The "stress test" of the single statute of the honorary magistrate (legislative decree no. 116/2017) between counter-reform projects, compatibility with constitutional principles and Euro-unitary protection of the worker against the abuse of the reiterat

Abstract

The implementation of the Orlando Reform proves problematic for the dispute that has arisen over the labour protection of lay judges and for of the compatibility of the honorary magistracy statute to constitutional principles. It is necessary to reckon with the consolidated historical origins of various figures of honorary magistrates and with the stable reliance of justice on the work of honorary court judges and on honorary deputy prosecutors to overcome the backlog.
They timely introduction in the reform proposals of a disciplinary system and of rules on transfers do not fully reconcile with the idea of a magistrate not bound by a professional relationship with the State as he is destined to perform his duties on a part-time basis and for a strictly limited period of time, while the economic incentives offered to the category do not represent the orthodox way to comply with the European Union rules against the abusive reiteration of fixed-term contracts.
For an effective justice service, it would be necessary to ensure to the judicial offices a stable and competent contribution of honorary magistrates, which is difficult to reconcile with article 106 of the Constitution. Therefore, there are necessary basic choices to make such as semi-professionalizing the honorary magistrates by affecting the constitutional norm, or limiting their use to the minimum necessary by returning to a lay jurisdiction of proximity, or still preserving the existing honorary courts by repealing the new powers introduced by d. lgs. no. 116/2017. In any case, effective decision-making powers must be ensured to the GOP even in the criminal sector (limited only to certain offences). The opportunity of the PNRR funding resources cannot be lost.