Contenuti per la categoria: Giurisdizioni e tribunali ecclesiastici

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa - 2. L'art. 60 del Decreto generale sul matrimonio canonico della CEI e l’obbligo di delibare - 3. La fase dell’indagine pregiudiziale e quella introduttiva - 4. La fase istruttoria e quella discussoria - 5. La fase decisoria - 5.1. Della redazione della sentenza - 5.2. Dell’interferenza delle questioni patrimoniali - 6. Conclusioni.

Reflections on marriage nullity proceedings in the context of the Italian exequatur procedure

ABSTRACT: The obligation to request the exequatur of the ecclesiastical sentence of marriage nullity, foreseen by the art. 60 of the General decree on the canonical matrimony of the CEI, constitutes in Italy a legal duty for the faithful who determines, for judges and lawyers, a corresponding moral duty (but which for lawyers can also become legal, under the professional mandate) of collaboration, during the various prejudicial and judicial phases of the canonical proceedings, in acquiring and making available all the useful elements in view of a exequatur procedure.

Sommario: 1. Nozioni introduttive - 1.1. Premessa - 1.2. Profili evolutivi del potere costituente nella Chiesa - 1.3. Verso una nuova costituzione materiale? - 2. Un sistema costituzionale non codificato - 2.1. Caratteristiche generali - 2.2. La “materia” costituzionale - 2.3. Debolezza politica (non tecnica) della dottrina canonistica - 3. Sullo stato della separazione dei poteri - 3.1. Il decreto di scioglimento del matrimonio non consumato - 3.2. La “sentenza” di nullità di matrimonio “ex certo et authentico documento” - 3.3. Discrezionalità pastorale e giustizia penale - 4. Fonti normative - 5. Profili giurisprudenziali - 6. Bibliografia essenziale.

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. Norme di conflitto del diritto canonico - 3. Visione d’insieme delle disposizioni - 3.1. Competenza dei tribunali ecclesiastici - 3.2. Il diritto processuale applicabile - 3.3. Il diritto sostanziale applicabile - 3.4. Il valore del diritto divino - 4. Dignitas connubii e Mitis iudex - 4.1. La Dignitas connubii è ancora in vigore? - 4.2. Processus brevior per matrimoni di non cattolici? - 5. L'art. 4 DC nella prassi giudiziale - 5.1. Una sentenza a Vancouver - 5.2. Aspetti processuali - 5.3. Il diritto sostanziale da applicare - 5.4. Terminologia - 6. Argomenti non presenti nella Dignitas connubii - 6.1. Riconoscimento di sentenze di nullità matrimoniale straniere - 6.2. Vizio di forma accertabile nell'esame degli sposi - 6.3. Quale tribunale cattolico è competente? - 7. Uno sguardo a possibili sviluppi futuri.

Dignitas connubii and marriages of Non-Catholics. An achievement to be maintained, improved and complemented

Abstract: The instruction Dignitas connubii of 2005, Art 2-4, deals with marriages, in which one or both parts are non-Catholic - whether baptized or not. This is a great progress initiated by the Second Vatican Council, even if there still are some omissions and ambiguities in the regulations. Since 2005, some jurisprudential experience could be gained and further official documents concerning non-Catholic marriages have been issued. They are mainly dealing with Orthodox Christians and are dedicated to the recognition of matrimonial sentences, the determination of formal defects and competence issues. Mitis iudex does not mention anything concerning this topic but in case a new instruction should be made now, the named Articles would have to be maintained, improved and complemented.

SOMMARIO: 1. Notazioni introduttive - 2. I termini della vicenda da cui origina il rinvio pregiudiziale e la competenza della Corte di giustizia a pronunziarsi sulla questione controversa - 3. La portata applicativa del regolamento n. 1259 del 2010 e le sentenze dei tribunali religiosi - 4. Le implicazioni di carattere sistematico della pronunzia in rapporto al principio di incompetenza dell’Unione nella materia ecclesiastica o religiosa - 5. I dubbi sostanziali circa la riconoscibilità in Europa del ripudio islamico - 6. Conclusioni.

