This paper stresses the need to figure out whether the duty to comply with laws under any circumstances, traditionally expressed in the latin motto “dura lex, sed lex”, in the current legal framework of democratic states could tolerate being mitigated because of the alleged superior demand of protecting fundamental values, if threatened by the norms. Starting from a recent case sprouted in Italy few months ago, when a few Mayors declared the will to suspend the application of some norms established by the law n.132/18, implementing the so-called “security – decree” n. 113/18, the main issue to be assessed is whether first and foremost human dignity could be considered a supreme principle of each contemporary democracy, able – in certain conditions – to prevail over contrasting rules set by the Parliament. Or, conversely, if compliance with the laws, expression of the usual parliamentary centrality in the constitutional organization, is a principle that under the rule of law still cannot stand any exception except for a Constitutional Tribunals’ ruling of unconstitutionality, even in the current context of “globalized” protection of human rights. Following this last opinion, it is a consequential need to further assess if any eventual measures are left to civil servants at large against those laws that allegedly undermine fundamental rights and human dignity while waiting for the Constitutional judges’ ruling.

"Dura lex, sed lex", yes or no? Regarding a recent, relevant case of announced civil disobedience in Italy

CIANCIO A
2019

Abstract

This paper stresses the need to figure out whether the duty to comply with laws under any circumstances, traditionally expressed in the latin motto “dura lex, sed lex”, in the current legal framework of democratic states could tolerate being mitigated because of the alleged superior demand of protecting fundamental values, if threatened by the norms. Starting from a recent case sprouted in Italy few months ago, when a few Mayors declared the will to suspend the application of some norms established by the law n.132/18, implementing the so-called “security – decree” n. 113/18, the main issue to be assessed is whether first and foremost human dignity could be considered a supreme principle of each contemporary democracy, able – in certain conditions – to prevail over contrasting rules set by the Parliament. Or, conversely, if compliance with the laws, expression of the usual parliamentary centrality in the constitutional organization, is a principle that under the rule of law still cannot stand any exception except for a Constitutional Tribunals’ ruling of unconstitutionality, even in the current context of “globalized” protection of human rights. Following this last opinion, it is a consequential need to further assess if any eventual measures are left to civil servants at large against those laws that allegedly undermine fundamental rights and human dignity while waiting for the Constitutional judges’ ruling.
RIGHT OF RESISTANCE, CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, RULE OF LAW, SEPARATION OF POWERS, CONSTITUTIONAL ADJUDICATION, CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
ciancio-dura-lex-sed-lex-yes-or-no.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: ARTICOLO
Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Dimensione 610.75 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
610.75 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11769/362435
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact