thoughts" "
A directive to facilitate the free circulation of citizens within the European Union is also proving an occasion to “verify” the concept of the family itself. In the headquarters of the EU institutions in Brussels work has been proceeding since 2001 on a new directive, proposed by the Commission, to facilitate and render effective the right of each EU citizen to move freely within the territory of member states, which will rise in number from the current 15 to 25 on 1st May. Such circulation is one of the fundamental liberties safeguarded by the Union. The text of the directive, which must receive the “green light” of Parliament and Council, would replace the various legislative provisions currently in force in this field. The draft directive must ensure that every citizen of a member state and his/her family, even if non-EU nationals, has the right to move freely within the frontiers of the 25 for a specified period (three months) without excessive bureaucratic hassles or requests for permits, for reasons of study, work or tourism. The same right should also be guaranteed to family members (whatever their citizenship) in the event of the death of the holder of the right or divorce. But it’s just the definition of “family members” that is creating problems and giving rise to concern in various European political, cultural and religious circles. The Brussels office of COMECE, the Commission of the episcopates of EU member countries, has also expressed its concerns on the matter. In particular, article 2, paragraph two, of the draft in question means, by family member, not only the spouse, direct descendants and ascendants, but also the cohabitant with which the EU citizen had contracted a “registered union”; an important “rider” prescribes, however, that it shall be the host State that shall equate, or not, according to its own legal system, registered cohabitants with married couples. If not, the cohabitant of the EU citizen shall not enjoy the right of entry and residence. The person who cohabitates with an EU citizen by a “lasting” but “not registered” union, shall in any case enjoy the right in question (though always taking into account the laws of the host country), even if that person is not included among the members of the family. Article 3 of the draft directive in fact establishes that the host state, in conformity with its own legislation, shall “facilitate” that person’s entry into its national territory. Differences in attitude between the various institutions have emerged in their approach to this issue: the Commission had preferred not to enter into the merit of the concept of family, regarding this as a matter for national laws; the European Parliament, for its part, has showed itself more “permissive” on the question, while the Council has seemed more attached to the traditional concept of the family. The positions are also differentiated between state and state: in some countries of northern Europe the “registered partner” is already considered to all intents and purposes a member of the family; in others, provision is made for forms of union between persons of the same sex; in others again the recognition of so-called “ de facto families” has already begun. It is clear that the importance of the directive in question goes well beyond the “right to circulation and residence”: placed at the centre of attention is the idea of the family itself, nor can it be ruled out that this concept may be revised. The stakes are high for the future of Europe: the cultural and political contribution of Christians to the debate must not be lacking. Gianni Borsa
