JUDGMENT NO. 141

YEAR 2024

ITALIAN REPUBLIC

IN THE NAME OF THE ITALIAN PEOPLE

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

composed of:

President: Augusto Antonio BARBERA

Justices: Franco MODUGNO, Giulio PROSPERETTI, Giovanni AMOROSO, Francesco VIGANÒ, Luca ANTONINI, Stefano PETITTI, Angelo BUSCEMA, Emanuela NAVARRETTA, Maria Rosaria SAN GIORGIO, Filippo PATRONI GRIFFI, Marco D’ALBERTI, Giovanni PITRUZZELLA, Antonella SCIARRONE ALIBRANDI,

has delivered the following

JUDGMENT

in the proceedings concerning the constitutional legitimacy of Articles 35, paragraph 2, and 56 of Law of the Sardinia Region No. 9 of October 23, 2023 (Provisions of an institutional, organizational, and financial nature on various matters), and of Article 5, paragraph 1, of Law of the Sardinia Region No. 21 of December 29, 2023 (Amendments to Regional Law No. 17 of 2023, to Regional Law No. 9 of 2023, and to Regional Law No. 1 of 2023), initiated by the President of the Council of Ministers, through appeals notified on December 22, 2023, and February 27, 2024, filed with the Clerk's Office on December 22, 2023, and February 27, 2024, registered under No. 35 of the 2023 Register of Appeals and No. 7 of the 2024 Register of Appeals, and published in the Official Gazette of the Republic, Nos. 4 and 7, First Special Series, of the year 2024.

Having seen the act of constitution of the Autonomous Region of Sardinia;

Having heard the Reporting Judge Angelo Buscema at the public hearing of July 2, 2024;

Having heard the State Attorney Fabrizio Urbani Neri for the President of the Council of Ministers and the Attorney Sonia Sau for the Autonomous Region of Sardinia;

Having deliberated in the Council Chamber of July 2, 2024.

Considered in Fact

1. – With an appeal registered under No. 35 of the 2023 Register of Appeals, the President of the Council of Ministers, represented and defended by the State Attorney General’s Office, initiated issues of constitutional legitimacy concerning certain provisions of the Law of the Sardinia Region No. 9 of October 23, 2023 (Provisions of an institutional, organizational, and financial nature on various matters), including Articles 35, paragraph 2, and 56, which are the subject of this judgment.

Article 35, paragraph 2, would conflict with the interposed norm referred to in Article 23, paragraph 2, of Legislative Decree No. 75 of May 25, 2017, containing "Amendments and additions to Legislative Decree No. 165 of March 30, 2001, pursuant to Articles 16, paragraphs 1, letter a), and 2, letters b), c), d), and e), and 17, paragraph 1, letters a), c), e), f), g), h), l), m), n), o), q), r), s), and z), of Law No. 124 of August 7, 2015, regarding the reorganization of public administrations", thus violating Article 117, paragraphs two and three, of the Constitution, which reserves to the exclusive legislative competence of the State the matter of "civil order" (paragraph two, letter l) and the determination of fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance" (paragraph three), also with regard to the principles of budget balance and sustainability of public debt, as referred to in Articles 81 and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution.

The appellant also challenged Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, which amends the text of Article 5, paragraph 12, of the Law of the Sardinia Region No. 1 of February 21, 2023 (Stability Law 2023).

The challenged provision stipulates that the unused resources within the spending ceiling allocated for 2020 for hospital care may be redistributed among private accredited providers who have produced hospital activity exceeding the budget allocated in 2021, and provides for an increase in the spending ceiling for hospital care in 2023 "even beyond the limits imposed by national legal provisions that mandate the reduction of the acquisition of volumes of health services from private accredited providers for specialist outpatient care and for hospital care aimed at contracting public expenditure, given that the Region provides for the financing of health expenditure with its own resources."

This provision would conflict with Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of July 6, 2012 (Urgent provisions for the revision of public expenditure with unchanged services for citizens and measures to strengthen the equity of companies in the banking sector), converted, with amendments, into Law No. 135 of August 7, 2012, which is indicated as an interposed norm; from this conflict would derive the violation of Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution, which reserves to the State the determination of fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance", also in relation to the principles of budget balance and sustainability of public debt, as referred to in Articles 81 and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution.

The appellant contends that the constraints provided for by Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, regarding the resources intended to cover healthcare expenditure, would constitute an insurmountable limit not only for the administration but also for private operators, whose surpassing would justify the adoption of necessary measures for financial rebalancing (the judgment of this Court No. 203 of 2016 is cited).

