This volume brings together four essays that examine and reflect upon some of the most significant dynamics characterizing the activity of the Italian Constitutional Court in recent years. The first contribution offers several considerations on the contemporary relevance of judicial review concerning formal defects in legislation. After briefly retracing its historical development within Italian legal culture, both during the Statutory period and under the Republican Constitution, the essay critically investigates the gradual devaluation of formal defects, arguing for the need to recover the deeper meaning and systemic value of compliance with the rules governing the legislative process. The second essay examines the most recent configuration of the relationship between the Constitutional Court and the Parliament. It first analyses the choice made by the Court to transform legislative discretion, through inadmissibility decisions that nonetheless substantively ascertain a constitutional defect, into a temporary barrier to a judgment of unconstitutionality, which may subsequently be delivered should the legislature fail to intervene. The contribution then traces the reasons underlying the abandonment of the theory of the socalled “obliged solutions” (rime obbligate) in favour of the broader possibility of issuing additive judgments, notwithstanding the existence of a plurality of constitutionally compatible remedies, whenever a constitutionally appropriate solution can be identified within the legal system. Finally, the essay considers the implications of the technique of the postponed-decision order (ordinanza di rinvio a data fissa) for the relationship between the Court and the Parliament, rejecting the view that this type of ruling constitutes the latest step in a phase marked by increased judicial assertiveness vis-à-vis the legislature’s sphere of decision-making. The third contribution addresses recent constitutional case law that is shaping a new framework for the relationship among legal orders, particularly with respect to the European Union. Within this renewed framework, examined through all its principal developments over at least the last decade, it is argued that the role of the Constitutional Court is to ensure that the “constitutionalization” of the European Union proceeds in accordance with the principles enshrined in the Italian Constitution. From this perspective, the Granital model for resolving conflicts between domestic law and EU law, first articulated in Judgment No. 170 of 1984, has not been abandoned; rather, it has been complemented by other models, all serving the broader objective of integration among legal orders. The fourth and final essay focuses on the instruments of communication through which the Constitutional Court seeks to establish a relationship with public opinion. Particular attention is devoted to the use of the Court’s institutional website, which, from the perspective considered here, has in recent years assumed a central and predominant role, insofar as it enables the Court to perform a variety of functions, more or less closely connected with its adjudicatory activity. The essay therefore reflects on the legal implications of each of the communication tools examined, while at the same time highlighting how the political legitimacy that the Court seeks to foster through its relationship with public opinion has become necessary in contemporary society if the constitutional judge is to fulfil its role effectively.
Il volume raccoglie quattro saggi che analizzano e riflettono attorno ad alcune delle dinamiche più significative che caratterizzano l’attività della Corte costituzionale italiana degli ultimi anni. Il primo lavoro svolge qualche considerazione sull’attualità del valore del sindacato sul vizio formale di legge. Dopo averne sinteticamente ripercorso la parabola storica nella nostra cultura giuridica, sia in epoca statutaria che in quella repubblicana, il contributo si sofferma criticamente sul processo di progressiva svalutazione del vizio di forma, argomentando in ordine alla necessità di recuperare il senso profondo e il valore sistemico dell’esigenza dell’osservanza della norma sulla normazione legislativa. Il secondo saggio analizza la più recente configurazione dei rapporti tra Corte costituzionale e legislatore. Si analizza, innanzitutto, la scelta del giudice delle leggi di trasformare la discrezionalità legislativa – per mezzo di una decisione d’inammissibilità che però sostanzialmente accerti l’illegittimità costituzionale – in argine temporaneo alla decisione di accoglimento, che potrà intervenire in un secondo momento a fronte del mancato intervento del legislatore. Il lavoro ripercorre, poi, le ragioni dell’abbandono della teorica delle c.d. rime obbligate in favore della più ampia possibilità di adottare sentenze additive ogni qualvolta esista, pur a fronte di una pluralità di rimedi costituzionalmente compatibili, una soluzione costituzionalmente appropriata individuabile nel sistema normativo. Il saggio, infine, si interroga sulla ricaduta che la tecnica dell’ordinanza di rinvio a data fissa può avere nell’assetto dei rapporti in esame, escludendosi che questa tipologia di pronuncia sia un ultimo tassello di una stagione condotta all’insegna di una maggiore aggressività della Corte nei confronti della sfera decisionale del legislatore. Il terzo lavoro qui raccolto