CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 janvier 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } Communicated on 27 January 2021 Published on 15 February 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 4066/20 Chrysoula POMONI and Others against Greece lodged on 13 January 2020 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants, a mother with her two sons, complain about the structure and the data inserted in the birth registration acts of the second and third applicants. In particular, the first applicant complains about the requirement provided by Article 22 (e) of Law no. 344/1976 to declare her religious beliefs when registering the birth of her children. All the applicants complain about the existence of the pre-printed section concerning christening in the birth certificates of the second and third applicants. They argue that both the required declaration and the structure of the birth certificate with the pre-printed section constitute a violation of their right to freedom of religion. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the first applicant’s right to freedom of religion as guaranteed by Article 9 of the Convention due to the requirement to declare her religion when registering the birth of her sons?   2.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of religion as guaranteed by Article 9 of the Convention as a result of the pre-printed section concerning christening on the birth registration act of the second and the third applicants?   3.     Has there been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention due to the alleged lack of effective remedies in relation to the applicants’ complaints under Article 9 of the Convention?