Primus SUPER pares: death of a democracy.

[Risottia]

Yesterday the Italian Corte Costituzionale began revising the so-called "lodo Alfano" (Alfano by-law), that is the law, written by Berlusconi's Justice Minister Alfano, that stops the trials against those holding the four highest offices in the Italian Republic.
In due order, these are:
The President of the Republic (mr.Napolitano)
The President of the Senate (mr.Schifani)
The President of the House (mr.Fini)
The President of the Ministers' Council (mr.Berlusconi)

If the "lodo Alfano" is deemed anticonstitutional by the Court, it will automatically be erased from the Italian code of laws. This will cause the so-called "Mills trial" against Berlusconi to be resumed.
For those who don't know, the trial features Berlusconi being charged with corrupting judges in order to benefit himself and his own enterprises (Fininvest and Mediaset). In an earlier part of the trial mr.Mills, a British lawyer working for Berlusconi, was found guilty. The judges could not finish to try Berlusconi, too, because in the meanwhile he became PM and had the "lodo Alfano" approved by his coalition.

What is quite terrifying is the line of defence Berlusconi's lawyers have chosen to hold in front of the Corte Costituzionale. Mr.Ghedini (chief lawyer of Berlusconi's) and mr.Pecorella (both MPs in Berlusconi's party) have claimed that:
#1-the Constitution states that "everybody is equal in front of the law"; BUT the application of law must not necessarily be equal.
#2-Berlusconi has been directly elected as PM by the electors
#3-hence Berlusconi is not a "primus INTER pares" (latin: first among equals), but a "primus SUPER pares" (first above equals).

#1 is a dangerous interpretation already. It is generally understood (through rulings of the Corte Costituzionale) that law is applied differently because the harshness of the SENTENCE must be somewhat adapted to fulfill the need for a just balance between punishment and rehabilitation - which may differ from one culprit to another; but nowhere it has been said that TRIALS must be held or not held or suspended according to supposed differences between citizens, or the offices they hold.

#2 is clearly FALSE, because Italy is a parliamentary republic: the electors vote directly for the MPs, but the PM is nominated by the President of the Republic AND given a confidence vote by both Houses.

#3 is the most astounding thing ever to be heard in a democracy. No wait, in a republic altogether.
What does "primus super pares" mean? "Primus inter pares" means that the "primus" holds a place of honour among his equals; this was as Augustus styled himself in comparison to the Roman senators, meaning he had equal rights and equal duties as any other senator BUT he was the first to speak (of course, he meant otherwise, but it was a sort of "understatement").
"Primus super pares" implies either:
-Berlusconi is above his own equals (clearly, it doesn't make any sense)
-the citizens of Italy are equals, BUT Berlusconi is above them all.

If such ideas are not rejected as anticonstitutional by the Corte Costituzionale, I think we can but declare the death of the Italian Republic, which article 1 of the Constitution states to be "democratic", and watch the birth of a new oligarchy, where the ones holding the highest offices are "more equal" than commoners.

[Non Aligned States]

#3 is the most astounding thing ever to be heard in a democracy. No wait, in a republic altogether.
What does "primus super pares" mean?

It's a two parter. Question and answer.

Question: Who is the boss of you?
Answer: Me! I am the boss of you!

[The Archregimancy]

Oh, Risottia, I feel your pain, really I do. Any even mildly left of centre Italian must cringe with embarrassment over Berlusconi. It's not just the corruption charges, it's the call girls, the control of private media, the entire sublimation of the state to the ego of a septuagenarian satyr whose sexual antics might have made Tiberius blush...

And yes, I agree the case in front of the constitutional court is a serious one that everyone in Western Europe has to take seriously. The idea that a head of government can introduce a law that retrospectively protects him from legal charges while in office is (with apologies to Aelosia) something I'd associate with an authoritarian South American pseudo-democracy, not one of Europe's leading economies, and an important pillar of the EU. I really hope the bastard loses. It's appalling.

But where you write:

If such ideas are not rejected as anticonstitutional by the Corte Costituzionale, I think we can but declare the death of the Italian Republic, which article 1 of the Constitution states to be "democratic", and watch the birth of a new oligarchy, where the ones holding the highest offices are "more equal" than commoners.

