The reform of the Rules of Procedure (Regolamento) of the Grand and General Council (Consiglio Grande e Generale) is designed to correct distortions that have built up over the years and to restore efficiency to parliamentary work. This was the position set out by Gian Nicola Berti (AR), sole majority rapporteur, in the statements of vote that preceded the final approval of the bill, passed with 36 votes in favour and 11 against.
Berti began with the concrete workings of the chamber, pointing to September’s Council session as an example of the difficulties that, in his view, make reform necessary. After nearly thirteen days of proceedings, with thirty items initially listed on the agenda, the Council had only reached item fourteen — even though three points had in the meantime been postponed. According to the Alleanza Riformista councillor, this is not an isolated case but the result of problems that have emerged across several legislatures.
The rapporteur also rejected the idea that the majority had ignored calls for dialogue, recalling the attempts made to reach common ground with the opposition and the meetings organised throughout the reform process, including sessions held in the presence of San Marino RTV. Berti further noted that the need to reform the Rules of Procedure had, in the past, also been acknowledged by the same political forces now opposing the measure. The new rules, he stressed, are not designed to benefit the current majority, since they will apply equally regardless of who holds government or opposition roles in future legislatures.
Berti nonetheless openly acknowledged one of the most contested aspects of the debate: “In some respects, it does limit certain freedoms of councillors.” He argued this limitation was necessary because, in the majority’s view, some of the tools available to councillors had been used excessively, making it harder to pass legislation and, in turn, harder for a majority to carry out the programme it had presented to voters.
One of the central points concerns the use of the “sede redigente” procedure in Council committees. Berti pushed back against the portrayal of this mechanism as a revolution in the legislative process, pointing out that it is already provided for under the current Rules of Procedure. Rather, the reform aims to make it the ordinary method for examining legislation, while preserving the possibility — through qualified majorities — of reverting to the procedure currently in use.
According to the rapporteur, shifting the examination of articles, amendments and more technical aspects to committee level does not diminish political debate. On the contrary, it is precisely in committees that councillors who follow specific policy areas on an ongoing basis come together, allowing for a more informed and detailed examination of legislation.
This is also his response to opposition claims that the reform would ultimately curtail councillors’ right to speak. “So there is no silencing whatsoever. It is a different conception: in this chamber, general themes are debated, while in committees the technical aspects of laws are discussed, debated and amended,” Berti said, adding that every councillor retains the right to speak both during the first reading and at the final approval stage.
The councillor also addressed provisions initially included in the reform but later removed during the review process. These, he said, are not issues that have been shelved for good: they will need to be taken up again within the Committee for Institutional Reforms, together with other outstanding matters such as the status of councillors, the presidency of the chamber, and the role of the Captains Regent (Reggenza).
In his closing remarks, Berti returned to the theme of parliamentary efficiency, linking it to the quality of debate in the Council. “While it is true that the right to speak is sacred, it is equally true that the right to be heard depends on the quality of what is said — a quality that is very often lacking in this chamber,” the majority rapporteur concluded. Shortly afterwards, the final vote was held: the reform of the Council’s Rules of Procedure was approved with 36 votes in favour and 11 against.
