A complex question

Equality and non-discrimination are “ambiguous” ideas which are built around a multitude of definitions and concepts and therefore having several possible meanings”. Obviously the EU law is not “a forum which provides comprehensive answers to all questions brought up in philosophy, theology or law”. However, there is an established general principle of “equal treatment”. Namely, “law must allow for general principles to be accommodated. Differences of opinion are at the heart of the democratic concept. In framing legislation it is therefore essential that provisions designed to promote equality do not have the unintended consequence of removing or unjustly limiting other fundamental rights and freedoms”. These are the premises of a document issued in June by COMECE titled “Developing Fair Non-Discrimination Legislation”. Follows an excerpt of the document. A preliminary condition. “The right not to be discriminated against is only one reflection of the acknowledgement of human dignity”, states the document. “The manifestation and implementation of this right cannot be pursued in separation from other principles, rights and freedoms pertaining to each human being. Among those rights freedom of religion and freedom of expression take prominent place. Ignoring other human rights and freedoms while focussing exclusively on the right not to be discriminated against does not do justice to the legal and moral evaluation of relationships between people”. According to the COMECE working group a general principle ought to prevail: “the right not to be discriminated against cannot in principle be treated as superior to other rights”. A complex idea. “In the common perception – continues the document – discrimination is often taken as treating one person worse than others. However, despite the fact that such an attitude is morally and socially unacceptable, it is not always prohibited by law. Additionally, in certain situations law not only allows for differentiated treatment, but even demands it”. COMECE thus guards against the risk of “oversimplification” and “schematic” perception of equality and non-discrimination. And warns: these questions have gone through a “long process of development” to reach the “form” it has today. “It is a complex idea, not only restricted to mere equality before the law, which requires that all persons, regardless of their characteristics, are to be treated in the same way before the law nut is enriched by various other approaches. In principle, EU lacks a general and solid theoretical foundation and this absence might lead to tensions in situations where various rights and freedoms are confronted with the right not to be discriminated against. Law should therefore be clear enough to provide answers on how to resolve these conflicts. The Church. “The Catholic Church has a substantial interest in questions of equality, equal treatment and non-discrimination. From her long-standing experiences she has an important contribution to make to the development of legislation that promotes just and fair behaviour between people. Drawing from her Social Doctrine, the Church wishes to engage with the European institutions in the task of enriching and supporting the process of building EU non-discrimination legislation”, which the COMECE document is evidence of. Freedom of religion. A section of the COMECE document is devoted to the freedom of thought, conscience and religion. International legislation protects the “internal” dimension, referring to “the sphere of individual conscience, personal beliefs and religious creeds”. COMECE points out: “Religion is not just a set of ideas and beliefs, it is also a set of activities such as worship, teaching, practice, observing dietary restrictions or respecting days of rest. Religious freedom therefore covers also an “external” dimension which comprises the right to manifest one’s religion and act according to religious rules”. Not only, it includes “the right to express moral and ethical judgements to the light of religious beliefs”. In short, “freedom of religion can be exercised alone and in private, as well as in public and in community with others, within the circle of those whose faith one shares”. However, this freedom is also subject to “possible limitations” in the interests of public safety and for the protection of public order. These freedoms can be restricted by the State and reflect the fundamental importance “of that right for a democratic society where various religions and convictions exist”.