a civil Court, and the administrative law judge may rule on the referendum question in the same day, i.e. tomorrow. The decision of the Tar Lazio is, in fact, further delayed, and the rumors say that he might arrive between today and tomorrow. In the latter case, you incrocerebbe with the verdict of the civil Court of Milan, called to speak as a matter of urgency on a similar appeal, in discussion, in fact, tomorrow. The same civil Court of Milan, then, will return to the matter on the 27th of October, when it will discuss the appeal brought by the former president of the Consulta, Valerio Onida.
the Referendum, the appeal M5S-You to the Tar on the question
Tomorrow, then, you could have two judges who declare themselves to be both competent on the same topic. The preliminary issue to be resolved is, in fact, jurisdiction: it is necessary to determine if the decree of convocation of the referendum (i.e. the Presidential decree issued on the 27th September 2016 at the proposal of the President of the council of ministers, in concert with the ministers of the Interior and of Justice), in which it is written the question, whether an administrative act (which the court can suspend), or rather a “necessary act of political bound”, and as such unquestionable; or, again, a damaging provision of the fundamental right of the voter freedom to vote (for this profile, the competence of the ordinary judge). There are those who believe that the jurisdiction of a court to exclude the other, and those who, like Onida, consider, instead of parallel, so much so that he is facing at the same time to the Tar and to the Court.
“Query heterogeneous”, even Onida used to and asks for the suspension
At the time, what is certain is only that the second section-bis of the administrative court of the capital, chaired by Elena Stanizzi, is in conclave by two days, after the hearing Monday in which they were heard, the parties (among others, lawyers, Giuseppe Bozzi, Enzo Palumbo and Luciano Vasques, the first two also in their personal capacity as citizens, voters, and, together, to the third, as the representatives of Vito Crimi, the M5S, and Loredana De Pretis, You). Two days of chamber of council, if not three, or even four, suggest that the preliminary issue on jurisdiction has already been resolved in the affirmative. And that, therefore, the college has moved to examine the contents of the appeal, in which you ask, in the main, the cancellation of the decree of convocation of a referendum (because in the question are not shown on the individual items subjected to constitutional review) and, in the alternative, the reinstatement of the acts to the constitutional Court because the law on referendum of 1970 does not allow the elector to express themselves on the individual articles or parts of the reform), but by suspension of the injunction (and therefore of the procedure for a referendum in the course).
The government of the purpose and the scenarios in the “after” that embarrassed the opposite of ” no ”
Learn more
it Is possible that in these hours, the Tar is then already writing the reasons for the decision on the merits. In fact, unlike what happens in the appeals in electoral matters – which will be the publication of the decision on the same day of the hearing – in this case the time taken is to mean that the judges are still arguing. Or by writing.
the Inevitable the tam tam of the rumors. Among these, according to which the board would be lively, comparing to the option of suspension, subject to appeal to the council. Or that according to which the courts would have instead opted for the unpacking of the referendum question in function of the different parts of the reform. Goes In this direction, however, the appeal of Onida, which, however, has not yet been discussed in front of Tar.
© Reproduction reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment