Contenuti per la categoria: Uguaglianza e non discriminazione

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: le tappe di un leading case controverso - 2. La presenza dei musulmani in Tracia: un itinerario storico tra fonti interne e internazionali - 3. Il quadro normativo vigente al momento della causa - 4. La Corte e il suo legal reasoning tra equità e uguaglianza - 5. Conclusione: il soft law come substrato valoriale di una decisione annunciata.

The Muslims of Thrace and the case Molla Sali c. Greece. A historical and legal itinerary between religious pluralism and demands for equality

ABSTRACT – The article is inspired by the Molla Sali v. Greece case, resolved by the ECHR. Starting from this case, the article analyzes the complex historical development of the legislation relating to the Muslim minority in the Greek region of Thrace. In particular, the article deals with the prerogatives of the mufti in the judicial field and the application of Islamic law to relations among private individuals. In addition to the treaties concluded between the decaying Ottoman Empire and the main European powers, the article explores the corresponding implementing rules in the Greek legal system. Finally, the article proposes some critical considerations about balancing the principle of equality and the rights of minorities.

SOMMARIO: 1. La figura del “reato culturalmente motivato” e l’idea di multiculturalismo - 2. L’eterogeneità della categoria dei reati culturalmente motivati. Il principio di offensività come canone ermeneutico e veicolo di un approccio interdisciplinare - 3. Il “porto” del kirpan: l’approccio ‘fonografico’ del giudice di legittimità nell’ordinamento italiano - 4. La reasonable accomodation nell’interpretazione pluralista della Corte Suprema Canadese attraverso il caso Multani. Spunti per una comparazione - 5. L’„accomodation” alla prova del paradigma sicuritario. La vicenda del riconoscimento della personalità giuridica della comunità sikh in Italia.

Rethinking the antinomy of the cultural offence. Hypotheses from a legal-philosophical perspective

ABSTRACT: The essay is intends to problematize the epistemological perspective which, in the Italian system, upholds the judicial interpretation related to the cases that can be ascribed to the category of the so-called cultural offence. In this regard, t he article is focused on the case-law concerning the religious practices of the sikh believer and on the legal recognition affair of Sikhism in Italy, identifying this empirical field as a privileged observatory. The topic of the analysis, through the Canadian approach, makes it possible to assess the canons of the prevailing hermeneutics in matter and to envisage hypotheses toward a rethinking of the theoretical assumptions underlying the criminal law enforcement, especially considering non offensive conduct of a religious nature.

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione - 2. La genitorialità intenzionale nell’attuale giurisprudenza italiana - 3. Profili critici - 4. La questione di illegittimità costituzionale - 5. Scenari possibili.

The Sins of the Fathers. Comment to Corte di Cassazione, judg. n. 8325 April 29th 2020

ABSTRACT: This essay examines the Italian judgement (Ordinanza) n. 8325, issued on April 2020, that has raised a question of constitutionality against the jurisprudential address which, appealing to the limit of the public order, excludes the Italian recognition of foreign jurisdictional decisions that ascertain the right to be inserted - as an intentional parent - in the birth certificate of a child born through the so-called “surrogate motherhood”. In particular, after a survey of the current Italian case law (§ 2) and the problems that it raises (§ 3), the essay examines the arguments advanced by the judgement (§ 4), wondering about its possible outcomes (§ 5).

SOMMARIO: 1. Cibo e religione (e mercato) - 2. L’evoluzione storica del rapporto tra cibo e religione - 3. Elementi utili per una definizione giuridica di macellazione rituale - 4. La questione dello stordimento - 5. La sentenza della Grande Chambre della Corte di giustizia del 29 maggio 2018 (causa C-426/16): la posizione dell’Avvocato Generale Nils Wahl - 6. La sentenza della Grande Chambre della Corte di giustizia del 26 febbraio 2019 (causa C-497/17) - 7. Alcune considerazioni (non) conclusive.

Multicultural societies and protection of food identity: some reflections on ritual slaughter.

