WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE ITALY - news journal UPDATE - (en) Italy, FAI, UCADI #191 - What's new - The Court and differentiated autonomy (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 Examining the appeals filed by four regional councils regarding the law

on differentiated autonomy, the Constitutional Court has found the
illegitimacy of some of its key provisions, effectively transforming the
provision into an inapplicable legislative provision, unless it is
radically rewritten and conceptually redefined. The text of the Sentence
has not yet been made public and we therefore reserve an analysis on the
merits, using greater technicality; however, we believe it is
appropriate to develop some general considerations here.

The ruling of the Court

To attenuate the political significance of this ruling, supporters of
the law have pointed out that judging the question of constitutional
legitimacy to be unfounded means considering the provision to be
substantially legitimate. In reality, the Court could not have
otherwise affirmed that the approval of a law introducing differentiated
autonomy is in accordance with the constitutional provision, due to the
wicked modification of the fifth title of the Construction that provides
for it. It follows that the Court's statement remains obvious. However,
it is on the merits that the Court considers unconstitutional "the
possibility that the agreement between the State and the region and the
subsequent differentiation law transfer subjects or areas of subjects,
where the Court believes that the devolution must concern specific
legislative and administrative functions and must be justified, in
relation to the individual region, in light of the aforementioned
principle of subsidiarity". This means, for example, that it cannot be
the object of transfer to competence in school matters in general, but
individual activities can be transferred by decision of Parliament. The
Court then intervened on the subject, and it is one of the most delicate
points of the law, in relation to the determination of the LEP in
relation to which it noted that "The granting of a legislative
delegation for the determination of the essential levels of performance
concerning civil and social rights (LEP) lacks suitable guiding
criteria, with the consequence that the substantial decision is placed
in the hands of the Government, limiting the constitutional role of
Parliament". Therefore, it cannot be a decree of the President of the
Council of Ministers to determine the updating of the LEP, which must
instead be decided by Parliament.
Since "it is up to Parliament, in the exercise of its discretion, to
fill the gaps resulting from the acceptance of some of the issues raised
by the appellants, in compliance with the constitutional principles, so
as to ensure the full functionality of the law", it being understood
that "The Court remains competent to examine the constitutionality of
the individual differentiation laws, if they are censored with an appeal
in the main way by other regions or in an incidental way". This is to
reiterate that a possible introduction of differentiated autonomy would
obviously be carefully monitored by the Court.
It will now be up to the Court of Cassation to assess whether the
conditions still exist for the abrogative referendum of the entire law
to be called, requested by more than half a million signatures. This is
because the Court could consider that the mutilations made to the law
have so modified it as to distort its content, rendering the questions
ineffective, so that the referendum request would fall on a measure that
in fact no longer exists. It would therefore be necessary, if the
referendum initiative was to be maintained, to provide for a new
collection of signatures, after Parliament has reviewed and modified the
law because "it is up to Parliament, in the exercise of its discretion,
to fill the gaps resulting from the acceptance of some of the questions
raised by the appellants, in compliance with the constitutional
principles, so as to ensure the full functionality of the law". The note
concludes: "The Court remains competent to examine the constitutionality
of individual differentiation laws if they were censored with a
principal appeal by other regions or incidentally".

The defeat of the prime minister's advice

Beyond any political considerations relating to the reaction of the
various political forces that followed the ruling, we limit ourselves to
noting that the sentence effectively disavows the structure of the law
and imposes a solemn rejection against the person who, posing as a great
advisor to the prime minister, acted as technical consultant for the
measure, Professor Sabino Cassese. eternal aspirant to the Presidency of
the Republic, self-styled reserve of the Republic, who considers himself
the shadow man of the President in office and who behind the scenes
would like to keep an eye on him, having two editorials a week in the
so-called big newspapers, claiming to guide the institutional choices of
the country, to the point of having, in fact, replaced the incompetent
and inconsistent Casellati Alberti in the development of the reform of
the premiership. By dismantling the framework of the law on
differentiated autonomy that he had prepared, the Consulta has placed
the role and function of Parliament at the center, going in the exact
opposite direction of its tendential marginalization, which is the
object of the proposal for the premiership and has therefore issued an
early assessment of the approach that the government intends to give to
the institutional reform. However, what strikes us most is not so much
the political message launched by the judges of the Consulta, but rather
the ignominious and pathetic disavowal from the point of view of the
legal technicality of a chameleon-like jurist, good for all seasons,
who, having distinguished himself for having planned the nefarious
autonomy of schools, has indifferently put himself at the service of
governments of all colors, in order to keep perks, salaries and power
firmly in his hands.
The role of president of the Clep, the Committee of 61 experts for the
identification of the essential levels of performance concerning civil
and social rights, has definitely not brought him luck, nor has it
helped him to be defined by the Minister of Regional Affairs Roberto
Calderoli, "wise guide" and "captain of this adventure". (sic!)

https://www.ucadi.org/2024/11/23/cosa-ce-di-nuovo-la-corte-e-lautonomia-differenziata/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca