The study states that some theoretical-practical problems produced by the decision of the Constitutional Court n. 269 of 2017 would find an optimal resolution in the combination of the remedies of non-application and the annulment of the norms contrary to the supranational standard.
An even better solution would be the forecast - preferably by law and, alternatively, with an act of self-regulation by the Constitutional Court - of an accelerated path before the Constitutional Court itself, so that the shortest possible time passes between the two remedies and satisfies the expectations of all the judges and those who turn to them for justice.
On the basis of two recent judgments of the United Sections of the Court of Cassation, this commentary tries to analyse the fundamental stages of constitutional jurisprudence on the subject of judicial review of parliamentary rules, and tries to point out in what way the resolution of such issue will affect the balance between independence of Parliament and protection of the rights of the individual.
As the Constitutional Court has stated, there cannot be a judicial review on parliamentary rules; as a consequence of that, the mean to make sure there is a fair balance between the two abovementioned opposed interests (independence of Parliament and protection of the rights of the individual) is the conflict of powers.
The commentary then analyses the extension of such control and its effectiveness in relation to the protection of the right of defense of the individual.
The recent issue with the pensions of former members of Parliament is taken into account, too; in fact, such issue makes clear that sacrificing the rigidity and inflexibility of the Constitution may involve serious consequences, both immediately and in the longer term (E.R.).
The paper, starting from the consideration of the invaluable contribution of the scientific contribution of prof. Ruggeri on the subject of inter-ordinal relations, a veritable compass indispensable for orienting oneself in increasingly thick plots of interaction and conflict, focuses on "horizontal migration of constitutional ideas". In particular, the essay focuses on the special responsibility that, by making a parallel with antitrust law, could weigh, in this regard, on the most authoritative and persuasive Western Courts (O.P.)
DOMENICO ARGONDIZZO – FELICE BESOSTRI – GIAMPIERO BUONOMO
A metahistorical comparison between the living British system and the Italian Kingdom Parliamentary system, in the first post-war period, reinforces the thesis that the House of Commons can legitimately still be master of a part of their own agenda and of the totality of their calendar even in the period of prorogation of the session.
In the two-year period 1920-1922, the Parliament of the Kingdom of Italy conquered, thanks to a socialist initiative, the power to decide on its recalling, and the organization of legislative activity through permanent commissions. It was a significant achievement: in the session of the Council of the regulation of July 31, 1920, the socialist MP Modigliani even spoke of a coup d'état, in the event that the right to prorogue or close the session was exercised immediately after Parliament had recalled itself. Even then closing the session had the effect not only of suspending, but of ending all pending matters, cancelling all work not completed; stopping all the offices including the Presidency. If a member of the opposition had succeeded in passing a proposal contrary to the Government views, or a project dissatisfied a part of the majority, the Cabinet should only close the session and the Ministry was removed from all embarrassment. For this reason, the Parliamentary power to recall itself was the frontier between the democratic evolution of the form of government and the Fascist reaction.
The Northern Ireland Executive Formation Act 2019, subsection 3 and 4 effectively grants the British Parliament the power to recall itself under the Meeting of Parliament Act 1797. If it is true that the self-recalling is exercisable lawfully within the session and not during a prorogation, it is clearly evident that the government cannot lawfully prorogue Parliament when it is self-recalled. The major thesis that Parliament - the seat of democratic sovereignty – should prevail over Government in constitutional conflicts, with the Queen neutral, remains unprejudiced (Andrea Pisauro).
Constitution and Euthanasia. Critical Considerations in the Light of Antonio Ruggeri’s Teaching.
The article deals with a possible introduction of euthanasia int o the Italian legal order from a constitutional point of view, coming to the conclusion that it would conflict with several constitutional provisions. The various arguments that are usually put forward to object this thesis are reviewed one by one and refuted with particular regard to the teaching of Antonio Ruggeri, in honour of whom the essay was written.
The author analyzes in particular how the Constitution imposes limits on the principle of self-determination such as the right to life, which – like other fundamental rights cannot be renounced – and the duty to contribute to the material and spiritual progress of society, as outlined by its art. 4. Furthermore, it shows why the legalization of euthanasia does not derive from the principles of equality and human dignity, unlike what had been suggested by the Italian Constitutional Court in the case DJ Fabo/Cappato (decision n. 207 of 2018) (F.V.)
The Constitutional Court rules about the relationship between the poiltical chief and the top of the administration of local authorities. A new form of “bicephalism” for municipal and provincial secretaries?
The article analyzes the Italian Constitutional Court’s decision n. 23 of 2019 which dismissed the question of constitutionality of the normative provision that links the duration of the office of municipal and provincial secretary to the administrative mandate of the mayor or of the president of the Province. In particular, starting from the cornerstones on which the discipline of public management is based in Italy and from the consolidated constitutional precedents about “spoils system”, some critical remarks are proposed with regard to the motivation that led to the rejection of the question of constitutionality and to the type of decision adopted by the Constitutional Court.
The crisis of the first Conte Government and the revenge of representative democracy on the direct pseudo-democracy of the squares and the web
The paper highlights the most important aspects of the crisis of the first Conte Government, starting from the one concerning the renewed attention to the rules of parliamentary democracy that the President of the Conte Council took care to lend. Therefore, some controversial theoretical questions are taken up again, both in political circles and among scholars, including the question whether, following the opening of the crisis, the early dissolution of the Houses should take place immediately, or if priority should be given to the attempt to to give life to a Government supported by the confidence of the parliamentary majority. A consideration is therefore made to the changed political-institutional role that seems to emerge for the President of the Council G. Conte in the passage from the first to the second Government presided by him. The work ends with a brief reflection on the relationship between direct pseudo-democracy and representative democracy and on the future of the constitutional state.