Right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief

This right is based on Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Australia ratified in 1980.

Scope of the right

This right ensures that everybody is free to think and believe what they choose, develop their own conscience, and adopt and practise a religion or belief.

This right has 2 key parts:

1. Freedom to think and believe: The absolute right to hold any thoughts, beliefs, or opinions and to adopt a religion.
2. Freedom to demonstrate beliefs: The right, which can be limited, to express and practise religion or beliefs publicly or privately, individually or in a group.

This right protects activities like:

• participating in organised religious rituals and ceremonies
• building places of worship or religious teaching
• publishing and sharing religious tracts and texts
• displaying symbols or wearing particular kinds of clothing
• observing religious holidays or days of rest
• following specific dietary practices or avoiding certain foods.

Under international law, the right to have or adopt a religion or belief is absolute, so no limitations of that aspect could be justified in a free and democratic society.

The right to demonstrate a religion or belief may, however, be subject to reasonable and justifiable limits.

Learn more about justification and other obligations on public entities to respect human rights.

Case examples

Freedom of religion not violated in vaccine mandate case

A security officer employed by Queensland Health challenged an employment directive that required him to be vaccinated against COVID-19. He was refused an exemption from the directive and eventually dismissed from his job. The employee claimed that his dismissal and the requirement to be vaccinated violated his right to freedom of religion and belief.

The Court found that the employee had refused to be vaccinated because of his personal views about the vaccination, not because of genuinely held religious beliefs. The court also found that the directive imposed reasonable and justified limits on the right to practise religious beliefs, given legitimate public health and safety concerns and the right to life and health of patients. Therefore, the measures were compatible with the right to freedom of religion and belief.

Drage v Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service [2025] QSC 22 (14 February 2025)

Freedom of religion considered in application to build new mosque (Victoria)

This case involved an application to establish a Shi’ite Islamic mosque in a Melbourne suburb near a church with a congregation of Assyrian background. Many members of the church had fled Iraq due to extremist Islamic violence.

Hume City Council approved the mosque application, but 10 local residents objected, claiming it would negatively impact the church community and the area’s safety. The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal reviewed the Council’s decision and considered the right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief under the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.

The Tribunal upheld the Council’s permit approval, stating that town planning should not reinforce divisions based on religion or ethnicity. Instead, planning decisions should reflect Australia’s history of welcoming all religions and fostering a society where people of different faiths can live and worship together peacefully.

Rutherford Ors v Hume CC [2014] VCAT 786 (14 July 2014)

Women-only swimming sessions help uphold freedom of religion (Victoria)

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal considered an application for an exemption to the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 to allow women-only swimming sessions. Community consultations revealed that many women in the area were not participating in sports or recreation due to cultural and religious constraints.

The Tribunal found that the women’s rights to practice their religion and culture was relevant to the decision. It determined that the exemption would allow women to exercise their rights to practise their religion and culture, which otherwise prevented them from using the pool when men were present. The exemption was granted.

Hobsons Bay City Council Anor (Anti-Discrimination Exemption) [2009] VCAT 1198 (17 July 2009)

This information is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice.