Italy's Supreme Court Approves Referendum to Revoke Autonomy Legislation
Italy's Supreme Cassation Court has sanctioned a referendum aimed at completely abolishing the government's controversial legislation that introduced differentiated autonomy, giving regions the ability to request greater control over the distribution of tax revenues within their jurisdictions. The central office of the Supreme Court, as first reported by the online edition of the daily newspaper Repubblica, deemed it legitimate to seek the total cancellation of the law. This ruling follows a previous declaration from the Constitutional Court, which noted last month that it regarded several provisions of the law as illegitimate. The decision rendered by the Cassation Court was documented in a comprehensive 30-page ruling, notably concerning two potential referendum questions: one seeking complete abolition of the law—approved—and another aimed at partial revocation, which was rejected. The matter will now be redirected to the Constitutional Court, tasked with assessing the relationship between autonomy and the budget law—an intricate connection that proponents of the referendum believe is purely instrumental. In its previous ruling, the Constitutional Court asserted that claims regarding the entire differentiated autonomy law being unconstitutional were unfounded, yet it acknowledged the illegitimacy of specific portions of the legislation. The evaluation of the law emerged following objections raised by various regional governments, reflecting the contentious nature of this autonomy initiative. Opposition parties have voiced strong concerns that the law poses a significant threat to national unity, particularly exacerbating the existing north-south divide and further marginalizing less affluent regions in the south. They have successfully garnered enough signatures to prompt the referendum aimed at revoking the law. Among the critical issues raised by the Constitutional Court was the legitimacy of the minimum levels of service (LEPs) that must be universally provided by all regions, which must be updated through a decree issued by the Prime Minister. Additionally, the court questioned whether regions opting for devolution are required to participate in public financial contributions or may do so voluntarily, cautioning against a weakening of solidarity and national cohesion. The court has left it to the Parliament to address these identified challenges, pushing for a resolution to this contentious legal and political matter.
Related Sources: