Romania is a semi-presidential republic with a multi-party system, a member of the EU and NATO.
Constitution and government |
Education and children’s rights |
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals |
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Constitution and government
Education and children’s rights
Family, community, society, religious courts and tribunals
Freedom of expression advocacy of humanist values
The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Countries: Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Central African Republic, Chile, Congo, Republic of the, Ecuador, Estonia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Japan, Kenya, Kosovo, Mongolia, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, South Africa, South Sudan, Suriname, Taiwan, Ukraine
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Croatia, Egypt, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ghana, Iran, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
No formal discrimination in education
Countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Congo, Republic of the, Ecuador, El Salvador, France, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Iceland, India, Japan, Korea, Republic of, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Mali, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, São Tomé and Príncipe, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Sweden, Taiwan, Timor-Leste (East Timor), United States of America, Uruguay
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
Countries: Comoros, Ethiopia, Gambia, Jamaica, Kenya, Lebanon, Niger, Philippines, Senegal, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom
No religious tribunals of concern, secular groups operate freely, individuals are not persecuted by the state
Countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Canada, Chile, Congo, Republic of the, Dominica, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Ghana, Guatemala, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Republic of, Kosovo, Latvia, Luxembourg, Micronesia, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, São Tomé and Príncipe, Slovenia, Sweden, Taiwan, Uruguay, Venezuela
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Countries: Austria, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Côte d'Ivoire, Czech Republic, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Seychelles, South Africa, South Sudan
No fundamental restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy of humanist values
Countries: Bahamas, Belgium, Costa Rica, Iceland, Jamaica, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Palau, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden, Taiwan, United States of America
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand
Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition
Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious
This condition is unusual in that it is applied in cases where there is some social discrimination, but it is not pervasive or nationwide. This condition is applied when there is sufficient background evidence to warrant the assertion that discrimination is not anomalous but widespread, and this condition may be applied for example even where if there is no legislative discrimination or where the non-religious may have legal recourse against such discrimination. However, societal discrimination (i.e. discrimination by peers, as opposed to state or legal discrimination) is not easily measured, and for this reason the Report does not currently have similar more severe boundary conditions to capture higher levels of social discrimination per se. In principle these may be introduced in future. However, we consider that countries with actual higher levels of social discrimination against the non-religious will generally already meet other higher level (more severe) boundary conditions under this thematic strand.
The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination
Applied when the influence of religion on public life undermines others’ rights, such as SRHR, women’s rights, LGBTI+ rights.
May be applied when the influence is overt (i.e. when religious laws are applied to undermine others’ rights) or covert (i.e. where religious pressure groups exert influence to affect policy)
Countries: Andorra, Armenia, Bahamas, Belize, Bolivia, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eswatini, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Hungary, Iran, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Liberia, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Nicaragua, Oman, Paraguay, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, Zambia
Use of Conscientious Objection clauses resulting in the denial of lawful services to women and LGBTI+ people
Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of expression and thought, religion or belief
Applied when overriding acts of oppression by the State are extreme, to the extent that the question of freedom of thought and expression is almost redundant, because all human rights and freedoms are quashed by authorities.
The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
Countries: Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, Eritrea, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
There is systematic religious privilege
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Belize, Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malta, Moldova, Nepal, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Tunisia, United Kingdom, Zambia, Zimbabwe
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment
Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
There is state funding of at least some religious schools
Countries: Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Comoros, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Fiji, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kosovo, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Morocco, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Pakistan, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Switzerland, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe
State-funded schools offer religious or ideological instruction with no secular or humanist alternative, but it is optional
Countries: Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Italy, Kiribati, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Moldova, Monaco, New Zealand, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Spain, Tanzania, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela
Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence
The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
Countries: Algeria, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Nigeria, Oman, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Turkey
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Countries: Bangladesh, Barbados, Colombia, Egypt, Georgia, Ghana, Guyana, Iraq, Macedonia, Malaysia, Poland, Samoa, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Uganda
Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
Countries: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, Chad, China, Iran, Kuwait, Mauritania, North Korea, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is severely restricted
Countries: Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brazil, Burundi, Central African Republic, Congo, Democratic Republic of, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Gabon, Gambia, Guinea, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Laos, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Philippines, Russia, Rwanda, Samoa, Somalia, Sudan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Expression of core humanist principles on democracy, freedom or human rights is somewhat restricted
Countries: Andorra, Armenia, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Congo, Republic of the, Côte d'Ivoire, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Myanmar (Burma), Niger, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Senegal, Singapore, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda
Some concerns about political or media freedoms, not specific to the non-religious
Countries: Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bangladesh, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Denmark, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, France, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, India, Ireland, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Korea, Republic of, Kosovo, Kuwait, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, São Tomé and Príncipe, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tonga, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Zambia
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state
State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Countries: Algeria, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general
This condition is applied where there are miscellaneous indicators that organs of the state offer various forms of support for a religion, or to religion in general over non-religious worldviews, suggesting a preference for those beliefs, or that the organs of that religion are privileged.
