Samenvatting

Every now and then the question whether or not civil servants are allowed to wear religious and ideological signs divides the minds of the people, and leads to societal and political controversy. In this article we examine this controversy by contrasting two different conceptions of neutrality, an inclusive and an exclusive account. We illustrate why the former is to be preferred and hence that a neutral government should not necessarily ask its servants to abstract from religious and cultural expressions. This however does not imply that all kinds of expressions should be allowed. In order to prevent a slippery slope, we formulate a number of formal criteria that can help to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff: (1) the interpretation of neutrality in relation to a minimum and objective review; (2) the proportionality criterion; (3) the functionality criterion; and (4) the criterion of contact with the public.