Il ricorso "diretto" a Strasburgo in deroga al principio del previo esaurimento, ex art. 35 CEDU: un possibile "cortocircuito" tra sistema costituzionale e convenzionale di tutela?

di Costanza Masciotta

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa. - 2. L'obbligo del previo esaurimento dei rimedi interni e la sua evoluzione ermeneutica nella giurisprudenza convenzionale. - 3. I casi Costa e Pavan e Parrillo contro Italia: verso la creazione di una "pregiudiziale di convenzionalità"? - 4. Considerazioni conclusive.

This article provides a detailed analysis concerning a recent practice adopted by the European Court of Human Rights on the requirement of exercising all of the internal remedies, ex art. 35 CEDU.
Whenever the violation of the Convention stems from Parliamentary law, the Strasbourg Court considers the constitu-tional judgement an "ineffective" national remedy, due to the lack of direct action before the Italian Constitutional Court.
This practice was embraced also in two recent judgments, Costa e Pavan vs. Italy and Parrillo vs. Italy: both concern-ing the Italian law on artificial procreation.
The article aims at figuring out whether this kind of "direct action" before the Strasbourg Court creates a "short circuit" with the Italian Constitutional Court.
Furthermore, the article investigates the current status of "twin judgments" model and aims at verifying whether the direct action before the Strasbourg Court is an established practice or an extraordinary exception justified by the princi-ple of maximum expansion of fundamental rights.