1. The Constitution does not impose a particular electoral system, therefore not even a proportional system, but it does impose that there be a balancing of constitutionally protected interests for the purposes of the formation of the parliamentary body and above all that there be a proportion between the means chosen and the objectives pursued.
2. The purpose of facilitating the formation of a parliamentary majority is a constitutionally legitimate objective. The defect found lies, however, in the disproportion between the choice of adopting a proportional-based system and the extent of the distortion achieved by the majority twist determined by the prize. A prize awarded without a minimum threshold, in short, overturns the ratio of the electoral formula based on proportionality chosen by the legislator of 2005.
(In December 2013, the I civil section of the Court of Cassation, with the remittance order 12060/2013, raised the question of constitutionality of Law No. 270/2005).
Cookies
This site uses technical, analytics and third-party cookies. If you want to learn more or opt out of all or some cookies, press the "Manage cookies" button or consult the
Cookie policy