Countries: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burundi, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Zimbabwe
Official symbolic deference to religion
Countries: Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Botswana, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Djibouti, Dominica, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini, Finland, Germany, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kiribati, Korea, Republic of, Laos, Latvia, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Moldova, Monaco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Singapore, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States of America, Vanuatu, Zimbabwe
Religious or ideological instruction in a significant number of schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety
This condition highlights countries where schools subject children to fundamentalist religious instruction with no real opportunity to question fundamentalist tenets, or where lessons routinely encourage hatred (for example religious or ethnic hatred). The wording “significant number of schools” is not given a rigid quantification (sometimes the worst-offending schools are unregistered, illegal, or otherwise uncounted); however the condition is not applied in cases where only a small number of schools meet the description and may be anomalous, as opposed to being indicative of a widespread problem.
Religious schools have powers to discriminate in admissions or employment
Countries: Argentina, Armenia, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Eritrea, Finland, Germany, Haiti, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Lebanon, Macedonia, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Sri Lanka, Uganda, United Kingdom, Zimbabwe
State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the nonreligious
Systemic religious privilege results in significant social discrimination
Countries: Afghanistan, Angola, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ghana, Guinea, Guyana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Palestine, Paraguay, Qatar, Russia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Zimbabwe
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
Countries: Bangladesh, Comoros, Egypt, Haiti, Jamaica, Malaysia, Nigeria, Palestine, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Turkey
‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Countries: Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence
Blasphemy or criticism of religion is restricted in law and is punishable by a fine
Countries: Australia, Austria, Barbados, Brazil, Cambodia, Finland, Italy, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Moldova, Montenegro, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Saint Lucia, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Kingdom
Concerns that secular or religious authorities interfere in specifically religious freedoms
Countries: Angola, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Congo, Republic of the, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ethiopia, Germany, Ghana, Haiti, Hungary, Italy, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Nepal, North Korea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Serbia, Singapore, Tajikistan, Tonga, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam
State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Countries: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Brunei Darussalam, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
There is an established church or state religion
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Finland, Georgia, Haiti, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritania, Monaco, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Tuvalu, United Kingdom, Yemen, Zambia
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Countries: Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Dominica, Ethiopia, France, Ghana, Guinea, India, Jamaica, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Switzerland, Thailand, Tonga, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
Countries: Argentina, Armenia, Belize, Burundi, Cambodia, Chad, China, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Georgia, Germany, Guinea, Haiti, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Jamaica, Jordan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Lesotho, Libya, Malawi, Malaysia, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Palestine, Peru, Philippines, Samoa, Switzerland, Thailand, Uganda, United Kingdom
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
Countries: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Egypt, Hungary, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, China, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Grenada, Hungary, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Russia, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zimbabwe
Discriminatory prominence is given to religious bodies, traditions or leaders
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Bahamas, Bahrain, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kiribati, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Micronesia, Moldova, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Nigeria, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Tonga, Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
‘Blasphemy’ is outlawed or criticism of religion (including de facto ‘blasphemy’ laws) is restricted and punishable with a prison sentence
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Cameroon, Comoros, Cyprus, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Germany, Grenada, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Nepal, Oman, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Vanuatu, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced, or a single-party regime holds uncontested power, subject to severe punishment
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of belief
Countries: Argentina, Canada, Eritrea, Haiti, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Tonga
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities
Countries: Afghanistan, China, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Kuwait, Maldives, Morocco, North Korea, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans)
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Burundi, Djibouti, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar (Burma), Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
Religious groups control some public or social services
Countries: Algeria, Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Denmark, Eritrea, Germany, Haiti, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Marshall Islands, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Rwanda, Solomon Islands, Switzerland, Tunisia, United Kingdom, Vanuatu
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
Countries: Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Maldives, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
Countries: Argentina, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Haiti, Hungary, Italy, Pakistan, Peru, Portugal, Rwanda, Samoa, Sweden, Switzerland
Religious control over family law or legislation on moral matters
Countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Fiji, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Macedonia, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen
It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
Countries: Brunei Darussalam, Comoros, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, United Arab Emirates
Some concerns about children's right to specifically religious freedom
This condition may apply if specifically religious education, religious materials, or specific religious denominations are so tightly controlled that children are in fact over-protected from exposure to religion and are likely unable to explore or construct their own worldview in accordance with their evolving capacities. This condition helps us to classify states (perhaps with secular constitutions) which have criminalized specifically religious beliefs or practices. This condition is not applied if the restricted beliefs or practices are found to be outlawed due to their being of an extremist variety. While this condition does not directly reflect discrimination against non-religious persons or non-religious ideas, it does represent an overall threat to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; such restrictions could spill over to affect non-religious beliefs later; and they pose a risk of backlash against over-zealous secular authorities or even against non-religious individuals by association.
