CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 31 mai 2007

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 97 May 2007 Grande Oriente d’Italia di Palazzo Giustiniani v. Italy (no. 2) - 26740/02 Judgment 31.5.2007 [Section I] Article 14 Discrimination Statutory obligation for Freemasons to declare their membership when applying for regional authority posts: violation   Article 34 Victim Association of Masonic lodges complaining of statutory obligation for Freemasons to declare their membership when applying for positions of high responsibility: victim status upheld   Facts : The applicant is an Italian Masonic association to which several lodges are affiliated. It has been in existence since 1805 and is affiliated to Universal Freemasonry. It complained of a regional law passed in 2000 which lays down the rules to be followed for appointments to public office at regional level. The law requires candidates for nomination and appointment to public office at regional level to declare whether they are members of any Masonic or secret association. The absence of a declaration is a ground for refusing appointment. Of the candidates for a post on the executive board of a company in which the Region was a stakeholder, the only one who had declared his membership of a Masonic lodge was chosen by the Regional Council to carry out those duties. Law : The applicant association was a grouping of several Masonic lodges. It could claim to be a "victim" of a breach of its right to freedom of association as the legal obligation to declare one's membership of a Masonic lodge when applying for positions of high responsibility might adversely affect its image and associative life. That   conclusion meant that there had been an interference with its right to freedom of association. The provision in question distinguished between secret and Masonic associations, membership of which had to be declared, and all other associations, whose members were exempted from any such obligation; there was therefore a difference of treatment between the members of the applicant association and those of any other, non-secret, association. In the first case of Grande Oriente d'Italia di Palazzo Giustiniani   v. Italy , no. 35972/97, CEDH   2001‑VIII, the Court had held that the prohibition on appointing Freemasons to public office, which had been introduced in order to "reassure" the public at a time when there had been controversy surrounding their role in the life of the country, had pursued the legitimate aims of protecting national security and preventing disorder. In the instant case the Court considered that those requirements, valid in 1996, were still valid in 2000. Here, unlike in the legislation challenged in the first case, membership of the Freemasons did not automatically debar the candidate from appointment to one of the offices in question. When such membership was declared the public authority used its discretion in determining whether the link between the candidate and the lodge, possibly in conjunction with other considerations, should disqualify the candidate. This had been demonstrated by the fact that the only candidate to have declared his membership of a lodge had been chosen for a post on the executive board of a company in which the Region was a stakeholder. However, membership of many other, non-secret associations might create a problem for national security and the prevention of disorder where members of those associations held public office. This might be the case, for example, for political parties or groups advocating racist or xenophobic ideas, or for sects or associations with a military-type internal structure or those that established a rigid and incompressible bond of solidarity between their members or pursued an ideology that ran counter to the rules of democracy. Yet only members of a Masonic association were under an obligation to declare their membership when seeking appointment to certain public offices for which the Region was the appointing authority. No objective and reasonable justification for this difference in treatment compared with members of non-secret associations had been advanced by the Government. Conclusion : violation (six votes to one). Article   46 – It was for the respondent state to take the necessary steps to repair the damage caused by the discrimination suffered by the applicant and considered by the Court to be at variance with the Convention. Article   41 – Damage: finding of violation sufficient. See also Grande Oriente d'Italia di Palazzo Giustiniani v . Italy , no. 35972/97, judgment of 2 August 2001, Information note no. 33 and ECHR 2001‑VIII. See also Article   34.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes