In the name of freedom

On June 30 the High Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights will convene to review the judgment which a different Chamber of the same Court issued November 3rd, ruling against the display of crucifixes in Italy’s public schools. The question was raised by an Italian citizen of Finnish origin in 2002, when he had urged a school in Abano Terme (Padua, Italy) to remove the Christian symbol form all classrooms, described as hindering the freedom of education and religion. After a series of pronouncements by the Italian judiciary the petition was submitted to the European Court – a body of the Council of Europe, not of the European Union – which applies the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms (1950). In January 2010 Strasbourg accepted the appeal against the first ruling presented by the Italian Government. In the audience at the end of June the High Chamber (17 judges) will hold hearings with the stakeholders and will register the pleadings presented by “third parties” (a dozen national governments, a group of European parliamentarians, NGOs and associations). A final and conclusive ruling will ensue – probably not before several months – on whose enforcement will vigil the Ministers’ Committee, the highest body of the Council of Europe. On the eve of the hearing, Bishops’ Conferences in Europe have addressed the subject. Follow the excerpts of statements released to SIR Europe until June 21.Italy: “it’s not an imposition””The presence of religious symbols, notably of the Cross, which reflects the religious sentiment of Christians from all denominations, is not an imposition and should not be understood as conveying exclusion. Rather, it expresses a tradition which everyone has knowledge of and acknowledges in its high spiritual value, as a sign of an identity open to dialogue with all men of good will, in support and to the benefit of the needy and the deprived, regardless of their faith, ethnicity or nationality. We hope that in examining such a delicate subject these values will be acknowledged along with the religious sentiments of the population, in the awareness that the right to religious freedom has been reaffirmed in all European States, and that is has undergone positive developments, of which the display of religious symbols represents an important expression”.Scotland: “a sign of solidarity””The cross is not an imposition of religion. Rather, it is an invitation and a sign of Christian solidarity with all populations. Europe is a multicultural and plural continent where the State and the Church are distinct spheres and the rights of believers and non-believers are equally respected. However, respecting these distinctions doesn’t mean rejecting the cultural tradition of our nations. The precious religious heritage of peoples and nations across Europe, along with the tolerance and the freedom of faith advocated by democratic societies are in danger. We hope that the European Court of Human Rights will endorse these values, which are part and parcel of our Christian heritage. It’s our duty as Christians to explain that the Cross is not an imposition of religion. It is an invitation and a sign of Christian solidarity with all peoples”.Albania: “a stimulus for a wholesome growth”Not to prohibit the “public display of religious symbols, especially in places where minds and hearts are being formed, in the conviction that these symbols are not an obstacle but rather a stimulus for the wholesome development of the identity and values of the next generations”. “History bears witness to the Christian roots of Europe. The presence of Christian religious symbols and our reference to the Crucifix doesn’t exclude others from the religious experience”. Rather, it “creates ties for dialogue and sharing” regardless of “religious belief, ethnicity and nationality”. “In Christian culture and tradition the Cross symbolizes everyone’s salvation and the freedom of humanity: an experience which far from being an imposition represents the highest degree of altruism and generosity combined with a profound solidarity offered to everyone” along with “forgiveness without distinctions”. Given societies’ multiethnic and multicultural coexistence, each nation has the right/duty to preserve the religious symbols and the symbols representing the national culture”.Greece: “prohibiting the Cross is a contradiction””In countries with a century-long Christian tradition the display of religious symbols shouldn’t be prohibited, especially in places devoted to the conscience formation of children and youth. The opposite would be a contradiction and a denial of the religious and cultural patrimony of the Country. A small minority should not prevent the large majority from practicing their religious faith, according to the traditions of a people. Likewise the majority shouldn’t prevent the minorities’ practices. Mutual respect for the different traditions is critical to the correct performance of a multicultural society. This will ensure the peaceful coexistence of all religions while condemning all forms of religious fundamentalism, a source of major evil for humanity”.Slovenia: “it also reflects cultural heritage””The Crucifix is a symbol that reflects not only the religious but also the cultural identity of European nations. Churches, crucifixes and other religious symbols and images present throughout Slovenia – and across European Countries -, represent the Country’s national and cultural patrimony. Religious symbols in public buildings are not intended as a form of discrimination or exclusion but rather they are an expression of liberty, democracy and respect for the secular tradition of European nations. The unmotivated removal of crucifixes and of other religious symbols would lead to the forced separation of the national identity from the cultural