法院对新冠疫情期间宗教自由的评估

Valerio D'Alò
{"title":"法院对新冠疫情期间宗教自由的评估","authors":"Valerio D'Alò","doi":"10.54103/1971-8543/18821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. Premise - 2. Italy: the relevance of the possibility of satisfying religious feeling through the alternatives offered by computer tools - 3. Germany: the non-belonging of the public exercise of worship to the Wesensgehalt of the right to religious freedom - 4. France: the suspension of religious ceremonies as a “serious and manifestly unlawful interference” with religious freedom - 5. United States of America: the participation in religious services as the “heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty” - 6. Concluding remarks. \nABSTRACT: The purpose of this paper is to examine the position and the scope of the right to religious freedom in the case law of the national courts of some European and non-European countries, which are called upon to establish the legitimacy or otherwise of the balancing realized by the emergency regulation against Covid-19 between this interest and the equally important one of health. Such evaluations, essentially conducted by the judges using the principle of proportionality (as well as that of reasonableness), betray, in fact, in the phase of verification of the adequacy of the measure (so-called Verhälntismäßigkeit im engeren Sinne) the identification of the sphere of intangibility within the right, removed from further balancing. The systems taken into consideration for this purpose are the Italian, German, French and American ones, identified as significant expressions of different regimes of relations between the State and religious denominations, and, therefore, tending to a different overall attitude of the State towards religious experience.","PeriodicalId":30314,"journal":{"name":"Stato Chiese e Pluralismo Confessionale","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Religious freedom during Covid-19 in Courts’ evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Valerio D'Alò\",\"doi\":\"10.54103/1971-8543/18821\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. Premise - 2. Italy: the relevance of the possibility of satisfying religious feeling through the alternatives offered by computer tools - 3. Germany: the non-belonging of the public exercise of worship to the Wesensgehalt of the right to religious freedom - 4. France: the suspension of religious ceremonies as a “serious and manifestly unlawful interference” with religious freedom - 5. United States of America: the participation in religious services as the “heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty” - 6. Concluding remarks. \\nABSTRACT: The purpose of this paper is to examine the position and the scope of the right to religious freedom in the case law of the national courts of some European and non-European countries, which are called upon to establish the legitimacy or otherwise of the balancing realized by the emergency regulation against Covid-19 between this interest and the equally important one of health. Such evaluations, essentially conducted by the judges using the principle of proportionality (as well as that of reasonableness), betray, in fact, in the phase of verification of the adequacy of the measure (so-called Verhälntismäßigkeit im engeren Sinne) the identification of the sphere of intangibility within the right, removed from further balancing. The systems taken into consideration for this purpose are the Italian, German, French and American ones, identified as significant expressions of different regimes of relations between the State and religious denominations, and, therefore, tending to a different overall attitude of the State towards religious experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30314,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Stato Chiese e Pluralismo Confessionale\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Stato Chiese e Pluralismo Confessionale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54103/1971-8543/18821\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stato Chiese e Pluralismo Confessionale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54103/1971-8543/18821","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目录:1;前提- 2。意大利:通过计算机工具提供的替代方案来满足宗教情感的可能性的相关性- 3。德国:不属于公众行使宗教信仰权利的宗教自由权- 4。法国:暂停宗教仪式是对宗教自由的“严重和明显的非法干涉”。6.美利坚合众国:参加宗教服务是“第一修正案保障宗教自由的核心”。结束语。摘要:本文旨在考察一些欧洲和非欧洲国家的国家法院判例法中宗教自由权的地位和范围,这些判例法被要求确立《新冠肺炎应急条例》所实现的宗教自由权与同样重要的健康自由权之间的平衡的合法性或其他方面。这种评价基本上是由法官利用相称性原则(以及合理性原则)进行的,事实上,在核查措施是否适当的阶段(所谓的Verhälntismäßigkeit im engeren Sinne)暴露了对权利内的无形范围的确定,而不是进一步的平衡。为此目的所考虑的制度是意大利、德国、法国和美国的制度,这些制度被认为是国家与宗教派别之间关系的不同制度的重要表现,因此,它们倾向于国家对宗教经验的不同总体态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Religious freedom during Covid-19 in Courts’ evaluation
TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. Premise - 2. Italy: the relevance of the possibility of satisfying religious feeling through the alternatives offered by computer tools - 3. Germany: the non-belonging of the public exercise of worship to the Wesensgehalt of the right to religious freedom - 4. France: the suspension of religious ceremonies as a “serious and manifestly unlawful interference” with religious freedom - 5. United States of America: the participation in religious services as the “heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty” - 6. Concluding remarks. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this paper is to examine the position and the scope of the right to religious freedom in the case law of the national courts of some European and non-European countries, which are called upon to establish the legitimacy or otherwise of the balancing realized by the emergency regulation against Covid-19 between this interest and the equally important one of health. Such evaluations, essentially conducted by the judges using the principle of proportionality (as well as that of reasonableness), betray, in fact, in the phase of verification of the adequacy of the measure (so-called Verhälntismäßigkeit im engeren Sinne) the identification of the sphere of intangibility within the right, removed from further balancing. The systems taken into consideration for this purpose are the Italian, German, French and American ones, identified as significant expressions of different regimes of relations between the State and religious denominations, and, therefore, tending to a different overall attitude of the State towards religious experience.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
73
审稿时长
3 weeks
期刊最新文献
Lealtà istituzionale, fedeltà religiosa e integrità morale in democrazia La qualificazione giuridica dello Stato di Israele dal punto di vista della libertà religiosa La vigilanza sull’amministrazione economica della Curia Romana È possibile misurare i diritti delle minoranze di religione e convinzione? De Albanensium seu Græcorum peculiari cura habenda. La condizione religiosa dei fedeli italo-albanesi nella Calabria post-tridentina. Profili storico-giuridici
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1