Abstract

The author draws a picture of the balancing tests that have driven the Constitutional Court to strike down important sections of the electoral laws nn. 270/2005 and 52/2015 (see respectively decision n. 1/2014 and n. 35/2017). Attention is particularly driven on the differences between the two tests on the ground that, while the former confirms the traditional doctrine that each electoral law has to take due account both of the need of representing the electorate and of governmental stability, the latter tends rather to prefer the first element, and therefore the proportional system.