NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

within a considerably shorter period. The Court therefore ruled that the difference in treatment was not based on any ‘objective and reasonable justification’. Accordingly, there had been a violation of Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 9. The difference between a religious society and a religious community under Austrian law was also subject to legal dispute in the case of Jehovas Zeugen in Österreich v. Austria . 1081 In the present case, the applicant, Jehovas Zeugen, was a religious community, which was later granted the status of a religious society. The case concerned its complaint that it was discriminated against when it was a religious community. At that time, it had been subject to laws (e.g., the Employment of Aliens Act) concerning employees and tax from which it would have been exempt had it been a recognised religious society. In particular, it would have been able to employ ministers from the Philippines for the benefit of its Tagalog speaking members in Austria and it could have been exempt from inheritance and gift taxes for donations. The Court noted that the refusal of the authorities to grant an exemption from the provisions of the Employment of Aliens Act was also based on the fact that the applicant community was not a recognised religious society. Given its findings in the case of Religionsgemeinschaft der Zeugen Jehovas and Others , 1082 the Court concluded that the same criterion identified (whether or not the applicant community was a recognised religious society) could not be understood differently in the present case and its application inevitably resulted in discrimination 1083 prohibited by the Convention. 1084 The next case relating to a violation of Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 9 in respect of Jehovah believers is the case of Members of the Gldani Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses and Others v. Georgia. 1085 It concerned the lack of effective investigation into a violent assault on a congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses by a group of Orthodox believers. This fanatical group had attacked 120 members of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the course of a religious gathering. They punched and kicked Jehovah believers, and struck them with sticks and belts. One of the applicants had had his head shaved as religious punishment. Religious literature of the congregation had been confiscated and burnt while the Witnesses were forced to look on. The attack was filmed by one of the assailants. On the recordings, a number of the attackers were clearly identifiable. The criminal proceedings, however, were repeatedly suspended, allegedly because the attackers could not be identified. In view thereof, the Court concluded that the applicants concerned were victims of a violation of Article 14 in conjunction with Articles 3 and 9 of the Convention, because the police’s refusal to promptly intervene was largely due to the applicants’ religious convictions. 1086 The Georgian government had put forward no justification for that discriminatory treatment. 1081 Jehovas Zeugen in Österreich, cited above, § 34. 1082 Religionsgemeinschaft der Zeugen Jehovas, cited above. 1083 HALSTEAD, P. Human Rights . Routledge, 2013, p. 173. 1084 Jehovas Zeugen in Österreich, cited above, § 36. 1085 Members of the Gldani Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, cited above, § 140. 1086 EVANS, M. Manual on the Wearing of Religious Symbols in Public Areas . Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1. 1. 2009, p. 78.

204