Fifty years after the conference in which Law and Religion Scholars held a dialogue with Constitutional Scholars in Siena, central issues of that discussion are recalled, and those of a future debate are envisaged, with the hope that both disciplines might benefit from it.
Contributi di Federico Colombo
Papers presented at the panel "The spatial ramifications of religion: new and traditional legal challenges " held at the Annual Conference 2022 of EuARe (European Academy of Religion), which took place in Bologna from 20th to 23rd June 2022 and was organised by FSCIRE.
SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa - 2. Il caso Casamitjana Costa v. The League Against Cruel Sports - 3. Il veganismo nella giurisprudenza italiana - 4. Pari dignità delle coscienze … - 5. (segue) e specificità del fenomeno confessionale - 6. Definire le convinzioni personali tra libertà del singolo e necessità di accertamento - 7. Spunti conclusivi.
Beyond religious pluralism. Veganism as an expression of freedom of conscience
ABSTRACT: A recent judgement of the Employment Tribunals and a following one of the Tribunal of Bologna recognized veganism as a belief worth of protection. The two judges went beyond the bounds of the religious sphere, exploring the horizon of cultural pluralism, which the Italian Republic, as a secular state, should guarantee. The sentences therefore represent a starting point for addressing the complex issue of the relationship between law and conscience, which recently acquired major importance. As a matter of fact, according to an authoritative doctrine, there is a tendency in all Western legal systems to leave moral or ethical matters to individual self-determination, in accordance with the personalist and pluralist principle. This contribution will then start from the examination of the sentences and then it will deal with some of the main problems concerning freedom of conscience and its protection.
SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa - 2. Il profilo soggettivo: la confessione Chiesa d’Inghilterra - 3. I contenuti: un’analisi genealogica - 4. (segue) la carenza di specificità - 5. Spunti conclusivi.
The Agreement between the Italian State and the Church of England. A Genealogy
ABSTRACT: On 30 July 2019, the Church of England signed an Agreement with the Italian State pursuant to art. 8, last paragraph, of the Italian Constitution. The Agreement is the first following Sentence no. 52 of 2016 by the Italian Constitutional Court, a judgement which was highly criticized by the doctrine as it gave too few attentions to concrete problems which affect minority denominations. As expected, the Agreement presents the same flaws of the previous ones to which is actually similar. More precisely, it seems to borrow entire articles from them, simply making systematic adjustments of the provisions. For these reasons, it seems possible to make ‘a genealogy’ of it in order to detect the juridical roots of its content and, therefore, a sort of evolution in the process of standardization. The operation seems to reveal a progressive loss of relevance of the negotiations on content, as the sole purpose of the Agreements seems to be to grant to denominational parties the set of privileges consolidated over time.
SUMMARY: 1. Introduction: From the Traditional Interpretation towards New Openings - 2. Some interpretative difficulties - 3. The Necessary Balance with Other European Interests - 4. Conclusions.
Interpreting Article 17 TFEU: New Openings towards a European Law and Religion System
ABSTRACT: Article 17 TFEU has been mainly interpreted as a “safeguard clause” aimed at preventing the EU from affecting (even indirectly) national disciplines religiously connoted. Although this traditional interpretation seems to find confirmation in the letter of the provision, in the systematic reading with Article 4 TEU, second paragraph, as well as in the original will of the parties, some scholars started giving credit to a different interpretation: the Article could allow the development of a European Law and Religion System. This article aims to investigate the current possibility for the aforementioned change of prospective. It focuses on three key factors: the interpretative difficulties concerning the Article, the recent jurisprudential evolution of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the growing axiological-systematic relevance of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. This work argues that Article 17 TFEU does not recognize a national competence ex ante in all religious matters; it only requires the EU to refrain from regulating cases that are concretely characterized by a high rate of denominational specificity.