The state legislation providing for these rebalancing measures would set fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance", given that it expressly pursues the "purpose of addressing the high and increasing healthcare deficit and the unavoidable budget needs and public expenditure containment". This purpose, being imposed by the budgetary constraints arising from the international obligations assumed by Italy in the European context, would also be binding on the respondent, given that Article 4 of Constitutional Law No. 3 of February 26, 1948 (Special Statute for Sardinia) – in the matter of "public assistance and charity" and in the matter of "hygiene and health" – expressly conditions the exercise of regional legislative powers on compliance with the constraints arising from the Constitution, from the principles of the state legal system, from international obligations, from national interests, from the fundamental rules of the economic and social reforms of the Republic, as well as from the principles established by state laws.

2. – The Autonomous Region of Sardinia has appeared in court, pointing out that Article 35, paragraph 2, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023 was repealed by Article 5, paragraph 32, letter b), number 2), of the Law of the Sardinia Region No. 17 of December 19, 2023, containing "Amendments to Regional Law No. 1 of 2023 (Stability Law 2023), budget variations, recognition of off-budget debts and past liabilities, and various provisions", effective from December 20, 2023 (pursuant to the provisions of Article 27, paragraph 1, of the same regional law).

Regarding Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, the regional defense limits itself to pointing out that this provision was first replaced by Article 5, paragraph 32, letter f), of Regional Law Sardinia No. 17 of 2023 and then by Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Law of the Sardinia Region No. 21 of December 29, 2023 (Amendments to Regional Law No. 17 of 2023, to Regional Law No. 9 of 2023, and to Regional Law No. 1 of 2023). The latter, pursuant to the provisions of Article 9, paragraph 1, of the same regional law, entered into force on December 30, 2023.

3. – With an act filed on February 22, 2024, the President of the Council of Ministers waived the issues of constitutional legitimacy of Article 35, paragraph 2, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, as the provision had been repealed without – in the meantime – any application.

4. – Shortly before the public hearing, the State Attorney General’s Office filed an explanatory memorandum in which it reported the amendment of Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, first by Article 5, paragraph 32, letter f), of Regional Law Sardinia No. 17 of 2023, and subsequently by Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023.

It considers, however, that these legislative interventions cannot lead to a declaration of cessation of the subject matter of the dispute, as they would not have removed the defects of constitutional legitimacy deduced in the appeal; indeed, the intervening legislation would also have been subsequently challenged by the President of the Council of Ministers with the appeal registered under No. 7 of the 2024 Register of Appeals.

The State Attorney General’s Office contends that Article 56 would conflict with the provisions of Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, which identifies specific expenditure targets for public finance, imposing the progressive reduction – for all regional entities – of the volumes of health services purchased from private accredited providers for specialist outpatient care and for hospital care. From this would derive the violation – through the aforementioned interposed norm/provision – of Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution, insofar as it reserves to the State the determination of fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance".

5. – The President of the Council of Ministers, with an appeal registered under No. 7 of the 2024 Register of Appeals, challenged Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023.

Article 5 under consideration intervenes, as mentioned, on the text of Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, which was challenged by an appeal registered under No. 35 of the 2023 Register of Appeals.

The State Attorney General’s Office asserts that the challenged Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 would conflict with the provisions of Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, which would identify specific expenditure targets for public finance, providing for the reduction, for all regions and autonomous provinces, of the purchase of volumes of health services from private accredited providers for specialist outpatient care and for hospital care.

It also highlights that the spending limit indicated in the first period of the state provision was redetermined by Article 1, paragraph 233, of Law No. 213 of December 30, 2023 (State Budget for the Financial Year 2024 and Multi-Year Budget for the Three-Year Period 2024-2026).

The interposed state norm, with a view to spending review, would set specific expenditure targets and limits for public finance to which regions and autonomous provinces would be subject, without any derogation even if the region provides for the financing of health expenditure with its own resources. Failure to comply with these constraints would pose risks not only for public finance but also for the sustainability of the expenditure of the Regional Health Service (on this point, the judgments of this Court No. 203 of 2016 and No. 236 of 2009 are cited).

The appellant further asserts that the interposed state provision establishes a discipline that would weigh proportionally not unreasonably on private operators in relation to the purpose that the legislator intends to achieve.

The reduction measure that private operators are called upon to bear could not be considered an excessive burden, first of all, due to the timing with which it was imposed; furthermore, the reduction would not refer to services already provided beyond the maximum expenditure forecast redetermined pursuant to the provision under challenge before its entry into force; finally, it would entail modest quantitative reductions calibrated taking into account the credit expectations of health operators, at a lower percentage for the closest period and a progressive (albeit still reduced) increase for subsequent periods.

