For the purposes of organizing and discussing the RE syllabus, humanists are deemed to be on a par with other religious representatives. However, it is not like the situation in Kent is the norm across the country. Out of the 151 SACREs, some 67 have humanists as members of group A. The ideal would be to have members sitting in every group. The argument often given behind decisions such as those made by Kent County Council is that humanism isn’t a religion. But, Humanists UK have stated regarding the court’s decision That the law requires far more clarity and that this decision has a larger scope:

However Bowen is clear that references to religion in the relevant legislation should be read in a way which would ‘read in’ words extending the scope of possible group A members to include humanists. Reading it in this way is required by the Human Rights Act 1998. The law has now been unambiguously clarified in this area.

Furthermore, the new Bowen judgment restates the Fox judgment, that humanism should be included and given ‘equal respect’ in RE syllabuses. In fact, it is even clearer on this point: those syllabuses failing to be inclusive will leave themselves open to legal challenge.

The news that Kent County Council will not be going to the Court of Appeal means that the name Bowen now joins Fox as a key element of case law upholding the equal respect that must be afforded to humanism in education. It also represents a further instance of the Human Rights Act being used to clarify that humanism should be ‘read in’ to references to religion in other legislation – in this case the Education Act 1996. There may well be further examples in public life where this would apply.