In this series, contributors discuss the naming of religious entities as a religious freedom issue. Focusing on Australia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Poland, Romania, Spain, and Ukraine, they analyze regulations implemented or considered in these states to restrict the autonomy of religious groups in choosing a name. From the perspective of human rights law, this autonomy, as an aspect of freedom of religion or belief, is not absolute. States are allowed to proportionally interfere in the naming of religious organizations to balance religious autonomy against the rights of others or other legitimate values, such as protection of intellectual property.

However, a fruitful distinction can be made between religion-related and non-religion-related restrictions of religious names. The latter are presumably imposed in a general and neutral manner and can be similar to restrictions applied to political parties or business entities (such as a restriction on the use of identical names). But the former implies religious or religio-political goals of the state, such as favoring or disfavoring religions for certain reasons. While both types of restrictions can be proportionate or disproportionate, religion-related restrictions often provoke concerns over the religious neutrality of the state and possible discrimination. To address these concerns, the state should be especially cautious when adopting and enforcing such restrictions.

Posts in the Series:

Dmytro Vovk. Restricting Religious Names: Three Recent Cases

Jeremy Patrick. Legal Restrictions on Names of Religious Groups in Australia

Alberto Jose Ferrari Puerta. Your Name Is Religion: Public Authorities’ Assessment of Faith Groups in the Spanish Registration System

Cǎtǎlin Raiu & Mihai Miron. Naming of Religious Organization in Romania

Mieczysław Różański & Piotr Szymaniec. Names of Churches and Religious Associations in Poland