After Crucifixes, Now Icons: Europe’s Judges Target Greece

Once again, the European Court of Human Rights goes after the display of Christian symbols in public spaces, first Crucifixes in Italy, now icons in Greece.

From The European Conservative

By Hélène De Lauzun, PhD

A new case before Europe’s human rights court could reopen a long-running fight over Christianity’s place in public life—this time inside Greece’s courtrooms.

For several years now, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has made the presence of Christian images and symbols in public spaces one of its recurring battles. After Italy was pressured through litigation to remove crucifixes from its schools, Greece is now being targeted over the presence of holy icons in its courts. Italy ultimately won its case. Will Greece succeed in safeguarding this essential part of its historical and spiritual heritage?

Some cases have a long life. In 2009, the ECtHR issued a ruling requiring Italy to remove crucifixes from public schools. The unprecedented mobilisation of twenty-one European states alongside Italy forced it to back down, and two years later, in 2011, in the case known as Lautsi v. Italy, it finally handed down a ruling in favour of Italy’s position, allowing it to keep its crucifixes.

The Lautsi case was followed by a period of relative calm in the fight against the presence of religious symbols (Christian, needless to say) in public spaces.

In 2020, a request was filed inviting the ECtHR to take up another contentious case: the presence of Orthodox icons in Greek courts.

The offensive came from an atheist association, the Union of Atheists of Greece. The first appeals were lodged in 2018 and 2019. The applicants requested the removal of Christian symbols displayed in the courtroom during hearings on religious matters. They argued that the presence of these icons was discriminatory, compromised the objectivity of the court, and violated their right to a fair trial, as well as their right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.

The Greek courts rejected the requests to remove the icons, leading the association to take the case to the ECtHR.

Today, the ECtHR is taking up the case to propose a revision of the Lautsi case law, on the grounds that it must be “living, dynamic and evolving.”

On closer inspection, the 2011 ruling undeniably left considerable leeway for states wishing to publicly display religious symbols. The ruling first considered that the presence of a crucifix was not an act of proselytism—unlike, for example, the wearing of a veil or religious education classes. It also recognised a “margin of appreciation” for states if they wished to give “prominent visibility” to a majority religion in the country—or even, as is the case in some European states, in the case of an “official religion.”

The Greek case should fall squarely within the framework established by the Lautsi judgment, as pointed out by ADF International, which filed a brief in support of the Greek cause.

“The display of religious symbols in public spaces is in no way incompatible with international human rights law. Public spaces should not be stripped of crosses, icons or other symbols of significant religious, cultural and historical value in the name of pluralism,” said Adina Portaru, senior counsel at ADF International.

Today, Greece is an officially Orthodox Christian state and confirmed its confessional character during a constitutional revision in 2019. The revised Greek constitution states that “the dominant religion in Greece is that of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ.” Furthermore, it recognises “Our Lord Jesus Christ as the supreme spiritual leader.” There is no doubt that such formulations are not to the liking of the judges of the ECtHR.

As Nicolas Bauer of the European Centre for Law and Justice points out in an opinion piece published on Tuesday, February 3rd, in Le Figaro, the ECHR should not have to rule on the identity or essence of a country, but only on practices that contravene individual freedoms. He points out that the governments most often condemned by the ECtHR, including in matters of religious freedom, are those of secular states—proof that the constitutional identity of a state, even when it includes a religious and cultural dimension, is not necessarily linked to coercive practices towards its citizens.

Under these circumstances, the ECtHR has no business intervening in the Greek practice of displaying icons in courts. “Forcing Greece to remove icons from the walls of its courts would do nothing to advance individual freedoms, but would be a loss in terms of civilisation,” explains Bauer.

The Greek government is due to publish a memorandum on the subject on February 19th, 2026, prior to the ECtHR’s ruling. Bowing to the demands of militant atheists would send a disastrous signal in a global context of growing anti-Christian persecution in Europe.

Pictured: An icon of Christ, the Just Judge