Consulta OnLine (periodico online) ISSN 1971-9892
GIANMARIA ALESSANDRO RUSCITTI
The article analyzes sentence no. 254/2019 of the Constitutional Court, underlining how in solving an urban planning problem, the Court takes the opportunity to reaffirm some fundamental points in the matter of constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion.
ALESSANDRO ROSARIO RIZZA
Reconstructing some ideas proposed in doctrine, the Author analyzes the emergency decree in the sources of law, applying the criteria for the resolution of antinomies. In the discussion, the Author compares the emergency decree with the ordinary law decree, governed by the art. 77 of Constitution.
Nota a prima lettura della sentenza del Tribunale costituzionale federale tedesco sul Quantitative easing: un decisione politica che chiude la strada alle misure di mutualizzazione del debito e la apre al MES
The paper comments on the sentence of the German Federal Constitutional Court which declared Germany's participation in the public sector purchase program, PSPP, implemented by the European Central Bank - ECB, partially unconstitutional. The paper discusses the current and future implications of the important decision.
The paper argues the thesis according to which technology if, on the one hand, offers itself as a guarantee of rights and for the fulfillment of constitutional duties, on the other hand it acts as a factor of "constitutional distancing" and, therefore, of discrimination incompatible with the very essence of the rule of law.
The Constitutional Court has already addressed the electronic process relating to the regulation of the timing of PEC notifications in the civil trial. For some time now, the Court has been committed to studying the use of technologies for its own trial. The implementation of this type of process presupposes the preliminary modification of the regulatory rules. The study investigates the legal and technical profiles of the problem.
A year after the ordonnance n. 17/2019, the Constitutional Court scrutinises for the second time the parliamentary procedure by which the 2020 State Budget was approved. In this decision, the Court excludes that Opposition parliamentary groups may file a petition acting as “powers of the State” to challenge the parliamentary procedure before the judge. The Court confirms, by contrast, that the abuse of parliamentary procedure can be contested by each member of Parliament. The Constitutional judges point out that only a very serious violation of the lawmakers’ rights can lead to a declaration of the unlawfulness of the Parliament Act. In order to verify that, the Court proceeds to check the balance between the MPs’ rights enshrined by the Constitution and the needs and principles inherent to the State budget approval. In this case, the Court rules out that the procedure followed in the Chambers shows such an absence of balance justifying the judge’s intervention .
The paper supports the need for a constitutional discipline relating to the management of emergencies which reinforces the role of guarantee of the President of the Republic, providing for the control of the governmental acts adopted to deal with them and at the same time admitting the possible verification of the Constitutional Court.
The document, which commemorates the 150th anniversary of the French imperial constitution of 1870, illustrates its characteristics and the temporal situation in which it came to light, preceded by other acts of Napoleon III oriented in a liberal sense.