In what way does the last part of that sentence not describe most Western democracies? Most Western democracies these days are run by a self-perpetuating political class, where serving as an elected representative has its own career trajectory. The idea that someone might enter politics alongside another career, or after a successful career has become increasingly rare. Instead, we've become elective oligarchies where the people we are allowed to vote for select themselves, and they clearly increasingly believe themselves to be a class apart, whatever the backslapping slogans about 'serving the people' might suggest.

[Non Aligned States]

In what way does the last part of that sentence not describe most Western democracies? Most Western democracies these days are run by a self-perpetuating political class, where serving as an elected representative has its own career trajectory. The idea that someone might enter politics alongside another career, or after a successful career has become increasingly rare. Instead, we've become elective oligarchies where the people we are allowed to vote for select themselves, and they clearly increasingly believe themselves to be a class apart, whatever the backslapping slogans about 'serving the people' might suggest.

The problem with any political power system is that as time goes by, a specific demographic of people will enter that field with the knowledge and influence necessary to perpetuate the continuance of that demographic's hold in the political arena (how long it takes depends on the persistence of the demographic and the checks to their power), eventually reaching a point where it's a full on aristocracy.

So far, I haven't been able to think of a system proof against this inevitable corruption of the political process and subsequent creation of oligarchies.

[Yootopia]

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

[Risottia]

Oh, Risottia, I feel your pain, really I do. Any even mildly left of centre Italian must cringe with embarrassment over Berlusconi.

Actually there are also many right-wingers who feel the same. For one, take mr.Marco Travaglio (a journalist who's clearly a liberist), he's one of the staunchest opponents of Berlusconi.

Most Western democracies these days are run by a self-perpetuating political class, where serving as an elected representative has its own career trajectory. The idea that someone might enter politics alongside another career, or after a successful career has become increasingly rare. Instead, we've become elective oligarchies where the people we are allowed to vote for select themselves, and they clearly increasingly believe themselves to be a class apart, whatever the backslapping slogans about 'serving the people' might suggest.

True. Still, in most countries there is a system of check and balances that prevent politics from crossing the line into a true oligarchy.
The most important components of the check-and-balance being the constitutional principle of equality in front of law, an independent judiciary and the free media. Berlusconi is focusing on destroying these checks: attack against any media he doesn't control; refusing the equality in front of law; and also he's trying to put the the prosecutors under the direct control of the executive.



Btw, update:
1.the ruling of the Corte Costituzionale will be published this afternoon. I'll keep you informed.
2.mr.Bossi, leader of Lega Nord (part of Berlusconi's coalition), after a meeting with mr.Fini (President of the House, from Berlusconi's party) stated that, if the lodo Alfano is rejected, he will mobilize the population against the Corte Costituzionale to support the executive.

[The Archregimancy]

Btw, update:
1.the ruling of the Corte Costituzionale will be published this afternoon. I'll keep you informed.
2.mr.Bossi, leader of Lega Nord (part of Berlusconi's coalition), after a meeting with mr.Fini (President of the House, from Berlusconi's party) stated that, if the lodo Alfano is rejected, he will mobilize the population against the Corte Costituzionale to support the executive.

How seriously should we be taking the Northern League?

I've always pinned them down as a bunch of northern populists who occasionally exploit resentment of the south and work themselves up over a silly pseudo-nationalism, but not as a serious political force except in so far as they may occasionally be necessary to support a governing coalition.

I mean, we shouldn't seriously be expecting a March on Rome by a bunch of blackshirted Lombards, should we?

[Risottia]

How seriously should we be taking the Northern League?

I've always pinned them down as a bunch of northern populists who occasionally exploit resentment of the south and work themselves up over a silly pseudo-nationalism, but not as a serious political force except in so far as they may occasionally be necessary to support a governing coalition.

True, they are a bunch of populists, but they got 9% at the last general elections, with 60 seats in the House and 25 in the Senate.
At the EU elections last June, they got 9 seats (4 on their own polls + 5 seats taken from lists who didn't reach the 4% threshold).

I mean, we shouldn't seriously be expecting a March on Rome by a bunch of blackshirted Lombards, should we?

Green-shirted. They wear green shirts.


Yep, they give my region a bad name. I hate them.

[Krypton-Zod]

True. Still, in most countries there is a system of check and balances that prevent politics from crossing the line into a true oligarchy.
The most important components of the check-and-balance being the constitutional principle of equality in front of law, an independent judiciary and the free media. Berlusconi is focusing on destroying these checks: attack against any media he doesn't control; refusing the equality in front of law; and also he's trying to put the the prosecutors under the direct control of the executive.