The challenged provision, on the other hand, establishes that the unused resources within the spending ceiling allocated for 2020 for hospital care may be redistributed among private accredited providers who have produced hospital activity exceeding the budget allocated in 2021 and increases the spending ceiling for hospital care in 2023 even beyond the limits imposed by national legal provisions that mandate the reduction of the purchase of volumes of health services from private accredited providers for specialist outpatient care and for hospital care aimed at contracting public expenditure.

According to the State Attorney General’s Office, the conflict with Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, would consequently lead to the violation of the principle of "coordination of public finance" referred to in Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution.

Furthermore, regarding the ius superveniens, the appellant recalls that the first legislative amendment (Article 5, paragraph 32, letter f, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 17 of 2023), although not challenged, was replaced by Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 and, therefore, could be considered implicitly repealed. The provision would in any case be subject to the effects of the possible declaration of constitutional illegitimacy of the previous Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023.

The state defense also notes that, should the appeal against Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023 be declared inadmissible in light of the intervening legislation, this would make the interest in the declaration of constitutional illegitimacy of Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 even more relevant.

In light of the foregoing, the President of the Council of Ministers requests that Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 be declared constitutionally illegitimate for violation of Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution, with regard to the principle of "coordination of public finance", as well as of Articles 3, 81, and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution, in relation to Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, and in reference to Articles 3 and 4 of the special statute.

6. – The Autonomous Region of Sardinia has appeared in court, requesting that the appeal be declared unfounded.

The regional defense contends that, like all territorial entities that fully bear the cost of their own healthcare expenditure, the Autonomous Region of Sardinia should not be bound by state financial coordination rules that define the methods of containing healthcare expenditure (on this point, the judgment of this Court No. 125 of 2015 is cited), as the State does not contribute in any way to the financing of the Regional Health Service (the judgment of this Court No. 231 of 2017 is cited) to guarantee the provision of essential levels of care (LEA) and the reduction of waiting lists.

In fact, according to the provisions of Article 1, paragraphs 834 to 840, of Law No. 296 of December 27, 2006, containing "Provisions for the formation of the annual and multi-year budget of the State (financial law 2007)", in particular paragraph 836, "[f]rom the year 2007, the Sardinia region provides for the financing of the overall needs of the national health service in its territory without any contribution from the State budget."

The increase in expenditure for the purchase of health services from private accredited entities provided for by the challenged provision would also not be unconditional, but would represent a power of the Regional Council to re-modulate health expenditure with other categories of expenditure or to increase it for the purchase of services from private providers of the regional health system, in compliance with the general economic and financial balance of the regional health system. For this reason, where the necessary resources were found, the application of the regional provision would not entail risks for the sustainability of the expenditure of the Regional Health Service.

The regional legislation, moreover, would be aimed at implementing Article 32 of the Constitution, in the exercise of regional competence in the matter of "protection of health", pursuant to Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution and Article 4 of the special statute; a competence that – for autonomies that fully bear the cost of health expenditure with their own resources – would be limited exclusively by the principles aimed at guaranteeing the minimum thresholds of standards and the necessary expenditure, and not by specific measures that affect the use of regional resources, preventing their use to expand the satisfaction of citizens' health needs.

The reference to the aforementioned judgment No. 203 of 2016 would be completely irrelevant, especially for the aspects emphasized by the appellant, since this decision refers to the legislative competence of an ordinary region, whose healthcare expenditure is entirely financed by the State. The need for the healthcare expenditure of ordinary regions to be compatible with the limited financial resources would be referable, for these regions, to state resources, the amount of which would not, however, condition the spending capacity of the Autonomous Region of Sardinia, since the latter independently establishes the limit of resources to be allocated to the protection of the health of the Sardinian community, in relation to budget appropriations, which solely bear the regional health expenditure.

Since, in the case under consideration, the challenged provision would expressly provide for the obligation to maintain the general economic and financial balance of the Regional Health Service, it would be evident that the risk feared by the appellant of compromising the sustainability of the expenditure of the service itself would not exist. All the more so since the special autonomy regions must compulsorily allocate to their health service, for the provision of LEA, the share parameterized at the state level, and, unlike what happens with reference to the ordinary regions in which a possible deficit implies a negative result of the health sector, the special autonomies can cover any excess expenditure during the year with the allocation of additional resources.

