Some Remarks on the ‘Shechita Case’ of the ECJ
Abstract
This study strives to answer why the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) ‘Centraal Israëlitisch Consistorie van België’ judgment, delivered on 17 December 2020, triggered heated reactions. Similarly, sharp criticisms were articulated regarding the recent decision of the Belgian Constitutional Court (Grondwettelijk Hof), where the Court upheld the national legislation on the ban of slaughter without prior stunning per the aforementioned ECJ judgment. This study examines the historic, theological, and scientific background of shechita and halal slaughter with reference to the aforementioned framework. Furthermore, the study strives to introduce the pros and cons of the issue to help the reader decide whether the ritual slaughter — the slaughter of animals without prior stunning but following certain rules aimed at sparing animals from useless suffering — is as humane as the modern non-religious method, where the slaughter is conducted with prior stunning. This study also examines the different theological interpretations on the acceptability of stunning animals before slaughter. In the second part, the study briefly introduces the freedom of religion-related case law of the European Court of Human Rights, and thoroughly analyses its Cha’are Shalom ve Tsedek decision. Moreover, it examines the ECJ’s two ritual slaughter cases, namely the Liga van Moskeeën and Œuvre d’assistance cases, which preceded the Centraal Israëlitisch Consistorie van België case. As a brief excursus into the jurisprudence of the national constitutional courts, this study also introduces two cases brought by the constitutional courts of Germany and Poland. Finally, the third part thoroughly analyses the Advocate General’s opinion and the judgment delivered in the Centraal Israëlitisch Consistorie van België case of the ECJ to highlight the reasons for the different interpretations of the very same EU law.
References
Anil, H., Miele, M., Luy, J., von Holleben, K., Bergeaud-Blackler, F., Velarde, A. (2010) ‘Religious rules and requirements – Halal slaughter’, Dialrel Reports, pp. 1-3. [Online]. https://www.dialrel.net/dialrel/images/halal-rules.pdf (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Anne Peters (2018) ‘De-humanisation? CJEU, Liga van Moskeeën en islamitische Organisaties Provincie Antwerpen on Religious Slaughter’, EJIL:Talk! Blog of the European Journal of International Law (26 June 2018) [Online]. Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/de-humanisation-cjeu-liga-van-moskeeen-en-islamitischeorganisaties-provincie-antwerpen-on-religious-slaughter/ (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Anne Peters (2019) ‘Religious Slaughter and Animal Welfare Revisited: CJEU, Liga van Moskeeen en Islamitische Organisaties Provincie Antwerpen’, Canadian Journal of Comparative and Contemporary Law, 5, pp. 269-298.
Baron, S.W. (1938) ‘The Jewish Question in the Nineteenth Century’, Journal of Early Modern History, 10 (1), pp. 51-65.
Bartosiewicz László (2014) ‘Szívszorító hasonlóságok. Gondolatok a rituális állatvágás kapcsán’, Ókor: folyóirat az antik kultúrákról, 13 (3), pp. 77-81.
Bartosiewicz, L., Csiky, G., Gyarmati, J. (2008) ‘Emberiességi szempontok és a hagyományos állatvágás két példája’, Animal Welfare, Ethology and Housing Systems, 4 (3), pp. 130-149.
Benyusz, M., Pék, E., Marinkás, Gy. (2020) ‘Vallási diszkrimináció megnövekedése Európában és az arra adott állami válaszok I. Vallásszabadság a nyugat-európai állam-egyház modellekben’, Miskolci Jogi Szemle, 15 (2), pp. 148-173.
Berényi Mátyás (2013) ‘A haszonállatok halal vágása, a rituális vágás élelmiszerbiztonsági kérdései, hatása a húsminőségre’, PhD Dissertation, Debrecen, p. 63.
Berger, P. (1999) ‘The Desecularization of the World: The Resurgence of Religion in World Politics’, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Company, p. 143.
Bomhoff, J. (2013) ‘Balancing Constitutional Rights: the Origins and Meanings of Postwar Legal Discourse’, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 280.
