Governmental predominance in Italian law-making: undemocratic or illiberal?

IF 1.5 Q1 LAW

Theory and Practice of Legislation Pub Date : 2021-06-24 DOI:10.1080/20508840.2021.1942372

G. Piccirilli

引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Italy has experienced different kinds of involution of parliamentary democracy and the legislative output over the course of the past couple of decades. Following the ‘Berlusconi-era’ (1994–2011) two major issues have dominated the evolution of Italian politics: technocratic governments (predominantly that of Monti in 2011–2013) and the recent emergence of populist parties (e.g. the Five Star Movement, the League). Despite the apparent opposition of these phenomena, they do share many commonalities with regard to their approaches to the legislative process. They both fostered an acceleration of established in Italian law-making, which also become more apparent in the last decade. The constraints provided for by the 1948 Constitution (including the Head of State and the independent and powerful Constitutional Court) had so far limited impact on these problematic trends.

查看原文本刊更多论文

政府在意大利立法中的主导地位：不民主还是不自由？

摘要在过去的几十年里，意大利经历了不同类型的议会民主和立法产出的内卷化。在“贝卢斯科尼时代”（1994-2011）之后，两个主要问题主导了意大利政治的演变：技术官僚政府（主要是2011-2013年蒙蒂政府）和最近出现的民粹主义政党（如五星运动、联盟）。尽管这些现象明显遭到反对，但它们在处理立法程序的方法方面确实有许多共同点。它们都促进了意大利国内立法的加速，这在过去十年中也变得更加明显。1948年《宪法》规定的限制（包括国家元首和独立而强大的宪法法院）迄今为止对这些问题趋势的影响有限。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Theory and Practice of Legislation LAW-

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

10.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Theory and Practice of Legislation aims to offer an international and interdisciplinary forum for the examination of legislation. The focus of the journal, which succeeds the former title Legisprudence, remains with legislation in its broadest sense. Legislation is seen as both process and product, reflection of theoretical assumptions and a skill. The journal addresses formal legislation, and its alternatives (such as covenants, regulation by non-state actors etc.). The editors welcome articles on systematic (as opposed to historical) issues, including drafting techniques, the introduction of open standards, evidence-based drafting, pre- and post-legislative scrutiny for effectiveness and efficiency, the utility and necessity of codification, IT in legislation, the legitimacy of legislation in view of fundamental principles and rights, law and language, and the link between legislator and judge. Comparative and interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged. But dogmatic descriptions of positive law are outside the scope of the journal. The journal offers a combination of themed issues and general issues. All articles are submitted to double blind review.