Law professors from 11 countries urge repeal of ban on crucifixes

  • Thread starter Thread starter Soutane
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
"Alice von Hildebrand says it well: “Authentic culture can only be resurrected by remembering that man is not an animal with a remarkably developed brain but a person made in God’s image and likeness. True culture can only blossom in a world steeped in reverence and a consciousness of man’s spiritual dignity.” "

Wonderful quote.And THANK YOU;)
 
What the following diplomatic gobbledygook means is that they have a lot of trouble enforcing rulings. 😃

2009 Annual report on the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has issued today its third annual report on the supervision of the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.
Click to expand...
In 2009 1515 new judgments finding violations of the European Convention on Human Rights were brought before the Committee of Ministers for supervision of their execution, thus bringing the number of cases under supervision to 7 881.
…]
Click to expand...
In the light of the challenges posed by the present situation… the importance of continuing the efforts to optimise the supervision of execution on the basis of the action plans and reports submitted by governments and to reinforce cooperation programmes with States (notably through the Human Rights Trust Fund set up end 2007).
Click to expand...
The Director also underlines the improvement of the effectiveness of domestic remedies and the efficient means to be developed at national level to accelerate the execution of the judgments of the European Court, in the light in particular of the Committee of Ministers’ Recommendation (2008)2 on the subject. He also underlines the importance of the increased interaction between the Court and the Committee of Ministers, as well as with other Council of Europe bodies.
Click to expand...
 
GraceSofia said:
What the following diplomatic gobbledygook means is that they have a lot of trouble enforcing rulings. 😃

2009 Annual report on the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Click to expand...
They’re also good at avoiding trouble - as in ‘Vo v France’ which was about abortion. Their decision was that abortion was entirely a matter for the individual States and nothing whatsoever to do with them.

While this was the kind of decision that Americans would wish their Supreme Court had made/would make, it was a disappointment to European pro-lifers who hoped that a decision would be made in favour of the rights of the unborn. The Court, however, decided to keep well away from the whole business.
 
It’s not just North Americans who get confused between the Council of Europe’s ECHR and the EU. Us Brits are also notorious for mixing them up, especially the Eurosceptic tabloids (e.g. the “Daily Mail”).

I’m not sure if the court have much of an enforcement mechanism (except threatening expulsion) to compare with fines issued by the EU Court of Justice, so it’s possible Italy may be able to ignore this ruling.

With things like using the death penalty, I think ignoring rulings leads to expulsion–that’s why Russia renewed it’s moratorium on capital punishment. I think Russia has ignored rulings on homicides and other human rights abuses in Chechnya though without much happening.
 
Paying £40 mil per day for “politically correct” laws is a waste. Countries can make up their own laws. We even have laws where you can break into someone’s house and sue them if you hurt yourself because of the EU! I’m sure a piece of wood in the shape of a cross will do no harm :mad:
 
Thyme said:
We even have laws where you can break into someone’s house and sue them if you hurt yourself because of the EU!
Click to expand...
Perhaps you could cite the legislation and its relationship to the EU?
 
Speaking of Italy and whether they’re going to listen even if they lose the appeal:
In* Sentenza N. 311*, the Italian Constitutional Court stated that where rulings by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) conflict with provisions of the Italian Constitution, such rulings “lack legitimacy.” Sources close to the Italian judiciary told the Friday Fax that the decision was intended as a warning that activist rulings by the Strasbourg-based ECHR overstepping jurisdictional boundaries will not be given deference.
Click to expand...
Code: 
 Sources point to the timing of the decision, which followed an early November ECHR ruling, *Lautsi v. Italy*, directing that crucifixes be removed from the Italian classroom. The Italian government is appealing that decision to the full Grand Chamber.
Click to expand...
c-fam.org/publications/id.1537/pub_detail.asp
 
Thyme said:
. We even have laws where you can break into someone’s house and sue them if you hurt yourself because of the EU!
Click to expand...
I very much doubt there is such a law.

Can you direct us to it please?
 
I am an American lawyer who is mildly amused at the observations on this thread. From where I sit it looks to me like some countries in Europe are engaged in a great experiment which seeks to join highly diverse cultures in a common union for largely economic reasons. The extent to which this effort will succeed remains to be seen. One has to admit that the scope of the effort is wide. That Germany would allow itself to be put in the position of having to support Greece financially, for one example, is stunning. That the independent, and proud of it, French would ever see eye to eye with anyone on a controversial issue is another. An attempt to erect a judicial system whose jurisdiction would be respected and enforced by members of the union frankly astounds me. The legislation quoted is no more murky than much in the US. What the legislation says is not important, what is important is how the legislation is construed. (Any American lawyer can give a litany of observations how Courts have tortured statutes to reach a desired result.) There will be successes and failures. I am standing by for developments.
 
Thyme said:
If you google it, you can find cases where this has been done. I’ll have a look for it next week after my exams.
Click to expand...
If it’s related to the UK Human Rights Act, then it’s to do with the Council of Europe & the European Convention on Human Rights not the EU.

I personally think our last government liked people to think certain laws came from Europe because they couldn’t be bothered to change them, or to cover for British judges making unpopular judgements.

I seriously doubt in EU member states such as Poland, or Council of Europe members Turkey and Russia, burglars can sue householders.
 
Thyme said:
If you google it, you can find cases where this has been done. I’ll have a look for it next week after my exams.
Click to expand...
Well I did google it until I got bored - and still can’t find a ‘‘law’’ that states if you get hurt breaking into someones house you can sue.

I did however, find tons of stories of burglars getting their just deserts at the hands of homeowners.

This one in particular made me chuckle:

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196479/Pictured-The-battered-bruised-face-burglar-got-wrong-72-year-old-boxer.html

I found tons of stories like that one, but none of this mysterious ‘law’’ of which you speak.

Good luck with your exams 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top