Countries: China, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Guinea, Guyana, Italy, Kazakhstan, Laos, Madagascar, Mexico, Serbia, Tajikistan, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Zimbabwe
State-funding of religious institutions or salaries, or discriminatory tax exemptions
Countries: Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bhutan, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Eswatini, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Korea, Republic of, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Montenegro, Myanmar (Burma), Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Suriname, Switzerland, Thailand, Timor-Leste (East Timor), Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
Countries: Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Comoros, Egypt, Eritrea, Malaysia, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Senegal, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan
Systemic Discrimination |
Mostly Satisfactory |
Free and Equal |
Constitution and government
The constitution and other laws and policies protect freedom of religion or belief, and freedom of expression and assembly. However, the government strongly favours the Romanian Orthodox Church and places some impediments on the freedom of minority religions and the non-religious to practice and promote their beliefs.
The government formally recognizes exactly eighteen religions. The eighteen, contained as an annex to Law 489/2006 “on religious freedom” begins with the Romanian Orthodox Church and consists mostly of Christian groups and one Unitarian church (numbers 1-15), followed by the Federation of Jewish Communities in Romania (16), “the Muslim religion” (17), and “the Jehovah’s Witnesses religious organization” (18).
<dreptonline.ro/legislatie/lege_libertate_religioasa_regimul_cultelor.php>
Religious privilege
Each of the eighteen recognised religions is eligible for state funding, with no comparable or alternative funding available for secular, Humanist or other philosophical organizations.
Under the religion law, state funding is determined by the number of adherents of each recognized religious community reported in the most recent census and “the religion’s actual needs,” a vague provision leaving room for interpretation. The Romanian Orthodox Church receives the large majority of these funds.
Since 2011, the Secular Humanist Association of Romania, Asociația Secular-Umanistă din România (ASUR) (an Member Organization of the IHEU) has run a popular campaign raising awareness about the opaque and politically biased funding of religion by the state, including the exaggerated state-spending on religious institutions. The campaign included billboards and social-media content remarking on the numbers of institutions of different types across the country: “18,300 churches; 4,700 schools; 425 hospitals”.
<asur.ro/proiecte/in-plata-domnului/>
During the 2016 elections, some members of the Social-Democrat Party announced that they have the backing of the Orthodox, and the local head of the Church campaigned for candidates. <romanialibera.ro/politica/partide/video–lider-judetean-social-democrat–inregistrat-in-timp-ce-povesteste-cum-l-ar-fi-convins-pe-mitropolitul-ardealului-sa-colaboreze-pentru-a-convinge-credinciosii-sa-voteze-psd-si-alde-434467>
Another attack on the separation of church and state was the fact that the Romanian Parliament decided to empower the Orthodox Church with organizing the festivities for Constitution Day – the day Romania celebrated 150 years since its first Constitution and 25 years since its current Constitution. The events took place inside the Patriarchy Palace and the only journalist allowed inside for the entire event were the ones representing the Orthodox Church press trust. <bn24.ro/dupa-intalnirile-cu-rusii-patriarhul-daniel-muta-constitutia-la-bor-si-interzice-accesul-presei/>
Challenging church-state relations
In 2015, Remus Cernea, the only openly humanist member of Parliament (and Honorary President of the Romanian Humanist Association, Asociația Umanistă Română), initiated three propositions meant to reform State-Church relations. The first concerned the public funding of the National Redemption Cathedral, a massive building under construction in Bucharest, for which tens of millions of Euros have been allocated for by the government and local mayors from all over the country, despite the majority of Romanians opposing the public funding of this project. In Bucharest, after the intervention and explicit request by representatives of the Romanian Orthodox Church for further funding from the newly elected mayors (local elections were held in June 2016), at least 3 million Euros were granted in the latter part of 2016.
The second initiative asked for the verification of all religious leaders that have ties with Securitatea, the secret police agency of the Communist regime. Both of these first two initiatives have been rejected by the Romanian Parliament.
