The object of this thesis is the analysis of the relations between the pronunciations of the Constitutional Court and the changing role of the President in their forms of government. According to tradition, in constitutional and comparative law, the different and specific facets of the Head of State, affected the doctrine committed to study the political and legal aspects and peculiarities of a complex figure, in which the political element meets guarantee legal taking, from time to time, a different appearance, which is often difficult to be interpreted. In recent decades the constitutional science became interested in Head of State after some events that imposed a review of theories about the political and legal responsibility of the President of the Republic within classical forms of government like the Italian, French and US. Also we will see the constitutional conflicts at the beginning of the "recent transitional democracies" of Eastern Europe like Romania and Lithuania where the Head of State was involved in a series of clashes against "other" political organs. The common feature of all these situations was the resolute intervention of the constitutional courts as judges of the conflicts between the organs of the accusations against the head of state or even called to express an advisory opinion about the parliamentary proceedings of presidential removal. Every time the courts had to operate on presidential matters, the result of their judgment, although in different ways, often crossed the borders of the single issue by shaping, however, an interpretation of the fundamental characteristics of the head of state and of the form of government. The aim of this work is to provide the reader with a systematic review of the interaction between the decisions of the highest courts to solve institutional conflicts and developmental aspects of presidential office, to be able to assess how the decisions of the first an impact on the status of the responsibilities of the second conditioning further development within the institutional architecture designed by the Constituent Assembly and the same form of government as a whole. For this purpose have been analysed the constitutional models which have "consolidated democracy" such as Italy, France and the USA. These points have subsequently been compared to those realities that are still looking for a more solid institutional balance as Romania and Lithuania. From a methodological point of view, finally, the structure of the thesis has been divided along two main lines: at first it has been dealt the issue of the different extension of presidential responsibility during the decades, then turning the attention to the way in which the judgments of the Constitutional Courts had an impact on its way to manifest and develop. In second place, then, the focus was set on the influence that the same decisions have had in the evolution of the same form of government, in particular in those systems which were less tested and those which were in search of stabilization such as Romanian and Lithuanian.
|Data di pubblicazione:||19-feb-2016|
|Titolo:||Funzioni e responsabilità del Capo dello Stato nelle giurisprudenze costituzionali|
|Settore Scientifico Disciplinare:||IUS/21 - DIRITTO PUBBLICO COMPARATO|
|Corso di dottorato:||SCUOLA DI DOTTORATO IN SCIENZE GIURIDICHE - 71R|
|Citazione:||(2016). Funzioni e responsabilità del Capo dello Stato nelle giurisprudenze costituzionali. (Tesi di dottorato, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, 2016).|
|Parole Chiave (Inglese):||Presidente, Responsabilità, Corte Costituzionale, immunità|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||07 - Tesi di dottorato Bicocca post 2009|