On 9 June 2010, the Constitutional Court has ruled that nuclear is not the urgency of Italy.
At least it is not so urgent to get around the application of Italian laws, as they believed the Council of Ministers and the former Minister Scajola. With the ruling
215 9 June 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that the implementation of the process of emergency planning and development of lines and energy production "must be taken following procedures to ensure the participation levels of government involved by means of sincere cooperation ".
Basically it means that, while not denying that the emergency procedures should be implemented, they are still concert with the local authorities.
You can not circumvent the principle for which the legislature must cooperate with the regions where they have to legislate on competing with the central government.
addition, the ruling states that if actions are taken so urgent implementation of the same can not be done with private capital, as the legislative instruments do not have the immediacy required by the change and dall'aleatorietà faced by private funds.
Please note that under the critical interventions for which the Government adopts special procedures need to be funded with public money.
The government also adduced as a reason to use the urgent procedure, the fact that the legislation "the production, transmission and distribution of energy 'was lagging with European standards. The Court, however, stressed that the legislative gap is a previous situation, which can not be resolved by a special procedure, especially when it violates the "principle of cooperation" between state and regions that have legislative competence in this field competitor.
In short, the ruling says you can not build nuclear power plants without first consulting the local institutional bodies, it is said also that to implement the emergency procedures (to circumvent many "nodes" bureaucratic) we have need that there is indeed a situation of urgency and the construction of a nuclear reactor, which requires 20 years, is not among them. Finally it is stressed that the implementation of these special procedures should be made through state funds and not private, because they are subject to the "whims" of the market and are difficult to reconcile with a rapid and immediate management of any emergencies.
A modest opinion of Howl, this is a ruling in favor of true federalism in the sense that it gives power to the "owners" to decide what to put in your garden. It 's a way to restore a minimum of democracy and fairness in dealings state / city. Just as the citizen is not going to choose the host tends to the House, so the Government should not impose choices that the vast majority of Italians ball with a popular referendum in 1987.
Link: 215 Constitutional Court ruling.
http://www.cortecostituzionale.it/giurisprudenza/pronunce/scheda_ultimo_deposito.asp?comando=let&sez=ultimodep&nodec=215&annodec=2010&trmd=&trmm =
PS Ideally citizens should be able to choose the curtains of the House, but it would be difficult to agree to the tastes of 60 million people in a referendum ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment