The Tribunal of Faith
Key questions for the jury and voting results
Case 1: Holy Shitstorm – Between Blasphemy and the Freedom of the Arts
- 1. Does the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of artistic expression permit the use of any kind of religious symbols and imagery?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: Yes. - 1.a. Even if it is legally permitted: are there not ethical and moral concerns?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: Yes. - 2. Should art respect the religious feelings of believers and avoid offending them?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: No. - 3. Should the blasphemy clause be removed from Austrian criminal law?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: Yes.
Case 2:Purloined Goddesses – The Cult of Appropriation
- 1.Should the bust of Nefertiti be returned to Egypt?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: Yes. - 2. In the interests of a globally just world culture, should, for example, a painting by Dürer or the remains of Empress Sisi be handed over to Egypt instead of the restitution of Nefertiti?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: No, as question 1 has already been answered with a ‘Yes’. Otherwise, it would be worth considering. - 2.a. Everything should remain as it is, because works of art and historical artefacts have long been the universal heritage of humanity and their specific location of exhibition is irrelevant.
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: No. - 3. Should Austrian institutions return art looted in the 19th and early 20th centuries to their original owners?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: Yes. - 4. Should human remains be allowed to be exhibited?
The jury votes 3 to 1 in favour of: Yes.
Jury’s note: If ‘Yes’: Communities from the contexts of origin of the human remains must give their consent. If ‘No’: Exceptions may be granted with the consent of communities from the contexts of origin.
Case 3: Bad Religion – In the Dungeons of the Almighty and His Theocracies
- 1.Is the legitimisation of theocratic rule in the form of a theocracy an abuse of religion(s)?
The jury votes 3 to 1 in favour of: Yes.
Comment on the ‘No’ vote: This vote is based on the jury member’s view that this is not an abuse, but rather a consequence of religions. - 2. Should it be permitted in liberal democratic states governed by the rule of law to campaign for the establishment of a theocracy?
The jury votes 2 to 2. Therefore, no decision is reached on this question. - 3. Should any attempt to introduce a fundamentalist religious form of government be prohibited?
The jury votes 4 to 0 in favour of: Yes.
