlements thus brought closer to churches. The Constitutional Court has explained that the mere visual or auditory perception of religious symbols (e.g. viewing a church or mosque, a religious procession, an adherent wearing religious clothing, a muezzin’s call to prayer, or the sound of church bells) cannot constitute forced exposure to a religion from which the state is obliged to protect the individual (CC: U-I-92/07, par.167). Guidelines of the Catholic Church (2013) are suggesting a search for consensus with neighbouring residents and recommending adjustments and time limitations of church bell ringing in agglomerations.

– The definition of public holidays and work-free days states three different modes of public celebrations: holidays as work-of days, holidays as working days and work-of days alone. The latter are including western Christian Easter, Pentecost, Assumption of Mary, Christmas and Protestant Reformation Day (Public Holidays and Work-off Days in the Republic of Slovenia Act, Article 2). The Constitutional Court (CC: U-I-67/14) has established that specific work-of days were selected due to their heritage in the territory of Slovenia and not because of their religious content. The choice for inclusion of heritage of some but not other religions is thus not connected with exercising of religious freedom and cannot be considered as discriminatory.

– Religious dress code is not regulated by the state law. Court decision, according to which a Muslim candidate for a post of nurse had to remove her hijab at work, was not discriminatory, because a hijab is not a part of dress code for nurses (Advocate of the Principle of Equality, 2018). Wearing of a hijab is an expression of belief, which is protected by the Constitution, therefore it is not possible to ask a pupil to remove it, unless a hijab would represent a manifestation which would cause intolerance and incitement of hatred. Any other treatment of particular pupils because of this reason would represent unjustified discrimination (Human Rights Ombudsman, 2006).