Contenuti per la categoria: Diritto ecclesiastico europeo

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. Esperienze normative - 3. Nello spazio giuridico europeo e internazionale - 4. Valida e inefficace - 5. Una ragionevole normativa penale - 6. Rigidità e flessibilità - 7. Fondati timori - 8. Us and Them - 9. Le culture tra eguaglianza e differenze – 10. Conclusioni.

Cultural Defenses between Monoculturalism and Multiculturalism

ABSTRACT: In an increasingly globalized world, individuals and groups are seeking to have their own culture respected, maintaining their cultural diversity in the face of growing globalization. These claims are connected with the formal conceptions of the principle of equality, which often produces substantial and discriminatory inequalities. This situation becomes even more complicated when related to the specific field of criminal law concerning cultural defenses. The author analyses the different approaches to cultural defenses, those oscillating from multiculturalism to monoculturalism, taking into account the Italian and European-international legal context.

SOMMARIO: 1. La direttiva 1999/70/CE del Consiglio del 28 giugno 1999 relativa all’accordo quadro CES, UNICE e CEEP sul lavoro a tempo determinato e i meccanismi di definizione della politica sociale europea - 2. Cenni sulla disciplina generale del rapporto di lavoro a tempo determinato risultante dal decreto legislativo 6 settembre 2001, n. 368, attuativo della direttiva 1999/70/CE, e dal decreto legislativo 15 giugno 2015, n. 81 - 3. La posizione ricoperta dall’insegnante di religione nell’ambito dell’ordinamento del personale docente della scuola - 4. La vertenza riguardante gli insegnanti di religione cattolica e le questioni pregiudiziali sottoposte alla Corte di giustizia - 5. L’eventuale incidenza dell’impegno dell’Unione a salvaguardare lo status previsto per le confessioni religiose dal diritto nazionale (art. 17 TFUE) - 6. La tutela antidiscriminatoria degli insegnanti di religione: a) l’assenza di una discriminazione per motivi di religione rispetto alla posizione degli altri supplenti della scuola pubblica - 7. (segue) b) L’inapplicabilità della clausola 4 dell’Accordo quadro - 8. La prevenzione degli abusi della successione dei contratti a tempo determinato per gli insegnanti di religione: in particolare le “ragioni obiettive” che possono giustificare il rinnovo - 9. Conclusioni.

The Employment Relationship of Religious Education Teachers in Italian State Schools before the Court of Justice of the European Union

ABSTRACT: The Italian legislation excludes the transformation of successive fixed-term contracts into contracts of indefinite duration in the teaching sector. This also applies to Catholic religious education teachers. The present paper analyses the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-282/19, which dealt with the issue of the compatibility of such a rule with the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999) and with the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion (Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000). According to the Author, the Court’s final indication for the referring court, to verify whether an interpretation of the national provisions which is consistent with the framework agreement is possible, is not easily practicable, because the “obligation on a national court to refer to the content of a directive when interpreting and applying the relevant rules of domestic law […] cannot serve as the basis for an interpretation contra legem”, as noted by the Court.

SOMMAIRE: 1. Introduction: paradigmes de relations et droit à la liberté religieuse, de l’identité à la tension - 2. Des paradigmes des relations État-Églises au droit à la liberté religieuse - 3. La force attractive des paradigmes dans le scénario européen contemporain - 4. Les paradigmes des relations État-Églises dans la nouvelle arène internationale - 5. Conclusion: une citoyenneté inachevée.

The “European Right” to Religious Freedom and Paradigms of State-Religion Relations in Contemporary Europe: a thorny cacophony

ABSTRACT: The article examines the dialectic between European national models of religious freedom and the paradigm of religious freedom shaped in the international order and in particular by the human rights discourse. The analysis of the relationship between the modern - national-centered - and the contemporary - individual-centered - paradigm of religious freedom reveals, on the one hand, the difficult but inevitable osmosis between legal systems in a multilevel system of rights protection and, on the other hand, the deep transformation of religious freedom in contemporary Europe.