ABSTRACT: The intensification of migratory flows and the demographic increase of the population of the Islamic religion in Europe now make it unavoidable to consolidate that process of cultural integration between different ethnic, linguistic and religious components, which had already begun a few decades ago in Western countries and aimed at defining of a new model of open and pluralist society. This process calls into question, in various areas - including that of food protection - the values ​​of dignity, freedom and equality on which European democracies are founded, imposing the search for new balances between potentially conflicting interests. This contribution aims to investigate the compatibility profiles between respect for the food identity of religious minorities, the protection of human health and food safety and the prohibition of causing unnecessary suffering to animals, to highlight whether the principle of neutrality accepted by the current EU legislation is indeed the most suitable for promoting the fundamental values ​​of European society.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction - 2. Alevi Population in Turkey and in Europe - 3. What is Alevism? Who are the Alevis? - 4. Discrimination against Alevis and Alevi Massacres from the Ottoman Empire to the Turkish Republic - 5. Alevi Migration in Turkey and to Europe - 6. Alevi Organizations in Europe: Cultural, Social, and Historical Perspectives - 7. Discourses of “Other” vs “Equal” on Alevis - 8. Alevi Associations in Europe: Legal Perspectives - 9. Alevism in the Turkish Legal Setting - 10. Alevism at the European Court of Human Rights - 11. Concluding Remarks on Legal Issues - 12. Concluding Remarks on Social and Cultural Issues.

ABSTRACT: Using interdisciplinary lenses, this article examines the cultural, social, and juridical status of the Alevis in Turkey and Western Europe. The ongoing social exclusion and discrimination against Alevis in Turkey make their everyday lives challenging. In Europe, Alevis organized themselves in associations, forming vibrant transnational communities. They struggled for recognition of their cultural-religious rights, and in some European countries, they are given special status. As we will illustrate, their recognition in Europe significantly effected in their case in Turkey but failed to emancipate them fully and posed further issues to tackle with and for the Alevis in Turkey. Gedik and Birkalan-Gedik present sociological, historical, and political contexts to understand the current realities of Alevis in Turkey and Europe, mostly based on their ethnographic studies. Madera examines five cases between 2007-2016 which were presented by the Alevis to the European Court. We conclude that currently, Turkey does not try to suffice the European requirements, namely, the implementation of policies aimed at guaranteeing adequate protection of the collective dimension of religious freedom in a way consistent with European directives.

SOMMARIO: 1. Gli interventi contro i Testimoni di Geova nella Federazione Russa - 2. La presenza storica dei Testimoni di Geova nel Paese - 3. La libertà religiosa nella normativa dell’Unione Sovietica - 4. Le leggi sulla libertà di coscienza degli anni ’90 - 5. La legislazione “anti estremismo” e antiterrorismo - 6. Considerazioni conclusive.

“Anti-extremism” Legislation and Religious Freedom in the Russian Federation. The case of Jehovah's Witnesses

ABSTRACT: The application of "anti-extremism" legislation to minority religious groups in the Russian Federation has led to a progressive institutional tightening of the persecution and heavy discrimination, especially against Jehovah's Witnesses. Although many of these legislative instruments have existed for over a decade, the Russian government has only recently begun to use them in sustained campaigns designed to punish or exclude "non-traditional" religions and movements. In the specific case of Jehovah's Witnesses, these measures have taken on the purpose of delegitimising an entire community, solely because of the religious faith being persecuted, with accusations ranging from missionary activity to offending the religious feelings of believers. Overall, these interventions are part of a wider process of ideological control over society, aimed at curbing, if not stifling, the forces of political and religious dissent. It is well known that secularism is based on two fundamental principles: the inviolability of human rights, which constitute the prodrome of political power and therefore of the State, and, secondly, the importance of a culture and institutions that guarantee the effectiveness of pluralism. The analysis of the Russian history is, in this sense, an important perspective because it calls into question the European model of recognition and guarantee of religious pluralism.

