Can the concept of European identity together with that of national identity – as provided for in current EU law - satisfy the needs of present-day multicultural society, which implies that cultural and linguistic pluralism are safeguarded, promoted and/or protected? This is the basic question to which this work tries to answer. After having deepened the concept of collective identity from the general theory of law point of view, we tried to apply the results to the EU law. The coexistence in the latter of both of the European and of the national identities was interpreted by the doctrine in two senses: a) in a de iure condito approach, the double concept would be founded on past cultural legacies; b) in a de iure condendo approach, the same double concept should only be seen in a future perspective. From a positive law standpoint, then following the first approach, one asked if the European Union is a legal system aimed exclusively at the past culture, or if, after all, it offers ideas aimed at opening up to today’s multicultural society. From the analysis of the primary EU law, one could check that both of art. 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Charter of Nice) and of art. 167, par. 1, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union-TFEU do not refer to the concept of cultural pluralism, that would imply cultural choices coming from below, from spontaneous communities, but to the concept of cultural diversity, that instead meant going towards cultural choices determined from above, from the State or from other public authorities. Therefore, the EU law approach to cultural diversity was (is) top-down. Indeed, if we refer to “the cooperation [of the EU] with third countries and the competent international organizations in the sphere of culture”, as stated in par. 3 of the same art. 167 TFEU, it allows us to give a different interpretation to the concept of cultural diversity. This was possible by observing the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, approved by the European Union in 2006. The Convention made it clear that cultural diversity is a matter for local communities, formed by the same individuals who practice it, according to the bottom-up approach. Then, the international law, recognized by the EU law, considers this concept as a product from the bottom, deriving from cultural collective identities and not from public authorities. In this way we could assimilate the concept of cultural diversity to the concept of cultural (and linguistic) pluralism. In conclusion, the current EU law allows us to deal with both of the cultural collective identity aimed at the past, managed by public authorities, and of the cultural collective identity aimed at the future left in the hands of spontaneous communities. The latter allows us to respond, at least in nuce, to the needs of the today multicultural society, from which Europe can not ignore. On the level of public actions, cultural diversity – as a fruit of freedom of man – makes use of the promotion and of the safeguard. Regarding linguistic diversity, to which the EU law always responds with promotion, in reality protection action should be granted, if it is true that linguistic diversity is a real fundamental human right

Può il concetto di identità europea unitamente a quello di identità nazionale, così come previsti nel diritto UE vigente, soddisfare alle esigenze della società multiculturale del tempo presente, che implica che il pluralismo culturale e il pluralismo linguistico siano salvaguardati, promossi e/o tutelati? E’ questo l’interrogativo di fondo al quale il presente lavoro cerca di rispondere. Dopo aver approfondito il concetto di identità collettiva da un punto di vista di teoria generale, si è cercato di applicarlo al diritto UE. La coesistenza dell’identità europea con l’identità nazionale nel diritto UE è stata interpretata dalla dottrina in due sensi: a) in un approccio de iure condito, il doppio concetto si fonderebbe su eredità culturali passate; b) in un approccio de iure condendo, lo stesso doppio concetto andrebbe visto solo in prospettiva futura. Da un punto di vista giuspositivistico, seguendo dunque il primo approccio, ci si è chiesti se l’UE sia davvero un ordinamento rivolto esclusivamente alla cultura passata, oppure se, in fondo, offra spunti volti ad aprirsi alla società multiculturale di oggi. Dall’analisi del diritto primario UE si è potuto constatare che tanto l’art. 22 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’UE (Carta di Nizza) quanto l’art. 167, c. 1, TfUE fanno riferimento non al concetto di pluralismo culturale, che implicherebbe scelte culturali provenienti dal basso, dalle comunità spontanee, bensì al concetto di «diversità culturale», che invece ha significato andare verso scelte culturali determinate dall’alto, dallo Stato, o da altre pubbliche autorità. Pertanto, l’approccio del diritto UE alla diversità culturale è stato (ed è) di tipo top-down. Invero, il c. 3 del medesimo art. 167 TfUE, facendo riferimento alla “cooperazione [dell’UE] con i paesi terzi e le organizzazioni internazionali competenti in materia di cultura” consente di dare al concetto di diversità culturale una differente interpretazione. Ciò è stato possibile osservando la Convenzione UNESCO sulla protezione e la promozione della diversità delle espressioni culturali del 2005 approvata dall’UE nel 2006. La Convenzione ha chiarito che la diversità culturale è questione che riguarda le comunità locali, formate dagli stessi individui che la praticano, secondo un approccio bottom-up. Quindi, il diritto internazionale riconosciuto dal diritto UE considera tale concetto come prodotto dal basso, da identità culturali di tipo collettivo e spontaneo e non da autorità politiche. Il che ci ha portati ad assimilare il concetto di diversità culturale al concetto di pluralismo culturale (e linguistico). La conclusione è che l’ordinamento UE vigente consente di occuparsi tanto dell’identità culturale collettiva rivolta al passato gestita dalle pubbliche autorità, quanto dell’identità culturale collettiva volta al futuro lasciata nelle mani delle comunità spontanee. Quest’ultimo risultato permette di rispondere, almeno in nuce, alle esigenze della società multiculturale di oggi, dalla quale l’Europa non può prescindere. Sul piano delle azioni pubbliche, la diversità culturale – in quanto frutto di libertà - si avvale della promozione e della salvaguardia. Per quanto riguarda la diversità linguistica, alla quale il diritto UE risponde sempre con la promozione, in realtà si dovrebbe accedere ad azioni di tutela, nella misura in cui la diversità linguistica è vero e proprio diritto fondamentale dell’uomo