Questo incontro nasce da un dato di fatto che è sotto i nostri occhi: in Italia non tutte le minoranze religiose sono uguali o, meglio, sono trattate nello stesso modo dall’ordinamento giuridico. Nel 1978 Giorgio Peyrot poteva definire le minoranze religiose in Italia un “coacervo anonimo degli indistinti”. Aveva ragione perché allora vi era una divisione netta tra la Chiesa cattolica da un lato, i cui rapporti con lo Stato italiano erano regolati dai Patti lateranensi, e tutte le altre comunità religiose dall’altro, che ricadevano sotto la disciplina della legge sui culti ammessi del 1929. Ora non è più così e continuare a parlare di maggioranza e minoranze religiose, come se esse fossero due blocchi monolitici, sarebbe fuorviante. All’interno di quello che era “il coacervo anonimo degli indistinti”, è necessario distinguere almeno due grandi gruppi di minoranze religiose, quelle incluse nel sistema giuridico italiano e quelle che invece ne restano ai margini e che nel titolo di questo incontro sono definite “le minoranze religiose escluse”.

Religious minorities escluded. A thematic introduction

ABSTRACT: In the contest of a wider pluralism of the Italian and of the European society at large, it is more and more necessary to try to guarantee an equal treatment to all religious minorities. But how to identify what a religious minority is? This paper points three possible ways and finally proposes a new possible tool to analyse the legal status of religious minorities in Europe.

SOMMARIO: 1. Il cambio di paradigma indotto dalla pandemia - 2. Complessità sociali e complessità giuridiche: le loro scansioni temporali - 3. L’obiettivo di “vivere insieme in una società democratica” - 4. L’esemplare negativo della pronunzia S.A.S. c. Francia - 5. La critica alla “cecità interculturale” del secolarismo - 6. La “laicità all’europea” e il principio del “dualismo giurisdizionale” - 7. L’apporto degli ecclesiasticisti: il contributo dell’ ‘accademia’ a una politica del diritto più inclusiva - 8. Il ritorno in auge dei paradigmi euro-mediterranei e gli sviluppi delle democrazie pluraliste.

Cross-cultural Dialogue and Religious Minority in Europe at the COVID-19's time. The Contribution of the Ecclesiasticists.

ABSTRACT: The spread of the pandemic COVID-19, together with the measures of social distance and lockdown, paradoxically have contributed to making the need to recognize what is in common between the most diverse realities increasingly felt. Europe has greater legal resources than other regions of the world to ensure genuine cross-cultural and pluralistic development of the democratic systems.

SOMMARIO: 1. Dai cittadini alle persone: la rivoluzione dell’ospitalità del diritto - 2. Le democrazie costituzionali e l’UE: il progetto di una sovranità ospitale - 3. L’ospite nel diritto cosmopolita: i confini del diritto di ospitalità - 4. Dall’ospitalità alla cittadinanza plurale: l’ospite musulmano e il diritto di libertà religiosa come ospitalità.

The hospitality of the right or the arduous journey of human dignity

ABSTRACT: The paper, starting from the idea of law as a producer and, at the same time, an expression of the hospitality of a political community investigates the progressive opening of state legal systems to the "stranger" in the age following the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The paper highlights the difficulty in the implementation of an effective multi-level protection of fundamental rights and the resilience of the ancient paradigms of Westphalian sovereignty. In conclusion, the role of the right to religious freedom is underlined as the right to hospitality for the stable construction of multicultural and multireligious societies.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa - 2. Brevi cenni sul contesto normativo internazionale - 3. La valenza della prassi internazionale: in particolare, il ruolo degli organismi internazionali indipendenti - 4. La giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo e la rilevanza delle convinzioni religiose dei genitori - 5. Segue: il rispetto del diritto all’educazione dei minori - 6. Il limitato rilievo dei principi generali a tutela dei minori e la necessità di riconoscere loro un locus standi in sede processuale.

