This article examines the role of party-initiated proceedings under Article 172 of the Italian Code of Accounting Justice in light of Law no. 1/2026 (the so-called Foti Reform), which envisages their expansion within the framework of delegated legislation. Through a systematic analysis of Article 172, the paper seeks to determine whether the typologies of proceedings currently provided therein allow for the identification of an objective criterion capable of delineating the scope of accounting jurisdiction in disputes concerning public finance, particularly where private individuals or entities other than the State are involved. The central argument is that the issue of expansion cannot be addressed merely at the procedural level, but requires a substantive reconstruction of the notion of “public accounting matters” under Article 103(2) of the Constitution. From this perspective, party-initiated proceedings represent a critical junction between the material dimension of public financial relations and the subjective dimension of judicial protection. The analysis suggests that the unifying element across the different categories of proceedings lies in the existence of patrimonial relationships directly affecting public resources, thereby supporting a functional and substantive criterion of jurisdiction. The article concludes by highlighting the unresolved policy choice facing the delegated legislator: whether to preserve the traditional centrality of liability and accounting proceedings, or to reconfigure the Court of Auditors as the primary adjudicator of patrimonial and revenue-related disputes within the broader domain of public finance.
L’art. 172 del Codice giustizia contabile: altri giudizi a istanza di parte e le prospettive di ampliamento previste dalla riforma Foti
Loredana Giani;
2026-01-01
Abstract
This article examines the role of party-initiated proceedings under Article 172 of the Italian Code of Accounting Justice in light of Law no. 1/2026 (the so-called Foti Reform), which envisages their expansion within the framework of delegated legislation. Through a systematic analysis of Article 172, the paper seeks to determine whether the typologies of proceedings currently provided therein allow for the identification of an objective criterion capable of delineating the scope of accounting jurisdiction in disputes concerning public finance, particularly where private individuals or entities other than the State are involved. The central argument is that the issue of expansion cannot be addressed merely at the procedural level, but requires a substantive reconstruction of the notion of “public accounting matters” under Article 103(2) of the Constitution. From this perspective, party-initiated proceedings represent a critical junction between the material dimension of public financial relations and the subjective dimension of judicial protection. The analysis suggests that the unifying element across the different categories of proceedings lies in the existence of patrimonial relationships directly affecting public resources, thereby supporting a functional and substantive criterion of jurisdiction. The article concludes by highlighting the unresolved policy choice facing the delegated legislator: whether to preserve the traditional centrality of liability and accounting proceedings, or to reconfigure the Court of Auditors as the primary adjudicator of patrimonial and revenue-related disputes within the broader domain of public finance.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
13828-27683-1-PB.pdf
accesso aperto
Licenza:
Dominio pubblico
Dimensione
1.03 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.03 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
