Homophobia: what the Zan bill says and why the Vatican is calling for changes
Rights — di Simone Santi
The Vatican has invoked the Concordat to request amendments to the Zan bill on homotransphobia: everything you need to know.
Homophobia: what the Zan bill says and why the Vatican is calling for changes
The Vatican has invoked the Concordat to request amendments to the Zan bill on homotransphobia: everything you need to know.
The Vatican has asked Italy to amend the Zan bill, the measure against homotransphobia already passed by the Chamber of Deputies and now at the centre of a lengthy and slow debate in the Senate, on the grounds that it would violate "in certain provisions the agreement revising the Concordat" — or more precisely, the agreement signed in 1984 between the State and the Church that superseded the Concordat of 1929, part of the Lateran Pacts. The 1984 Concordat, also known as the Villa Madama Agreement and signed by Prime Minister Bettino Craxi and Vatican Secretary of State Agostino Casaroli, updated the arrangements between State and Church, regulating, among other things, the independence and sovereignty of the two legal orders, the establishment of Catholic schools and their equivalence to state schools, the protection of Vatican buildings and artistic heritage, and the introduction of the otto per mille.
Cosa c’è (in Vaticano) dietro lo strappo sulla legge contro l’omofobia csera.it/8d08057aWM
The Vatican's request delivered in a formal note
The official request reached the Italian embassy to the Holy See on 17 June (though news of it was only made public yesterday by Corriere della Sera) in the form of a verbal note — a formal communication drafted in the third person and unsigned. It was delivered by Monsignor Paul Richard Gallagher, Secretary for Relations with States of the Secretariat of State, the equivalent of our Foreign Minister.
The note — which by its nature cannot be attributed personally to Monsignor Gallagher or to Pope Francis, but rather to the Holy See in general — explains that certain passages of the Zan bill would call into question "the freedom of organisation of private Catholic schools": this is because Article 7 of the bill would not exempt private schools from organising activities on the occasion of the National Day against homophobia, lesbophobia and transphobia, established by the new law itself.
#22giugno #Vaticano Il cardinale Gambetti spiega le recenti norme sulle celebrazioni mattutine nella Basilica di San Pietro, ricordando che le azioni liturgiche non sono azioni private e che per i sacerdoti è più che opportuno concelebrare.
Approfondisci: bit.ly/3j3LbwG
Approfondisci: bit.ly/3j3LbwG
But above all, the Vatican explains, the provisions of the Zan bill "would even threaten, in a more general sense, the freedom of thought of the Catholic community", with concern "that the approval of the law could go so far as to entail risks of a judicial nature". The Vatican therefore asks that "our concerns be taken into consideration".
In what sense, or in what way? The Concordat between State and Church provides that, when a problem arises over the correct application of the agreement, it is possible to activate a joint commission tasked with resolving the dispute amicably. Article 14 of the 1984 Concordat indeed states that "should difficulties of interpretation or application of the provisions arise in the future, the Holy See and the Italian Republic shall entrust the search for an amicable solution to a joint commission appointed by them".
In practice, however, from 1984 to the present no need has arisen to invoke the joint commission, whose composition is not even specified in the text: in 2005 the Vatican did campaign for the failure to reach a quorum in the abrogative referendum on assisted reproduction, but by addressing public opinion rather than the political sphere, while in 2016, on the occasion of the approval of the civil unions law, Bergoglio stated clearly that "the Pope does not interfere in Italian politics". The only precedent in which the Vatican, through the then Pope Paul VI, addressed the Italian ambassador to the Holy See directly was in 1974, on the occasion of the divorce law, but even then no genuine State-Vatican negotiation ensued, just as was the case in 1981 over the legalisation of abortion, which was also viewed very negatively by John Paul II.
The response from the institutions
For this reason, the Vatican's official note was seen by many observers as an interference in the work of Parliament, which is currently in the midst of its examination of the bill. Roberto Fico, president of the parliamentary chamber that has already approved the Zan bill, has already made clear that "Parliament is sovereign". And also in the Chamber today, Prime Minister Mario Draghi stated: "Ours is a secular state, not a confessional state, and therefore Parliament is certainly free to debate and to legislate".
Vaticano-ddl Zan, Fico: «No alle ingerenze, Parlamento è sovrano» trib.al/e6OKJJs
The deadlock in the Senate and the alternative bill
The Zan bill has so far been approved only by the Chamber, last November, while in the Senate it was scheduled for the Justice Committee as early as May, but progress has been slow due to a split within the majority itself. Lega, Forza Italia and Udc have in fact put forward an alternative bill, which limits itself to introducing homophobia as an aggravating circumstance alongside those already provided for under Article 61 of the Penal Code ("having acted on grounds of ethnic origin, religious belief, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, disability").
The concern that the Zan bill could impinge on freedom of opinion, as highlighted by the Vatican, is one of the main concerns of the centre-right. "The task of criminal law — as stated in the explanatory report to the alternative bill — is to adhere to the materiality of facts, and it cannot be used to promote ethical and cultural values".
What the Zan bill provides for
The bill against homotransphobia, misogyny and ableism drawn up by Alessandro Zan, a member of parliament for the Pd, would instead amend Article 604 bis of the Penal Code, which currently punishes with up to six years' imprisonment the offences of propaganda and incitement to crime on grounds of racial, ethnic and religious discrimination, by also adding discriminatory acts based on "sex, gender, sexual orientation or gender identity".
Article 4 of the Zan bill does, however, clarify that "the free expression of beliefs or opinions, as well as lawful conduct attributable to the pluralism of ideas or freedom of choice, are safeguarded, provided they are not capable of giving rise to a concrete danger of discriminatory or violent acts being committed".
This is because, as Zan himself explained to LifeGate, "if you assault someone today on grounds of race, ethnicity or religion, you are punished with an aggravating circumstance under the Mancino law. If you assault a person or a couple because they are gay, however, that is not the case." Italy is currently among the few countries in Europe that do not provide for this type of aggravating circumstance: not only more progressive countries such as Germany, England and France (where in 2019 the assault by three young men on a gay couple in Orléans was classified as a hate crime), but even countries such as Hungary, now at the centre of controversy over a new law banning minors from accessing pro-LGBTQI content, have adopted legislation on the matter in past years.