The Minister of Infrastructure and Transport, Matteo Salvini, secretary of the League, declared in recent days that the centre-right" would not be "divided on the third mandate" as, on the issue, "Parliament has freely decided". No discussion on the point, also because it cannot, at present, be considered in any way plausible to believe that the stability of the alliance could be prejudiced.

However, it cannot be absolutely ruled out (the doubtful formula imposes itself) that the rejection of the proposal in some way ends up having repercussions on the internal balance of power of both the coalition and the party of reference. Not only that, and not so much, because if the aforementioned "third term" question had not been important, it would not have made any sense to submit it to the judgment of Parliament in such a delicate moment as the current one, i.e. close to the polls, but because, perhaps , in the near future plan concerning the internal organizational organizational chart of the Party, the position of Luca Zaia could prove fundamental (and in fact already is) who, due to his indisputable political and administrative skills, has represented, and represents, a significant personality and of stable reference, and who, with good likelihood, could even take turns with Matteo Salvini himself in the Secretariat.

The hypothesis does not seem, if carefully considered, to be entirely far-fetched, also because Luca Zaia, of a thoughtful and moderate temperament, particularly appreciated in the Territory but also in the national context for his pragmaticity, seems to express a political position probably much closer to the origins ideologies of an Identity Party deeply anchored to the geographical context of reference which does not seem to be able to lose its ideological soul. Let's be clear: the result on the "third term" issue was most likely a foregone conclusion, and the Secretary of the League could probably have specifically sought the "rejection" on the point in awareness of the outcome in order to be able to assert his weight in other contexts and in different occasions. Sixteen votes against only four from the League. The Carroccio seems to have been isolated: what are the consequences? A fracture that cannot otherwise be remedied within the government majority is not certain, in fact it would be excluded, but, perhaps, internal competition between the leaders perhaps yes, when we wanted to consider everyone's need to prevail in the very close European competitions due to the evident repercussions of the outcomes of the same on an exquisitely political level and of setting up the dynamics reflected on a pure and simple administrative level.

In this case and more clearly: confirmation of the consensus and approval for the President of the Council of Ministers Giorgia Meloni and/or, instead, reaffirmation of the Secretary of the League, Matteo Salvini, who had distinguished himself in previous competitions with considerable percentages of consensus. If we were then to consider the circumstance whereby the representative of Italia Viva in the Institutional Affairs commission of the Senate expressed himself in favor of the Northern League's proposal, then the issue could also take on further connotations. But, beyond any potential consideration and/or satisfaction and/or aspiration, does it still make sense to discuss the limits of electoral mandates? Let's understand each other better. There is a law that specifically regulates the issue. This is the law known as number 165 of 2004, which, in article 2, indicates the cardinal points, so to speak, that the various Regions are called upon to implement to regulate the various cases of ineligibility of their leaders.

In particular, the same article mentioned above, in its letter f), indicates the "non-immediate re-eligibility at the end of the second consecutive mandate of the President of the Regional Council elected by universal and direct suffrage, on the basis of the regional legislation adopted on the matter". Well: if this is the literal content of the reference standard, it would not seem possible to discuss it in an alternative way. First of all, because this principle seems to be considered a fundamental bulwark of democracy. Therefore, because it guarantees, as has always been noted by scholars in the sector, both the need to safeguard the freest expression of the popular vote and, at the same time, the need to guarantee the authenticity of the electoral competition. Finally, because the dictate of the aforementioned letter "f" mentioned above satisfies the need to encourage the physiological turnover of the political class over time.

However, even today, the clarity of the regulatory provision is faced with interpretative questions which would require further clarification studies aimed precisely at avoiding, if not completely useless, at least cumbersome comparisons. In this sense, it would be appropriate to have a functional interpretative clarification from Parliament or the Government aimed at resolving the age-old question once and for all, perhaps by expressly providing that, at the time of transposition of the national legislation by the Regions, the The Regions themselves would, in turn, expressly prohibit immediate re-eligibility upon expiry of the second consecutive mandate of the President of the Regional Council.

Given the different positions currently appreciable in the field, it seems likely to believe that the discussion on the point could be rather complex and certainly not resolvable in a short time. Nor could it be ruled out that in the near future, as the second consecutive mandate of the President of the Regional Council in strategic Regions approaches, the issue will arise again with more immediate relevance, coming to the attention of Parliament and the Government with all its pressing urgency. . Time, as always, is Lord, and always offers its answers in due time. All that remains is to wait.

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

(Lawyer – Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata