Selective Secularism and the Governance of Religious Diversity in German Case Law: A Case-Illustrative Socio-Legal Analysis

This article offers a case-illustrative socio-legal analysis of five decisions of German ordinary courts concerning Muslim prayer and halal food in prison, Islam-coded public performance in urban space, minority community mediation in criminal justice and male circumcision as a ritual controversy involving Muslim and Jewish communities. Building on comparative work on “moderate secularism” and using cases identified through the CUREDI database, it develops a focused account of selective secularism by examining how courts translate minority claims into legal categories within Germany’s formally cooperative framework for governing religion. The analysis distinguishes this wider Christian-centred recognition architecture from the more specific legal and institutional baselines operative in the selected disputes. Within this framework, the argument examines how, in the selected decisions, minority practices are assessed through arena-specific legal standards and institutional routines presented within legal reasoning as neutral, administrative or secular, including security, public order, ordinary institutional diet, restorative justice, bodily integrity and child welfare. Non-religion is approached as an implicit baseline within disputes legally framed as religious. The article contributes to debates on Islam and religious diversity in Germany by analysing prison accommodation, urban public order, criminal mediation and bodily-integrity controversies together. It shows how each legal arena defines what counts as ordinary, which minority claims require justification, and which forms of accommodation or restriction become possible. It argues that, across these decisions, minority claims receive less restrictive legal treatment when they can be translated into goals legible to state institutions, such as order, repair, child welfare or regulated inclusion.