The lawyer Maria Stella La MalfaThe representative in the Mantua case stated that it is not yet possible to predict how the Italian Constitutional Court will conduct the trials related to the Tajani Decree, which altered the rules for Italian citizenship by descent.
The Mantua case was split up and will have its own hearing on June 9thThe Turin case continues with hearing scheduled for March 11.
Difference between Turin and Mantua
According to La Malfa, the Court tends to analyze each case within the limits of what was raised by the court that referred the question. (1 from Turin, 1 from Mantova and 2 from Campobasso)She stated that, although both cases involve Article 3, the Turin case has a more restricted scope.
In other words, it is true that both are about article 3. (All citizens are equal before the law)"But the Constitutional Court of Turin is basically talking about the issue of the retraction of European ties," said La Malfa.
She explained that the Mantua process raises a broader set of parameters and targets the constitutionality of the decree as a whole, including people born before and after the legislative change.
“The Mantua court aims to declare the unconstitutionality of all points of the decree, both for those born before and those born after. So much so that in Turin we have two parameters, in Mantua we have a lot of parameters that were mentioned,” he explained to Italianismo this Friday (20).
According to the lawyer, the Court would likely rule on each of the points raised, including formal aspects of the decree, such as the declaration of urgency.
"So, theoretically, the Court should rule on each of these. Even if the objective in the Mantua case was to emphasize the issue of the declaration of urgency, the parameter of Article 77 of the Constitution should also apply so that the decree, at least in its entirety, not just a part of it," he said.
What is at stake in the processes?
The questions analyzed by the Court address different aspects of the decree and the law that converted it, including article 3-bis, which involves the issue of retroactivity, and other grounds that may affect the full validity of the rule.
Depending on the scope of the March 11 decision, the Court may keep the debate restricted to what was raised in Turin or move on to broader points, which also appear in the Mantua case and the Campobasso proceedings.
As of now, the hearing scheduled for March 11 remains unchanged. The hearing in Mantua is still scheduled for June 9. In both cases, the rapporteur will be... John Pitruzzella.
FOLLOW-US