Children's right to religious freedom: between international norms and practice

ABSTRACT: Religious freedom is considered a cornerstone of democratic societies, a vital element that contributes to forming the identity of believers and, with reference to minors, the course of their education and upbringing, accompanying them to adulthood. In international law studies, the right of minors to religious freedom, understood as the set of international obligations imposed on States, in both the negative and positive senses inherent in its achievement, has been little explored. The paper aims to identify systematic elements to help reconstruct the “minimum” content of a child’s right to religious freedom, pursuing two main lines of investigation: one relating to the exercise of freedom of worship in the various social contexts in which minors grow up; the other inherent in the educational project that leads them to adulthood. Recognition of the child of a locus standi in the independent court of law compared to that of the family members in charge of his care will help to realize the subjectivity of the child even in such a sensitive subject matter as religious freedom.

Sommario: 1. Introduzione - 2. La dimensione della ‘non credenza’ e le direttive costituzionali - 3. Fenomeno ateistico collettivo, eguale libertà e pluralismo ideale - 4. Il libero esercizio della propaganda come strumento irrinunciabile di realizzazione della dimensione comunitaria della miscredenza.

Organized atheistic belief and free propagandistic communication of the ideal-spiritual orientations

ABSTRACT: With an its recent intervention, the Court of Cassation has clearly affirmed that the freedom of conscience of non-believers falls within the broader freedom, in religious matters, ensured by the articles 19 and 21 of the Constitutional Charter. A freedom to be understood also in the negative sense, having to exclude, within our system, any form of differentiation for the protection of the free, individual and collective, explanation both of religious faith and of atheism. In this order of ideas, any limits and prohibitions to the exercise of the right to propaganda of atheistic associations integrate the extremes of discrimination that are incompatible with the constitutional and supranational norms to guarantee the freedom of expression of thought, the ideal and confessional pluralism, the dignity of the human person and the neutrality of public authorities.

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. Premessa teorica: la funzione di orientamento sociale del diritto - 2.1. Chiarezza dei messaggi normativi (a monte) - 2.2. Chiarezza dei messaggi normativi (a valle) - 3. Accomodamenti ragionevoli nel diritto antidiscriminatorio dell’Unione europea - 3.1. Perché manca una disposizione sugli accomodamenti ragionevoli basati su tutti i fattori? - 3.2. Perché ampliare la norma sugli accomodamenti ragionevoli? - 4. Dalla norma inderogabile al diversity management - 5. Ripensare il diritto antidiscriminatorio e il diversity management in una prospettiva interculturale - 6. Considerazioni conclusive.

Reasonable Accommodation Based on Religion in Law and Diversity Management

ABSTRACT: The ban on discrimination against workers grounded on religion is a fundamental principle enshrined in the European Union’s primary legislation and anti-discrimination law. However, currently, there is no binding provision at this level of legislation which imposes on employers to adopt reasonable accommodation based on this category. Many scholars promote the adoption of this measure based on religion. Still, the recent jurisprudence of the Court of Justice does not seem encouraging in this sense. In light of this situation, the article aims to investigate the reasons underlying the limitations of the hard law provisions and the implications of the shift from the level of the mandatory norm to that of policy and diversity management in accommodating religious diversity at work, with particular regard to Muslim women working in the private sector. European institutions seem to delegate the law-related function of social orientation to policy and diversity management. Various critical issues emerge from this process of de-juridification, although diversity management generates some good practices, also within the so-called Diversity Charters. With the aim to support the implementation of reasonable religion-based accommodation, this article suggests rethinking the anti-discrimination law and diversity management from an intercultural perspective.

SUMMARY: 1. Preliminary remark - 2. The Işık v. Turkey case before the European Court of Human Rights and its background - 3. The previous case-law of the ECtHR in connection with the Işık case - 4. A new protagonist on the Strasbourg stage: The Religious Affairs Directorate - 5. Follow-up cases and subsequent developments – 5.1. ECtHR’s case law – 5.2. Domestic law - 6. Instead of a conclusion: trying to analyse an identity crisis.