European court rules door-to-door evangelization cannot be banned

(LifeSiteNews) — The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that all 46 member states of the Council of Europe cannot implement a blanket ban on evangelization.

On June 9, the ECHR ruled in Velev and Others v. Bulgaria that Bulgaria violated the European Convention on Human Rights by issuing an overly broad ban on “religious propaganda” to prevent Jehovahʼs Witnesses from proselytizing door-to-door. However, while religious door-to-door outreach was banned, canvassing for economic or political reasons was allowed.

The case was brought by local Jehovahʼs Witnesses in Bulgaria, who argued that the city of Shumen had violated their right to carry out missionary work.

According to the judges of the European court, the city of Shumen unlawfully restricted religious activity and failed to define what constitutes “religious propaganda.” They concluded the law violated Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects freedom of religion, thought, and conscience.

Nicolas Bauer, a jurist and advocacy director at the European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ), which was part of the case as a third party, stressed that the ruling reaffirms the fundamental principle of religious liberty and freedom to evangelize for all religions in Europe.

“Evangelizing is often viewed with suspicion in a secularized Europe,” Bauer told EWTN News. “The ECHR ruling reaffirms a basic requirement of religious freedom for believers: the right to the same freedom of expression as everyone else.”

“It was permitted to knock on the door of the cityʼs inhabitants to sell a vacuum cleaner or promote a political program, but forbidden to hand out a Bible or a pious image,” he said, explaining the details of the case.

Municipal authorities justified their actions by claiming to protect the resident against “abusive or coercive proselytism.” The court rejected the argument and dismissed the alleged need for a blanket ban on door-to-door missionary work. It further noted that the authorities failed to demonstrate “the existence of concrete or repeated disturbances,” which is required to justify such a measure.

The court emphasized that exposure to differing religious beliefs is part of life in a democratic society, stating that “being exposed to religious ideas or beliefs that one does not share cannot, in itself, justify a blanket ban on peaceful missionary activities.”

While the case represents a victory for Christians in all of Europe who carry out evangelization, Bauer warned that religious liberty has been under attack by aggressive secular governments and courts across Europe.

He pointed to the highly controversial “buffer zone” laws in the U.K. and Spain that prevent pro-lifers from peacefully praying in the vicinity of abortion clinics.

Bauer stressed the importance of public displays of Christian worship and piety, because, he argued, “a freedom that is not exercised eventually erodes.”

He cited the decline of Eucharistic processions in many European countries as a concerning sign for a practice used to publicly express the Christian faith.