Borhegyi, P. (vezetőszerkesztő): ‘Történelem 11.’, Kiadó: Oktatási Hivatal [Online]. Available at: https://www.nkp.hu/tankonyv/kiadasra_alkotokra_vonatkozo_adatok/tortenelem_11 (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Cuccurese, A., Sechi, P., Cenci Goga, B., Poeta, A., Cambiotti, V., Santella, E., Salamano, G. (2013) ‘Acceptability of Electrical Stunning and Post-Cut Stunning Among Muslim Communities: A Possible Dialogue’, Society & Animals, 21, pp. 443-458.
Delahunty, R.J. (2015) ‘Does Animal Welfare Trump Religious Liberty – The Danish Ban on Kosher and Halal Butchering’, San Diego International Law Journal, 16 (2), pp. 341-380
Editorial Comments (2020) ‘Not mastering the Treaties: The German Federal Constitutional Court’s PSPP judgment’, Common Market Law Review, 57 (4), pp. 965-978.
EFSA (2004) ‘Welfare aspects of the main systems of stunning and killing the main commercial species of animals’, The EFSA Journal, 45 (EFSA-Q-2003-093), pp. 1-29.
EFSA (2006) ‘The welfare aspects of the main systems of stunning and killing applied to commercially farmed deer, goats, rabbits, ostriches, ducks, geese and quail’, The EFSA Journal, 326, pp. 1-18.
EFSA (2013) ‘Scientific Opinion on monitoring procedures at slaughterhouses for bovines’, The EFSA Journal, 11 (12):3460, p. 65.
EFSA (2013) ‘The welfare aspects of the main systems of stunning and killing applied to commercially farmed deer, goats, rabbits, ostriches, ducks, geese and quail’, The EFSA Journal (326), pp. 1-18.
EFSA (2014) ‘Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a request from the Commission related to welfare aspects of the main systems of stunning and killing the main commercial species of animals’ (6 July 2014) (EFSA, 2014a), p. 270. [Online]. Available at: https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/45 (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
EFSA (2014) ‘Welfare aspects of the main systems of stunning and killing the main commercial species of animals’, The EFSA Journal, 45, pp. 1-29. (EFSA, 2014b). EFSA (2020) ‘Welfare of pigs at slaughter’, The EFSA Journal, 18 (6):6148, p. 113.
Farouk, M.M., Al-Mazeedi, H.M. Sabow, A.B., Bekhit, A.E.D., Adeyemie, K.D., Sazili, A.Q., Ghani, A. (2014) ‘Halal and Kosher Slaughter Methods and Meat Quality: A Review’, Meat Science, 98 (3) ISSN 0309–1740, pp. 505-519.
Geiger, R., Khan, D.E., Kotzur, M. (eds.) (2015) European Union Treaties. Munich, C.H.Beck Hart, p. 225.
Gliszczytiska-Grabias, A., Sadurski, W., (2015) ‘Freedom of Religion versus Humane Treatment of Animals: Polish Constitutional Tribunal’s Judgment on Permissibility of Religious Slaughter’, European Constitutional Law Review, 11 (3), pp. 596-608.
Grandin, T., Regenstein, J.M. (1994) ‘Religious slaughter and animal welfare: A discussion for meat scientists’, Meat Focus International, pp. 115-123 [Online]. Available at: https://www.grandin.com/ritual/kosher.slaugh.html (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Heinz, G., Srisuvan, T. (2001) ‘Guidelines for Humane Handling, Transport and Slaughter of Livestock’, UN FAO RAP Publication (2001/4), p. 91.
Jütte, D. (2002) ‘Tierschutz und Nationalsozialismus. Die Entstehung und die Auswirkungen des nationalsozialistischen Reichstierschutzgesetzes von 1933’, Didaktik Biologie, 2, pp. 167-184.
Kaminski, A.C. (2019) ‘The “Stunning” Reality Behind Halal Meat Production’, Environmental and Earth Law Journal, 9 (1), pp. 32-54 [Online]. Available at: https://lawpublications.barry.edu/ejejj/vol9/iss1/2 (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Kant, I. (1992) The Conflict of the Faculties (Translated by: Gregor, M.J.). Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press, p. 217.
Krajnyák, E. (2020) ‘A lelkiismereti és vallásszabadság vizsgálata az emberi jogi bíróságok joggyakorlatának tükrében’, in: Vadászné Bognár, G. – Dabasi-Halász, Zs. (eds.) Miskolci Egyetem Tudományos Diákköri Tanács, XIII., pp. 93-101.
