Already tomorrow the Constitutional Court could announce whether or not it will judge the referendums to repeal the current electoral law admissible. The Consulta is, in a certain sense, between two fires. The first is legal. If he declares referendums admissible, and these, as everything suggests, will receive the consent of the voters, there is a risk of opening up a legislative vacuum, which would have the consequence of leading to the revival of the Mattarellum, unless a timely legislative intervention by the Parliament. Thesis that a part of the constitutionalists does not agree with.
The second focus is instead political. If the Court will rule for the inadmissibility of the referenda there is the more than real risk that no one will touch Porcellum (the current electoral law).. In fact, the parties declare that this law needs to be changed by now, its drafter (the Northern League's Calderoli) has defined it as "filth". But in fact, Italians have already had to vote twice with that absurd system which does not allow representatives to choose their own representatives in Parliament.
Of course, today the parties say that, whatever the verdict of the Consulta, they will change that law. But the lesson of things tells us something else. The parties had plenty of time to change the Porcellum and they didn't. One could also think that they have the mental reservation of preferring it to be they rather than the electors who nominate deputies and senators.
For this the green light of the Constitutional Court in the referendums would have a double effect: it would not prejudice the possibility that in the months that will separate the sentence from the date of the consultation, the Parliament may enact another law. But, otherwise, it would give citizens the guarantee that next time in any case they would not vote with the Porcellum. Of course, in the event of inaction by the Chamber and the Senate, the old Mattarella law would be revived. Which, it is worth remembering, was certainly not a bad law.
