"Democratic decisions can be wrong, unjust and impractical, violate the country’s constitution and even violate basic human rights. They can even relate to issues for which the democratic system is quite simply inadequate".
This is a citation from the article in openDemocracy which discusses the Swiss plebiscit againt the construction of minarets in switzerland.
Also Italy is nearer to a tyranny of the majority than to a constitutional state under the rule of law.
Berlusconi probably does not know the difference. he expresses clearly that he feels justified doing anything through the fact that he has a popular mandate,
there examples for the tyrrany of the majority:
- the law about "testamento biologico" with which the parlamentary majority presumes to determine against the right of the single human being to decide if to live or to die
- the law about artificial insemination with which the parlamentary (and also plebiscitary) majority presumes to decide from whom donor semen can be taken and from whome not.
There are more examples, but the worrying story is "Rightfulness" and "opinion of the majority" are always more equated. An that is the secure way to tyranny.
President Napolitano now has given a bad example in this direction. The Berlusconi troops have been too stupid in several cases to follow the rules to get their lists for the regeional elections registered. They did not follow the law and the rules. The government made a decree to allow these lists nevertheless. Napolitano countersigned this decree for safeguarding democracy. The opens the door to always change the laws, when the elected government is negatively influenced by it.
All the laws "ad personam" are going in the same direction.
"An absolutized concept of democracy can threaten freedom and is susceptible to misuse. An enlightened people recognizes and acknowledges the limits of its sovereignty and knows that these limitations are what strengthen democracy and freedom." (Bechtler)