CEDHPRESS;HEARINGS;ENG
CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 30 juin 2010
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:003-3181443-3547433
- Date
- 30 juin 2010
- Publication
- 30 juin 2010
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulAnalyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .sA101A847 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold } .sE0D34C67 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s1F6AC3E7 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32B93E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:5pt } .sBA813D16 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0000ff } .sACA0C168 { margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; font-size:11pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s276B5F6E { margin-top:5pt; margin-left:28.06pt; padding-left:7.94pt; font-family:serif; font-size:11pt } .s51351B31 { margin-left:28.06pt; padding-left:7.94pt; font-family:serif; font-size:11pt } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sE3FD21FF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:108pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-108pt; font-size:11pt } .s59B37E5D { width:44.42pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s386C3491 { width:31.24pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sE926D4E4 { width:22.95pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s67F86EFC { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; color:#000080 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s8B683E1B { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sC90828B6 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline } 531 30.06.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING LAUTSI v. ITALY     The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Chamber hearing today, Wednesday   30   June   2010, at 9.15 a.m . in the case of Lautsi v. Italy (application no. 30814/06). The hearing will be broadcast from 2.30 p.m. on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).     The applicant, Ms Soile Lautsi, is an Italian national who lives in Abano Terme (Italy). In   2001-2002 her children, aged 11 and 13 respectively, attended the State school “ Istituto comprensivo statale Vittorino da Feltre ” in Abano Terme. All of the classrooms had a crucifix on the wall, including those in which Ms Lautsi’s children had lessons. She considered that this was contrary to the principle of secularism by which she wished to bring up her children. At a meeting of the school’s governing body the applicant’s husband raised the question of the display of religious symbols in classrooms and asked if they could be removed. In May 2002 the governors decided to leave the crucifixes in the classrooms. A directive recommending such an approach was subsequently sent to all head teachers by the Ministry of State Education.   On 23 July 2002 the applicant complained to the Veneto Regional Administrative Court about the decision by the school’s governing body, on the ground that it infringed the constitutional principles of secularism and of impartiality on the part of the public authorities. In 2005 the administrative court dismissed the applicant’s complaint. It held that the crucifix was both the symbol of Italian history and culture, and consequently of Italian identity, and the symbol of the principles of equality, liberty and tolerance, as well as of the State’s secularism. By a judgment of 13   February 2006, the Consiglio di Stato dismissed an appeal by the applicant.   On 3 November 2009 the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education) taken together with Article   9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion). The panel of five judges of the Grand Chamber, meeting on 1 and 2 March 2010, accepted the referral request submitted by the Italian Government on 28 January 2010. In accordance with   article 36 of the Convention,   the President of the Court authorised the   following   third parties to present written observations:   Governments of Armenia, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Lithuania, Malta, Monaco, Romania, the Russian Federation and San-Marino Jointly 33 members of the European Parliament Greek Helsinki Monitor Associazone nazionale de libero Pensiero European Centre for Law and Justice Eurojuris Jointly : International Commission of Jurists, Interights, Human Rights Watch Jointly: Zentralkomitee des deutschen Katholiken, Semaines sociales de France, Associazioni critiane lavoratori italiani     The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (France), President , Christos Rozakis (Greece), Nicolas Bratza (the United Kingdom), Peer Lorenzen (Denmark), Josep Casadevall (Andorra), Giovanni Bonello (Malta), Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenia) Nina Vajić (Croatia), Rait Maruste (Estonia), Anatoly Kovler (Russia), Sverre Erik Jebens (Norway), Päivi Hirvelä (Finland), Giorgio Malinverni (Switzerland), George Nicolaou (Cyprus), Ann Power (Ireland), Zdravka Kalaydjieva (Bulgaria), Guido Raimondi (Italy), judges , Mihai Poalelungi (Moldova), David Thór Björgvinsson (Iceland), Kristina Pardalos (San Marino), substitute judges , and also Erik Fribergh , Registrar .     Representatives of the parties   Government:   Nicola Lettieri , co-Agent ; Giuseppe   Albenzio and Umberto De Augustinis , Advisers ;   Applicants:     Nicolo Paoletti , Counsel , Natalia Paoletti and Claudia Sartori , Advisers ;     Third parties   Among the Third Parties, eight out of   ten governments have been granted the right to intervene during the hearing. They will be represented by   :   Joseph Weiler , Counsel , Stepan Kartashyan , Andrey Tehov , Euripides Evriviades , Vasileia Pelekou , Darius Simaitis , Joseph Licari , Georgy Matyushkin and Guido Bellatti Ceccoli , Advisers .     After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which will be held in private. Its ruling in the case will, however, be made at a later stage.   *** The press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on its Internet site . To receive the Court’s press releases, you can subscribe to the Court's RSS feeds .   Press contacts [email protected] / +33 3 90 21 42 08   Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : + 33 3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone: + 33 3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone: + 33 3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone: + 33 3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone: + 33 3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: + 33 3 90 21 49 79)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG
- Date
- 30 juin 2010
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:003-3181443-3547433
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel