ORDER NO. 99
YEAR 2026
ITALIAN REPUBLIC
IN THE NAME OF THE ITALIAN PEOPLE
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
composed of:
President: Giovanni AMOROSO;
Judges: 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, Massimo LUCIANI, Maria Alessandra SANDULLI, Roberto Nicola CASSINELLI, Francesco Saverio MARINI,
has issued the following
ORDER
in the proceedings for a conflict of attribution between State powers, arising from the resolution of the Chamber of Deputies of 8 May 2024, doc. IV-ter, no. 6-A, initiated by the Court of Appeal of Ancona, by order notified on 21 January 2026, filed with the Registry on 23 January 2026, registered as no. 3 of the 2025 Register of conflicts between State powers, and published in the Official Gazette of the Republic no. 5, first special series, of the year 2026, merit phase.
Having regard to the act of appearance of the Chamber of Deputies, as well as the intervention submitted by Alex Marini;
having heard the Reporting Judge, Antonella Sciarrone Alibrandi, in the chambers on 8 June 2026, scheduled pursuant to Art. 5 of the Supplementary Rules for proceedings before the Constitutional Court for the decision on the admissibility of the intervention of Alex Marini;
deliberated in the chambers on 8 June 2026.
Considering that, by order filed on 26 March 2025 (reg. confl. pot. no. 3 of 2025), the Court of Appeal of Ancona, Second Civil Section, initiated a conflict of attribution between State powers regarding the resolution of 8 May 2024 of the Chamber of Deputies (doc. IV-ter, no. 6-A), whereby it was affirmed that the statements made by the then-deputy Vittorio Sgarbi, in a post published on his Facebook page on 6 May 2019, constituted opinions expressed in the exercise of parliamentary functions pursuant to Article 68, first paragraph, of the Constitution, and were as such non-justiciable;
that the applicant states it is seized of an appeal against the judgment of the Ordinary Court of Macerata of 6 April 2021, rendered in civil proceedings between Vittorio Sgarbi and Alex Marini, at the time of the events, respectively, a deputy and a councilor of the Autonomous Province of Trento;
that the contested judgment ruled on the claim for damages brought against Alex Marini for statements made upon the appointment of Vittorio Sgarbi as President of the Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art of Trento and Rovereto (Mart), allegedly defamatory and harmful to the plaintiff’s honor and reputation, as well as on the counterclaim filed by the defendant to obtain compensation for damages caused by the statements made by Vittorio Sgarbi in relation to the same event, contained in the cited post and deemed equally offensive;
that the Court of Macerata rejected the principal claim while upholding the counterclaim, ordering the former deputy to pay a sum in favor of Alex Marini;
that the applicant reports that the Chamber of Deputies, in the session of 8 May 2024, approved the proposal formulated by the Giunta for authorizations to recognize the non-justiciability of the opinions expressed by Vittorio Sgarbi, at the time of the events a deputy (doc. IV-ter, no. 6-A);
that, according to the Court of Appeal of Ancona, the resolution of the Chamber of Deputies reflects "an incorrect exercise of the powers reserved to said institutional body regarding the authority to evaluate the conduct attributed to Dr. Sgarbi in relation to the opinions expressed by him in a Facebook post on 6 May 2019”;
that such opinions – quoted in full in the order – were allegedly made "outside the exercise of functional activity, attributable to the status of deputy,” following a conflict arising between the parties regarding the appointment of the President of the Mart, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Provincial Government of Trento, and therefore within the scope of matters extraneous to parliamentary activities;
that, therefore, "in light of the principles affirmed by the Constitutional Court and in accordance with the jurisprudence of legitimacy,” the prerogative of non-justiciability provided for by Art. 68, first paragraph, of the Constitution could not apply to such opinions;
that, according to the applicant, the statements of Vittorio Sgarbi were rather an expression of the exercise of the right to report and criticize pursuant to Art. 21 of the Constitution, "the existence of whose limits is however entrusted to the exclusive assessment by the Judicial Authority,” precluded in this instance by the Chamber of Deputies with the resolution in question "in violation of Articles 68 and 102 of the Constitution”;
that, therefore, the Court of Appeal of Ancona deems it necessary to initiate the conflict of attribution between State powers due to the lack of the prerequisite of a functional nexus, which is necessary for the purposes of the non-justiciability resolution, "in accordance with the request to that effect made by the respondent Marini Alex”;
that, for all these reasons, the applicant requests this Court to declare that the Chamber of Deputies lacked the authority to classify the opinions expressed by Vittorio Sgarbi – a deputy at the time of the events – in the post published on his Facebook page on 6 May 2019 as non-justiciable, as they were exercised outside the hypotheses provided for by Art. 68, first paragraph, of the Constitution and, consequently, requests the annulment of the relevant resolution adopted on 8 May 2024;