The issue of the civil recognizability of the Islamic divorce by the EU Court of Justice (considerations on the ruling of December 20th 2017, C-372/16)

ABSTRACT: The present paper takes as a starting point a recent ruling by the EU Court of Justice concerning the issue of recognizability of Islamic repudiation under the EU Regulation No. 1259/2010. After assessing the conditions underlying the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice to rule on such a controversial matter, the Author excludes that the religious judgments fall within the scope of the aforementioned regulation (and within the purpose of Regulation No. 2201/2013), also in light of the so-called principle of the Union’s incompetence in ecclesiastical or religious matters. Moreover, although the unilateral repudiation is to be considered contrary to the principle of public order of the moral and legal equality of the spouses, the Author concludes that, consistently with the current trend of many legal systems to give increasing broader space to the “negotiating” management of the marriage bond, effective protection of the principle of equality should involve letting women, in some particular situations, have the choice of concretely enforcing that principle.

SOMMARIO: 1. La giurisdizione dei tribunali rabbinici in materia di status personale: il matrimonio e il divorzio nel diritto halachico e nei più recenti orientamenti giurisprudenziali - 2. Diritto, stato e religione nel modello giuridico israeliano: religious law vs. secular law? - 3. L’incorporazione diretta del diritto ebraico nel modello israeliano: law as religion, religion as law - 4. Beis Din, identità religiosa e risoluzione alternativa delle controversie.

The fatal attraction between religious law and secular law in the Israeli legal system: the jurisdiction of the rabbinical courts in matters of marriage and divorce

ABSTRACT: This article explores a unique case study of privatized family law in a liberal democratic state in the Western world: Israel. The complex relationship among law, religion and state presents characters quite peculiar in the Israeli experience. Due to historical and cultural reasons, among the systems belonging to western legal tradition, there is no other country that experiences more intensely the problem of religion’s place. In matters of marriage and right to divorce, the Israeli system nominally adheres to exclusive religious law and jurisdiction, by means of rabbinical courts, but religious and civil systems interact profoundly, shaping its family law as a hybrid creature of civil and religious legal elements. Unlike what happens in other countries, such as Canada, United Kingdom or United States, the Supreme Court of Israel has not yet undertaken a detailed policy analysis of the balance between the rights and obligations of the husband and wife in the process of enforcing divorce judgments, but sanctions against recalcitrant spouses in Rabbinical courts in Israel have been addressed in light of the principles of Jewish and constitutional law. The implementation of fundamental rights in family law matters, specifically the one of equality between spouses, is a prerogative of the jurisprudence of secular courts.

SOMMARIO: PARTE I: DAI SINODI DEI VESCOVI SU MATRIMONIO E FAMIGLIA AI DUE ‘MOTU PROPRIO’ DI PAPA FRANCESCO - 1. I Sinodi dei Vescovi del 2014 e del 2015 quali ‘contesti interpretativi’ delle leggi pontificie. Alcune riflessioni sull’ermeneutica delle norme relative alle procedure di nullità matrimoniale - 2. Le Litterae Apostolicae Motu Proprio datae Mitis iudex dominus Iesus e il diritto processuale codiciale - 3. La scelta dello strumento formale - 4. ‘Singolarità’ della pubblicazione/promulgazione … - 5. (segue) … e della stessa fase preparatoria - 6. Il proemio e la Ratio procedendi - PARTE II: IL COMPLICARSI PROGRESSIVO DEL QUADRO DELLE FONTI - 1. Il dilemma interpretativo circa l’abrogazione ovvero la deroga del Motu Proprio Qua cura e circa la ‘sopravvivenza’ dei tribunali regionali italiani. Le Risposte particolari del Pontificio Consiglio per i Testi Legislativi e le ‘indicazioni’ del Supremo Tribunale della Segnatura Apostolica - 2. (segue) La dichiarazione della mens legislatoris del 4 novembre 2015 - 3. (segue) Il Rescritto pontificio (ex audientia SS.mi?) del 7 dicembre 2015 - 4. (segue) Il ‘tavolo di lavoro’ Santa Sede-Conferenza Episcopale Italiana istituito da Papa Francesco il 1° giugno 2016. La mens legislatoris del 12 marzo 2016 - 5. Vademecum applicativi (?) - 5.1. L’Istruzione Dignitas connubii - 5.2. Il «Sussidio applicativo del Motu pr. Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus» della Rota Romana del gennaio 2016 (e il Rescriptum ex audientia SS.mi del 22 gennaio 2016) - 5.3. Un’appendice: la Lettera Circolare della Segnatura Apostolica Inter munera del 30 luglio 2016 - PARTE III: PROSPETTIVE DI RAZIONALIZZAZIONE - 1. Verso una soluzione quanto più possibile rapida delle questioni interpretative aperte: l’approdo a una tendenzialmente stabile ‘conclusione’ della riforma del processo e dell’ordinamento giudiziario ecclesiale - 2. La produzione di norme nella Chiesa: una ponderata ars legiferandi e una garantista distinzione delle funzioni quali essenziali esigenze di legalità e non di mero legalismo. Pubblicazione, promulgazione e divulgazione: una necessaria revisione.

