Four years of disagreements between Meloni and Mattarella

Yesterday, Giorgia Meloni decided to respond to remarks made in recent days by the Head of State regarding the proposal to introduce a cap on the number of foreign pupils in classes. “When the President of the Republic was Minister for Education, he drew up circulars urging that foreign pupils should not be concentrated in the same class; it is a common-sense measure. I believe it is right to take it forward,” said the Prime Minister in an interview with Bruno Vespa. Meloni’s response marks a slight shift in tone: the Prime Minister did not simply brush aside Sergio Mattarella’s comment, as she has done in the past, but chose to take it up. Yet the exchange between the two heads of state has proved lively on other occasions over the last four years.

From 2023 to the present day, on several occasions Mattarella has signed government laws and decrees whilst adding comments and requesting amendments, such as with the ‘Milleproroghe’ decree in 2023, which the Quirinale deemed to contain too many disparate provisions, and with the Competition Act in 2023, in which the extension of street trading licences was criticised, in breach of certain European regulations; or the decrees prepared by the government in 2024 ahead of the European elections, regarding which Mattarella called for greater attention to be paid to the ‘genuine grounds for urgency’. 

One of the thorniest issues in the dispute between the Colle and Palazzo Chigi concerns security. In February 2024, after the police responded with truncheons to the unrest caused by a group of students marching in Pisa, Mattarella telephoned the Minister of the Interior, Matteo Piantedosi, and issued a statement saying: “Using truncheons against young people is a sign of failure.”

In February 2026, the Quirinale raised objections to certain provisions of the security package, in particular regarding preventive police detention and the so-called ‘criminal immunity shield’. Alfredo Mantovano met with Mattarella and reported the Quirinale’s objections to Meloni; the text was then amended prior to approval. A few months later, in April 2026, the Quirinale intervened regarding the Security Decree over a provision that provided for a €615 incentive for lawyers who had assisted migrants until their voluntary repatriation. Following a meeting with Alfredo Mantovano, the government amended the provision with a corrective measure.

The other major area of institutional disagreement is the justice system. In October 2024, Mattarella intervened following an attack by Meloni on the judiciary. In October 2024, the Court of Rome refused to authorise the detention of 12 migrants who had been transferred to Italian centres in Albania. Meloni accused the judiciary of seeking to obstruct the government’s actions. Mattarella called for “cooperation between institutions” and, in the days that followed, met Meloni at the Quirinale, with whom he agreed on the need to maintain a more conciliatory tone towards the judiciary. 

In the case of the pardon granted to Nicole Minetti in 2026, following press rumours about the documentation used in the preliminary investigation, the Quirinale asked the Ministry of Justice to carry out further checks. The issue of pardons arose again later, following the final conviction of jeweller Mario Roggero, when Minister Nordio announced that he had initiated the procedures for a request for a pardon. Mattarella summoned him to the Quirinale, reminding him that, according to the Constitution, the power to grant a pardon is a prerogative of the President of the Republic

. The most striking case of friction between the Quirinale and Palazzo Chigi, however, occurred in November 2025. It was an entirely political clash triggered by an article in La Verità, which attributed to Francesco Saverio Garofani, an adviser to Mattarella, remarks about possible political scenarios as alternatives to the majority led by Meloni. FdI reacted strongly and demanded clarification from the Quirinale. Meloni met with Mattarella, describing Garofani’s words as ‘institutionally and politically inappropriate’. In the end, the affair concluded with renewed respect for the President of the Republic.