Les héritages chrétiens: quel avenir?

Moreana ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (Number 176) (1) ◽  
pp. 175-190
Author(s):  
Bernard Bourdin

The legacy from Christianity unquestionably lies at the root of Europe, even if not exclusively. It has taken many aspects from the Middle Ages to modern times. If the Christian heritage is diversely understood and accepted within the European Union, the reason is essentially due to its political and religious significance. However, its impact in politics and religion has often been far from negative, if we will consider what secular societies have derived from Christianity: human rights, for example, and a religious affiliation which has been part and parcel of national identity. The Christian legacy has to be acknowledged through a critical analysis which does not deny the truth of the past but should support a European project built around common values.

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-84
Author(s):  
Max Vetzo

The cases of Menci (C-524/15), Garlsson (C-537/16) and Di Puma (C-596/16 and C-597/16) deal with the duplication of criminal and punitive administrative proceedings for the same conduct in the area of VAT and market abuse. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held that this duplication of proceedings constitutes a limitation of the ne bis in idem principle of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (Charter). This infringement is only justified if the requirements of the limitation clause of Article 52(1) of the Charter are met. The judgments were highly anticipated as they constitute the response of the CJEU to the judgment in A and B v Norway delivered by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), in which the ECtHR lowered the level of protection afforded by the ne bis in idem principle of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention of Human Rights (A4P7 ECHR). While there are differences between the approaches taken by both courts, it appears that the reasoning of the CJEU in the judgments largely mirrors that of the ECtHR in A and B v Norway. This article frames the judgments in terms of the dialogue between the CJEU and ECtHR on the ne bis in idem principle. It does so chronologically, by focusing on the past, present and future of the ne bis in idem dialogue between both European courts.


2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-130
Author(s):  
Ferenc L. Lendvai

According to a generally accepted conception, members of a nation foster their national identity through assorting their memories of the past, elaborating and preserving their symbols collectively. We have to look for the original unity forming the basis of national unity either in the cohesive force of common origin and residence, or in the self‐conscious contracts of the individuals, or in both. The European Union as such does not have sovereignty; those of the Member States overrule its legislative and executive institutions. Perhaps we can speak about the European Union as a community on a cultural basis. This will raise the question of multiculturalism. Recently an interesting polemic has been developing on the concept and role of Leitkultur. In antiquity the Imperium Romanum, in the Middle Ages the Republica Christiana seem to have been the multicultural forerunners of the European Union.


