The Case of the Mosque of Monfalcone: the Administrative Regional Court ruling

The provision of the Mayor Anna Cisint

The political instrumentalization of Muslims in Italy has clearly emerged with the recent provision of the mayor of Monfalcone (Gorizia), Anna Cisint, further extending to a second mosque and a third outdoor place of worship. This provision triggered a tug-of-war with national resonance starting at the end of last year. Anna Cisint had ordered the closure in the context of an ongoing attack on Islam, sparking an uproar. Islamic communities were not able to pray during the holy month of Ramadan, despite a provisional ruling by the Council of State in favor of freedom of worship.

The TAR ruling on the change of intended use

The TAR judges have now agreed with the Cultural Center on a crucial issue: the change in intended use of the premises designated as a mosque. According to the sentence, "The regional forecast requires - for the activation of the municipal repressive power - the demonstration that the new intended use be prohibited by the urban planning instrument or that it affects the standards in terms of waste management, traffic or safety. Whilst the pure and simple observation of the formal difference between the use indicated in the title and the one actually exercised is not sufficient, nor that the variation leads to the passage between different functional categories".

The Municipality led by Cisint would have proven, but didn’t, that there had been an "actually affects the need for territorial facilities, infrastructures, services, equipment, public spaces or for public use and any other urbanization work and for environmental, landscape, socio-economic and territorial sustainability"". According to the TAR, the administration did not even demonstrate that there was an essential change in use. Indeed, the judges noted that the urban planning instrument admitted the use of the property for "collective services and equipment" including "use for worship" indicated by cultural and prayer centers.

Constitutional and urban planning implications

Furthermore, the judges emphasized that it could be unconstitutional to relegate the possibility of opening Prayer Centers only to certain areas of the territory, as the municipal ordinance required. The second oversight of the Municipality was given by the "incomplete" investigation, in other words by the "generic" and insufficient explanation of the increase in the urban planning load that the mosques would have caused. The Closure Order, in fact, took it for granted that converting the premises into a religious center would lead to a greater need for public services and equipment, which, however, was without demonstration.

The satisfaction of the Islamic community

"We are satisfied above all that the TAR acknowledged that we do not live in illegality, we have not broken the law. Mayor Cisint accused us of having made the Municipality spend money on the cases, now the judges confirm that we were right to seek for the protection of our rights," commented Bou Konaté, spokesperson for the Islamic community at a press conference.

Editorial