Kymlicka, W., Donaldson, S. (2014) ‘Animal Rights, Multiculturalism, and the Left’, Journal of Social Philosophy, 45 (1), pp. 116-135.
Lerner, P., Rabello, A.M. (2006) ‘The Prohibition of Ritual Slaughtering (Kosher Shechita and Halal) and Freedom of Religion of Minorities’, Journal of Law and Religion, 22 (1), pp. 1-62.
Lipka, M., Hackett, C. (2017) ‘Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group’, Pew Research Center (6 April 2017) [Online]. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/why-muslims-are-the-worlds-fastestgrowing-religious-group/ (24 September 2021).
Lottini, M., Giannino, M. (2019) ‘Slaughtering without Pre-Stunning and EU Law on Animal Welfare: The Particular Case of Organic Production’, European Food and Feed Law Review, 14 (6), pp. 502-511.
Lucci, D. (2008) ‘Judaism and the Jews in the British Deists’ Attacks on Revealed Religion’, Hebraic Political Studies, 3 (2), pp. 177-214.
Marinkás, Gy. (2016) ‘Az őslakos népek védelmének aktuális jogi kihívásai’, PhD Dissertation, Miskolc, p. 406. – The theses of the dissertation in English language are online available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15rduuQHxlNNdlnt0UbKe7pJgyGMYNXW3/view?usp=sharing (Accessed: 24 September 2021)
Marinkás, Gy. (2017) ‘Cultural Rights as a Tool of Protecting the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, In: Szabó, M., Láncos, P. L., Varga, R. (eds.): Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law 2016 (Year of publication: 2017.), pp. 15-38.
Marinkás, Gy. (2018) ‘Az őslakos népek védelmének aktuális jogi kihívásai’, Miskolc, Private edition, p. 404. ISBN: 9786150038445 [Online]. Available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wfOWtEKTwz5k1JJqyW95k765SoDkT4bN/view?usp=sharing (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Marinkás, Gy. (2021) ‘A Covid-19 járvány európai uniós kezelése a „hatáskörök hálója”, avagy a rejtett hatáskörök révén’. Publicationes Universitatis Miskolcinensis, Sectio Juridica et Politica, Tomus XXXIX/1 (2021) pp. 138-166. (Hereafter: Marinkás 2021a). The revised and proofread version of the manuscript is available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11UWtJ0tcuo6o7w3-q6THjEM3QIn1Zm45/view?usp=sharing (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Marinkás, Gy. (2021) ‘Vallási diszkrimináció megnövekedése Európában és az arra adott állami válaszok II. Párhuzam a muszlimokat Európában érő – növekvő mértékű – diszkrimináció és a Közel-keleten a keresztények helyzete között’, Miskolci Jogi Szemle, XVI. (1/1), pp. 52-75. (hereafter: Marinkás 2021b).
Metcalf, M.F. (1989) ‘Regulating Slaughter: Animal Protection and Antisemitism in Scandinavia, 1880–1941’, Patterns of Prejudice, 23 (3), pp. 32-48.
Morini, C. (2010) ‘Secularism and Freedom of Religion’, Israel Law Review, 43 (3), pp. 611-630.
Pin, A., Witte Jr., J. (2020) ‘Meet the New Boss of Religious Freedom: The New Cases of the Court of Justice of the European Union’, Texas International Law Journal, 55 (2), pp. 223-268.
Porat, I. (2020) ‘The Starting at Home Principle: On Ritual Animal Slaughter, Male Circumcision and Proportionality’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies (2020/27).
Rahman, S.A., Phillips, C.J.C. (2017) ‘Religion and Animal Welfare – An Islamic Perspective’, Animals, 7 (2), pp. 1-11.
Rosen, S.D. (2004) ‘Physiological insights into Shechita’, The Veterinary Record, 154 (24), pp. 759-765.
Rosta, G. (2019) ‘Szekularizáció? Deszekularizáció? Merre tart a vallási változás a világban?’, Magyar Tudomány, 180 (6), pp. 792-803.
Salamano, G., Cenci-Goga, B. (2015) ‘Religious slaughtering, animal protection and freedom of religion’, Industrie Alimentari, 53, pp. 5-10.