Which is why in Europe, the political classes are slowly and covertly abolishing parliamentary democracy. How? By increasingly transferring these powers to an unelected class of Politburo kommissars (European commission they call it) which is neither elected nor subject to what one can call 'parliamentary scrutiny'. The system is set up specifically to encourage national government ministers go to to Brussels, agree with ministerial colleagues, do a deal with the Politburo (Commission) and then present the national parliaments with a law/directive/regulation that cannot be changed or blocked by any parliament.

Thus parliamentary democracy is dying in Europe.

In the USA, stuck with a two party oligarchy it is somewhat different, in USA the congress is actually the motor of the anti-democratic forces who want to take our money and give it to the corporations.

[The Archregimancy]

Yep, they give my region a bad name. I hate them.

Tee-hee

You know, it's hard to take them too seriously when they wear a shade of aqua better left on a Milan catwalk, and the middle one looks like he's auditioning for the Village People.

Though I concede I'd probably think differently if I were either Romanian or Romany - not that I suspect any of those three would either be able to tell the difference or even care that there is a difference.

[The Archregimancy]

Berlusconi lost.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8295716.stm

While not Italian myself, as a European I join Risottia in feeling pleased.

[Cosmopoles]

Prime Ministerial immunity?
It's just been revoked!

Thats one step towards getting Europe's worst leader out of office permanently. Now we only have to find a way to cure the apparent amnesia that strikes certain Italian people every few years where they forget what a total disgrace Berlusconi is and end up reelecting him not once, but twice.

[North Suran]

Why is it that corruption seems to be so prevalent in the Italian executive?

I could just be stereotyping here, but the Italian government seems to have a proportionally higher quantity of politicians with distasteful reputations.

[Yootopia]

Why is it that corruption seems to be so prevalent in the Italian executive?

I could just be stereotyping here, but the Italian government seems to have a proportionally higher quantity of politicians with distasteful reputations.

You ever heard of Sicily?

[Gopferdammi]

Berlusconi lost.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8295716.stm

While not Italian myself, as a European I join Risottia in feeling pleased.

Finally some good news regarding that shithead. Congratulations from Svizzera, and good luck!

[North Suran]

Why is it that corruption seems to be so prevalent in the Italian executive?

I could just be stereotyping here, but the Italian government seems to have a proportionally higher quantity of politicians with distasteful reputations.

You ever heard of Sicily?

It's excused because it managed to make its corruption into a beast of a book and a film.

[DrunkenDove]

Berlusconi lost.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8295716.stm

While not Italian myself, as a European I join Risottia in feeling pleased.

I'll drink to that!

[Buffett and Colbert]

Good for Italy!

[Risottia]

Berlusconi lost.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8295716.stm

While not Italian myself, as a European I join Risottia in feeling pleased.

I love everybody. (Except the psychodwarf.)

Seriously, now:
the Corte Costituzionale rejected the lodo Alfano as "violating article 3 of the Constitution", that is the article that states that "all citizens are equal in front of the law..."

There's still a tiny spark of hope for this country.

[Risottia]

You ever heard of Sicily?

It's excused because it managed to make its corruption into a beast of a book and a film.

psst... Neaples isn't in Sicily. It's in Campania.
Palermo is in Sicily (and Corleone is in the province of Palermo).

[North Suran]

You ever heard of Sicily?

It's excused because it managed to make its corruption into a beast of a book and a film.

psst... Neaples isn't in Sicily. It's in Campania.
Palermo is in Sicily (and Corleone is in the province of Palermo).

Pah.

They all speak Italian, they're all the God damn same to me.

[Bluth Corporation]

If the "lodo Alfano" is deemed anticonstitutional by the Court, it will automatically be erased from the Italian code of laws.

This is a huge violation of the separation of powers that is at the heart of any valid government.

Only the legislature properly possesses the power to make or repeal laws (leaving aside for the moment the question of a given law's moral validity).

Courts can render certain laws effectively unenforceable, by saying "We're not going to accept any cases or suits brought under this law so don't waste your time," but actually striking the law from the books should require an explicit act of the legislature to that effect.

The U.S. does it right in this regard--courts declare laws unconstitutional, but it is up to the legislature responsible for passing the law in the first place to actually remove the law from the books if it so desires, and it has no obligation to do so--courts, at any level, cannot compel legislatures, at any level, to repeal laws.