On Friday 5 July, the referendum question to repeal the Calderoli Law concerning Differentiated Autonomy was filed in the Supreme Court. The question, as far as it was possible to learn from the press, would have the following wording: «Do you want the law of 26 June 2024, n. 86, “Provisions for the implementation of the differentiated autonomy of the Regions with ordinary statute pursuant to article 116, third paragraph, of the Constitution”?”. Simple and clear therefore in its literal statement, and which will have to be answered, in the event that five hundred thousand voters or five Regional Councils request it, with a "yes" or a "no".
The political forces of the centre-left are mainly pursuing the issue, but there seems to be no shortage of positions inspired by a sense of concern for the effects of the reform in the southern regions, even on the part of some centre-right exponents. The latter circumstance is probably enough in itself to fuel more than just perplexity, if not on an ideological level, at least on an empirical and factual level. In other words: if with the implementation of the so-called differentiated autonomy the State will be able, at the request of a party, to proceed in the direction of the attribution to a Region with Ordinary Statute, of legislative autonomy on matters of concurrent competence and, in limited cases, of exclusive of the former, one could not run the risk (the doubtful formula seems necessary) of seeing the rationale of the principle which, in its time, years ago, led to the recognition of the Regions with Special Statute, as example Sardinia? Couldn't we run the risk of giving shape to a country at "different speeds" with equally different potential for development and growth?
Also because, even if one wants to consider and grant everything, one could not help but point out that in terms of the use of services, the country, as highlighted by many parties, already currently, seems to present, despite the distribution of tax revenue is guaranteed on a national basis in consideration of specific needs and important inhomogeneities.
What would happen if each Region that requested autonomy could then retain its own revenue within itself? The question would seem anything but trivial, and the attempt to resolve the issue would probably not be considered sufficient simply by maintaining that the reform would offer the Southern Regions the opportunity to pursue greater wealth without having to wait for the state contribution, thus making the own directors. In the meantime, because, from 2001 to today, the Reform of Title V of the Constitution has never been concretely implemented, such hesitancy could probably have been inspired precisely by the existence and/or persistence of large economic and social differences still existing within the national perimeter, by not moving the various Italian Regions from equal positions of uniform distribution of useful wealth to guarantee an equally satisfactory and uniform use of services. Therefore, because if one wanted to discuss in terms of a "Republic of the Regions", therefore essentially a Federal type Republic, then probably (the conditional seems necessary), such an argument could only begin from a basic evaluation of the meaning of the "speciality" and on the prospects, in the near and future, of the same, especially when one wants to consider that the principle of equality which characterizes the condition of every citizen should be presented, and is presented, as a political and ethical value useful to substantiate the so-called liberal democracy. Finally, because the circumstance that until now only certain regional realities have been united by a condition of "special autonomy" would still presuppose today, and above all in consideration of the potential effects of the Calderoli Law, careful reflection not only on those that were the profound reasons that led to their institution, but also what their function could be in the context of a renewed system of "differentiated autonomy" within which a political path of territorial importance, so to speak, distinct would be created clearly from the national one.
To be clear: how would the so-called peripheral identity of certain regions such as those, for example, islands, be better protected as a result of the implementation of the Calderoli Law?
Furthermore, it would not be useful, in the current context, to ignore the position of the European Commission on the subject, which, immediately, and according to what was reported by the media, did not fail to point out that the "attribution of additional competences to the Italian regions" could lead to “risks for cohesion and public finances”.
On a political level, and on another level, the Calderoli Law had the direct and immediate effect of reuniting the opposition forces, which was anything but obvious. The latter circumstance, which if appropriately appreciated by the relevant parties, and if the proposed referendum question finds a favorable outcome, could call into question the compactness of the current Government majority also in consideration of the direct and indirect effects on the country of the new balances of power that will be determined in Europe.
In the meantime, the initiative to launch a popular consultation appears to be a useful choice.
Giuseppina Di Salvatore – Lawyer, Nuoro
