Chandra Wijayanto
The Italian Constitutional Court has officially declared that the conflict of powers involving Bartolozzi in the handling of the “Almasri Case” is constitutional and admissible for trial. This decision, which affirms the position of the Chamber of Deputies, opens a new chapter in one of the most sensitive legal issues in the country, with a crucial hearing scheduled for next autumn.
The Consulta's decision, announced in mid-2026, marks a significant turning point. It constitutes the acceptance of a request filed by the Chamber of Deputies against the Tribunal of Ministers, highlighting jurisdictional tensions between state institutions within the Italian judicial system.
Rome — At the heart of this issue is an alleged breach of jurisdiction. The Chamber of Deputies formally objected, requesting the Constitutional Court to intervene over what they considered an overlap of authority between Bartolozzi and the Tribunal of Ministers in the context of the “Almasri Case” handling.
This conflict of powers arose from a series of decisions and actions taken by Bartolozzi, a key figure in the Italian legal system, which, according to the Chamber of Deputies, exceeded his authority, particularly in relation to an ongoing investigation by the Tribunal of Ministers.
“The Almasri Case” itself has attracted widespread public and national media attention for some time. Although the details of the case are still in the early stages of constitutional discussion, it involves serious alleged violations that require careful judicial review.
Constitutional law experts welcomed the Court's decision. Professor Elena Ricci from Sapienza University of Rome stated, “The acceptance of this conflict of powers affirms the fundamental role of the Constitutional Court as the guardian of the balance between state powers. This is crucial to ensure every institution operates within constitutional boundaries, especially concerning influential individuals.”
Ricci added that this step is essential to maintain the integrity of the legal and political system, preventing abuses of power or disputes that could undermine public trust.
Bartolozzi himself has not yet issued an official statement regarding the Constitutional Court's decision. Sources close to him indicate that he will prepare a strong defense for the upcoming hearing, emphasizing that his actions have always been in accordance with the law and established procedures.
Conversely, the Chamber of Deputies, through its spokesperson, expressed satisfaction with the ruling. They hope the Constitutional Court will provide definitive clarity regarding the jurisdictional boundaries between the institutions involved, to avoid similar incidents in the future.
“The integrity of the legal process is our utmost priority,” said a representative of the Chamber of Deputies, “and we believe the Court will uphold this principle for justice and the enforcement of the rule of law in Italy.”
This case potentially has broad implications for legal and political practice in Italy. The outcome of the trial could set an important precedent regarding the limits of intervention between the Chamber of Deputies and the Tribunal of Ministers in sensitive cases, including those similar to the Lavitola Scandal or ethical violations like those highlighted in reports about former Italian intelligence selling state secrets.
International media are also beginning to cover this development, viewing it as an indicator of the strength of Italy's checks and balances system, which is fundamental to modern democracy.
The public will anxiously await the results of this autumn's hearing, which is expected to shed light on the alleged conflict of powers and clarify the role of each entity in the state's governance, providing legal certainty for all parties.
The Constitutional Court's decision is a procedural step indicating that the Chamber of Deputies' arguments have a strong basis for thorough examination. It is not a guilty verdict, but rather an acknowledgment that a constitutional issue needs to be resolved to maintain legal and constitutional order.