Summary: 1. Introduction - 2. Italian legal responses to COVID-19: the Italian constitutional and legal framework on religious freedom - 3. The suspension of religious assemblies during phase one of the pandemic - 4. A “cautious resumption” of religious gatherings during the phase two in Italy - 5. U.S. legal responses to COVID-19: U.S. constitutional and legal framework about religious freedom - 6. The legal patchwork because of the pandemic - 7. Judicial balance between individual liberties and the preservation of health - 8. Litigation in lower courts about the exercise of religious freedom during Covid-19 - 9 New creative ways of worshipping in Covid-19 times: drive-in religious services - 10. Third-party burdens and the successful nondiscrimination approach - 11. Department of Justice statements - 12 Supreme Court intervention in temporary state restrictions on religious assemblies - 13. “Religious America” and “secular” Italy during Covid-19 phase one - 14. Management of religious freedom during the pandemic and the lack or presence of a statute governing religious freedom - 15. Effect of the pandemic on the question of whose religious freedom should be protected - 16. Guaranteeing a fair level of religious accommodation during a pandemic - 17. Enhanced need to balance the exercise of religious freedom with third-party harm during a pandemic - 18. Impact of the pandemic on the exercise of religious freedom in the long term.

ABSTRACT: The so-called lockdown, imposed to restrain (or at least limit) the spread of COVID-19, has, in the over four seemingly endless months since it started, had an overwhelming impact not only on our personal lives, but also on domestic regulatory frameworks. Legal systems responded individually, and with differences to the pandemic emergency, ranging from a complete interruption of the collective exercise of religious worship (Italy), to a more cautious recognition of forms of religious accommodation (United States). The present paper compares the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on the exercise of religious freedom in the United States and the Italian legal contexts, and investigates how the pandemic crisis emphasized underlying judicial, political, sociocultural, and economic challenges, giving rise to a tension between competing rights and exacerbating concerns about the “special” role of religion. As the COVID situation is changing so rapidly in the United States, in Italy, and around the world, I clarify that the information in the present paper relates at the situation as at the end of June 2020.

SOMMARIO: 1. L’intervento della Suprema Corte federale americana in tema di compatibilità della normativa emergenziale con la Free Exercise Clause - 2. I termini della questione originariamente sollevata e la pronunzia del giudice di primo grado - 3. L’appello dinanzi alla Corte del Nono Circuito e l’opinione dissenziente del giudice Collins - 4. Il problema della costituzionalità delle misure restrittive incidenti sulla libertà di culto nei contrapposti orientamenti seguiti dalle Corti inferiori - 5. Gli argomenti posti a fondamento del ricorso alla Corte Suprema - 6. La contrapposizione tra judicial deference e lettura rigorosamente neutrale dei termini della vicenda portata all’esame dei giudici - 7. Una riproposizione dei canoni di stretta neutralità anche nell’interpretazione dei principi costituzionali in materia religiosa? - 8. Notazioni conclusive.

Anti-Covid Law vs. Free Exercise Clause in US Supreme Court Case Law: is it a Return to the Doctrine of “Neutrality” in the Interpretation of Religious Clauses of the First Amendment?

ABSTRACT: The paper analyzes the question of wheter the Stay-at-Home Order and the Reopening Plan that were issued by the State of California to combat the Covid-19 pandemic discriminate against places of worship in violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. In South Bay United Pentecostal Church vs. Newsom, the Supreme Court of the United States upholds California’s guidelines for places of worship that limit religious worship services to 25% of a building’s capacity or a maximum of 100 attendees, because similar restrictions apply to comparable secular gatherings.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa - 2. I giudizi promossi dal TAR Lombardia. Alcune riflessioni - 3. La decisione del TAR Lombardia. La fondatezza “anticipata” - 4. Il caso davanti alla Corte costituzionale: la sentenza n. 254 del 2019 - 5. Il new deal dell’art. 19 Cost. e della laicità ”positiva” per via giurisprudenziale (costituzionale). Brevi considerazioni.

Regional Religious Building. Legal Approach to the test of (again) administrative and constitutional case-law.

ABSTRACT: This essay concerns important judgements of the Regional Administrative Court and the Italian Constitutional Court on religious freedom and places of worship.