The reform of the process for the declaration of nullity of marriage: the progressive complication of the regulatory sources

ABSTRACT: The essay examines, first of all, the anomalous ways in which the Pope Francis’s reform about the process of declaration of nullity of marriage was prepared, published and finally promulgated in 2015. Even the legal configuration of the document issued is atypical. Inevitably, many interpretative doubts have arisen in these two years. Consequently, a number of regulatory measures have been issued to resolve this situation. The present work examines their very problematic qualification and the consequent uncertainties about their legal value. Currently the situation is chaotic: in reference, above all, to the framework of the normative sources and to the various application problems of the new reform. An incisive intervention of overall clarification is necessary, concludes the article.

SOMMARIO: 1. Le Sharia court: origini, attività e scopi - 2. Alcuni dati statistici - 3. Un’ulteriore evoluzione: l’Arbitration Act e il Muslim Arbitration Tribunal - 4. Il discorso dell’arcivescovo di Canterbury e reazioni - 5. Il Private Members’ Bill della baronessa Cox - 6. La risposta dell’Islamic Sharia Council - 7. Un dibattito ancora in corso: Friend or Foe?

Sharia Courts. History and evolution of Muslim courts in the United Kingdom

ABSTRACT: In the last thirty years the United Kingdom has experienced the formation and surge of so-called Sharia courts or councils, unrecognised Muslim tribunals with purpose of settling disputes using Islamic religious law. Their stated objectives include providing advice and assistance in the operation of Muslim family life, establishing a bench of scholars to operate as a council, making decisions on matters of Muslim family law, and promoting an enlightened practice of the Muslim faith by Muslims living in the UK.

This paper analyses the origins, evolution and functioning of these councils, with emphasis on the lively public debate initiated in 2008 following the Archbishop of Canterbury’s remarks and followed with the bill proposed by Baroness Cox. An overview of the relations between Sharia councils and the State is presented, while providing insight on future scenarios.

Summary: 1. The Challenges of Pluralistic Societies with Dissimilar Cultural Identities and Religious Traditions: from a Melting Pot to a Cultural Mosaic - 2. European Catholic Tradition of Dual Legislation and Jurisdiction: 2.1. The Development of the Religious Jurisdiction: from the Episcopalis Audientia under the Christian Roman Empire to the Homologation of Religious Decisions by a Civil Judge – 2.2. The Development of Secular and Religious Jurisdictions: from the Leges Barbarorum et Romanorum under the Principle of Personality to the Medieval Dual Jurisdiction in Europe – 2.3. Religious Minorities under Christian Rulers – 3. Muslim Legal Tradition of Plural Jurisdictions: 3.1. Muslim Empires and the Dhimma System – 3.2. Islamic Communities in Transition: from the Pre-colonial Era to the Colonial Rule – 3.3. The Exceptionality of Palestine and Israel- 4. Toward a Global World: Legal Pluralism and the Development of ADR. The Role of Religious Mediation and Arbitration: 4.1. The American Experience in Religious Arbitration: the Jewish Beth Din Courts and the Challenge of Islamic Arbitration – 4.2. Confronting the Fear of Islamic Arbitration Tribunals in the UK, Canada, and Australia - 5. Conclusions.

