Articles 1, 2 and 4 of Law Decree no. 19 of 2020 did not confer on the President of the Council of Ministers either a legislative function in violation of articles 76 and 77 of the Constitution or extraordinary powers in violation of article 78, but only assigned him the task of implementing the primary rule through acts sufficiently typed administrative.
This is a salient passage of sentence no. 198 filed today (editor Stefano Petitti), with which the Council on 23 September last 'saved' the Dpcm for the management of the Covid emergency.
The Court ruled on the issues raised by the Justice of the Peace of Frosinone regarding the constitutional legitimacy of Law Decree no. 6 and n. 19 of 2020, both converted into law, concerning the adoption, through decrees of the President of the Council of Ministers (Dpcm), of urgent measures to contain and manage the epidemiological emergency from COVID-19. In the specific case, a citizen had proposed an opposition against the administrative fine of 400 euros imposed on him for leaving his home during the "lockdown" of April 2020 in violation of the prohibition established by the Decree and then by the Dpcm.
According to the Justice of the Peace, the two decree laws would have conferred on the Prime Minister the legislative function or extraordinary powers, in contrast with articles 76, 77 and 78 of the Constitution. The Court declared the questions concerning the first Decree - no. 6 of 2020 - inapplicable result in consideration of the time in which the sanctioned conduct was put in place. Instead, the questions concerning Decree no. 19 of 2020 - applicable to the specific case - since the latter has not only typified the measures that can be adopted by the President of the Council, but, establishing that the relative execution must take place according to principles of adequacy and proportionality, has also imposed a typical criterion of exercise administrative discretion,in itself incompatible with the attribution of legislative power.
