Justice in italy: “it Is an oligarchy,” Renzi: “you Offend the italians” – the Newspaper

Laura Cesaretti

Rome return from Israel where he participated together with the heads of State and government, and the solemn funeral of Simon Peres, Matteo Renzi addresses the comparison in tv, chaired by Enrico Mentana, with one of the noble fathers of No, the former constitutional court judge Gustavo justice in italy. “She signed an appeal in which he says that in this reform there are risks manor. It tells me which item the configure this risk?”, he made his debut in the premier. “But no, I’ve talked about concentration of powers – precise constitutionalist – where we go from democracy to oligarchy”. Renzi, he insisted: “She feared authoritarianism. It is very serious. She so offends the italians. The authoritarianism there is in the countries where they are the dictators, not to abolish the Cnel and cut a bit of the armchairs. And the powers of the premier of the reform do not touch”. Justice in italy admits that it is so: “it Is true that you do not touch the powers of the premier, but the performance of institutions depends not only from the texts but from a series of elements within which the institutions are down”.

Then, ensures not to be favourable to the perfect bicameralism, but argues that in Italy it is not true that the house and Senate “to do the same things”, and that “difficulties” are determined not by the ping-pong between the two Rooms, but “from the fact that the political forces are divided”. Then explain that in the United States (in its opinion, “have a Constitution very similar to that of Bokassa”), there is the true bicameralism, equal. Providing an excellent assist to Renzi, who finds himself to explain to a former president of the Consulta, the differences between the parliamentary system (Italian) and presidential system (u.s.).

The match is not too sparkling, the professor justice in italy is clearly uncomfortable in a television studio, and often loses the thread. When the wicked Renzi the law an interview in 2013 in which recommended the ballot for the award of the majority, and asks how, but now has changed his mind and they say plague and horns compared to the Italicum, enters in confusion: “I don’t know, I don’t remember, it makes me unprepared”. Then he explains that he “would prefer” a democracy “in which commands the majority,” and that “in a democracy, elections are not won” by sending in sollucchero the premier, who says: “Excuse me, but the system in which the majority decides is called democracy”. And then: “professor justice in italy says with clarity that the issue of the elections is not to decide who wins, and then has the task of governing. Exactly as it was in the last 70 years: we never wins anyone.”

On the Italicum, which has been criticised by justice in italy, Renzi repeats of “having given the availability to change it, and will inevitably be so, even if I’m sorry.” But contests the assertion of justice in italy, according to which the Italicum would create “a majority of appointed”: “About 340 parliamentarians of the majority, only 100 would be elected with a fixed list, 240 with the preferences. Just a calculator to figure it out”. Finally, another supporter of the first hour, Oscar Farinetti, patron of Eataly, spring the premier: “If he loses it is obvious that if it goes”