To prepare the public administration for the association agreement with the European Union, initial estimates point to roughly forty additional staff members. But questions remain over responsibilities, office organization and timing. A week before the signing, scheduled for October 19, discussions in the joint Internal and Foreign Affairs committees are focusing on two concrete issues: how to put the country in a position to apply European rules, and how to push them through Parliament without grinding legislative work to a halt.
Secretary of State for Internal Affairs Andrea Belluzzi explained that staffing needs vary from office to office. “Some offices have emerged where the impact is not particularly significant, and others that can keep up with the agenda without additional resources. In some areas, however, extra resources or different skill sets than those currently present in the organization are needed.” The ten department directors already act as reference points. Training, he added, will need to involve staff as well as managers.
Among the changes being prepared is an autonomous and independent statistics office, necessary for data exchange with the EU. Belluzzi also pointed to public procurement as one of the sectors requiring intervention in order to open the European market to Sammarinese businesses. “To me this is the main point, the heart of the association agreement: having opportunities we don’t have today.”
The sharpest criticism concerned the level of readiness of the public administration itself. Matteo Zeppa (Rete) asked for figures, deadlines and details on which roles need training or recruitment: “I expected much more: data, dates, information on the impact on public administration. Instead, nothing was said.” Maria Luisa Berti (AR) brought the discussion back to the day-to-day functioning of public services: “Even today we have offices that don’t communicate with each other, and that cannot be considered a positive feature of public administration.”
Nicola Renzi (RF) challenged the delays on residency permits and procurement, attributing them to government choices: “This is a political delay, because it’s not the administration that decides when to bring us bills and proposals.” He also called for clear lines of responsibility, to prevent multiple offices from working on the same issues without coordination. Carlotta Andruccioli (D-ML) wants to know who is responsible for what, by when, and with what resources. At stake is the possibility of meeting the March 2027 deadline, cited for several areas currently at very different stages of readiness.
The other front concerns how European rules will be transposed into Sammarinese institutions. Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Luca Beccari proposed an annual law that would set out which measures to address and what procedure to follow. The goal is to spread out the workload, preventing a flood of new rules from clogging up the Council. For the most sensitive matters, he suggested debate through ordinary legislation; for technical adjustments, faster procedures.
The idea of forward planning found broad support, but the Council’s role remains the key political sticking point. Concerns focus above all on how decrees move through committee and how much room there will be to amend them later in the chamber. These concerns were raised by members of the majority as well. Filippo Tamagnini (PDCS) asked whether final ratification alone is enough to safeguard the legislative function. Giuseppe Maria Morganti (Libera) warned: “I believe the legislative function of the Grand and General Council (Consiglio Grande e Generale) cannot be weakened through tools designed merely to streamline procedures.”
Giulia Muratori (Libera) called for a distinction between technical measures and decisions affecting labor, rights, competition and the environment. “Simplification should make Parliament more efficient, not less central.” Antonella Mularoni (RF) said she was open to faster procedures, but wanted clarity on the choices at stake first: “We have no principled objection to how the EU acquis is transposed, but we need to agree on the substance first.” Several speakers also called for dedicated staff to support council groups, to help them examine incoming legislation.
Francesco Mussoni (PDCS) argued for bringing order to the process and making the rules understandable to citizens. Matteo Rossi (PSD) pointed instead to the strain this transition will place on institutions, given that councillors also hold other jobs, and supported faster tracks for technical matters. Ilaria Baciocchi (PSD) urged officials to explain the concrete effects of the agreement: “If we describe the agreement only as a huge mass of European rules to adopt, we risk losing its meaning entirely.”
In his closing remarks, Belluzzi rejected the idea that work has stalled and proposed a dedicated session on the organization of the public administration, together with the Public Function Directorate. Beccari pointed to the activation of liaison officers and a digital procedure for circulating texts among offices. On Parliament’s role, he clarified: “Let’s clear up a misunderstanding: there is no intention to take anything away from the Council. The whole spirit of the omnibus law is precisely that the Council decides what to simplify and what not to.”
Beccari signaled openness to amending the most contested passages and proposed a joint discussion: “Let’s meet together, majority and opposition, and form a working group where everyone can have their say.” The first annual law is expected by June 2027. In the meantime, existing tools will continue to be used to adopt the necessary rules.
