The UK Supreme Court has ruled that the current provision of Christian religious education and collective worship in Northern Ireland’s schools fails to meet human rights standards and is therefore unlawful.
In a landmark decision, the court upheld an appeal brought by a Belfast pupil, identified as JR87, and her father. It reinstated an earlier High Court judgment which found that the teaching of RE and collective worship does not present religion in an “objective, critical and pluralist manner”, as required under human rights law. JR87 was attending a controlled primary school in Belfast in 2019, where she took part in non-denominational Christian RE and collective worship as part of the curriculum.
Her parents later wrote to the school, raising concerns that the religious instruction did not align with their own philosophical and religious beliefs. The school responded by confirming that its provision was “Bible-based” and that it followed the core syllabus for religious education. The family then launched a judicial review against the Department of Education. Their legal team argued that the school’s approach breached the state’s obligation to ensure children receive education that respects parents’ religious and philosophical convictions.
++ The importance of stimming for autistic people
In 2022, the High Court ruled in favour of the family, concluding that Northern Ireland’s RE teaching and worship requirements were unlawful. That decision was subsequently overturned by the Court of Appeal, prompting the family to appeal to the Supreme Court. Delivering Wednesday’s unanimous judgment, Lord Stephens said the Court of Appeal had erred in its interpretation of European human rights principles, stating it should not have departed from the High Court’s findings.
He said the distinction drawn between indoctrination and instruction that is not “objective, critical and pluralistic” was misguided:
“These concepts are two sides of the same coin. Conveying knowledge in a manner that is not objective, critical and pluralistic amounts to pursuing the aim of indoctrination.”
Lord Stephens also noted that requiring parents to withdraw their children from RE could place an “undue burden” on families. He stressed, however, that the judgment “was not about secularism” and did not suggest religious education should be removed from Northern Ireland schools.
Darragh Mackin of Phoenix Law, solicitor for the family, described the ruling as a “watershed moment” for education rights.
“The Supreme Court has confirmed that all children are entitled to an education that respects their freedom of thought, conscience and religion,” he said, adding that withdrawal mechanisms cannot justify one-sided religious teaching.
DUP deputy leader and former education minister Michelle McIlveen said the ruling was “deeply disappointing”, warning it would alarm many parents, teachers and faith communities.
“For generations, Christian values have shaped the moral character of our school system,” she said. “That heritage is not something we apologise for, nor something we are prepared to see diminished.”
Humanists UK urged the government to review religious education and collective worship laws across England in light of the ruling.
Education campaigns manager Lewis Young said: “You cannot respect families’ human rights simply by telling them they can opt out of a system that is, at its core, religiously one-sided. The UK Government must urgently move to replace these practices with inclusive assemblies and teaching that respect every child’s freedom of belief.”
