10.  On 4 April 2008 thirty-two Orthodox priests from parishes of the Metropolis of Oltenia, most of which were within the jurisdiction of the Archdiocese of Craiova (a region of south-western Romania), and three lay employees of the same archdiocese held a general meeting at which they decided to form the Păstorul cel Bun trade union. The relevant parts of the union’s constitution, as adopted at the meeting, read as follows:
“The aim of the union of clergy and lay persons working in parishes or other ecclesiastical bodies within the administrative and territorial jurisdiction of the Metropolis of Oltenia has been freely defined. It shall consist in representing and protecting the professional, economic, social and cultural rights and interests of its members, both clergy and laity, in their dealings with the Church hierarchy and the Ministry of Culture and Religious Affairs.
In order to achieve the above aim, the union shall:
(a)  ensure respect for the fundamental rights of its members to work, dignity, social protection, safety at work, rest, social insurance, unemployment benefits, pension entitlements and other entitlements laid down in the legislation in force;
(b)  ensure that each of its members is able to carry out work corresponding to his professional training and skills;
(c)  ensure compliance with the statutory provisions concerning the duration of leave and days of rest;
(d)  promote initiative, competition and freedom of expression among its members;
(e)  ensure the implementation and strict observance of the statutory provisions concerning protection of employment and the rights deriving therefrom;
(f)  ensure the full application of the provisions of Law no. 489/2006 on religious freedom and the legal status of religious denominations, the Statute of the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Holy Canons of the Romanian Orthodox Church;
(g)  negotiate collective agreements and contracts of employment with the Archdiocese and the Metropolis expressly setting out all the rights and duties of the clergy and laity;
(h)  afford protection to its president and representatives, both during and after their terms of office;
(i)  ensure that it is represented at all levels and on all decision-making bodies, in accordance with the statutory provisions in force;
(j)  use petitions, demonstrations and strikes as means of defending its members’ interests and protecting their dignity and fundamental rights;
(k)  take legal action against any individuals or other entities acting in breach of employment legislation, trade-union law, the provisions of the collective agreement signed within the Metropolis or employment contracts, if it has proved impossible to resolve the disputes in question by means of negotiation;
(l)  ensure the observance and implementation of statutory provisions relating to remuneration and guarantees of decent living conditions;
(m)  strive to secure to the clergy and laity the benefit of all the rights enjoyed by other sectors of society;
(n)  set up mutual-aid funds;
(o)  produce and issue publications providing information to its members and defending their interests;
(p)  establish and operate cultural, educational and research organisations in the trade-union sphere, as well as social and socio-economic institutions, in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions and in the interests of its members;
(r)  raise funds to support its members;
(s)  organise and fund religious activities;
(ş)  make proposals for elections to local Church bodies and put forward a priest from among its members to take part in the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church;
(t)  ask the Archdiocese to submit a report on its revenues and expenditure to the Assembly of Priests; and
(ţ)  ask the Archdiocesan Council to notify it, on a quarterly or annual basis, of any decisions relating to appointments, transfers and allocation of budgetary resources.” 11.  In accordance with the Trade Unions Act (Law no. 54/2003), the union’s elected president applied to the Craiova Court of First Instance for the union to be granted legal personality and entered in the register of trade unions, submitting that the application for registration was in conformity with that Act and that the formation of a trade union was not prohibited by the Religious Freedom Act (Law no. 489/2006). 12.  The public prosecutor’s office, representing the State in the proceedings, supported the application for registration, submitting that the establishment of a trade union for members of the clergy and lay staff was not in breach of any provision of the law. It added that since the union’s members were employees working under contracts of employment, they were entitled, like any other employees, to join together as part of a trade union to defend their rights. 13.  The Archdiocese of Craiova, intervening in the proceedings as a third party, confirmed that the union’s members were employed by the Archdiocese but argued that the establishment of the union, without the Archbishop’s consent and blessing (“permission”), was prohibited by the Statute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, as approved by Government Ordinance no. 53/2008. It added that the Statute barred priests from taking part in proceedings in the civil courts, even in connection with personal disputes, without the archbishop’s prior written permission. Pointing out that priests chaired parish assemblies and governing bodies, the Archdiocese submitted that they were thus unable to form trade unions since the Trade Unions Act prohibited anyone performing management functions from doing so. Lastly, it produced written statements from eight members of the union indicating that they no longer wished to be part of it. 14.  Having observed that the application for registration satisfied the formal requirements of the Trade Unions Act, the court decided that the application should be examined in the light of Articles 2 and 3 of that Act, Article 39 of the Labour Code, Article 40 of the Constitution, Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 15.  In a judgment of 22 May 2008, the court allowed the union’s application and ordered its entry in the register of trade unions, thereby granting it legal personality. 16.  The relevant passages of the judgment read as follows:
“The third party submits that the application to form the trade union infringes both the special legislation on religious freedom and the legal status of religious denominations and also, in the absence of any blessing from the Archbishop or of any prior written permission to take part in court proceedings (a requirement that applies even to personal disputes), the Statute of the Romanian Orthodox Church.
