Antidisestablishmentarianism, Italian style - fall of Italian government

National Review, Feb 20, 1995 by Antonio Martino

On Friday, January 13, as I landed at Heathrow on my way from New York to Rome, the Italian ambassador informed me that Lamberto Dini, formerly treasury minister, had been asked by the president of the Republic to form a new government made up of "experts" (tecnici) having no connection to political parties. The decision came at the end of nearly a month of byzantine political maneuvers and intrigues, which had followed the resignation of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi on December 22. All of which was the climax of a nine-month-long political struggle. What follows is an account of the cause and significance of this struggle. Since I was a participant, as foreign minister in the Berlusconi government, you, gentle reader, must make due allowance for bitterness and bias (as well, of course, as my usual bile).

Simplifying a much more complex picture, here is what happened.

In 1993, following an epidemic of political scandals, Italians overwhelmingly voted in favor of a change in the electoral laws, moving from proportional representation (PR) to a majoritarian system. The main reason prompting 80 per cent of the voters to ask for such a change was that they wanted voters, as opposed to party leaders, to choose the government. Under PR, the proliferation of political parties makes the formation of coalition governments unavoidable. Since many different combinations are possible, the coalition that will actually govern the country is not chosen by the voters, but by the political parties. Thus paradoxically, PR is less democratic than a majoritarian system like the one in the United States.

Under the new law, as a concession to the old arrangement, 25 per cent of the seats in both houses are allocated on a PR basis, while 75 per cent are elected in American-style single-candidate constituencies. Thanks to the discredit surrounding the old establishment and to an aggressively pro-free-market program, a new political movement, Forza Italia (FI), founded at the beginning of last year by Mr. Berlusconi, a Milan-based entrepreneur, became Italy's major political party only three months after its founding. Together with its allies - the Northern League in the North, and the National Alliance in the rest of the country - it won a majority in Parliament in the elections of March 27, 1994. Almost all the parties of the old order (Christian Democrats, Socialists, Republicans, etc.), which in shifting coalitions had ruled the country for 45 years, were wiped out. A new government was formed with Mr. Berlusconi as prime minister.

Considering that the new government had a clear program and a majority in Parliament, it looked as if it could govern for a full five-year term and implement the drastic liberalizing reforms Italy so badly needs. Unfortunately, the success and popularity of Mr. Berlusconi angered and threatened both the leftist opposition (made up of former Communists, unreconstructed Communists, left-wing Christian Democrats, and assorted lunatics) and Umberto Bossi, the erratic leader of the Northern League. Mr. Bossi was a difficult coalition partner from the start, issuing strong criticisms of the government, withdrawing them, and asserting them again. This may have been, in part, the resentment of the monopolist faced by a new competitor, since until the arrival of Forza Italia, the Northern League had been the sole free-market party of any size in Italy. Whatever the cause, after fitfully supporting the government for eight months, Bossi finally joined ranks with the Left and submitted along with them a motion of no confidence.

One could hardly conceive of a more heterogeneous bunch - the Northern League, committed to radical free-market reforms and federalism, and all the others supporting various versions of the old Big Government mythology. The only unifying element of this Unholy Alliance was hate - they couldn't stand the idea of Mr. Berlusconi succeeding. On December 22, having ascertained that his government had lost its majority in Parliament, Mr. Berlusconi handed in his resignation.

Under our constitutional system, when a government resigns, the president of the Republic, who is normally a figurehead like the Queen of England, allowed to do little more than kiss babies, attend funerals, and cut ribbons, becomes important. It is up to him to decide what to do.

However, the president's powers, even during a government crisis, are more apparent than real. Since Italy is a parliamentary democracy, the president must act on the basis of the situation in Parliament. He will not appoint a prime minister if he knows that the majority of Parliament will not give him its confidence. When there is no viable majority in Parliament - as was the case here because, although the Northern League and the Left could be united in opposing Berlusconi, they couldn't conceivably form a government together - the president should dissolve Parliament and call for new elections, asking the existing government to stay on as a caretaker. Why didn't President Scalfaro do what was obviously his constitutional duty?