Contributi di Giovanni Barberini

“La Conferenza di Helsinki sulla Sicurezza e la Cooperazione in Europa" - è stato autorevolmente affermato dal card. Achille Silvestrini – "ha rappresentato un’esperienza unica nel suo valore. Era la prima volta, dopo il Congresso di Vienna del 1825, che la S. Sede partecipava come full member in un Consesso di Stati (… ). La presenza della S. Sede ad Helsinki ha rappresentato un segno concreto della concezione della pace fra le nazioni come valore morale prima ancora che come questione politica, e una occasione per rivendicare la libertà religiosa come una delle libertà fondamentali di ogni persona e come valore di correlazione nei rapporti fra i popoli”. La Conferenza di Helsinki, che vide ovest ed est uniti sulla via della distensione, costituisce l’esito di una serie di fattori - storici, politici e diplomatici – che hanno infine condotto i soggetti interessati a incontrarsi per discutere di temi di comune interesse, nonostante la forte contrapposizione all’epoca esistente fra i diversi schieramenti a livello mondiale ed europeo. (continua)

SOMMARIO: 1. I confini dell’Europa nel pensiero di Karol Wojtyła - 2. Il Cristianesimo e l’ Europa - 3. La comune origine religiosa del continente europeo - 4. Un obiettivo caro a Giovanni Paolo II.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa - 2. S. Agostino - 3. S. Tommaso d’Aquino - 4. Francisco de Vitoria - 5. Francisco Suarez - 6. Problemi attuali.

ABSTRACT: At the present time, the complexity of international relations make us to reflect on ideologies that in past centuries, opening the modern history, helped to organize the international life and the relations between peoples and between States. Especially Hugo Grotius, Samuel von Pufendorf and Emmer de Vattel are to be regarded as founders of modern international law, but it would be a serious shortcoming for the scholar the oversight of the work of some spanish theologians and jurists, such as the dominican Francisco de Vitoria and the jesuit Francisco Suarez which, starting from the 16th century, have developed principles that are fundamental results in international law. The universal character of the christian message has had many applications in the social and legal sphere, requires that the human race constitutes one family and that the spirit of christianity is directed toward each institution aimed to prevent disputes between States and between the peoples become violent clashes, destruction or massacres. In ancient period the most important contributions that have enriched the catholic doctrine as well as its teaching in these matters were those of St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. In augustinian and thomistic doctrine the war must be regarded as a last resort to which it is not used that after having verified the impossibility to safeguard the good right; again, that the legitimate end of the war is not the victory, but the peace in justice, namely that is the restoration lasting public order in which everything is repositioned in the right place. The affirmative answer to the question if you can give a just war is the key element that is remained a fundamental basis in catholic morality. The war can be considered lawful under certain conditions; but it is nevertheless a profound injustice, as a result of the sins of humanity against the virtue of charity. An important part of the teaching of the spanish theologian Francisco de Vitoria, was especially concerned by the problems created in Spain by the conquest and colonization of Latin America. He was considered the true founder of international law from many specialists. He put in question the conviction then widespread that indigenous not enjoyed human rights, i.e. rights brought from civilization. The dominican theologian rejected these views because he was inspired by the natural law, which must regardless of profession of the true religion which regards the guidelines toward the personal spiritual salvation. Reflecting on the thought of the spanish jesuit Suarez, we are devoting, in particular, our attention to the “jus gentium”. The expression is not related to the international relations between peoples and between nations, what happened in the evolution that subsequently took the expression. Originally the expression jus gentium was referring to some of the rules common to all peoples; in some way a natural right, which led to consider the community of nations as forming a great social community, governed by a set of rules, principles, morals, rights, and duties, according to the needs or opportunities or indications of human nature that is the work of a single Creator. This concept has opened the way to the idea of international law understood as complex rules in relations between nations. In the contemporary era the concept of just war must be considered in a different way and must take account of two considerable elements: the lawfulness of the just war should be read today in harmony and with the observance of an “jus cogens” which goes beyond the respect for the territorial integrity and political independence of a State and then the use in war of deadly weapons, even for the civilian population, which upset the reflection on just cause for a war. We believe that this has fostered a rethinking of catholic doctrine and the positions of the Pope John Paul II who undertook very on the theme of peace and war: he had shown himself absolutely contrary to the war and, again, he seemed to want to overcome the doctrine of the just war. There are those who in the catholic world believes that today it is no longer possible to speak of just war and that the war can no longer be regarded as a means of resolving disputes between States. But before humanity some questions remain.

SOMMARIO: 1. Il diritto umanitario nei conflitti armati - 2. La codificazione del diritto umanitario - 3. Diritto della guerra e diritto della pace - 4. L’articolo 11 della costituzione italiana - 5. La protezione internazionale dei diritti e delle libertà della persona - 6. Conclusioni.

