Editorial

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that displaying crucifixes in Italian schools does not breach the rights of non-Catholic families. The judgment has rightly been received with satisfaction by Italy, the Holy See and all those – included, of course, Malta – who see and value the crucifix as a sign of Christianity’s key contribution to European culture and civilisation.

The European Court of Human Rights had, in November 2009, rejected arguments by the Italian government that the crucifix was a national symbol of culture, history and identity, tolerance and secularism. It ruled that having a crucifix in the classroom amounted to a violation of the right to parents to educate children as per their own wishes and a violation of the pupils’ right to practise the religion of their choice.

However, in a ruling that is binding on all 47 member countries of the Council of Europe, the Grand Chamber overturned the original judgment and decided crucifixes are acceptable in state school classrooms as it had found no evidence “that the display of such a symbol on classroom walls might have an influence on pupils”.

The origin of the case was a complaint 10 years ago by a Finnish-born Italian citizen who objected to the presence of crosses in her two sons’ classrooms in a state primary school near Padua. Italy’s Constitutional Court declined to rule on the matter, pointing out the crucifix provisions stemmed from secondary decrees predating the Constitution rather than Parliament-made law on the Italian statute books. The case then reached the European Court, which found in the mother’s favour, prompting Italy to request the matter be referred to the court’s appeal body, the 17-judge Grand Chamber.

Italy was joined in the appeal by 10 of the countries that make up the Council of Europe, including Malta. The other countries were Armenia, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Lithuania, Monaco, Romania, Russia and San Marino.

Arguing against the First Court’s comments, the Italian government’s representative, Nicola Lettieri, submitted that crucifixes in Italian classrooms are “a passive symbol that bears no relationship to the actual teaching, which is secular”. Moreover, there was no “indoctrination” involved and the cross did not deprive parents of the right to raise their children as they considered fit.

On their part, the 10 Council of Europe members supporting Italy argued, through their common representative, that the crucifix religious references and symbols are pervasive in Europe and do not necessarily suggest faith.

It was a major legal battle for freedom of faith, which produced the positive result Italy and its supporters in this case justifiably strived for. Christianity is a constant part of the ideals and principles that create a common patrimony of European states. The cross, as a basic Christian attribute, became at the same time a symbol of the common European heritage.

As Judge Giovanni Bonello said in his separate opinion that the ECHR was not empowered to bully states into secularism or to coerce countries into schemes of religious neutrality. Individual countries could choose whether to be secular or not.

The Grand Chamber’s decision was hailed by the Holy See as a historic and important ruling whereby an authoritative and international legal forum has ruled that the defence of human rights “cannot be juxtaposed against the religious foundations of European civilisation, a civilisation to which the contribution of Christianity was essential”.

It is a much-welcomed decision that will ensure the crucifix in European classrooms is there to stay.