Alliance Defending Freedom International has intervened in a case before the European Court of Human Rights that goes to the heart of religious freedom in public life. The case, which originated in Greece, concerns the display of Christian symbols in a courtroom and whether such symbols must be removed in the name of “state neutrality.”

ADF International is arguing that public spaces should not be stripped of symbols that carry deep religious, cultural, and historical significance. Far from violating freedom of religion, such symbols reflect the rich spiritual history and identity of European nations. Removing them does not create neutrality – it enforces a particular worldview that treats religious expression, and Christianity in particular, as something that must be hidden or excluded from public life.

Europe’s legal and cultural traditions were shaped over centuries by Christianity. As ADF International Senior Counsel Adina Portaru stated:

The European Convention on Human Rights robustly protects freedom of religion. Culturally rooted religiou symbols or artwork, such as centuries-old Orthodox Christian icons, do not impose a belief on anyone.

These developments in Europe should concern Australians as well. While the context differs, the same underlying attitude is increasingly visible here at home. The takeover of Calvary Hospital by the ACT Government raised serious concerns about whether faith-based institutions are still free to operate according to their religious ethos.

Similarly, cases like that of Matthew Squires, who lost his job after expressing Christian views, show how expressions of belief can now attract harsh professional consequences.

In each of these cases, the pattern is familiar: religious belief is tolerated in theory but penalised in practice. Public symbols are removed. Faith-based institutions are pressured to conform. Individuals must keep their faith private or risk discipline or dismisse for beliefs that were once uncontroversial.

At HRLA, we believe religious freedom means more than the right to believe quietly. It includes the freedom to live openly according to one’s faith, to express it publicly, and to see it reflected – lawfully and respectfully – in the institutions and culture shaped by it.

Australia would do well to pay attention. Once religious expression is pushed out of public life in the name of neutrality, reclaiming genuine freedom becomes far harder.