I'd have thought that that would come under the heading of contesting a historical claim of fact. As I say, I don't think the ECHR cases on this tend to invoke the belief protection but rather freedom of speech.

That's essentially the current state of the law. It's based on a Popper-type liberal premise that legal protection can be afforded to any religious or philosophical belief other than one which would wholly subvert the democratic order.

Second, if a Holocaust denier went full mask-off and said "I'm don't care about historical research, I believe this because I'm a Nazi", it would be immediate game over because Nazism (like Stalinism) is explicitly not protected under the EA2010 case-law.

In this context, my understanding is that when Holocaust denial cases have been brought under the ECHR in Strasbourg (this is relevant because ECHR cases heavily influence how UK courts approach protected beliefs) they have generally been brought under Article 10 (free speech) not Article 9 (belief)

Two things, essentially.

First, Holocaust denial purports to be a conclusion about historical facts based on research. The case-law on the Equality Act 2010 says that factual conclusions drawn from research aren't protected as beliefs.

My 1st trip to London was in Dec.'79, I was 19: coming from Rome, the presence of people from many countries and 'races' was something that really struck me & my friends
Funny fact: one night we decided to go to a disco, following advice of a guide booklet which turned out to be out of date! 1 ->

It should be more widely known that the English judicial system decided that eternal damnation is not truly a part of the doctrine of the church.

robindouglas.org/2025/11/06/t...

/End

I've written an article based on an odd episode from the "this is what happens when you have an established religion" file. The episode was scandalous in its time but is now mostly forgotten.

/2

Yes, perhaps!

I suspect that the person to write it would be, if not a Scots lawyer, then a practitioner of Anglican ecclesiastical law. There must still be some DCLs around.

I don't think it's mysterious why rightwing authoritarians don't like internationalist rules-based organisations, and it has nothing to do with "a different legal tradition".

I think you may be conceding too much to these people and their rhetoric of common-law exceptionalism. I would argue that common-law and civil-law systems are not really that different in practice, and the case of Ireland shows that the common law doesn't generate political Euroscepticism.

ICE won't allow communion to be given in detention centers because demons quail and shiver at the divine presence in the Host.

"Everyone will tell you that the wearers of this medal do not attach such significance to it, but on this account it is only more absolutely magical, having a dual sense and consequently a double virtue."

/End

"Below are placed, upon the same level, two loving and suffering hearts, encircled by twelve Pentagrams."

/5

"On the other side is the double TAU of the hierophants, the Lingam with the double Cteis or triple Phallus, supported, with interlacement and repeated insertion, by the kabalistic and masonic M, representing the square between the two Pillars JAKIN and BOAZ."

/4

"She extends her two hands in such a manner as to form a triangle, of which her head is the apex; her hands are open and radiant, thus making a double triangle, with all its rays directed towards the earth, evidently representing the emancipation of intelligence by labour."

/3