The ‘TariccoSaga’: the Italian Constitutional Court continues its European journey

Abstract

Why a 'saga' (and why that name)? Between 2015 and 2018, a chain of judicial decisions by the European Court of Justice and the Italian Constitutional Court (hereinafter 'Corte Costituzionale', 'the Italian Court', or simply 'the Court') drew significant attention in academic and judicial circles. At the core of the legal dispute, in constitutional terms, there was the possibility of the first application of so-called 'counter-limits' by a founding Member State. Partially overlapping with the conclusion of the Gauweiler case, 1 the Brexit negotiations, and the turmoil caused by the rule of law crisis in some Central European states, the 'Taricco saga' further stressed this difficult moment for European integration. The case arose from a question of interpretation of the Member States' commitment to countering frauds that affected the financial interests of the Union and the inability of Italian domestic law to properly attain that aim. Revolving around this original issue, the focus slightly changed in each passage to capture broader topics such as the competence of the EU to intervene in the substantive criminal law of member states, the dialogue between the European Court of Justice and national constitutional courts and, ultimately, some of the most fundamental principles of EU law (i.e. primacy, uniformity, direct effect). The interest and suspense induced by every new decision along this chain made it seem, in terms of

Clausole „europee” implicite ed esplicite nella Costituzione italiana

“…Senza ammettere questa diversità minima, l'ordinamento dell'Unione europea smarrirebbe il proprio fondamento: "in caso contrario i Trattati europei mirerebbero contraddittoriamente a dissolvere il fondamento costituzionale stesso dal quale hanno tratto origine per volontà degli Stati membri" (così l'ordinanza n. 24 del 2017 con cui la Corte costituzionale ha sollevato questione pregiudiziale alla Corte di giustizia sul c.d. "caso Taricco": su di essa Piccirilli, 2018;Bonelli, 2018;Tega, 2019).…”

Reconceptualizing the Primacy–Supremacy Debate in EU Law

“…There was thus a conflict between EU law and national law. Into the latter category belong cases that deal with, for example, 19 These cases did not concern rights granted to individuals by EU law nor a clash between EU law and national law, but rather they were about competition between different institutions. I argue that cases concerning individual rights are best conceptualized through primacy, whereas cases concerning institutional constitutional law through supremacy.…”

European Integration of Kosovo: Analysis of the Kosova Constitutional Provisions that Require Harmonization with EU Law

“…In the second Chapter of this Constitution, the general part provides that "Human rights and fundamental freedoms are indivisible, inalienable and inviolable and are the basis of the legal order of the Republic of Kosovo. "38 Article 22 of the Constitution provides that human rights and freedoms guaranteed by agreements and instruments for human rights, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, are directly applicable in the Republic of Kosovo and, in the case of conflict, have priority over the provisions of laws and other acts of public institutions 39.…”