di Francesca Cerulli

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione. – 2. Un passo avanti e due indietro per la giustizia climatica in Italia. – 2.1 La strategia processuale di parte attrice. – 2.2 Analisi critica della sentenza di primo grado. – 3. Le possibili implicazioni della sentenza KlimaSeniorinnen c. Svizzera per il contenzioso climatico in Italia: a) in materia di separazione dei poteri. – 3.1 Segue: b) in materia di obblighi di mitigazione. – 4. Conclusioni.

This study aims to examine Italy’s first case of climate change litigation, in which the Italian State was sued for failing to implement adequate climate policies in line with its international obligations. A critical analysis will be conducted of the judgment issued by the Tribunal of Rome on February 26, 2024, which dismissed the case as inadmissible due to an absolute lack of jurisdiction. The Tribunal based its decision on the grounds that proceeding otherwise would violate the principle of separation of powers. Additionally, this study will consider the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling in KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland, issued just weeks later. In fact, the European Court’s position on separation of powers and mitigation obligations, which Italian judges will need to consider on appeal, could influence the final outcome of the case.

di Agnese Vitale

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione. – 2. Sulle forme legittime di resistenza armata nel diritto internazionale. –3. Sulla definizione di terrorismo. – 3.1. Le liste nere degli organismi sovranazionali. – 3.2. Lettura dell’art. 270-bis alla luce della Convenzione di New York del 1999. – 4. Sulla nozione di Stato estero ai fini dell’applicazione dell’art. 270-bis. – 5. Considerazioni conclusive.

The Italian Court of Cassation – decision  n. 32712  of  20 August 2024 –  interprets art. 270-bis of the Italian penal Code in light of the International Convention on the Repression of Financing of Terrorism, signed in New York  on December 9^th  1999 and ratified by Italy with Law 14 January 2003, n. 7. It controversially includes in the notion of terrorist acts against a foreign State also violent acts against the civilian population in illegally occupied territories.

di Alessandra Prozzo

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione – 2. Il modello di delegificazione di cui all’art. 17, secondo comma, della legge n. 400/1988: ratio e limiti applicativi. – 3. Il meccanismo di delegificazione di cui al nuovo Codice dei contratti pubblici. – 4. Osservazioni conclusive.

The gradual overcoming of the delegation model introduced by Article 17, par. 2 of Law No. 400/1988 is now long highlighted by scholars. More recently, a confirmation in this sense is represented by the delegation “mechanism” provided for by the new Contract Code. This article will illustrate the peculiarities of this mechanism, which concerns the annexes to the Code, and the aspects that appear most problematic.

di Maddalena Cogorno

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione. – 2. Gli obblighi nascenti dalla Convenzione UNESCO del 2003. – 3. Lo stato dell’arte tra il 2007 e il 2023 in Italia. – 4. La legge 206/2023: quale patrimonio culturale intangibile? – 5. Struttura della legge e strumenti di tutela del patrimonio culturale intangibile. – 6. La legge sul Made in Italy e la Convenzione del 2003: quale relazione? – 7. Lacune e profili critici. – 8. Grandi speranze: la delega al Governo nella legge 152/2024 sulle manifestazioni di rievocazione storica. – 9. Segue: i criteri direttivi per una disciplina organica del patrimonio culturale immateriale. – 10. Note conclusive.

The entry into force of law 203/2026 on the protection of “made in Italy” and law 152/2024 on historical re-enactment events renews the discussion on the quality of the protection of intangible cultural heritage in the Italian legal system. These laws contain provisions that reference intangible cultural heritage and must, therefore, be read in harmony with the already existing legislation on the subject. This commentary identifies Italy’s obligations arising from the 2003 UNESCO Convention. Then it examines the extent to which they have been fulfilled and whether the new laws can be affirmed as a significant contribution to the protection of intangible cultural heritage.