Having regard to the provisions of the Church’s Statute and of the Religious Freedom Act (Law no. 489/2006), the court dismisses the third party’s arguments as unfounded for the reasons set out below.
The court notes that, pursuant to section 5(4) of Law no. 489/2006, religious communities, associations and groups are required to observe the Constitution and their activities must not threaten national security, public order, public health and morals or fundamental rights and freedoms.
The court further observes that the Statute of the Church, as approved by Government Ordinance no. 53/2008, does not expressly forbid the establishment of a trade union for clergy and lay staff in accordance with labour legislation. The third party, which contends that the right to form a trade union is subject to receiving the archbishop’s blessing, has not disputed that the union’s founding members are contractual employees.
The third party’s arguments have been analysed in the light of both sections 7 to 10 of the Religious Freedom Act, which acknowledges the important role of the Romanian Orthodox Church and its organisational and operational autonomy, and section 1(2) of the same Act, which provides that ‘no one shall be prevented from or coerced into embracing a religious opinion or faith contrary to his or her beliefs’ and that ‘no one shall suffer discrimination or persecution or be placed in an inferior position on account of his or her faith, membership or non-membership of a religious denomination, group or association, or for exercising freedom of religion in accordance with the law’.
In so far as members of the clergy and laity are recognised as employees, they have the statutory right to form a trade union. This right cannot be subject to any restrictions based on religious affiliation or to prior consent from the hierarchy.
In the court’s opinion, the principle of hierarchical subordination and obedience set forth in the Statute cannot be used as a basis for restricting the right to form a trade union; the only permissible restrictions in this sphere must be prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety, the prevention of disorder or crime, the protection of health or morals, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
The third party’s argument that the applicants did not obtain the archbishop’s permission to take part in proceedings in the civil courts must likewise be dismissed, given that Article 21 of the Constitution provides: ‘Everyone shall be entitled to apply to the courts for protection of his rights, freedoms or legitimate interests. The exercise of this right shall not be restricted by any statute.’
The establishment of a trade union does not necessarily indicate the existence of a dissident strand within the Romanian Orthodox Church with a disregard for hierarchy and the rules imposed by the Church; on the contrary, it is likely to contribute to employer-employee dialogue on such matters as negotiation of employment contracts, observance of working and non-working hours and the rules on remuneration, protection of health and safety at work, vocational training, medical cover and the opportunity to elect representatives and stand for election to decision-making bodies, with due regard for the special characteristics of the Church and its religious, spiritual, cultural, educational, social and charitable purpose.
Having regard to the foregoing, in accordance with section 15 of Law no. 54/2003, the court allows the application, dismisses the objection by the third party, grants legal personality to the union and orders its entry in the register of trade unions.” 17.  The Archdiocese challenged that judgment, arguing that the provisions of domestic and international law on which it was based were not applicable to the case at hand. Relying on Article 29 of the Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom and the autonomy of religious communities, it contended that the principle of religious freedom could not be overridden by other constitutional principles such as freedom of association, including the right to organise. 18.  It submitted that the emergence within the structure of the Church of a trade union-type organisation for members of the clergy would seriously imperil the freedom of religious denominations to organise themselves in accordance with their own traditions. The first-instance court’s judgment had added a new institution to the existing Church institutions, namely a trade union for priests, thereby jeopardising the autonomy of religious communities as guaranteed by the Constitution. 19.  The Archdiocese also criticised the applicant union’s stated aims, contending that they conflicted with the duties that were set out in the “job description” and accepted by priests by virtue of their “vow of faith”. It pointed out that upon ordination, all priests had undertaken to abide by all the provisions of the Church’s Statute, the rules of procedure of the Church’s disciplinary and judicial bodies and the decisions of the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church, local church assemblies and the parish council. 20.  In June 2008 the Holy Synod declared that initiatives by priests from various regions of the country to set up trade unions were in breach of the law, the canons and the Church’s Statute. 21.  In a final judgment of 11 July 2008 the Dolj County Court allowed the appeal by the Archdiocese and revoked the registration of the trade union. 22.  The relevant passages of the judgment read as follows:
“The Romanian Orthodox Church is organised and operates in accordance with its Statute, as approved by Government Ordinance no. 53/2008. The Statute prohibits priests from setting up associations, foundations or organisations of any kind, and hence trade unions. This prohibition is designed to safeguard the rights and freedoms of the Romanian Orthodox Church by allowing it to preserve the Orthodox tradition and its founding tenets.