and spiritual traditions”.Hungary: “the highest form of altruism””The presence of Christian religious symbols, of the Cross in particular, is not intended to exclude others. Rather, it is the expression of a tradition which everyone is familiar with and in which everyone can identify a series of high dialogue-fostering values which encourage service and support to the needy regardless of their faith, ethnicity and nationality. The symbol of the Cross expresses our common Salvation and the freedom of humanity as a whole. It does not impose a religion. Rather, it exemplifies the highest form of altruism and generosity and the greatest act of solidarity offered for the good of mankind. For this reason societies with a Christian tradition should not reject the public display of their religious symbols, especially in those places where their children are being educated. Otherwise those same societies risk failing in their task of transmitting their very own identities and values to the next generations. Religious symbols must be permitted by the law and by spontaneous acceptance”.Bulgaria: “the roots of Europe are Christian””Nobody doubts that Europe’s roots are Christian and that European civilization owes its existence to Christianity. We therefore exhort all Christian States, whether by origin or tradition, not to deny the presence and the display of Christian religious symbols – such as the Cross and the icon – in public buildings, especially in schools, where the children of Europe are raised and educated”.Russia: “an element of European identity””We understand the situation of religious freedom and of pluralism in Europe. However, religious symbols like the Cross epitomize not only the Christian religion but also one of the most important elements of European identity. We are cognizant of the significance of the ostension of traditional religious symbols. Under the Communist regime many believers underwent persecution in Russia and society reached peaks of moral folly. We believe that the presence of the Cross and of other religious Christian symbols doesn’t entail a preference for Christian confessions. The right to the freedom of religion does not exclude the spontaneous acceptance or the maintenance of traditional Christian symbols across European countries due to their high social value. Pluralism and the freedom of conscience must not lead to enforcing restrictions of the rights of those who wish to live in agreement with the spiritual and cultural identity of our continent”.Romania: “does not discriminate anyone””Displaying Christian religious symbols in public places, especially the Cross, reflects the religious feeling of the Christians of all confessions and does not mean to discriminate anyone. It does not impose a religion, but it is a sign of altruism, generosity and solidarity. The Cross is also a cultural ands social symbol, which has inspired the identities and values of the nations that compose Europe. For many nations of Eastern Europe, including Romania, the Cross is also the symbol of hope and of the fight for freedom. In the period of the Communist regime, religious symbols were banned and, after the fall of Communism, the newly-found possibility of displaying them publicly was regarded as a victory of democracy and freedom over totalitarianism and oppression. Therefore, societies of Christian traditions should not be prevented from publicly displaying religious symbols. Such a ban would mean not only to trample over religious freedom but it would also mean, for such societies, not to be able to hand their own identity and their own values on to the future generations”.Poland: “remember who we are and where we’re going””Societies with a Christian tradition shouldn’t fear displaying the Crucifix in public buildings, such as those where children and young people study. The Cross reminds us who we are and where we’re going. It speaks of the love of God for man who on the Cross found his deepest expression. It’s necessary that the Crucifix remain in the schools, in the hospitals and in public places, since the independence of the religious sphere from the secular one ought to be respected also in the relations amongst the various Countries and community institutions, while the dialogue between religions and people with different visions of the world will continue provided the respect for religious freedom, for the freedom of peoples and nations. The Church cannot renounce the Cross, which is present in public places and in individual conscience”. Fact file: the petitionersThe governments of ten countries belonging to the Council of Europe appealed against the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights on the Crucifix. During the hearing on 30 June, the Grand Chamber of the Strasbourg Court will examine the “written observations” submitted by these countries (Russia, Lithuania, Malta, San-Marino, Bulgaria, Monaco, Cyprus, Greece, Romania and Armenia) as well as the arguments of the applicant’s attorney and of the representatives of the Italian government. Another appeal was put forward by a group of 33 members of the European Parliament, including Miroslav Mikolasik (Slovakia), Marek Jozef Grobarczyk and Jacek Wlosowicz (Poland), Livia Jaroka (Hungary), Eija-Riitta Korhola (Finland), Carlo Casini and Mario Mauro (Italy), Eleni Theocharous (Cyprus), José Ignacio Salafranca (Spain), Bernd Posselt (Germany), Laszlo Tokes (Romania). Among the interveners for or against the rule are NGOs and associations such as Greek Helsinki Monitor, Associazione nazionale del libero pensiero, European Centre for Law and Justice, Eurojuris, International Commission of Jurists, Interights and Human Rights Watch. Finally, a joint appeal was also filed by Zentralkomitee des deutschen Katholiken, Semaines sociales de France and Associazioni cristiane lavoratori italiani.