The broad coalition is hoping for a repeat of the ‘No’ vote and is forming a ‘coalition of appeals’ against the Melonellum

With the new electoral law approved by 224 votes in favour and 164 against, an opportunity mingled with hope is opening up before the broad coalition, so much so that the centre-left coalition (which struggles to find common ground on other issues) now dreams of being able to replicate the miraculous unifying effect of the ‘No’ campaign during the referendum, and of transforming itself into a sort of ‘appeal coalition’ against the ‘fraudulent law’ – as the Melonellum-Stabilicum has been dubbed by the opposition – with the undisguised aim of ‘raising public awareness as in the days of the 1953 fraudulent law, which was repealed after less than a year’, through an alliance between the Network for a Free and Equal Vote, coordinated by Professor Roberto Zaccaria, alongside constitutional expert Enrico Grosso, lawyer Pietro Adami and Professor Maria Agostina Cabiddu. On Monday, in the Chamber of Deputies, the constitutional experts will present the campaign for forthcoming legal challenges alongside various representatives from parties across the broad political spectrum (from AVS to IV), together with Articolo 21 and the Demo Foundation led by Democratic Party MP Gianni Cuperlo, and with the participation of around 30 associations, many of which are already engaged in the referendum campaign (plus the CGIL providing external support). In short, the idea is that of a ‘relay’ between political parties and civil society, say Democratic Party Senator Alessandro Alfieri, head of Reforms within the party’s secretariat, and Filiberto Zaratti, AVS group leader on the Chamber of Deputies’ Constitutional Affairs Committee. Riccardo Magi, secretary of Più Europa, who has just emerged from a hunger strike lasting more than a week, says: “The struggle now shifts to the arena of legal challenges, and this is inevitable, given that the government has turned a deaf ear to all the initiatives we have put in place, begging it to stop and not to impose, yet again, an unconstitutional electoral law on the country.” Meanwhile, attention is also turning to the President of the Republic, to whom Magi wrote during his fast.

Simona Bonafè of the Democratic Party, who followed the entire legislative process on the Constitutional Affairs Committee, says: “Our battle against this electoral law – tailor-made by those in power – continues across the country, alongside all those who believe that the rules of the game affecting everyone should not be imposed by majority vote.” The machinery is already well-oiled. Zaccaria explains that legal challenges are being drafted in all regions, and that fundraising (under an umbrella organisation for the claimants) has already begun, so that, as the professor says, they will be ready to take action as soon as the law comes into force, between late October and early November. Having started with an appeal from 160 constitutional experts and followed by two conferences at the start and end of the summer, this network’s initiative, under the banner of ‘Constitution and Democracy’, aims to seek a ruling on whether the law infringes the right to vote and to obtain a judgement from the Court before the general election. While the civil society organisations involved in the Network partly overlap with those engaged in the ‘No’ campaign during the referendum, it is “first and foremost the spirit of the referendum”, says Zaccaria, that pervades this new “coalition” for the legal challenges. On the substance of the case, Professor Grosso will be responsible for the content. At present, it is understood that there will be six main points of contention to be put before the judge: the majority bonus as it is currently structured, with ‘fixed’ lists comprising 70 members of the Chamber of Deputies and 35 senators (should the bonus be awarded, with emphasis placed on both the size of the bonus, its distribution and the imposition of a ‘fixed’ list); the impossibility for voters to exercise an effective choice of representatives, given that only the election of list leaders is guaranteed; the ‘breach’ of Article 51 of the Constitution regarding gender balance; the obligation to indicate the name of the candidate for Prime Minister on the ballot paper, not only in relation to the prerogatives of the Head of State; the allocation of the bonus in the Senate, in relation to Article 57 (election on a regional basis); the number of signatures required to stand for election (6,000 per constituency, which brings the total number of signatures to be collected nationwide to over 300,000). “That’s almost the number of votes a small political party would receive,” say members of the broad coalition.