Degrassi, L. (2018). Salvaguardia del pluralismo culturale e linguistico come parte dell’identita Europea. FEDERALISMI.IT(7), 1-32.

Salvaguardia del pluralismo culturale e linguistico come parte dell’identita Europea

Degrassi, L
2018

Abstract

Can the concept of European identity together with that of national identity – as provided for in current EU law - satisfy the needs of present-day multicultural society, which implies that cultural and linguistic pluralism are safeguarded, promoted and/or protected? This is the basic question to which this work tries to answer. After having deepened the concept of collective identity from the general theory of law point of view, we tried to apply the results to the EU law. The coexistence in the latter of both of the European and of the national identities was interpreted by the doctrine in two senses: a) in a de iure condito approach, the double concept would be founded on past cultural legacies; b) in a de iure condendo approach, the same double concept should only be seen in a future perspective. From a positive law standpoint, then following the first approach, one asked if the European Union is a legal system aimed exclusively at the past culture, or if, after all, it offers ideas aimed at opening up to today’s multicultural society. From the analysis of the primary EU law, one could check that both of art. 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Charter of Nice) and of art. 167, par. 1, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union-TFEU do not refer to the concept of cultural pluralism, that would imply cultural choices coming from below, from spontaneous communities, but to the concept of cultural diversity, that instead meant going towards cultural choices determined from above, from the State or from other public authorities. Therefore, the EU law approach to cultural diversity was (is) top-down. Indeed, if we refer to “the cooperation [of the EU] with third countries and the competent international organizations in the sphere of culture”, as stated in par. 3 of the same art. 167 TFEU, it allows us to give a different interpretation to the concept of cultural diversity. This was possible by observing the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, approved by the European Union in 2006. The Convention made it clear that cultural diversity is a matter for local communities, formed by the same individuals who practice it, according to the bottom-up approach. Then, the international law, recognized by the EU law, considers this concept as a product from the bottom, deriving from cultural collective identities and not from public authorities. In this way we could assimilate the concept of cultural diversity to the concept of cultural (and linguistic) pluralism. In conclusion, the current EU law allows us to deal with both of the cultural collective identity aimed at the past, managed by public authorities, and of the cultural collective identity aimed at the future left in the hands of spontaneous communities. The latter allows us to respond, at least in nuce, to the needs of the today multicultural society, from which Europe can not ignore. On the level of public actions, cultural diversity – as a fruit of freedom of man – makes use of the promotion and of the safeguard. Regarding linguistic diversity, to which the EU law always responds with promotion, in reality protection action should be granted, if it is true that linguistic diversity is a real fundamental human right
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Cultural Pluralism; Linguistic Pluralism; Cultural Diversity; European Identity
Pluralismo culturale; pluralismo linguistico; diversità culturale; identità europea
Italian
28-mar-2018
2018
7
1
32
none
Degrassi, L. (2018). Salvaguardia del pluralismo culturale e linguistico come parte dell’identita Europea. FEDERALISMI.IT(7), 1-32.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10281/195425
Citazioni
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
Social impact