Revista da EMERJ - V. 21 - N. 2 - Maio/Agosto - 2019

37  R. EMERJ, Rio de Janeiro, v. 21, n. 2, p. 11-39, Maio-Agosto, 2019  rights against the public administration. 103 Moreover, the sixth transitional provision of the Constitution required that within five years special ju- risdictional bodies still existing at the time of entering into force of the Constitution shall be reformed in accordance with the Constitution. 104 3. The Current Situation Asa consequence of this perplexing approach, the Italian judicial system retains the distinction between ordinary and specialized courts, al- though specialised courts are not formally differentiated like, for example, in the German legal system (in particular, labour and social welfare dis- putes are brought before the ordinary courts). Currently, ordinary courts ( Giudice di pace and Tribunale at first instance, Corte di appello at second in- stance; Corte di Cassazione as Supreme Court) administer justice in civil and criminal matters, other than those for which the Constitution 105 or statu- tory regulations 106 require a specialized court. Among the specialized courts, the administrative courts are the most important. 107 Since 1971, they also have become more differentiated by way of the establishment of the Tribunali amministrativi regionali . In the last decades, the grey area linked to the distinction between rights and legitimate interests has encouraged the legislator to vest “exclusive” (i.e. irrespective of this distinction) subject matter jurisdiction in single administrative matters in the administrative courts in an increasing number of cases. 108 This trend is very questionable in terms of its 103 Moreover, “judicial protection of rights and legitimate interests against acts of the public administration must always be admitted before the courts of ordinary or administrative jurisdiction. Such judicial protection cannot be abolished or limited to specified categories of acts or to particular means of challenging” (Art. 113 Const.). 104 In this way, for example, tax courts ( commissioni tributarie ) still exist today. Cf. Decreto legislativo no. 54 of 1992. Besi- des the tax courts, further specialized courts render justice in military matters, and other minor matters. 105 Cf. the already mentioned Art. 103 Const. 106 Cf. the already mentioned Transitional and Final Provision of the Constitution, no. V. 107 To complete the picture of special courts, the Constitution provides for the Court of Accounts ( Corte dei conti ) both as a body in charge of the preventive checking of the legality of government acts and ex post auditing of the management of the State budget, and, as an adjudicating body, vested with jurisdiction “over matters of public accounting and such other questions as are specified by law”. Art. 103, para 2 Const. Art. 11 of the Law no. 15 of 2009 has redesigned the government body of the Court – the so called Consiglio di Presidenza della Corte dei Conti – placing on an equal footing the judicial and the lay (appointed by the Parliament) components of the body. For further analysis of the role played by the Corte deiConti, s. M. De Cristofaro, N. Trocker (eds.), Civil Justice in Italy, p. 28 f. 108 For the listing of these matters, see Art. 133 Code of Administrative Judicial Proceedings (D. Lgs. No. 104 of 2010). O.G. Chase, E. Hershkoff, L. Silberman, Y. Taniguchi, V. Varano, A. Zuckerman (eds.), Civil Litigation in Comparative Context, Thomson West, 2007, p. 123 f.; M. De Cristofaro, N. Trocker (eds.), Civil Justice in Italy, p. 27.