si occupa della più recente giurisprudenza costituzionale che sta delineando un nuovo assetto nei rapporti tra ordinamenti e, in particolare, con l’ordinamento UE. Il saggio è volto a dimostrare che in tale rinnovato assetto, esaminato in tutti i diversi snodi degli ultimi (almeno) dieci anni, il compito che la Corte si è assunta è quello di assicurare che la “costituzionalizzazione” dell’Unione europea si sviluppi in linea con i principi recati dalla Costituzione italiana. In questo quadro, si afferma che il modello Granital per la risoluzione delle antinomie tra diritto interno e diritto UE, risalente alla sentenza n. 170 del 1984, non è stato del tutto abbandonato, ma è stato invece affiancato da altri modelli, del pari funzionali all’integrazione tra ordinamenti. Il quarto e ultimo contributo prende in esame, infine, gli strumenti della comunicazione attraverso i quali la Corte costituzionale ricerca un rapporto con l’opinione pubblica. Ci si sofferma in particolare sull’utilizzo che viene fatto del sito web istituzionale, il quale, nella prospettiva che interessa, negli ultimi tempi ha assunto un ruolo centrale e predominante, perché per mezzo di esso la Corte svolge plurime funzioni, più o meno connesse alla propria attività giurisdizionale. Il saggio riflette, allora, sui risvolti giuridici di ciascuno degli strumenti della comunicazione analizzati, mettendo al contempo in evidenza, però, come la legittimazione politica che la Corte ricerca attraverso il rapporto con l’opinione pubblica sia necessaria, nella odierna società, affinché il giudice costituzionale riesca a svolgere a pieno il proprio ruolo.
Carnevale, P., Chinni, D. (2026). Dinamiche della giustizia costituzionale. Saggi. Napoli : Editoriale Scientifica.
Dinamiche della giustizia costituzionale. Saggi
CARNEVALE PAOLO;CHINNI DANIELE
2026-01-01
Abstract
This volume brings together four essays that examine and reflect upon some of the most significant dynamics characterizing the activity of the Italian Constitutional Court in recent years. The first contribution offers several considerations on the contemporary relevance of judicial review concerning formal defects in legislation. After briefly retracing its historical development within Italian legal culture, both during the Statutory period and under the Republican Constitution, the essay critically investigates the gradual devaluation of formal defects, arguing for the need to recover the deeper meaning and systemic value of compliance with the rules governing the legislative process. The second essay examines the most recent configuration of the relationship between the Constitutional Court and the Parliament. It first analyses the choice made by the Court to transform legislative discretion, through inadmissibility decisions that nonetheless substantively ascertain a constitutional defect, into a temporary barrier to a judgment of unconstitutionality, which may subsequently be delivered should the legislature fail to intervene. The contribution then traces the reasons underlying the abandonment of the theory of the socalled “obliged solutions” (rime obbligate) in favour of the broader possibility of issuing additive judgments, notwithstanding the existence of a plurality of constitutionally compatible remedies, whenever a constitutionally appropriate solution can be identified within the legal system. Finally, the essay considers the implications of the technique of the postponed-decision order (ordinanza di rinvio a data fissa) for the relationship between the Court and the Parliament, rejecting the view that this type of ruling constitutes the latest step in a phase marked by increased judicial assertiveness vis-à-vis the legislature’s sphere of decision-making. The third contribution addresses recent constitutional case law that is shaping a new framework for the relationship among legal orders, particularly with respect to the European Union. Within this renewed framework, examined through all its principal developments over at least the last decade, it is argued that the role of the Constitutional Court is to ensure that the “constitutionalization” of the European Union proceeds in accordance with the principles enshrined in the Italian Constitution. From this perspective, the Granital model for resolving conflicts between domestic law and EU law, first articulated in Judgment No. 170 of 1984, has not been abandoned; rather, it has been complemented by other models, all serving the broader objective of integration among legal orders. The fourth and final essay focuses on the instruments of communication through which the Constitutional Court seeks to establish a relationship with public opinion. Particular attention is devoted to the use of the Court’s institutional website, which, from the perspective considered here, has in recent years assumed a central and predominant role, insofar as it enables the Court to perform a variety of functions, more or less closely connected with its adjudicatory activity. The essay therefore reflects on the legal implications of each of the communication tools examined, while at the same time highlighting how the political legitimacy that the Court seeks to foster through its relationship with public opinion has become necessary in contemporary society if the constitutional judge is to fulfil its role effectively.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


