Autonomy, three scenarios for the Consulta. From the judges possible partial corrections

On one side the North, represented by Veneto Lombardy and Piedmont, on the other the South, represented by Puglia Sardinia and Campania. If it were not for the 'red' Tuscany, which has joined the other regions governed by the centre-left against the Calderoli law, the public hearing at the Palazzo della Consulta today would be a perfect depiction of the risk of the country splitting in two in view of the referendum on differentiated autonomy by the League.

Of course, the two issues at the attention of the constitutional judges concerning differentiated autonomy - which stems, it is worth remembering, from the reform of Title V desired in 2001 by the then centre-left - are different: one thing are the questions of constitutionality concerning the Calderoli law for the implementation of the differentiated autonomy of the ordinary statute regions raised by the four centre-left regions on which the Court will express its opinion in the coming hours (after the public hearing the judges will meet in chambers and the forecasts are those of a long discussion, which will take a few days); another thing is the judgement of admissibility of the abrogative referendums, one partial and one total, filed in the Supreme Court. But it is certain that the first ruling will influence the second, to the point of the possibility of blocking the referendum process altogether: this is also why the Court presided over by Augusto Barbera, whose term of office expires at the end of the year, has decided to proceed with the constitutionality judgement before tackling the question of the admissibility of the referendums.

There are three possible scenarios: if the appeals by the four regions were to be upheld (but this is the hypothesis considered least likely by the experts), there would no longer be a referendum question. If, on the other hand, the appeals were to be rejected, the Calderoli law would remain in place and with it the possibility of holding the referendum: even if the judges were not to consider the contested law illegitimate, in fact, in January the two questions could still be admitted and the referendum could thus be held in June 2025. There is, however, a third way, and it is the one currently considered the most probable: the Consulta could judge illegitimate only some parts of the Calderoli law (e.g. with regard to the extension of competences on the subjects to be transferred) with an additive corrective ruling. A solution that would effectively empty the impact of the law. In this case - as established by the Consulta itself in ruling 68/78 - it would be the task of the Court of Cassation to assess whether or not a legislative amendment (by parliament but also as a consequence of a ruling by the Consulta) passes the referendum. The word would then pass directly to the Court of Cassation, with the following possible outcomes: the questions could still stand, or the Court of Cassation itself could reformulate them, or it could also declare them superseded and annul the referendum.

A crucial step, therefore, that could lead to a halt in the popular vote in June. And which also explains the majority's attempted and failed blitz a month ago to elect Palazzo Chigi advisor Francesco Saverio Marini as the fifteenth judge of the Consulta, who has been missing for a year. The wait for the verdict in the coming hours has then in fact imposed a stand-by on the premierate dear to Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who wants to avoid the possible intersection with the referendum on differentiated autonomy: reopening the premierate file in Parliament at the same time would end up further consolidating the front opposed to both reforms. Once the ruling is filed, we shall see.