Cádiz, España
El TC considera que los derechos a la vida familiar y a la reagrupación familiar no están protegidos por el art. 18.1 CE, que garantiza el derecho a la intimidad personal y familiar, sino por el art. 10.1 CE, que garantiza el libre desarrollo de la personalidad, y por el art. 39.1 y 4, que ordenan la protección social, económica y jurídica de la familia. Esta jurisprudencia no coincide con la del TEDH, ni con la del TJUE, que por vía interpretativa reconoce el derecho a la intimidad personal y familiar y el derecho a la reagrupación familiar junto al derecho de toda persona «al respeto de su vida privada y familiar» (arts. 8.1 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos [CEDH] y 7 de la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea [CDFUE]). Esta posición divergente, que prescinde del criterio hermenéutico que en materia de derechos ordena el art. 10.2 CE, presenta, no obstante, algunas fracturas que permiten pensar en una posible confluencia futura de esta doctrina.
The Constitutional Court considers that the rights to family life and family reunification are not protected by Art. 18.1 EC, which guarantees the right to personal and family privacy, but by Art. 10.1 EC, which guarantees the free development of the personality, and by Art. 39.1 and 4, which order the social, economic and legal protection of the family. This case law does not coincide with that of the European Court of Human Rights, nor with that of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which recognises the right to personal and family privacy and the right to family reunification in the same article that recognises the right of everyone “to respect for his private and family life” (art. 8.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights [ECHR] and 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union [CFREU]). This divergent position, which disregards the hermeneutic criterion contained in art. 10.2 EC, nevertheless presents some fractures that allow us to think of a possible future confluence of this case law.