Diritto Pubblico Comparato ed Europeo

Sommario

1. Il valore della CEDU nella recente giurisprudenza costituzionale. – 2. La differenziazione tra diritto CEDU e diritto comunitario e l’equiparazione della CEDU al genus dei trattati internazionali. – 3. Rilievi critici: la possibilità di ricondurre la CEDU all’art. 11 Cost. in ragione delle peculiarità della convenzione. – 4. Il rigetto della tesi della «comunitarizzazione» della CEDU. – 5. Rilievi critici: il futuro della “comunitarizzazione” della CEDU con il trattato di Lisbona. – 6. Considerazioni conclusive: il rischio insito nella creazione di due categorie di diritti fondamentali e i possibili rimedi.

Abstract

The article comments on judgment nos. 348/07 and 349/07 of the Italian Constitutional Court concerning the effect of the ECHR in the Italian system of legal sources from the perspective of EU Law. In these decisions the Constitutional Court clearly distinguishes the ECHR from EC law. The Court considers the ECHR merely an international treaty whose provisions are not directly applicable. Hence, Italian judges cannot “cease to apply” (disapplicare) national provisions contrasting with the ECHR, as they would do with EC law, but they have to refer the case to the Constitutional Court. The article questions the Constitutional Court’s approach on two grounds. Firstly, the ECHR should not be considered merely an international treaty, but rather a constitutional instrument for protecting human rights. Moreover, its provisions meet most of the parameters required for direct effect to be recognised in regard to EC law. Secondly, following the 2007 Lisbon Treaty, the EU will most likely accede to the ECHR. The Convention will therefore be integrated with the EU legal system and its provisions will have direct effect, whenever conveyed into the Italian legal system through EU law. As a result the ECHR would have varying legal value depending on whether it comes into play in “EU situations” or “non-EU situations”. A double standard in the legal value of human rights could be deemed contrary to the non-discrimination principle set out in article 3 of the Italian Constitution. This signifies an incentive for the Constitutional Court to revise its conclusions in judgment nos. 348 and 349.