The culture of the dialogue

European Churches urged EU institutions to reflect on a series of measures envisaged in the “Directive for the return” of non-EC illegal immigrants. The news was given in March’s issue of “Europe infos”, the monthly magazine of the Commission of the Episcopates of the European Community (COMECE), and by Ocipe (Catholic information and initiative office for Europe). In an “ecumenical letter” underwritten by Comece, Ceme (Churces’ Commission for migrants in Europe), by Caritas Europe and by the Conference of European Churches (Kek), the signatories – Alessandro Calcagno explained – asked the Presidents of the European Commission, Parliament and Council to “attentively reflect” on the directive which aims at establishing common norms and procedures for the return of illegal migrants to their Countries of origin. The directive is adopted on the basis of the co-decision procedure, according to which the European Council and Parliament will have to reach a definitive agreement on the EU Commission’s proposal (of January 2005). Votes will be cast during the plenary session of the PE (May 2008), followed by the Council’s decision. The “ecumenical letter”. Christian Churches and organizations expressed their concern over the possible detention of illegal immigrants (up to 18 months following an administrative decision). “It’s unacceptable for this to be adopted as a common European norm. Detention is not a solution”, also since there “are other methods” to “guarantee the efficiency of deportation policy”. Perplexities regarded also the five-year return prohibition, which “is like a second sentence”. For this reason, the letter’s recipients are entreated “to limit detention” and “remove provisions regarding return prohibition”. “Although we cannot deny the need for apposite tools at European level”, we hope that “when elaborating the document, the need for just and efficient asylum regulations envisaging the non-refusal-of -entry principle will be adequately taken into account”. “The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights isn’t part of the Lisbon Treaty, although the latter ascribes it equal legal force”, remarked Peter Knauer, who also points out that it recognizes “dignity, equality and human solidarity” as “universal and indivisible values”. These values represent “the fundamental principles of the rights affirmed further ahead”. The expert reaffirmed the notion of human dignity, “which originally pertains to each human being and is inviolable, meaning that nobody acquires it at a certain point in life or can loose it before its termination”. However, it isn’t inviolable in the sense that it can be exposed to offence “through contrasting actions”. “Adopting the Charter certainly does not exclude a further evolution in the understanding of rights along with the recognition of new rights. Existing statements never fixed limits to their development; rather, they represent a stimulus to lead reflection increasingly further”. An additional force. “Conciliating fidelity to Islam and adhesion to the modern and universal values of democracy and pluralism”, considering present times and “specific traits of European reality”. This, underlined Vincent Legrand, “is one of the two dimensions” of “the Charter of European Muslims” , signed by some 400 organizations and presented the past weeks in Brussels by the Federation of Muslim organizations in Europe (Fioe). The initiative at the same time “entails an external dimension – Legrand explained – “the Charter proposes principles and guidelines for European society. In this European year devoted to this issue a true exercise of intercultural dialogue is being encouraged”. The document takes on a “pedagogic dimension aimed at clarifying a series of concepts, such as jihad , and at correcting wrong interpretations”. For Legrand, in this perspective Islam can be considered “an additional force to strengthen humanistic culture and spirituality in Europe, along with Christianity, Judaism and Buddhism”. Ethics and animal cloning. “Certainly a new topic for European citizens” is “animal cloning for food purposes”, claimed Katharina Schauer. She pointed out that the European Group on Ethics (Ege) believes “there is no justification to the production of foodstuff from cloned animals”. Although she shares this stand, Ms. Schauer expressed reservations on some of the Gee’s claims, in particular, their “incomplete perception of the ethical implications this issue involve”. However, she concluded, “it’s a positive point of departure to encourage a political debate on a topic which regards us all”.