FOGLI DI LAVORO per il Diritto internazionale 3 ... - Giurisprudenza

204
FOGLI DI LAVORO per il Diritto internazionale 3/2008
conscience and religion, and the duty of the national authorities
to impart to the public information on matters of general
concern.
97. The Court notes in the first place that the Basic Law
empowers the Government to collect and disseminate
information of their own motion. In reviewing the
constitutionality of this activity, the Federal Constitutional Court
has developed case-law limiting the Government's power in this
field. The Government, in fulfilling the functions assumed by it,
must take care that information is conveyed in a neutral manner
when dealing with religious and philosophical convictions and is
bound by the standards inherent in the proportionality principle.
Even when circumscribed in this way, such information clearly
cannot exclude on the part of the Government certain
assessments capable of encroaching on the religious or
philosophical sphere.
98. Having regard not only to the particular circumstances of
the case but also to its background, the Court notes that at the
material time the increasing number of new religious and
ideological movements generated conflict and tension in
German society, raising questions of general importance. The
contested statements and the other material before the Court
show that the German Government, by providing people in good
time with explanations it considered useful at that time, was
aiming to settle a burning public issue and attempting to warn
citizens against phenomena it viewed as disturbing, for example,
the appearance of numerous new religious movements and their
attraction for young people. The public authorities wished to
enable people, if necessary, to take care of themselves and not to
land themselves or others in difficulties solely on account of
lack of knowledge.
99. The Court takes the view that such a power of preventive
intervention on the State's part is also consistent with the
Contracting Parties' positive obligations under Article 1 of the
Convention to secure the rights and freedoms of persons within
their jurisdiction. Those obligations relate not only to any
interference that may result from acts or omissions imputable to
agents of the State or occurring in public establishments, but
also to interference imputable to private individuals within non-
State entities (see, mutatis mutandis, Calvelli and Ciglio v. Italy