The legitimate reliance of private individuals or their expectations would in no way have affected the choice to order the contested increase, which is explicitly aimed at guaranteeing LEA and reducing waiting lists.

The regional legislative intervention, moreover, would have been necessary as, at the date of approval of the challenged regional provision, the maintenance of the limit of the value of the expenditure incurred in 2011, i.e., relating to 12 years earlier (pursuant to Article 45 of Decree-Law No. 124 of October 26, 2019, containing "Urgent provisions in tax matters and for unavoidable needs", converted, with amendments, into Law No. 157 of December 19, 2019), would no longer have been sustainable.

As proof of this, the D.P.C.M. of January 12, 2017 (Definition and updating of the essential levels of assistance, pursuant to Article 1, paragraph 7, of Legislative Decree No. 502 of December 30, 1992) has expanded the range of LEA services to be guaranteed with more complex types and standards than in 2011.

Nevertheless, Article 1, paragraph 233, of Law No. 213 of 2023 would not have changed the situation, since it still uses the value of the expenditure incurred in 2011 as a parameter to provide for a very small increase in the spending limits referred to in Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted.

The regional legislator would therefore have exercised its competence in the organization and financing of the Regional Health Service, as well as the related financial autonomy, which cannot be compressed by specific state measures for the coordination of public finance.

The Autonomous Region of Sardinia would have adopted, within the limits established by the constitutional and statutory rules, a provision aimed at increasing the offer of services to citizens through the resources of its own budget (on this point, the judgments of this Court No. 11 of 2021, No. 174 of 2020, No. 241 of 2018, No. 231 of 2017, No. 75 of 2016, No. 125 of 2015, No. 115 of 2012, No. 133 of 2010, and No. 341 of 2009 are cited).

Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 would therefore be constitutionally legitimate, also in the part in which it sets the spending limits for high-specialty hospital services and for specialist outpatient services of hemodialysis and radiotherapy.

The regional defense points out that for high-specialty hospital services the power to derogate from the limits referred to in Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, would in any case be provided for by the same state legislation constantly applied by all regions and that, with regard to specialist outpatient services of hemodialysis and radiotherapy, being "life-saving" services, at the verification tables of the Ministry of Economy and Finance it was decided that their financing should not be contained within the limit of the expenditure incurred in 2011, as it would affect non-compressible rights (the judgment of this Court No. 275 of 2016 is cited).

Considered in Law

1. – With an appeal registered under No. 35 of the 2023 Register of Appeals, the President of the Council of Ministers initiated issues of constitutional legitimacy, inter alia, of Articles 35, paragraph 2, and 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023.

1.1. – Article 35, paragraph 2, would be constitutionally illegitimate as it – conflicting with the interposed norm referred to in Article 23, paragraph 2, of Legislative Decree No. 75 of 2017 – would violate Article 117, paragraphs two, which reserves to the exclusive legislative competence of the State the matter of "civil order" (paragraph two, letter l), and three, of the Constitution for violation of fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance", also with regard to the principles of budget balance and sustainability of public debt, as referred to in Articles 81 and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution.

1.2. – The appellant also challenged Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, which intervenes on the text of Article 5, paragraph 12, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 1 of 2023.

The challenged provision would conflict with Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, indicated as an interposed norm, and from this conflict would derive the violation of Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution, which reserves to the State the determination of fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance", also with regard to the principles of budget balance and sustainability of public debt, as referred to in Articles 81 and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution.

The appellant contends that the constraints provided for by the interposed norm, regarding the resources intended to cover health expenditure, would constitute an insurmountable limit not only for the public administration but also for private operators, whose surpassing would justify the adoption of necessary measures for financial rebalancing (the judgment of this Court No. 203 of 2016 is cited).

The state legislation providing for these rebalancing measures, in fact, would set fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance", given that it expressly pursues the "purpose of addressing the high and increasing healthcare deficit and the unavoidable budget needs and public expenditure containment". This purpose would also be binding on the respondent, given that – in the matter of "public assistance and charity" and in the matter of "hygiene and health" – Article 4 of the special statute expressly conditions the exercise of regional legislative powers on compliance with the constraints arising from the Constitution, from the principles of the state legal system, from international obligations, from national interests, from the fundamental rules of the economic and social reforms of the Republic, as well as from the principles established by state laws.

The State Attorney General's Office in the explanatory memorandum reports that Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023 was amended first by Article 5, paragraph 32, letter f), of Regional Law Sardinia No. 17 of 2023 and subsequently by Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023.