The third initiative (also rejected, but with a possibility that it will be resubmitted), is to reform the system through which religious denominations receive public funding. The bill proposes a system somewhat similar to the German model, where every taxpayer can decide to which belief group they want to redirect their taxes. This proposition also includes the end of tax exemptions specific to religions.
<voxpublica.realitatea.net/politica-societate/trei-noi-initiative-legislative-pentru-modernizarea-romaniei-114909.html>
Education and children’s rights
The constitution and the law allow the establishment of state-subsidized educational institutions administered by recognized religions.
Public schools conduct religious instruction. The 18 recognized religions are entitled to hold religion classes in public schools. The law entitles students to attend religion classes in their faith irrespective of their number. The religious instruction is based on the religious affiliation of the students’ parents.
Intolerance in schools
In September 2012, the Romanian Secular Humanist Association, Asociația Secular-Umanistă din România (ASUR) (an IHEU member organization), urged the Education Ministry to immediately withdraw from schools all religion textbooks that promote intolerance and to take all necessary steps to prevent religious indoctrination. The association expressed concern about the persistent inclusion of such themes as sin, hell, and the devil in religious textbooks for primary schools. These concerns continue, not least in relation to alleged homophobic preaching.
<asur.ro/nu-intoleranta-discriminarea-homofobia/>
Again in 2015, humanist groups complained that manuals used in religious classes promote intolerance and focus disproportionately on violence and death. The subject was reported in the press, but the Minister of Education took no action, saying only that the manuals (used in many schools around the country) are not directly authorized by the ministry.
<adevarul.ro/educatie/scoala/exclusiv-manualele-religie-pilde-patologice-nu-avizul-ministerului-educatiei-controleaza-afacerea-1_5645e4b27d919ed50e2d391e/index.html>
Presumed consent for religious instruction
To be excused from religious instruction classes, students must submit a request in writing, an option that had not been widely publicised before the end of 2014, and which may be socially discouraged. Students were otherwise usually presumed to consent to religious instruction.
However, on 12 November 2014, after a legal case brought by a humanist, Emil Moise, the Constitutional Court ruled that the predominant practice of presumed consent for enrollment in religious instruction is unconstitutional, and given their nature the classes should be run on an opt-in basis.
<asur.ro/asur-saluta-decizia-ccr/>
In February 2015 several NGOs wrote an open letter urging parliament to accept and implement the ruling. In March 2015, the Ministry of Education asked parents to decide if they wanted to opt-in for religious classes. During decision period, the Orthodox Church and its affiliated NGOs conducted a national campaign (including a TV ad run for free on the national television channels as a public interest announcement) in order to convince parents that they must choose religious classes for their children. Many parents reported that teachers and school principals applied pressure to opt in to the religious instruction classes; in some schools parents were told that they must justify any decision to opt out, or students were told that they would not be able to finish the school year if they were ungraded in the religious classes, both of which statements were false. Also, in some cases the school principals told parents that they could not enroll young children in school if they do not sign the request for religious classes. Eventually, the Minister of Education reported that 89.75% of students’ parents opted for their children to take religious classes.
<mediafax.ro/cultura-media/cna-recomanda-posturilor-tv-sa-difuzeze-spotul-in-care-dan-puric-si-connect-r-sustin-ora-de-religie-13924545>
<hotnews.ro/stiri-esential-19534937-presiuni-scoli-pentru-ora-religie-sorin-cimpeanu-despre-directorii-care-cer-parintilor-isi-inscrie-copiii-daca-nu-vor-nu-putem-accepta-niciun-fel-presiuni-nu-poate-vorba-despre-obligativitatea-optiuni.htm>
Problems continued in September 2015, when again there were reports of parents and students pressurised into opting in to religion classes, including by the Minister of Education.
Family, community and society
In the 2011 census 86.5% of the population identified themselves as Eastern Orthodox Christians. The number of declared atheists and non-religious citizens increased since the last census, from 0.1% in 2002 to 0.2% in 2011.
<recensamantromania.ro/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/TS8.pdf>
The eighteen officially recognized religions have a privileged right to establish schools, teach religion classes in public schools, and receive government funds to build places of worship, partially pay the salaries of clergy, broadcast religious programming on radio and television, apply for broadcasting licenses for denominational frequencies, receive tax-exempt status, and own cemeteries.
