La crisi dello “Stato moderno” e l’emergenza pandemica: appunti sul ruolo delle Camere nella lotta contro il coronavirus

di Gian Luca Conti

SOMMARIO: 1. Lo Stato moderno e la sua crisi: dopo il terremoto, la pandemia. – 2. La conversione di taluni (non tutti) i decreti-legge pandemici, fra aporie atomistiche e mozioni omnibus. – 3. Istruttoria legislativa e smarrimento di senso del Comitato per la legislazione: la prospettiva della riduzione dei parlamentari. – 4. Necessità e urgenza: un sindacato avvolto dal segreto. – 5. Mala tempora incumbunt?

The pandemic, like the Messina earthquake, requires us to investigate the reasons for the crisis of the "modern" state. At the time, these reasons were identified essentially in the difficulty of ensuring adequate political representation for the interests expressed by the world of economics and work. The solution was the Carnaro Charter and things didn't go too well. Now, the problem lies in some details of parliamentary law (decreti-legge that repeal other decreti-leggi with very complex consequences for the constitutional theory ; amendments that become agendas without a body able to check their respect by the Government; the practice of maxi-amendment leading to a de facto mono-chamber; the Copasir which judges on the situation of extraordinary necessity and urgency which has led to an unprecedented limitation of constitutional freedoms and fundamental rights). The true legacy of the pandemic is not only having given health as a value capable of overwhelming any other constitutional value, but also having entrusted the task of defining the hierarchy between constitutional values ​​to the Government, bypassing the Parliament’s role, which has reduced to approving a motion calling for a return to the decree-law (19 May 2020).
Mala tempora incumbunt?