Abstract: Most of juridical systems are historically developed from the interaction of two main legal principles: the principle of personality and the principle of territoriality. Roman Law is one of the best examples of it; its legacy channeled the growth and coexistence of religious and secular jurisdictions in the Germanic kingdoms of Western Europe. Under the principle of personality of laws, bonding individuals to their cultural or religious communities, legal pluralism was the common grounds from the Antiquity to the pre-Modern era. However, as a result of the religious wars in the Holy Roman Empire between Catholics and Protestants in the 16th and the 17th centuries, the Westphalian state model reinforced a territorial religious jurisdiction under the principle cuius regio eius religio, allowing the ruler to impose his religion on his subjects. The Muslim legal tradition developed, as well, plural juridical systems from the Dhimma System. One of them was the Ottoman Millet system that was adapted from the colonial era to the most of Middle East nation-states as a bonding personal religious law applied to non-Muslim communities. The secular paradigm of the Rule of Law, centralizing and reinforcing state and federal legislative powers, is implemented in Europe and her former colonies in the 19th century under the nation-state constitutional model, expanding worldwide the principles of territoriality and citizenship. As a result, religious legal systems are progressively confined to the private sphere. However, the secular paradigm is confronted gradually by a new development of legal pluralism, mainly as an effect of an extensive increment of global migrations; Halakha or Jewish Law, Canon Law or Catholic Law, Sharia or Islamic Law, are gaining strength as formal or informal religious ADR under the principle of Religious Freedom. Religious legal systems are becoming an innovative tool of mediation, conciliation, and arbitration accepted by some secular jurisdictions around the world, although there is a polarized debate about it. In today´s global world, which are the lessons to be learned from legal traditions and contemporary models of legal pluralism? Can religious legal systems become a tool of mediation for restorative justice preventing and exiting from violence? This article addresses this juridical and social challenge from an interdisciplinary comparative analysis.

Sommario: 1. Introduzione - Parte prima (Profili di diritto canonico) • 2. Successioni e donazioni nel diritto della Chiesa. Note storiche - 3. Il canone 1299 del Codex Iuris Canonici del 1983. Gli atti mortis causa - 4. Il testamento dei religiosi e dei presbiteri - 5. Le formalità del diritto civile - 6. Il canone 1299 del Codex Iuris Canonici del 1983. Gli atti inter vivos - 7. Il rinvio al diritto civile previsto dal canone 1290 in materia contrattuale - Parte seconda (Profili di diritto vaticano) • 8. Successioni e donazioni nelle fonti del diritto vaticano - 9. Aspetti di diritto processuale vaticano in materia successoria - 10. Giurisprudenza vaticana in materia successoria.

Vatican inheritance and gifts law. Substantive and procedural aspects

ABSTRACT: This paper aims to clarify Vatican (substantive and procedural) inheritance and gifts law. A special attention is given to canon law, first source of the Vatican legal system. The article specially considers the leading cases of Vatican Courts (first, second and third instance) regarding to succession.

SOMMARIO: 1. Le sfide del nuovo multiculturalismo in materia matrimoniale - 2. La riforma del processo matrimoniale canonico e le sue potenziali ricadute sul giudizio di delibazione - 3. Il processus brevior - 4. La crisi della bilateralità - 5. Il “mite” pluralismo statunitense e le nuove “anti-sharia laws” - 6. L’esperienza del pluralismo “forte” israeliano e i suoi effetti sulle minoranze - 7. Modelli di pluralismo a confronto.

Pluralism in Marriage: the New Challenges of the “Overlapping Jurisdictions”

ABSTRACT: The challenges of the “new multiculturalism” in the field of marriage law regard not only which forms of marriage should be recognized by the State but also the forums in which marriage cases can be adjudicated and the role of faith-based laws and religious courts in democratic and secular legal systems. Religious groups increasingly ask for accommodation of their cultural identities; however, a growing skepticism concerning forms of religious jurisdiction is developing in regimes devoted to individual liberties, which employ public policy as grounds to vacate religious rulings. The present paper highlights the need for Western States to update and exploit the full potential of their legal instruments in order to prevent restrictions on collective and individual religious freedom in matters of marriage.