There is often a presumption on the part of the church to social entitlements. In one instance, in Piatra Neamț, the church and residents of one neighbourhood were involved in a legal battle over the construction of a new church on a green space between buildings, to which the residents objected. The priest allegedly tried to obtain a construction permit without public consultation and without obtaining signatures from all neighbors (as required by law). In this case the priest, having failed to obtain a permit, filed suit against the neighbors that refused to sign in agreement with the building of his new church. After a two year judicial battle, concluding in September 2016, the local council decided to deny to construction of the church. Similar evasive practices are not uncommon in church construction in the country.
<hotnews.ro/stiri-administratie_locala-21293505-epopeea-bisericii-dintre-blocuri-consiliul-local-piatra-neamt-respins-actul-care-permitea-construirea-lacasului-cult.htm>
In other cities and villages, priests have sometimes refused to allow the burial of people that were not Orthodox in the public cemetery.
In March 2016, the MP Remus Cernea resubmitted for the third time a civil partnership bill, which would allow both same-sex couples and heterosexual couples to enter a civil partnership, but it was once again fiercely rejected in October 2016.
“Traditional family” as a challenge to individual liberties
Relations between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church have intensified, with officials of the Churches exchanging visits and creating common grounds on “promoting religious values and defending the traditional family”.
<digi24.ro/stiri/actualitate/evenimente/ambasadorul-rusiei-la-bucuresti-intalnire-cu-patriarhul-daniel-618489>
In November 2015 more than 40 religious NGOs of different cults united and formed ”Romania’s Coalition for Family” which grew to become one of the biggest challenges on freedom of thought and human rights in the country. The Coalition for Family began a nationwide campaign to ban same-sex marriage in the Constitution, by defining marriage exclusively as the union between a man and a woman. The Romanian Orthodox Church officially endorsed this campaign along with other denominations and reportedly used its priests to raise signatures to change the Constitution.
<revista22.ro/70251073/bor-strange-semnaturi-pentru-modificarea-constitutiei-familia-este-uniunea-barbat-femeie.html>
During the electoral campaign for the Parliament (to be held on 11 December 2016), one of the biggest parties in Romania, the National Liberal Party, signed a collaboration protocol with the Coalition.
<hotnews.ro/stiri-politic-21414558-conducerea-pnl-votat-protocol-coalitia-pentru-familie-pentru-sustinerea-referendumului-revizuire-constitutiei.htm>
So far, 78 other NGOs have organized themselves in denouncing the practices of the Coalition for Family and to protect the diversity in Romania.
<acceptromania.ro/blog/2016/11/07/societatea-civila-cere-parlamentului-sa-respecte-si-sa-protejeze-diversitatea-familiei-in-romania/>
Beside banning gay marriage, other proposals presented by the Coalition for Family include a celibacy tax, the banning of adoption by single parents and the active discouragement of sexual intercourse between unmarried persons.
<coalitiapentrufamilie.ro/manifestul-program-romania-pentru-familie/>
‘Homophobic’ referendum
According to Article 48 of the Romanian constitution, the family “is founded on the freely consented marriage of the spouses”. In October 2018, Romanians were asked to vote on whether they wanted the constitution changed to specify that marriage is restricted to unions between a man and a woman. The referendum followed a citizens’ initiative launched by Coalitia pentru Familie, or the Coalition for Family, which was able to gather 3 million signatures demanding to: “protect the traditional definition of marriage”. The minimum required number of signatures to initiate the process for a constitutional amendment referendum is 500,000.
In order for the referendum to be valid, participation must meet a minimum of 30 percent of the electorate. Despite the support of the powerful Orthodox church and the unusual step by the government of extending the vote to two days instead of one, only 20 percent of registered voters cast their ballots and the referendum failed.
<bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45745083>
Some commentators saw the referendum as an attempt by the government to divert attention from various corruption scandals surrounding the ruling party.
Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values
There is no “blasphemy” law in force. Freedom of expression specifically for religious groups is only restricted to the extent that it “must not infringe upon […] fundamental human rights and liberties” of others. While secularist politics and humanist views often meet vitriolic opposition, there are no formal restrictions on their free expression.
There were concerns about a political push to recriminalise “insult” and “libel” in 2013, repeated again again in 2015.
<en.rsf.org/romania-in-an-attack-on-free-expression-20-12-2013,45657.html>
<digi24.ro/Stiri/Digi24/Actualitate/Politica/Proiect+Pedepse+cu+inchisoarea+pentru+insulta+si+calomnie>
In January 2016, the two biggest humanist NGOs in Romania initiated a two-year collaboration project aimed at promoting humanist values all across the country. In August 2016 they organised the first Humanist Camp in the country, in October 2016 the first training for humanist parents took place, and in November 2016 they launched The Humanist Blog.
<http://umanismromania.ro/blog/>