It considers, however, that these legislative interventions cannot lead to a declaration of cessation of the subject matter of the dispute, as they would not have removed the defects of constitutional legitimacy deduced in the appeal; so much so that the intervening legislation was also subsequently challenged by the President of the Council of Ministers with a subsequent appeal.

2. – The President of the Council of Ministers, with an appeal registered under No. 7 of the 2024 Register of Appeals, challenged Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023, which, as seen, amends Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, for violation of Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution with regard to the matter of "coordination of public finance", as well as of Articles 3, 81, and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution, in relation to Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, which introduced the spending limits, subsequently redetermined by Article 1, paragraph 233, of Law No. 213 of 2023, and to Articles 3 and 4 of the special statute.

Article 5 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 provides that the unused resources within the spending ceiling allocated for 2020 for hospital care may be redistributed among private accredited providers who have produced hospital activity exceeding the budget allocated in 2021 and increases the spending ceiling for hospital care in 2023 even beyond the limits imposed by national legal provisions that mandate the reduction of the purchase of volumes of health services from private accredited providers for specialist outpatient care and for hospital care aimed at contracting public expenditure.

This provision would conflict with the provisions of Article 15, paragraph 14, of Decree-Law No. 95 of 2012, as converted, which identifies specific expenditure targets for public finance, with violation of the fundamental principles in the matter of "coordination of public finance" referred to in Article 117, paragraph three, of the Constitution.

3. – The proceedings, for the part that is relevant here, concern partly coinciding provisions, challenged with reference to the same parameters and with analogous arguments; therefore, reserving to separate judgments the decision of the additional issues of constitutional legitimacy initiated with the appeal registered under No. 35 of the 2023 Register of Appeals, they must be joined to be treated jointly and decided with a single judgment.

4. – With regard to the issue of constitutional legitimacy initiated against Article 35, paragraph 2, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, following the intervention by Article 5, paragraph 32, letter b), number 2), of Regional Law Sardinia No. 17 of 2023, which ordered its repeal effective from December 20, 2023 (as established by Article 27, paragraph 1, of the same law), the Council of Ministers, in the meeting of February 21, 2024, resolved to waive the challenge limited to the provision under examination.

At the public hearing of this judgment, the defense of the Autonomous Region of Sardinia declared to accept the waiver.

Therefore, the extinction of the proceedings relating to the issue of constitutional legitimacy of Article 35, paragraph 2, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023, must be declared, pursuant to Article 25 of the Supplementary Rules for judgments before the Constitutional Court (ex multis, judgments No. 119 of 2024 and No. 190 of 2022).

5. – Article 56 of Law No. 9 of 2023 intervenes on Article 5, paragraph 12, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 1 of 2023; the provision was then amended, first, by Article 5, paragraph 32, letter f), of Regional Law Sardinia No. 17 of 2023 and then replaced by Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023, challenged by the appeal registered under No. 7 of the 2024 Register of Appeals.

For this reason, it is considered appropriate to examine together the challenges initiated against these provisions.

5.1. – First, some preliminary aspects concerning the challenges initiated against Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023 and against Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 must be examined.

It is necessary to note ex officio a profile of inadmissibility of the challenges initiated with the appeal No. 35 of 2023 against Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023 with regard to the complained violation of the principles of budget balance and sustainability of public debt, as referred to in Articles 81 and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution.

The appellant, in fact, limits itself to invoking the aforementioned constitutional parameters without producing any argument in support of the alleged violation.

According to established constitutional case law, "the appellant has the burden not only to identify the challenged provisions and the constitutional parameters whose violation they denounce, but also to support the reasons for the deduced conflict by developing an argument that is not merely assertive, sufficiently clear and complete" (judgments No. 89 of 2024 and No. 112 of 2023).

A burden that, with regard to the cited constitutional parameters, is not fulfilled by the appellant in this proceeding and, therefore, the proposed challenges are inadmissible.

5.2. – Also with regard to the appeal registered under No. 7 of the 2024 Register of Appeals, it is necessary to note ex officio the inadmissibility of the issues initiated against Article 5, paragraph 1, of Regional Law Sardinia No. 21 of 2023 in reference to Articles 3, 81, and 97, paragraph one, of the Constitution, and 3 and 4 of the special statute, since these parameters are invoked by the appellant without even minimal argument.

This determines, in light of the established constitutional case law already cited, the inadmissibility of the related challenges.

6. – The issues of constitutional legitimacy of Article 56 of Regional Law Sardinia No. 9 of 2023 and of Article 5, paragraph 1