The Czech Catholic Church has filed a constitutional complaint in the dispute do determine ownership of St Vitus Cathedral at Prague Castle, in reaction to the Supreme Court's verdict confirming that it belongs to the state, Prague Archbishopric spokesman Ales Pistora told CTK on Tuesday. The church argues that the right to just court proceedings has been violated in this case.
The dispute between the state and church has been lasting since 1992 with a number of twists and turns.
The latest verdict, upheld by the Supreme Court, was based on the government's resolution from 1954. According to it, St Vitus Cathedral belongs to all Czechoslovak people.
The Supreme Court rejected the church's appellate review in March.
The lower-level and the appeals courts previously ruled that the cathedral was owned by the church. The verdict was, however, abrogated by the Supreme Court.
The St Vitus Metropolitan Chapter headed by Prague Archbishop Cardinal Miloslav Vlk questions the unbiased character of judge Frantisek Istvanek who was a member of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (KSC) before the 1989 collapse of the totalitarian regime.
The church has raised objections to the interpretation of the law and points to the state commitment to redress the property wrongs caused to the church by the communist regime. It also points out that the Supreme Court followed a legal opinion reflecting the communist era.
St Vitus Cathedral, founded in 1344 and completed in 1929 on the premises of Prague Castle, the presidential seat, is the most significant church in the Czech Republic that is annually visited by thousands of Czechs and foreign tourists.
Czech rulers were crowned and are buried in the cathedral. The Czech coronation regalia are also kept in the church that dominates the Prague skyline.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Disclaimer
No responsibility or liability shall attach itself to us or to the blogspot ‘Clerical Whispers’ for any or all of the articles placed here.
The placing of an article hereupon does not necessarily imply that we agree or accept the contents of the article as being necessarily factual in theology, dogma or otherwise.
Source (PDM)
SV (ED)