Schanda, B., Csiziné Schlosser, A. (2009) ‘Újabb fejlemények az Európai Emberi Jogi Bíróság vallásszabadsággal kapcsolatos gyakorlatában’, Iustum Aequum Salutare, V (2), pp. 67-81.
Siegel, S.N. (2018) ‘A new exodus? Explaining Jewish migration from Europe after the Cold War’, Journal of Modern Jewish Studies, 17 (4), pp. 416-433.
Silver, J. (2011) ‘Understanding Freedom of Religion in a Religious Industry: Kosher Slaughter (Shechita) and Animal Welfare’, Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 42 (4), pp. 671-704.
Skóra, A. (2019): ‘Religious slaughter of animals in light of the EU and in the Polish law.’ Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie Studia Prawnoustrojowe 43, pp. 283296. (ORCID: 0000–0003-2169–5326)
Śledzińska-Simon, A. (2015) ‘Ritual Animal Slaughter and Public Morality: a Comment on the Decision of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal’, Verfassungsblog (29 Januar 2015) [Online]. Available at: https://verfassungsblog.de/ritual-animal-slaughterpublic-morality-comment-decision-polish-constitutional-tribunal/ (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Sowery, K. (2018) ‘Sentient beings and tradable products: The curious constitutional status of animals under Union law’, Common Market Law Review, 55 (1), pp. 55-59.
Steven Reiss (2000) ‘Why People Turn to Religion: A Motivational Analysis’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 39 (1), pp. 47-52.
Stremmelaar, A., Lucassen, L. (2018) Antisemitism and Immigration in Western Europe Today. Is there a connection? The case of the Netherlands. EVZ Foundation, p. 75. [Online]. Available at: https://bisa.bbk.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/BBKJ5998-Pears-Institute-Reports-NETHERLANDS-COUNTRY-REPORT-180420.pdf (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Szilágyi, J. E. (2018) ‘VII. fejezet: Állatvédelmi jog’ in: Szilágyi, J.E. (ed.): Környezetjog II. kötet. Tanulmányok a környezetjogi gondolkodás köréből. Miskolc, Novotni Kiadó, p. 214.
Ungvári, Á. (2021) ‘A koronavírus-járvány hatása a szabad vallásgyakorlás jogára a Visegrádi Együttműködés államaiban’ (The place and the expected date of publication: Keresztény Jogakadémia, 2021).
Ungvári, Á., Hojnyák, D. (2020) ‘Az Európai Unió egyes tagállamainak koronavírusjárványra adott válasza, különös tekintettel a vizsgált államok által bevezetett különleges jogrendi szabályozásra’, Miskolci Jogi Szemle, XV (1), pp. 122-138.
Večerek, V., Voslářová, E., Kameník, J., Machovcová, Z., Válková, L., Volfová, M., Konvalinová, J. (2020) ‘The Impact of Deviation of the Stun Shot from the Ideal Point on Motor Paralysis in Cattle’, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (20 January 2020) [Online]. https://www.mdpi.com/2076–2615/10/2/280/pdf (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
Végh Ákos (2016) ‘Állatokon végzett jólléti vizsgálatok és az elektromos kábítás mutatóinak összefüggései sertéseken’, PhD Dissertation, Budapest, p. 73.
von Holleben, K., von Wenzlawowicz, M., Gregory, N., Anil, H., Velarde, A., Rodriguez, P., Cenci-Goga, B., Catanese, B., Lambooij, B. (2010) ‘Report on good and adverse practices – Animal welfare concerns in relation to slaughter practices from the viewpoint of veterinary sciences’, Dialrel Report (02/2010). Research done within the framework of the Dialrel Project: Religious slaughter, improving knowledge and expertise through dialogue and debate on issues of welfare, legislation and socio-economic aspects (European Union, FP6 Priority 5 “Food Quality and Safety”).
von Wenzlawowicz, M., Holleben, K., Eser, E. (2012) ‘Identifying reasons for stun failures in slaughterhouses for cattle and pigs: a field study’, Animal Welfare, 21, pp. 51-60.
Witte Jr., J., Pin, A. (2021) ‘Faith in Strasbourg and Luxembourg? The Fresh Rise of Religious Freedom Litigation in the Pan-European Courts’, Emory Law Journal, 70 (3), pp. 587-661. [Online]. Available at https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj/vol70/iss3/2 (Accessed: 24 September 2021).
