Kokkinakis v Greece
Freedom of religion includes the right to try to convince others of one's beliefs, and convicting a Jehovah's Witness of proselytism for discussing his faith with a neighbour breached article 9.
Facts
Mr Kokkinakis, a Jehovah's Witness, visited the home of his neighbour, the wife of a cantor at an Orthodox church, and engaged her in a discussion about religion. He was convicted of proselytism, which was a criminal offence under Greek law, and sentenced to imprisonment. He had been arrested more than 60 times for proselytism since becoming a Jehovah's Witness.
Legal principle
The European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of article 9. The court said that freedom of thought, conscience and religion is one of the foundations of a democratic society, and that it includes the right to try to convince one's neighbour, for example through teaching, failing which freedom to change one's religion or belief would be likely to remain a dead letter. A distinction must be drawn between bearing Christian witness and improper proselytism, involving the offering of material advantages or the use of improper pressure. The Greek courts had not shown that Mr Kokkinakis had used improper means.
Related cases on religion, expression, assembly and association (articles 9 to 11)
- Attorney General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) [1990] 1 AC 109
- Demir and Baykara v Turkey (2009) 48 EHRR 54
- Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd [1993] AC 534
- Director of Public Prosecutions v Ziegler [2021] UKSC 23, [2022] AC 408
- Eweida v United Kingdom (2013) 57 EHRR 8
- Handyside v United Kingdom (1979) 1 EHRR 737
- Jersild v Denmark (1995) 19 EHRR 1
- Kudrevičius v Lithuania (2016) 62 EHRR 34
Studying human rights law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
