Legislative initiative and popular participation in the1948 Constitution and its transposition in the first generation

The instruments of people’s participation found in the “first generation” Statutes (1971) were initially perceived as a further possible link between politics and civil society, in line with the overall favourable opinion that was attributed to people’s participation mechanisms in every field of social life in those years. However, Regions thwarted the hope that people’s participation instruments would become a second channel of participation in politics. The instruments described in the State model did not ensure the results hoped for and political parties remained the main way of participating in political life. At the beginning of the Nineties, the Public Administration proceedings were amended and some instruments of citizens’ participation were introduced. These changes influenced the future discipline of legislative proceedings. After the first reform of Title V of the Constitution (1999), the new text referring to art. 123 described the instruments for regional people’s participation as the previous one had done but the other significant changes introduced by the constitutional reforms in 1999 and 2001 permitted this norm to be interpreted differently. The difference may be based on three grounds: 1. the new presidential form of government, which implied research into closer links between Government Bodies and civil society; 2. greater legislative powers assigned to Regions, giving those Bodies more power to exert their influence on citizens’ lives; 3. “disaffection” with politics, as participation in the legislative process might become an alternative channel to traditional political representation. Therefore, in the “second generation” Statutes, instruments of people’s participation were described as “broad concepts” or as instruments strictly linked to their purpose. Regional norms encourage legislative initiative (provided that technical assistance for those who are promoting a law project is free, the costs sustained for collecting signatures are not charged to promoters, people’s legislative projects do not lapse at the end of legislation, some promoters are allowed to explain the project to the Regional Council, and if the project has not been discussed by a precise day, it is automatically registered in the agenda of the Regional Council). The limits of that instrument consist in: 1. a number of issues where the initiative cannot be exercised; 2. a minimum number of signatures are requested. Despite the guarantees mentioned above, people’s legislative initiative has not been exercised a great deal. This is mainly due to the fact that the norm found in most of the related provisions foresees that the Council cannot amend the projects presented by promoters. However, the new Statutes guarantee other forms of people’s participation in legislative proceedings, such as cognitive hearings, preliminary investigations, the opportunity to propose issues of great interest to the Council and the Registers of Associations, which are gaining considerable success. Another way of participation consists of establishing Bodies representing the economic or social parts of society but their implementation has been very unassuming up to now. To sum up, there are two models of people’s participation: the first one, comprising the initiative, is based on the principle of separation; the second one, comprising the other instruments, is based on the principle of integration/concerted action. The Constitutional Court has recognized the importance of the statutory provisions that refer to people’s participation institutes, therefore asserting their “juridical” nature.