ABSTRACT: The military operators must also assure the peace with the weapons and, above all, the persons responsible of the operations must give test of great sensibility because busy to conjugate laws and rules war with the objectives of pacification. The authorities responsible for the operations at any time they need to know what they can or must do and what orders impart; they must know what it cannot do or what should be avoided. The international humanitarian law, important part of the international law, is constituted by conventional and consuetudinary norms that are applied in the relationships among States with a specific objective: to protect in time of armed conflict the people who do not take part or do not take more part in hostilities and impose bans or limits to the use of means offensive, of sophisticated weapons and methods of warfare in situations of armed conflict in act or to avoid sleepwalking. The codification of the international humanitarian law is initiated in the century XIX, above all when it was tried to introduce with the Declaration of Petersbourg in 1868 a principle that individualized in the contrariety to the laws of the humanity the impassable limit to respect in the armed conflicts. The codification has received then force and importance after the second world conflict that the consciences of the people had struck with the systematic practice of the most merciless violence making to record million of deads. The fundamental importance of the 1949 Geneva four Conventions is unanimously recognized. They are based on ratio of the existence and the responsibilities of the Organization of United Nations; they have properly constituted the central nucleus of the said humanitarian law and they can be also considered as a reaction of the civilization towards the unheard of violences committed toward civil populations, prisoners and deporteds. In this reflection it is normal entirely a reference to the rules of engagement that accompany every military operation. The rules of engagement substantially have an operational content and the busy soldiers on the field set their attention on these rules more and more that in practice they represent a daily vademecum , not only because they individualize the chain of command. Their juridical value depends on the single arrangements that of it therefore responsible. The word "war" in the contemporary age it doesn't boast an uncontested right of citizen anymore in the international relationships. Our constitution in art. 11 among the fundamental principles enact that Italy repudiates the war as an instrument of offense against the freedom of other peoples and as ameans of resolving international  disputes. The war, as an instrument normally used in the past in the relationships among States, it is not in our juridical arrangement anymore. In 1948 started a very strong commitment to the universal level and at regional level; so much so that today we can count at least 130 Conventions and agreements for the protection of human rights, in various respects, for different situations. The reference to the international obligations placed to protection of the people led us to remember what has been written recently, i.e the two systems, the traditional humanitarian law and the recent human rights, with different historical training and technical configuration, based on a common philosophical basis, the affirmation of the value of the person, and tend toward the common goal of ensuring a stable and effective protection in every circumstance, that is then condition of world peace.

1 - La protezione delle minoranze nazionali è stato certamente un tema caro alla Conferenza sulla Sicurezza e la Cooperazione in Europa (CSCE) e ora all'Organizzazione per la Sicurezza e la Cooperazione in Europa (OSCE); e i dibattiti, i negoziati, i documenti, gli interventi che si sono registrati dall'avvio dei lavori della Conferenza di Helsinki costituiscono un elemento particolarmente significativo della sua storia. (continua)

ABSTRACT: The problem of the protection of national minorities was considered in the Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) in the 1975 from point of view of the individual rights; the VII principle of the decalogue that enacted the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all the persons, including those belonging to national minorities, had to be read in the logic of the principles of the inviolability of frontiers and the territorial integrity of States. The difficulties met by the doctrine to give a definition of national minorities also explain him with the history, with the tradition and with the political and war stories that Europe has crossed making to record so many deeply different situations among them and also potential cause of conflicts. In 1989 the problem of the protection of the minorities started to earn in the sensibility of the international community and they resulted a great deal meaningful the contained forecasts in the conclusive documents of three CSCE Meetings: Copenhagen, 1990; Geneva, 1991 and Helsinki 2 in the 1992. The international community takings action that the matter of the national minorities was connected with the security system and of stability in the European continent. Also for this reason the participating States to the CSCE decided to found the office of the High Commissioner on national minorities which a great discretionary competence is recognized for assuring the early warning and a early action and political interventions regarding tensions involving the national minorities that can degenerate in conflicts. The CSCE and now the OSCE, has intended to give life to a pacific system of “internationalization” of the problems concerning the national minorities.

SOMMARIO: 1. I negoziati – 2. Il significato dell’art. 24 – 3. La neutralità e l’inviolabilità del territorio vaticano – 4. La partecipazione della Santa Sede alla Conferenza di Helsinki – 5. La Santa Sede, Potenza non politica, svolge attività politica nella comunità internazionale.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premesse - 2. La Russia zarista e Leone XIII - 2.1. Il mancato invito alla Santa Sede per la Conferenza della pace nel 1899 - 2.2. Conclusioni - 3. L’Unione Sovietica e la Santa Sede - 3.1. Il coinvolgimento della Santa Sede per la Conferenza di Helsinki - 3.2. L’adesione della Santa Sede al trattato di non proliferazione delle armi nucleari - 3.3. L’èra di Gorbaciov - 3.4. Conclusioni.

SOMMARIO: Premesse – 1. Stato, Chiesa cattolica e Santa Sede – 2. Significato generale della norma – 3. Indipendenza e sovranità della Chiesa cattolica – 4. Ordine dello Stato e ordine della Chiesa – 5. Interferenze e ingerenze – 6. Questioni con carattere etico e religioso – 7. Possibile ingerenza dello Stato e possibile ingerenza della Chiesa – 8. La Chiesa cattolica nell’art. 7.1 – 9. Per una corretta interpretazione e applicazione della norma costituzionale – 10. Chi negozia con lo Stato – 11. La prassi in altri Stati.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa - 2. Adesione al Trattato di non proliferazione delle armi nucleari - 3. La Santa Sede e la pace - 4. La Santa Sede e l’Europa - 5. La Santa Sede e i problemi del disarmo - 6. La Santa Sede e l’Europa orientale - 7. La Santa Sede e la comunità internazionale - 8. La sicurezza e la cooperazione in Europa e la Santa Sede - 9. La Santa Sede fra tensioni e distensione - 10. La Santa Sede e i problemi dell’Europa contemporanea - 11. No alla violenza, sì alla pace - 12. The Holy See and Peace - 13. La Santa Sede e le sfide del mondo moderno - 14. Tra bipolarismo e responsabilità di tutti gli Stati - 15. La Santa Sede e il rispetto dei diritti dell’uomo.

SOMMARIO: 1. Il processo di democratizzazione – 2. La religione e le confessioni religiose nella rinascita degli Stati – 3. Il quadro giuridico – 4. Conclusioni.