هيثم الفقى
07-15-2009, 12:57 AM
X. v. ICELAND - 2525/65 [1967] ECHR 24 (06 February 1967)
THE FACTSWhereas the facts as presented by the Applicant may be summarised asfollows:The Applicant is an Icelandic citizen, born in 1919 and at presentliving in Reykjavik.He states that, in accordance with the custom in Iceland, he wasbaptised when he was only a few weeks old. This implied, in hissubmission, that the clergyman, the witnesses and his parents concludedon his behalf "a baptismal covenant with Jehovah in Heaven". Later, hewas also confirmed and on that occasion he had to confess his beliefin Jehovah.He states that he is no longer prepared to "abide by the baptismalcovenant" forced upon him as a child and he has, therefore, tried tohave his baptism annulled.For this purpose, he instituted proceedings against the Bishop ofIceland before the Town Court of Reykjavik, but his claim was dismissedby the Court. This decision was subsequently upheld by the SupremeCourt. He states that, according to Articles 9 and 10 of theConvention, he has the right to profess his "own beliefs, convictionsand thoughts" and he asks for "a binding decision that my baptism andconfirmation are annulled, making it clear that this be a fullcancellation of the promise I was forced to make at my baptism andsubsequent confirmation".As his appeals to the Icelandic courts have been unsuccessful he alsoconsiders that he has not had an effective remedy according to Article13 of the Convention.THE LAWWhereas an examination of the case as it has been submitted, includingan examination made ex officio, does not disclose any appearance of aviolation of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention andin particular in Articles 9, 10 and 13; whereas it follows that theApplication is manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 27,paragraph (2) (Art. 27-2), of the Convention.Now therefore the Commission declares this Application INADMISSIBLE.
THE FACTSWhereas the facts as presented by the Applicant may be summarised asfollows:The Applicant is an Icelandic citizen, born in 1919 and at presentliving in Reykjavik.He states that, in accordance with the custom in Iceland, he wasbaptised when he was only a few weeks old. This implied, in hissubmission, that the clergyman, the witnesses and his parents concludedon his behalf "a baptismal covenant with Jehovah in Heaven". Later, hewas also confirmed and on that occasion he had to confess his beliefin Jehovah.He states that he is no longer prepared to "abide by the baptismalcovenant" forced upon him as a child and he has, therefore, tried tohave his baptism annulled.For this purpose, he instituted proceedings against the Bishop ofIceland before the Town Court of Reykjavik, but his claim was dismissedby the Court. This decision was subsequently upheld by the SupremeCourt. He states that, according to Articles 9 and 10 of theConvention, he has the right to profess his "own beliefs, convictionsand thoughts" and he asks for "a binding decision that my baptism andconfirmation are annulled, making it clear that this be a fullcancellation of the promise I was forced to make at my baptism andsubsequent confirmation".As his appeals to the Icelandic courts have been unsuccessful he alsoconsiders that he has not had an effective remedy according to Article13 of the Convention.THE LAWWhereas an examination of the case as it has been submitted, includingan examination made ex officio, does not disclose any appearance of aviolation of the rights and freedoms set forth in the Convention andin particular in Articles 9, 10 and 13; whereas it follows that theApplication is manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 27,paragraph (2) (Art. 27-2), of the Convention.Now therefore the Commission declares this Application INADMISSIBLE.