This collection adopts a distinctive method and structure to introduce the work of Italian constitutional law scholars into the Anglophone dialogue while also bringing a number of prominent non-Italian constitutional law scholars to study and write about constitutional justice in a global context.
The work presents six distinct areas of particular interest from a comparative constitutional perspective: first, the role of legal scholarship in the work of constitutional courts; second, structures and processes that contribute to more “open” or “closed” styles of constitutional adjudication; third, pros and cons of collegiality in the work of constitutional courts; fourth, forms of access by individuals to constitutional justice; fifth, methods of constitutional interpretation; and sixth, the relationship between national constitutional adjudication and the transnational context. In each of these six areas, the volume sets up a new and genuine constitutional dialogue between an Italian scholar presenting a discussion and critical assessment of the specific topic, and a non-Italian scholar who responds elaborating the issue as seen from constitutional law beyond the Italian system. The resulting six such dialogues thus provide a dynamic, in-depth, multidimensional, national and transnational/comparative examination of these areas in which the `Italian style’ of constitutional adjudication has a distinctive contribution to make to comparative constitutional law in general.
Fostering a deeper knowledge of the Italian Constitutional Court within the comparative global space and advancing a creative and fruitful methodological approach, the book will be fascinating reading for academics and researchers in comparative constitutional law.
Table of Contents
2. Dialogue as Method, Vittoria Barsotti, Paolo G. Carozza, Marta Cartabia, and Andrea Simoncini; Dialogue I: Constitutional courts and legal scholarship;
3. Je t’aime… moi non plus: some considerations on (and impressions of) the relationships between constitutional justice and legal scholarship, Paolo Passaglia;
4. The wasp and the orchid: constitutional justice and legal scholarship need each other, Marc Verdussen; Dialogue II: Open and closed forms of constitutional adjudication;
5. Openness and transparency in constitutional adjudication: amici curiae, third-party intervention, and fact-finding powers, Tania Groppi and Anna Maria Lecis Cocco Ortu;
6. Procedural rules and the cultivation of well-informed and responsive constitutional judiciaries, Maartje De Visser; Dialogue III: The principle of collegiality;
7. Collegiality over personality: the refusal of separate opinions in Italy, Diletta Tega;
8. `Collegiality’ in comparative context, Sarah Harding; Dialogue IV: Access to constitutional adjudication;
9. Direct constitutional complaint and Italian style do not match. But why? Elisabetta Lamarque;
10. The potential virtues and risks of abstract constitutional challenges and individual complaints: some reflections from Spain, Victor Ferreres Comella; Dialogue V: Judicial reasoning and interpretation;
11. Forms and methods of constitutional interpretation – Italian style, Giorgio Pino;
12. The relationship between forms and methods in constitutional interpretation: comparative reflections, Jeff Pojanowski; Dialogue VI: National constitutional adjudication in a transnational context ;
13. The Italian constitutional court in the European space – an empirical approach, Marta Infantino;
14. European relationality in the European legal space: country-specific mixtures within one European style, Patricia Popelier;
15. Power is perfected in weakness: on the authority of the Italian constitutional court, Armin von Bogdandy and Davide Paris;
Vittoria Barsotti, Professor of Comparative Law, University of Florence, Italy;
Paolo G. Carozza, Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School, USA;
Marta Cartabia, Vice President of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Italy;
Andrea Simoncini, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Florence, Italy;