that this Court, with order no. 176 of 2025, deemed the subjective and objective requirements of the conflict to be met and declared the appeal admissible, in chambers and without adversarial proceedings, pursuant to Art. 37, first paragraph, of Law no. 87 of 11 March 1953 (Rules on the constitution and functioning of the Constitutional Court);
that the Chamber of Deputies has entered an appearance, requesting that the appeal be dismissed as unfounded;
that, by an act filed on 23 February 2026, Alex Marini intervened, claiming to have a qualified interest in intervening in the present proceedings, the outcome of which would directly and immediately affect his legal sphere and the possibility of obtaining protection in the ordinary courts;
that, in fact, as a party to the ordinary proceedings pending before the Court of Appeal of Ancona, within the scope of which the latter raised the conflict, the intervenor would be affected by the outcome of the conflict proceedings without the possibility of asserting his arguments;
that, therefore, in line with established constitutional jurisprudence (judgments no. 259 and no. 224 of 2019 are cited), he would have standing to intervene in the proceedings for a conflict of attribution between State powers, in the manner and within the time limit prescribed by Art. 4, paragraph 2, of the Supplementary Rules for proceedings before the Constitutional Court, to which Art. 31 of the same Supplementary Rules refers;
that, by order of 14 May 2026, communicated to the parties, the chambers for 8 June 2026 was set for the discussion regarding the decision on the admissibility of the intervention of Alex Marini.
Considering that, pursuant to Art. 5, paragraph 1, of the Supplementary Rules – as amended by the resolution of 12 March 2026, published in the Official Gazette of the Republic no. 94, general series, of 23 April 2026, and entered into force fifteen days after its publication, pursuant to Art. 9 of the same resolution – this Court shall decide on the admissibility of interventions under Art. 4, paragraphs 3 and 4 of the same Supplementary Rules, by decision to be taken in chambers;
that in proceedings for conflict of attribution, as a rule, the intervention of subjects other than those entitled to initiate or contest the conflict is not permitted;
that, however, this Court has consistently affirmed that "such preclusion does not operate when the object of the conflict is such as to involve, in an immediate and direct manner, the subjective situations of third parties, whose prejudice or protection depends on the outcome thereof” (most recently, order no. 33 of 2024);
that in such circumstances, without prejudice to the assessment of the admissibility of the intervention by this Court, third parties are entitled to intervene, given the reference under Art. 31 of the Supplementary Rules, in the manner and within the peremptory time limit referred to in Art. 4, paragraph 2, of the same Supplementary Rules;
that, in this case, Alex Marini is a party to the proceedings pending before the Court of Appeal of Ancona, as, from the first instance of judgment, he has filed a counterclaim for damages, as he is the recipient of the allegedly defamatory statements made by Vittorio Sgarbi in the post published on 6 May 2019, deemed non-justiciable ex art. 68, first paragraph, of the Constitution, by the Chamber of Deputies with the aforementioned resolution of 8 May 2024, in relation to which the conflict of attribution was proposed;
that, therefore, the situation arises in which the intervenor is "a party to proceedings, the outcomes or effects of which the judgment of this Court is capable of conditioning” (judgment no. 227 of 2023; to the same effect, judgments no. 157 of 2023 and no. 169 of 2018), to the point of "precluding the judicial protection of the subjective legal situation claimed” (judgment no. 262 of 2017) by the same;
that such a situation has led this Court to identify the existence of a "qualified interest, inherent in a direct and immediate manner to the relationship deduced in judgment” (Art. 4, paragraph 3, of the Supplementary Rules) capable of legitimizing the intervention, in order to allow the intervenor to assert his reasons;
that, furthermore, the intervention act of Alex Marini was filed on 23 February 2026 and therefore within the period of twenty days from the publication of the order of admissibility of the conflict in the Official Gazette, which took place on 4 February 2026 (no. 5, first special series), as prescribed by Art. 4, paragraph 2, of the Supplementary Rules;
that, in conclusion, the intervention of Alex Marini must be declared admissible.
Having regard to Articles 4, 5, and 31 of the Supplementary Rules for proceedings before the Constitutional Court.
for these reasons
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
declares the intervention of Alex Marini admissible.
Decided in Rome, at the seat of the Constitutional Court, Palazzo della Consulta, on 8 June 2026.
Signed:
Giovanni AMOROSO, President
Antonella SCIARRONE ALIBRANDI, Reporting Judge
Roberto MILANA, Director of the Registry
Filed in the Registry on 8 June 2026