di Martina Coli

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione – 2. La competenza della Corte di giustizia nelle procedure ex art. 7 TUE e la ricevibilità del ricorso – 3. Le questioni di merito: sulla violazione della procedura di voto – 4. Osservazioni conclusive.

The article examines the recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU in the annulment action Hungary v European Parliament (C‑650/18), concerning the reasoned proposal triggering the procedure under Article 7(1) TEU. The article discusses two of the most salient aspects dealt with in the judgment: the competence of the Court to review acts adopted under the so-called preventive instrument for the protection of the EU values and the voting mechanism provided for in Article 354 TFEU (notably the meaning of “votes cast”). It is submitted that the Court’s narrow interpretation of the limits to its jurisdiction under Article 269 TFEU is in line with the Union’s nature as a community “based on the rule of law”. At the same time, the Court missed the opportunity to clarify further procedural aspects concerning the procedures under Article 7 TEU.

di Virginia Campigli

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa. I profili di rilievo di Cons. St., Sez. I, parere n. 203/2021 nel quadro del sistema delle fonti. – 2. L’ordinanza oggetto di ricorso straordinario al Presidente della Repubblica. – 3. Il fondamento costituzionale del ricorso straordinario al Presidente della Regione Sicilia. – 4. L’estensione riconosciuta alla locuzione “atti amministrativi regionali”. – 4.1. Sulla (non) riconducibilità dei Comuni siciliani alla categoria degli organi dipendenti, controllati o vigilati dalla Regione. – 4.2. (Segue) Sulla sussistenza di un altro titolo ai fini della qualifica dei provvedimenti dei Comuni siciliani come “atti regionali”. – 5. La natura «giustiziale, ma sempre più assimilabile alla giurisdizione, del ricorso straordinario al Presidente della Repubblica»: raffronto con il ricorso straordinario al Presidente della Regione Sicilia. – 6. Opportunità di una «rimeditazione, anche a livello normativo», della disciplina procedurale del ricorso straordinario regionale.

The essay analyzes the opinion n. 203/2021 of the First Section of the Council of State, concerning the extraordinary appeal to the President of the Sicilian Region as compared with the extraordinary appeal to the Head of State. The Council first points out which are the administrative acts that are to be appealed to the President of the Sicilian Region. Then, the Court focuses on the juridical nature of the extraordinary appeal to the Head of State, developed from an administrative remedy into a substantially jurisdictional one, following legislative changes and recent judgments. This provides an opportunity to question whether the extraordinary appeal to the President of the Sicilian Region should become a jurisdictional remedy as well, to grant the same legal protection.

di Margherita Liguori

SOMMARIO: 1. Considerazioni introduttive. – 2. Applicazione e attuazione della Costituzione. – 3. Attuazione della Costituzione e clausole generali: “la buona fede”. – (Segue). Buona fede e divieto di abuso del diritto. – 5. (Segue). Interessi costituzionali e danno esistenziale. – 6. La regola del caso: combinazione o bilanciamento. – 7. Conclusioni.

This note is about the role of the judge in the Italian system of constitutional justice. It examines the juridical institution known as Drittwirkung, which consists in the direct application of the Constitution in the private relations. This research compares the direct application with the interpretation in conformity, different interpretative instruments that are often confused between them. Finally, it demonstrates the importance of the jurisdictional function in the implementation of the Constitution, especially in the recognition of new interests, worthy of protection, also when the Parliament is inefficient.

di Enza Cirone

SOMMARIO: Introduzione. – 2. Le competenze dell’Unione europea in materia di sanità pubblica. – 2.1. La disciplina dei poteri dell’UE. – 2.2. Il sistema europeo di contrasto alle catastrofi e alle emergenze a carattere transfrontaliero. – 3. Azioni adottate e carenze riscontrate in risposta alla pandemia: focus sul settore della salute pubblica. – 4. Certificato covid-19 UE: dalla proposta al regolamento (UE) 2021/953. – 4.1. La protezione dei dati come condizione essenziale di legittimità. - 4.2. Un sistema interoperabile. - 5. La promessa di libertà che apre un vaso di Pandora? – 6. Note conclusive sulle competenze in materia di salute. È tempo di riforma?

This article analyzes some of the challenges posed by the introduction of the EU Digital COVID-19 Certificate as a tool to facilitate mobility in the EU during the pandemic. While there is no consensus regarding the efficacy of vaccination in avoiding the transmission of the virus, the key rationale of these certificates is an attempt at striking a balance between two conflicting objectives: individual freedom on the one hand and public health protection on the other. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the ongoing discussion and an analysis of arguments relating to legal, ethical and social issues in the perspective of EU law. The results from this analysis show that, although this instrument facilitates European Union (EU) cross-border movement, it also risks creating new forms of inequality as well as opening Pandora’s box of discrimination. Interestingly, the study of the EU Digital COVID-19 Certificate, which cannot (and should not) be examined isolated from the overall EU regulatory response to the pandemic, is preparatory to further reflection on the redefinition of Union’s competences in the field of public health. In this respect, this article argues that the pandemic has revealed the need to provide the EU with solid legislative powers to tackle the various health challenges that could arise in the future.