The essay starts from the decision of the Italian State Council which readmitted the list "Left Rome - Fassina Mayor" in municipal elections in Rome on 5 June 2016: in this way, a net overruling - even compared to the recent previous case – was operated regarding the relationship between simplicity and instrumentality of forms in terms of causes of invalidity of electoral authentications. The idea represented by that ruling has served to analyze the political, legislative and case law context from which it starts. First, it analyzes the latest Constitutional and European case-law that, with regard to “right to vote” and “right to stand for election”, is redefining the balance between formal and substantive equality. The essay continues with an analysis of the relevant constitutional principles of electoral authentications, both in terms of the voting right, both in terms of the right to stand for election. Through a comparison with these principles, the essay highlights critical issues inherent in legislative interventions of recent years, that have made the discipline of the preparatory electoral process increasingly unstable and obscure: these interventions on the one hand tend to photograph the party structure that has emerged in representative institutions, protecting them from natural upheavals resulting from the popular consultation; on the other hand, they are far from providing adequate security to the authenticity of subscriptions required for submission of lists and, thereby, to the fullness of the right to vote and the right of voters to participate in the process of submission of applications. In conclusion, the essay proposes a reflection on the content and outcome (in terms of judicial application and bad practices carried out by political parties) of these rules which, when they do not consist of real direct discrimination between parties, introduce indirect discrimination, contrasting with equal access to the electoral competitions.
L’articolo prende le mosse dalla sentenza del Consiglio di Stato con la quale fu riammessa la lista “Sinistra per Roma – Fassina Sindaco” alle elezioni comunali di Roma del 5 giugno 2016: con l’occasione fu operato un netto révirement - anche rispetto ad orientamenti di poco precedenti – per quanto riguarda il rapporto tra essenzialità e strumentalità delle forme in tema di cause di invalidità delle autenticazioni elettorali. Lo spunto rappresentato da quella pronuncia è servito per analizzare il contesto politico, legislativo e giurisprudenziale da cui essa prende le mosse. Innanzitutto, viene analizzata la più recente giurisprudenza costituzionale ed europea che, in materia di diritti di elettorato attivo e passivo, sta ridefinendo il punto di equilibrio tra profilo formale e profilo sostanziale del principio di eguaglianza. Il contributo prosegue con una disamina dei beni costituzionali rilevanti in materia di autenticazioni elettorali, sia sul fronte dell’elettorato passivo, sia sul fronte dell’elettorato attivo. Rispetto a tali beni, vengono evidenziate criticità insite negli interventi legislativi degli ultimi anni che hanno reso sempre più instabile ed oscura la disciplina del procedimento elettorale preparatorio: si tratta di interventi che da un lato tendono a fotografare l’assetto partitico affermatosi nelle istituzioni rappresentative, preservandolo dai naturali sommovimenti derivanti dalle consultazioni popolari; dall’altro, sono ben lungi dal fornire adeguata garanzia alla genuinità delle sottoscrizioni richieste per la presentazione delle liste e, con ciò, alla pienezza del diritto di voto e del diritto degli elettori di partecipare al processo di presentazione delle candidature. In conclusione, si tirano le somme sul tenore e sulla resa (in termini di applicazione giurisdizionale e di prassi poste in essere dai soggetti politici) di queste previsioni che, quando non consistono in vere e proprie discriminazioni dirette tra i partiti, introducono discriminazioni indirette, volte a colpire la pari opportunità di accesso alle competizioni elettorali.
Lehner, E. (2016). Il caso Fassina: autenticazioni elettorali e favor partecipationis. GIURISPRUDENZA COSTITUZIONALE, 61(3), 1231-1251.
Il caso Fassina: autenticazioni elettorali e favor partecipationis
LEHNER, EVA
2016-01-01
Abstract
The essay starts from the decision of the Italian State Council which readmitted the list "Left Rome - Fassina Mayor" in municipal elections in Rome on 5 June 2016: in this way, a net overruling - even compared to the recent previous case – was operated regarding the relationship between simplicity and instrumentality of forms in terms of causes of invalidity of electoral authentications. The idea represented by that ruling has served to analyze the political, legislative and case law context from which it starts. First, it analyzes the latest Constitutional and European case-law that, with regard to “right to vote” and “right to stand for election”, is redefining the balance between formal and substantive equality. The essay continues with an analysis of the relevant constitutional principles of electoral authentications, both in terms of the voting right, both in terms of the right to stand for election. Through a comparison with these principles, the essay highlights critical issues inherent in legislative interventions of recent years, that have made the discipline of the preparatory electoral process increasingly unstable and obscure: these interventions on the one hand tend to photograph the party structure that has emerged in representative institutions, protecting them from natural upheavals resulting from the popular consultation; on the other hand, they are far from providing adequate security to the authenticity of subscriptions required for submission of lists and, thereby, to the fullness of the right to vote and the right of voters to participate in the process of submission of applications. In conclusion, the essay proposes a reflection on the content and outcome (in terms of judicial application and bad practices carried out by political parties) of these rules which, when they do not consist of real direct discrimination between parties, introduce indirect discrimination, contrasting with equal access to the electoral competitions.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Caso Fassina su Giur.Cost.pdf
non disponibili
Descrizione: PDF Editoriale
Tipologia:
PDF editoriale
Licenza:
NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione
100.71 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
100.71 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Lehner Post Print Caso Fassina.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Post-print
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
540.57 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
540.57 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/11365/1003602