Autor
Palabras clave
Libertad religiosa, símbolos religiosos, pluralismo constitucional, margen de apreciación, principio de subsidiariedad, jurisprudencia del TEDH.
Resumen
Las convicciones religiosas siempre han planteado controvertidas cuestiones en función del contexto político y social y seguramente nos encontramos en la actualidad en un momento de evolución debido al marcado pluralismo que presenta nuestra sociedad. Confrontado con el conflicto de los símbolos religiosos, el TEDH suele prestar deferencia a las peculiaridades de los Estados partes a través de la doctrina del margen de apreciación, otorgando protagonismo a las autoridades nacionales en tanto que organizador neutro e imparcial del ejercicio de las diversas religiones. Lejos de ello, sin embargo, en el asunto Lautsi la Sala del TEDH omitió recurrir a esta doctrina, lo cual plantea ineludiblemente si el esquema de relaciones mantenido hasta ahora continúa siendo válido y ello porque de sus considerandos parece destilarse la idea de que un entorno escolar abierto e inclusivo tiene necesariamente que requerir la exclusión de todos los símbolos religiosos, con independencia de que el estado obligue a exhibirlos. Desde nuestra perspectiva, la situación es totalmente distinta cuando la iniciativa parte de los usuarios de ese servicio público. La diversidad del acervo constitucional paneuropeo apelaría más bien a favor de que se pudieran mostrar todos aquellos que los usuarios de ese servicio público deseen.
Keywords
Religious liberty, religious symbols, constitutional pluralism, margin of appreciation, principle of subsidiarity, ECtHR Case-Law.
Abstract
Religious convictions have always raised controversial issues depending on political and social context. Surely we are now confronted with an evolution due to the
marked pluralism of our society. Faced with the conflict of religious symbols, the ECHR has often given deference to the peculiarities of states parties through the doctrine of margin of appreciation, giving prominence to the State’s role as the neutral and impartial organiser of the exercise of various religions. However, in Lautsi the ECHR chamber failed to resort to this doctrine. This inevitably arises whether the scheme relations so far maintained remains valid. From this case it seems to discard the idea that an school environment open and
inclusive necessarily have to require the exclusion of all religious symbols, regardless of
whether the state compel to display them. From our perspective, the situation is completely
different if the initiative comes from the users of this public service. The diversity of Pan-European constitutional acquis would appeal rather in favour of permitting all those symbols that public service users want.
marked pluralism of our society. Faced with the conflict of religious symbols, the ECHR has often given deference to the peculiarities of states parties through the doctrine of margin of appreciation, giving prominence to the State’s role as the neutral and impartial organiser of the exercise of various religions. However, in Lautsi the ECHR chamber failed to resort to this doctrine. This inevitably arises whether the scheme relations so far maintained remains valid. From this case it seems to discard the idea that an school environment open and
inclusive necessarily have to require the exclusion of all religious symbols, regardless of
whether the state compel to display them. From our perspective, the situation is completely
different if the initiative comes from the users of this public service. The diversity of Pan-European constitutional acquis would appeal rather in favour of permitting all those symbols that public service users want.