Author(s):  
حنان ساري ◽  
محمد أبو الليث الخيرآبادي

انتشرت لفظة الحداثة في عصرنا الحالي انتشاراً واسعاً، وأخذت مفهومات متعددة، ونحن لا نراها أكثر من أنها امتداد طبيعي للقلق الأوروبي.وسعى التيار الحداثي لتقديم مشاريع تعتمد كلية على مناهج وآليات غربية في دراستها وتعاملها مع القرآن الكريم والسنة، ولعل أهم الذين تقدموا بتلك المشاريع؛ محمد أركون، عبد المجيد الشرفي التونسي، محمد عابد الجابري، حسن حنفي، نصر حامد أبوزيد، الطيب التيزني السوري، محمد شحرور، جمال البنا وغيرهم، وطالبوا بإعادة قراءة القرآن الكريم على ضوء المناهج النقدية الغربية في عملية التقليد الأعمى، ومن ثم نقلوا التجربة الأوروبية بكل آثارها الفوضوية إلى ساحة الفكر الإسلامي. وإن مدعي تجديد الدين من هؤلاء، ليس لهم صلة بالدين أو علومه، بقدر ما تشبعت أفكارهم بمناهج علمانية، فالمراد من جهودهم ليس الدين، وإنما غرس الحداثة بدل الدين، فهي خطَّةٌ تقوم على التَّغيير من داخل البيت الإسلاميِّ من خلال العبث بالنُّصوص الشَّرعيَّة بتحريفها وتفريغها من محتواها الحقيقيِّ، ووضع المحتوى الذي يريدون؛ فهم يَطرحون أفكارَهم وآراءَهم على أنَّها رؤى إسلاميَّة ناشئة عن الاجتهاد في فهم الدِّين. وقد حَمَلَ هذا الاتجاهُ شعار (التَّحديث والعصرنة للإسلام)؛ فهم يريدون منَّا تركَ ما أَجْمَعَتْ عليه الأُمَّةُ من معاني القرآن والسُّنَّة، لفهم جديد مغاير لفهم السَّلَف الصَّالح يكون متناسبًا مع هذا العصر الذي نعيش فيه. الكلمات المفتاحيّة: الحداثة، أوهام، الحداثيون، قراءة معاصرة، العصرنة للإسلام. Abstract In modern times, the word Modernity has spread widely and has become widely understood, and we see it as a natural extension of European concern and confusion. The Modernist Movement strived to present the ideas that rely completely on Western methodologies and approaches in their study and dealing with Qur’an and Sunnah. The most important scholars that have presented these ideas are; Mohammad Arkoun, ‘Abd Al-Majid Sharafi al-Tunisi, Mohammed ‘Abed al-Jabri, Hassan Hanafi, Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, Tayyeb Tizini, Muhammad Shahrour, Jamal Al-Banna, and others, they called for a re-reading and reinterpret the Qur’an in the light of Western critical approaches. Then, conveyed and brought the European experience and practice with all its chaotic effects to Islamic thought. The slogan of “Renewal of Religion” from these people has no relation to religion (Islam) or its sources, but instead saturated their ideas with secular methods. They tried to instill modernity rather than religion, and misinterpreted the Islamic sources by distorting it and evacuating it from the true context and setting it with their own understanding. They claim their ideas and opinions as the effort to understand religion and carried the slogan of “Modernization and Modernization of Islam”; they want us to leave the consensus of the Muslim scholars on religious issues (Ijmaa’ al-Ummah) especially relating to the meaning of the Qur’an and Sunnah and bring us to a new views and understanding on religious issues which are contradictory to the views of the past Muslim scholars (al-salaf al-soleh) to fulfill their opinions. Keywords: Modernity, Misunderstanding, Modernists, Contemporary Reading, Modernization of Islam.


2020 ◽  
pp. 92-97
Author(s):  
A. V. Kuznetsov

The article examines the norms of international law and the legislation of the EU countries. The list of main provisions of constitutional and legal restrictions in the European Union countries is presented. The application of the norms is described Human rights conventions. The principle of implementing legal acts in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic is considered. A comparative analysis of legal restrictive measures in the States of the European Union is carried out.


2021 ◽  
pp. 203228442199593
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schomburg ◽  
Anna Oehmichen ◽  
Katrin Kayß

As human rights have increasingly gained importance at the European Union level, this article examines the remaining scope of human rights protection under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. While some international human rights instruments remain applicable, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union did not become part of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). The consequences, especially the inapplicability of the internationalised ne bis in idem principle, are analysed. Furthermore, the conditionality of the TCA in general as well as the specific conditionality for judicial cooperation in criminal matters are discussed. In this context, the risk that cooperation may cease at any moment if any Member State or the UK leave the European Convention of Human Rights is highlighted. Lastly, the authors raise the problem of the lack of judicial review, as the Court of Justice of the European Union is no longer competent.


2020 ◽  
pp. 203228442097974
Author(s):  
Sibel Top ◽  
Paul De Hert

This article examines the changing balance established by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) between human rights filters to extradition and the obligation to cooperate and how this shift of rationale brought the Court closer to the position of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in that respect. The article argues that the ECtHR initially adopted a position whereby it prioritised human rights concerns over extraditions, but that it later nuanced that approach by establishing, in some cases, an obligation to cooperate to ensure proper respect of human rights. This refinement of its position brought the ECtHR closer to the approach adopted by the CJEU that traditionally put the obligation to cooperate above human rights concerns. In recent years, however, the CJEU also backtracked to some extent from its uncompromising attitude on the obligation to cooperate, which enabled a convergence of the rationales of the two Courts. Although this alignment of the Courts was necessary to mitigate the conflicting obligations of European Union Member States towards both Courts, this article warns against the danger of making too many human rights concessions to cooperation in criminal matters.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document