By virtue of section 6(2) of Law no. 54/2003, internal regulations may not contain any provisions that are in breach of the Constitution or the law.
The establishment of a trade union would result in the consultative and deliberative bodies provided for by the Statute being replaced by or obliged to work together with a new body (the trade union) not bound by the traditions of the Church and the rules of canon law governing consultation and decision-making.
The freedom to organise religious communities is recognised by the Constitution and Law no. 489/2006 on religious freedom and the legal status of religious denominations. Each denomination draws up its own statutes governing its internal organisation, its members’ rights and obligations, its decision-making procedures and the operation of its disciplinary bodies.
Pursuant to Article 14 (w) of [the Statute of the Orthodox Church], the Holy Synod takes decisions concerning the establishment, operation or dissolution of national ecclesiastical associations and foundations set up and managed by the Romanian Orthodox Church; [it] grants or denies permission for the establishment, operation or dissolution of ecclesiastical associations and foundations which have their own governing bodies and operate within the territorial subdivisions of the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchate.
It follows from the above-mentioned provisions, which make no reference to trade unions, that the associations and foundations must be ecclesiastical and national in nature.
It also follows from Article 50 (e) of the Statute of the Orthodox Church that priests may not represent their parishes in court proceedings without the bishop’s prior written consent. Similarly, in view of the oath of obedience towards the bishop which they took upon ordination, members of the clergy may not take part in court proceedings concerning personal matters without the bishop’s prior written permission.
Law no. 54/2003 provides that persons performing management functions or functions involving the exercise of public authority, the judiciary, the military, the police and members of the special forces may not set up trade unions.
In the present case the Statute defines the parish, which is a subdivision of the Orthodox Church, as a community of Orthodox Christians, both clergy and laity, established within a specified geographical area, under the ecclesiastical, legal, administrative and economic authority of the diocese, and led by a priest.
An examination of the list of priests involved in the present case reveals that they chair their parish assemblies and councils. Since they perform management functions and receive stipends on that account in accordance with the above-mentioned provisions, they may not form trade unions.
Having regard to the foregoing, the court allows the appeal, quashes the judgment and refuses the application for registration of the trade union.” 23.  On 29 September 2008 the attempt to set up the applicant union was discussed within the Synod of the Metropolis of Oltenia. The Synod decided that if the union’s members were to lodge an application with the Court, they should be punished and referred to the disciplinary bodies. As a result, the members concerned were summoned to the Archdiocese headquarters, where some of them signed declarations to the effect that they no longer wished to pursue the application. 24.  In a letter of 21 June 2010, the chancery of the Romanian Orthodox Patriarchate reminded the Archdiocese that priests were forbidden to apply to domestic and international courts without the consent of their hierarchy and asked it to obtain written declarations from the priests in question stating that they no longer wished to pursue the application and, in the event of their refusal, to refer them to the appropriate disciplinary bodies. Some of the priests, despite having signed the declarations, informed the Court that they intended to pursue the application lodged on behalf of the union. 25.  On 19 April 2010 three priests who had been members of the applicant union set up an association called Apostolia together with five other people. The association received the approval of the Archbishop of Craiova, who made premises available for use as its headquarters. It was registered with the Craiova Court of First Instance on 8 June 2010. 26.  The association’s aims, as set out in its constitution, are: to educate the people in the spirit of Orthodox morality; to promote a sense of solidarity between the clergy and the faithful; to raise funds for the publication of documents to defend the faith and traditions; to organise and support cultural, religious and social activities; to take a stand against events, initiatives and demonstrations that denigrate Christian morality, the Orthodox faith, national identity and traditions; and to use all legal means to publicise its own decisions concerning the protection of pastoral, social and professional interests.