“A desperate attempt. Decision-making processes all to be rethought»- Corriere.it

Professor Alfonso Celotto, as Full Professor of Constitutional Law at Roma Tre University, what do you think of the amendments on the work of the Court of Auditors?


I am puzzled.

Why?

First about the method. They are complex topics. Issues concerning the architecture of the state cannot be tackled with amendments presented at the last moment, and with the question of trust that prevents adequate time for a peaceful discussion.

What should be done instead?

What concerns the confrontation between state powers requires a dialogical approach and deeper reflections. Things by bill.

The government says there is no time: the application of the Pnrr is pressing. Not so?

Certainly the Pnrr involves two problems: unfeasible projects and a lot of bureaucracy.

So what would he do?


If I knew, I would have been put in charge of the Pnrr enforcement structure (laughs, ed). As a simple professor, I can only point out that all this cannot be compensated for with a frantic attempt.

And the tax shield?

it was introduced for fear of public officials signing, limiting wrongful liability, in 2020. But it was a temporary measure.

Passed to the scrutiny of the Consulta, says the government.


true but now we would like to stabilize it, introducing it in the procurement code and extending it to the entire Pnrr. The problem is serious and important, but it is not by making the derogation stable that the problem is solved.

So how?

It is now clear that great works can only be done with the commissioner: the Genoa bridge, post-earthquake reconstruction, the fight against drought. Since the decision-making process does not work, it should be rethought.

The Court of Auditors protests against the abolition of concurrent control. so serious to delete it?

The concomitant control was born with two laws, of 2004 and 2009, but in fact it has only been applied for a year and a half.

At that time?

We are always at the same point. Thoughtful choices should be made when dealing with a matter concerning the correct balance between the functionality of the result and the correctness of the procedure. Parliament should be involved, hearings of experts, perhaps looking at what is happening in other countries, discussing with some time available. You can’t do everything with an amendment written in half an hour and presented the day before, without leaving room for reflection and debate.

Had the Court of Auditors raised its voice too much?

Assuming, as some do, a government vendetta against the Court of Auditors, a conspiracy theme. I think that, as Tacitus said, too many laws and laws are synonymous with a malfunctioning state. We need better legislation and this is yet another example.

The Political Diary newsletter

If you want to stay updated on political news, subscribe to the newsletter “Political Diary”. It is dedicated to Corriere della Sera subscribers and arrives twice a week at 12. Just click here.