Suchergebnisse

Liberté de religion crucifiée? Laïcité et écoles italiennes devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme Cet article explore la question de l'exposition obligatoire du crucifix dans l'école publique italienne, une matière qui est réglée par des dispositions datant des années 1920. La jurisprudence italienne sur cette question est contradictoire et à plusieurs reprises la Cour constitutionnelle a refusé de prendre position sur le sujet. La décision de la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme dans l'affaire Lautsi a mis fin a une odyssée judiciaire de quelque neuf ans sur la présence des crucifix dans les écoles italiennes. Selon la Cour, toute décision à ce sujet appartient à chaque État européen. Ce faisant la Cour a renoncé à jouer un rôle universaliste en faveur des systèmes constitutionnels nationaux. Cependant, plusieurs questions restent ouvertes pour l'Italie: notamment la place des signes religieux dans les espaces publics, leur relation avec les notions d'une société démocratique, pluraliste et laïque et les limites aux libertés de religion et de la religion tant à niveau individuel que collectif.

Le protocole n°11 à la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme, entré en vigueur le 1er novembre 1998, a fondamentalement modifié la procédure devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme. Le(s) particulier(s) ou ONG(s) peuvent désormais saisir directement la Cour, sans plus passer par le filtre de la Commission, qui est supprimée. La Cour devient quant à elle permanente. Un appel devant la Grande Chambre composée de 17 juges est enfin introduit par le protocole n°11.

Preliminary Material /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter One. Human Rights and International Law /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter Two. Non-qualified Rights /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter Three. Right to Liberty and Security /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter Four. The Notion of Fair Trial and Its Implications /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter Five. Private and Family Life /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter Six. Freedom of Expression /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter Seven. Non-Discrimination /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Chapter Eigh. Tother Issues /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Table of Judgments /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou -- Index /Françoise Tulkens , Anatoly Kovler , Dean Spielmann and Leto Cariolou.

For the European Court of Human Rights, the autonomy of religious communities forms the basis for guaranteeing freedom of religion for all faithful. Their right to organise themselves in accordance with their own rules, subject to very limited review by the courts, gives them considerable latitude in the recruitment, dismissal and assessment of the professional and personal conduct of their ministers of worship. Their specific mission also places them under an increased duty of loyalty to the religious organisation and the doctrine it professes, which will further limit their individual rights and freedoms. ; According to the European Court of Human Rights, the right to religious autonomy is at the heart of religious freedom for all believers. The right of religious communities to organize themselves according to their own rules, while being subject to limited judicial review, gives them a wide scope for action in the recruitment, dismissal and assessment of the professional and personal conduct of their ministers of religion. Because of their specific mission, the latter are bound by a heightened duty of loyalty towards the religious organization and its doctrine, which further limits their individual rights and freedoms. ; For the European Court of Human Rights, the autonomy of religious communities forms the basis for guaranteeing freedom of religion for all faithful. Their right to organise themselves in accordance with their own rules, subject to very limited review by the courts, gives them considerable latitude in the recruitment, dismissal and assessment of the professional and personal conduct of their ministers of worship. Their specific mission also places them under an increased duty of loyalty to the religious organisation and the doctrine it professes, which will further limit their individual rights and freedoms. ; Pour la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme, l'autonomie des communautés religieuses constitue un socle sur lequel repose la garantie de la liberté de religion de l'ensemble des ...

The Protection of the right to education has been the subject of endness debates troughout thepreparatory work on the European Convention of Human Rights. While the idea of a right to educationfor all was quite evident in the mind of the drafters of the European Convention of Human Rights, therespect for religious and philosophical convictions of parents, who come first in the education of theirchildren, has been more controversial. Theses doubts explain the inscription of this right in Article 2 ofthe Protocol to the Convention on 20 March 1952. Its importance mustn't be overlooked. Described asa « matrix right », the right to education contributes to a concrete and effective guarantee of the rightsand freedoms protected by the European Convention of Human Rights. It ensures personal blossomingand the right to make up their own minds. Therefore, everybody can claim this right, whether it be apupil or a student, regardless of the institution (public or private school, primary school or furthereducation). Aware of this key issue to protect a democratic society, the European Court of HumanRights has interpreted article 2 of the Protocol in order to reach a fair balance between the nationalmargin of appreciation and the protection of the right to education. That's the reason why the Courtrequires States to achieve some positive obligations especially to enable everyone to use existingeducation means. Through the guarantee to an equal access of everyone to education institutions, theEuropean Court of Human Rights also encourages national authorities to observe the distinctivefeatures of each individual. In order to do so, the authorities must remain neutral both in educationalinstitutions and their curriculum. No pupil or student must feel excluded or chastised because of hispersonal convictions. Then, securing the universal right to education implies securing the right to apluralistic education. ; La protection du droit à l'instruction a fait l'objet de longues discussions lors des travaux préparatoiresà la ...