Department of Political Science the Italian Parliamentarism and The
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Department of Political Science Master’s Degree in International Relations Chair of Comparative Public Law The Italian Parliamentarism and the Romanian Semi-presidentialism in a comparative perspective. Interesting similarities in two different forms of government. Prof. Cristina Fasone Prof. Giovanni Piccirilli SUPERVISOR CO - SUPERVISOR Teodora Ioana Vulpe ID 636682 CANDIDATE Academic Year 2019/2020 Table of contents Table of contents ........................................................................................ 2 1 Introduction ........................................................................................ 4 2 Forms of Government, definition, classification and a comparative analysis of Parliamentarism and Semi-presidentialism ................................ 7 2.1 Definition and classifying principles ...................................................... 7 2.1.1 Separation of powers, the basis of forms of government classification ............. 7 2.1.2 Definition and contemporary classification principles ........................................ 9 2.1.3 Classification principles of questionable effectiveness ..................................... 16 2.2 Parliamentarism and Semi-presidentialism in comparative perspective 20 2.2.1 A more in-depth analysis of the parliamentary form of government ............... 20 2.2.2 The parliamentary process of rationalization and its misinterpretations ......... 28 2.2.3 A more in-depth analysis of the semi-presidential form of government .......... 32 2.2.4 Underlining similarities and differences ............................................................ 42 3 Comparing origins. From different historical backgrounds to different democratization processes. Is there any space for similarities? .................. 49 3.1 Experiencing dictatorship ....................................................................49 3.1.1 The characteristics of Mussolini’s Fascist Corporate State ............................... 49 3.1.2 The characteristics of Ceaușescu’s Communist State........................................ 54 3.2 Leading the Democratic Transition .......................................................61 3.2.1 The Italian democratic constitution-drafting..................................................... 61 3.2.2 The Romanian democratic constitution-drafting .............................................. 70 3.3 Potential similar aspects and their influence on democratization ..........83 3.3.1 A common totalitarian vein but a different totalitarizing intensity .................. 83 3.3.2 Similar Constitutional needs and different institutional solutions .................... 88 4 The concrete functioning of the Italian Parliamentarism and the Romanian Semi-presidentialism in a comparative perspective ................... 94 4.1 The Parliament ....................................................................................95 4.1.1 The Italian Parliament ........................................................................................ 95 4.1.1.1 The structure, the confidence relationship and the legislative function . 95 2 4.1.1.2 The electoral system and its impact on the form of government ......... 100 4.1.1.3 The participation of the Italian Parliament in the EU affairs ................. 105 4.1.2 The Romanian Parliament................................................................................ 107 4.1.2.1 The structure, the confidence relationship and the legislative function107 4.1.2.2 The Ombudsman, the electoral system and the floor-crossing issue .... 112 4.1.2.3 The participation of the Romanian Parliament in the EU affairs ........... 114 4.2 The President of the Republic ............................................................ 116 4.2.1 The Italian Head of State and the fisarmonica presidenziale .......................... 116 4.2.1.1 Presidential election and main functions ............................................... 116 4.2.1.2 Contraction or expansion of the Presidential powers ........................... 121 4.2.2 The Romanian Head of State and the presidential activism ........................... 127 4.2.2.1 Presidential election and main functions ............................................... 127 4.2.2.2 The relationship with the Parliament..................................................... 132 4.2.2.3 The presidential activism ....................................................................... 134 4.3 The Government ............................................................................... 136 4.3.1 The Italian Government ................................................................................... 137 4.3.1.1 Appointment, structure and main functions ......................................... 137 4.3.1.2 Adoption of ordinary laws to implement art. 95 ................................... 141 4.3.1.3 Extra-constitutional empowerment of the Government ....................... 143 4.3.2 The Romanian Dual Executive ......................................................................... 146 4.3.2.1 Appointment, structure and main functions ......................................... 146 4.3.2.2 Governmental empowerment at the expenses of the Parliament ........ 149 4.3.2.3 An empowered President at the expenses of the Government ............ 151 4.4 The Constitutional Court .................................................................... 155 4.4.1 The Italian Constitutional Court ....................................................................... 155 4.4.2 (Failed) constitutional amendments in Italy: three important cases .............. 160 4.4.3 The Romanian Constitutional Court ................................................................ 167 4.4.4 Constitutional amendments in Romania. Still a Semi-presidential system? ... 170 5 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 176 6 Summary ......................................................................................... 185 7 Bibliography .................................................................................... 199 3 1 Introduction This study proposes a comparative analysis of the Italian parliamentary form of government and the Romanian semi-presidential one. Despite the different historical, political and cultural background in which they have been implemented, these two distinct forms of government may have several elements in common. The study starts from the hypothesis that, having both Italy and Romania experienced a dictatorial regime in the past, Fascism in Italy and Communism in Romania, they may have been characterized by similar authoritarian features. Moreover, common authoritarian features may have similarly influenced the Constitutional needs that the Italian and the Romanian founding fathers dealt with during the democratic transitions. Furthermore, if it is true there had been similar Constitutional needs, then there has to be space for similarities also in the concrete functioning of the two forms of Government, despite them being differently structured constitutionally. Are the Italian Parliamentarism and the Romanian Semi-presidentialism completely different, or is there any space for similarities? According to recent tendencies, are they becoming more similar? If there are some shared characteristics, are they linked to similar tendencies in the authoritarian past that both of them experienced? These are some of the questions this study aims to answer to. Usually, comparative studies focus on differences since they are easier to support with evidence. In fact, even the more similar ideal-types show differences in their concrete functioning. However, this study adopts a challenging approach, focusing on potential similarities between two different experiences. It is an aim that, as Massimo Luciani claims, should be the goal of whoever decides to deal with de study of forms of government (Elia & Luciani, 2011, p. 567). To do so, the study will first provide a general legal frame in which to contextualize the comparison and later on will go more deeply into the comparing activity. The first chapter defines the forms of Government, explains their functional link with the forms of State and it illustrates their contemporary classification following Mauro Volpi’s work. The contribution of extra-legal factors is taken into consideration. They are instrumental in clarifying the concrete functioning of a specific experience but, if given too much importance, they give birth to a 4 too descriptive classification, losing the ability to make prediction of future tendencies and evolutions. For all these reasons, extra-legal factors are here considered only for the detailed focus on Parliamentarism and Semi- presidentialism and; later on, for the concrete Italian and Romanian cases. In like manner, some questionable traditional classifying principles are dealt with for their valid contribution to the contemporary classification of forms of Government. However, being source of many uncertainties, they have not been applied to this study, but simply analyzed because of their past use into the doctrine. With the legal framework provided, Parliamentarism and Semi- presidentialism will first analyzed more into detail and later on compared. Concerning parliamentary systems, a whole paragraph (2.2.2) is dedicated to the rationalization concept because of its great influence on the Government’s stability and the regulation of the executive-legislative interplay. Altogether, not