Alberto Lucarelli and Ugo Mattei The debate on the scandalous refusal to election day has had the effect to bring out for a day on the main national media that the referendum will be celebrated. Such was the silence that has accompanied so far our battle last week that even an experiment on a university class of 200 students in law told us that only ten of them knew that it would be voted on 'water. The path towards the quorum is really difficult, even if the campaign is starting to take off. The Committee "means 2 to water the common good," for example, has created a beautiful 'activist kit "can be downloaded from the web and contains essential information and materials to spread our message.
flags will also be available soon referendum to be hung from balconies, a form of spreading the message very important in the deafening silence of the media. From this point of view, it seems that even a little 'ambiguous' Encroachment' Di Pietro, who still enjoys a media profile as a movement that we have not, however, have the honor to say that referendums are there, Perhaps most useful, at this stage, compared to claim authorship.
should continue to govern the election campaign accepting contributions of all on a journey that must be transformed into a march that involves people of all backgrounds and political beliefs. The debate sull'election day and the money squandered in order to skip the quorum has shown us that the sovereign people is still capable of outrage. We can not be satisfied with having raised the issue politically. The challenge is to give jurisdiction to an instance of reasonableness that involves everyone and which can not bind the government. What to do? Perhaps once again that great national common good that is our fundamental law can show us the way. In fact, the waste can not be part of a political and administrative discretion. Those 300 million could be used to repair the shores of rivers, avoiding future disasters (with damage priceless). This shows that good governance has a potential value of the multiplier public money that, like the 300 million coming from general tax revenues belong to all citizens and not the Minister pro tempore. L 'art. 97 of the Constitution establishes the principle of "good conduct and impartiality" of the public amministrazioine. In this light, wasting 300 million is constitutionally permissible? Then to waste them for a drawing of a party, to make the referendum invalid, it is even more serious and shows the total bias of the administration. Eligibility against the government had in fact already existed before the Constitutional Court, exercising its own prerogatives. And we defeated. The Court said that referendums are eligible giving justice to us. The government can not now take revenge extra ordinem, squandering public money just to ensure that the sovereign people speak second Constitution. There is a gross violation of Article structure. 75, which contains a positive view of direct expression of popular sovereignty. In short, the politico-administrative discretion does not go directly to the arbitrary and contrary to existing constitutional choices.
We ask Napolitano to intervene, but too many times to pull the jacket on the Presidency of the Republic is not wise policy in a logic of constitutional responsibility. But we are not without remedies. The referendum committee is in fact a constitutional organ of the State throughout the duration of the referendum process. It can then pull up in front of the Constitutional Court a jurisdictional dispute between state powers. We are studying the issue. 300 million of public money valgon well the danger of this match, however that would make it even clearer to all the irresponsibility of those who govern us. We are ready to go in front of the Consulta, but because it is written water law democracy.
flags will also be available soon referendum to be hung from balconies, a form of spreading the message very important in the deafening silence of the media. From this point of view, it seems that even a little 'ambiguous' Encroachment' Di Pietro, who still enjoys a media profile as a movement that we have not, however, have the honor to say that referendums are there, Perhaps most useful, at this stage, compared to claim authorship.
should continue to govern the election campaign accepting contributions of all on a journey that must be transformed into a march that involves people of all backgrounds and political beliefs. The debate sull'election day and the money squandered in order to skip the quorum has shown us that the sovereign people is still capable of outrage. We can not be satisfied with having raised the issue politically. The challenge is to give jurisdiction to an instance of reasonableness that involves everyone and which can not bind the government. What to do? Perhaps once again that great national common good that is our fundamental law can show us the way. In fact, the waste can not be part of a political and administrative discretion. Those 300 million could be used to repair the shores of rivers, avoiding future disasters (with damage priceless). This shows that good governance has a potential value of the multiplier public money that, like the 300 million coming from general tax revenues belong to all citizens and not the Minister pro tempore. L 'art. 97 of the Constitution establishes the principle of "good conduct and impartiality" of the public amministrazioine. In this light, wasting 300 million is constitutionally permissible? Then to waste them for a drawing of a party, to make the referendum invalid, it is even more serious and shows the total bias of the administration. Eligibility against the government had in fact already existed before the Constitutional Court, exercising its own prerogatives. And we defeated. The Court said that referendums are eligible giving justice to us. The government can not now take revenge extra ordinem, squandering public money just to ensure that the sovereign people speak second Constitution. There is a gross violation of Article structure. 75, which contains a positive view of direct expression of popular sovereignty. In short, the politico-administrative discretion does not go directly to the arbitrary and contrary to existing constitutional choices.
We ask Napolitano to intervene, but too many times to pull the jacket on the Presidency of the Republic is not wise policy in a logic of constitutional responsibility. But we are not without remedies. The referendum committee is in fact a constitutional organ of the State throughout the duration of the referendum process. It can then pull up in front of the Constitutional Court a jurisdictional dispute between state powers. We are studying the issue. 300 million of public money valgon well the danger of this match, however that would make it even clearer to all the irresponsibility of those who govern us. We are ready to go in front of the Consulta, but because it is written water law democracy.
0 comments:
Post a Comment