The claimants contend this ban (total ban on the use of corporal punishment in all schools) is incompatible with their Convention rights.

The issue contested was that the respondent’s (muslim) exclusion from school, due to repeated violations of the uniform code, unjustifiably limited, inter alia, her right under Article 9 of the Convention to manifest her religion and beliefs.

E complained that the exclusion of his son, M, from admission to the appellant school had been racially discriminatory.

The issue was whether Ordinance No. XX of 1984, The Anti-Islamic Activities of the Qadiani Group, Lahore Group and Ahmadis (Prohibition and Punishment) Ordinance, 1984 violates the Pakistani Constitution.

The constitutional validity of provisions in the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act 1967

The authors of this communication refused to be drafted for military service on account of their religious beliefs and conscience.

The authors state that the Order, established in 1900, is engaged, among other things, in teaching and other charity and community work, which it provides to the community at large, irrespective of race or religion.

The case was placed in question as to whether the Indian Constitution also included the right to ‘convert’ any person to the former’s faith.

The case was filed on the ground that the provisions of the Bombay Act of 1950 contradicted article 25 (1) and flexibility to oversee matters of religion as secured by article 26 (b) of the Constitution.

The morality of cattle slaughter by the Muslim Qureshi community, which had been a lifelong occupation to prosper trade, was attested by the Hindu community on the basis of morality and humanitarian grounds.