The final award of the State Council Summary: BETWEEN THE Sartini and voted out the mute WITHIN TWO MONTHS!
ITALIAN REPUBLIC ON BEHALF OF THE ITALIAN PEOPLE
in court (Fifth Chamber) has
Judgement on the appeal to General Ledger number 6551 of 2010, brought by Gloria Anna Sordoni, represented and defended by the lawyer. Bruno Leuzzi, with an address at the same in Rome, Via N. Lucretius Carus 63;
Monte San Vito, Gathering of the Presidents of the Chambers for the direct election of the Mayor and City Council, Office of the Electoral Chamber directly elected Mayor and No.2 Municipal Council, represented and defended by the lawyer. Maurizio Borgo, with an address at the State Attorney General in Rome, via the Portuguese, 12;
Sabrina Sartini, Manuela Bora, Lino Secchi, Paolo Pompignoli, Candelaresi Fabio, Michael Sebastian, Claudio D'Angelo, Lori Bernacchia, Luciano Giacometti, Manuela Grilli, Francesco Calignano, Marco Mazzanti, Alberto Pigliapoco, Alessia Chiodi, Renato Bonucci, Michela Marinangeli, Stefano Pace, Fabiano Pieralisi, represented and defended by the lawyer. John Ranci, Peter Ranci, with an address at Elio Vitale in Rome, Viale Mazzini 6, Rosemary
Martarello, represented and defended by the lawyer. Silvio Crapolicchio, with an address at Silvio Crapolicchio in Rome, via Belsiana, 100;
Alberto Bastianelli, Moreno Bertini, Alison Disciples, Erika Fulgenzi, Scarlett Martarello, Katia Pigliapoco, Fabio Piombetti, Emanuele Re, Alessandro Scaloni, represented and defended by the lawyer. Franco Boldrini, with an address by Gianluca Giovannetti in Rome, Via N. Lucretius Carus 63;
for the reform of the Judgement of TAR MARCHE - ANCONA: No. SECTION I 02461/2010, made between the parties concerning declared elected - CONSULTATIONS MUNICIPAL YEAR 2009
Given the appeal and its annexes;
seen acts of action brought by the Office of the Electoral Chamber No.2 Direct Election of Mayor and City Council and Sabrina Sartini and Manuela Bora and Lino Secchi and Paolo Pompignoli and Candelaresi Fabio and Michael Sebastian and Claudio D'Angelo and Lori Bernacchia and Luciano Grilli and Manuela Giacometti and Francis Calignano and Marco Mazzanti and Alberto Pigliapoco and Alessio Chiodi and Renato Bonucci and Michael Marinangeli and Stephen Pacetti and Fabiano Pieralisi and Rosemary Martarello and Alberto Bastianelli and Moreno Bertini and Alison and Erika Fulgenzi Disciples and Ross Martarello and Katia Pigliapoco and Fabio Piombetti and Emanuele Re and Alexander Scaloni;
views the briefs;
seen all the acts of the case;
speaker during the public days of the November 23, 2010 Cons. Marzio Branca and heard lawyers for the parties Leuzzi, Counsel State Faithful, ranch, and Crapolicchio Boldrini.
held and considered the facts and law as follows.
The outcome of the elections for the office of mayor and City Council held on 6 and 7 June 2009 in the town of Monte San Vito (AN), the mayoral candidate for the list n . 2 "Reformists and Democrats," Mrs Sabrina Sartini and other candidates on the same list, have appealed to the Regional Administrative Court requesting the annulment of the Marche:
- the act of proclamation of elected representatives of the minutes of the meeting of Presidents operations Sections of the election direct the Mayor and City Council - year 2009 - the City of Mount St. Vito;
- of the voting held in the Polling Place # 1 that gave the list a No. 1 vote already held and is not attributable null;
- of the voting held in the Chamber of the City of Constituency No. 2 Monte San Vito, who has given so many No.2 cards bearing the votes cast for the list # 2;
- the act by which the Mayor has published the results of the elections;
- than any previous measure, assumption, following contextual and thus still connected and related, nothing excluded, including, in the alternative, the voting procedures of the Office Seconded by the Department for collection of the vote with the special procedure of voters admitted in hospital with fewer than 100 beds,
and for the correction of the election results as proclaimed from meeting of the Presidents of the Chambers of the City of Mount St. Vito, resulting in a finding of ritual outcomes of the elections both for the candidate for mayor, both with regard to the list attached to the winning candidate for mayor.
Mayor declared elected Sordoni Anna Gloria, and other candidates on the list No 1 "Together for Monte San Vito - List Sordoni", proposed cross-appeal claiming the failure to provide two votes in the ballot is void.
The TAR Marche, with the award inscription, partly accepted the appeal and annulled the main award of the disputed vote Sardoni List, and dismissed the appeal brought by Ms Gloria Sordoni Anna.
Consequently, reversed in part here, the minutes of the Electoral Office of Section No. 1 and the minutes of the the meeting of Presidents of Sections.
He then ordered the correction of the electoral results for the list No 1, the total number of votes No 1,653 valid votes, the number of votes equal to the list No 2.
He also canceled the minutes of the the meeting of Presidents of the Chambers of the party which declared elected to the office of Mayor of Monte San Vito Sordoni Mrs. Gloria Anna instead of taking note of a tie between the candidate and the candidate for mayor, said Ms. Sartini Sabrina and order under art. 71 paragraph 6 of Legislative Decree no. 267/2000, the continuation of the electoral process through completion of the round runoff between those two candidates.
annulled, in the end, the minutes of the meeting of Presidents of the operations sections of the part in which shall distribute the number of seats on City Council.
Mrs. Sardoni appealed for the reform of the award.
were made in court to resist the appeal Ms. Sartini and candidates on his list, who have also made a cross-appeal to the party loses.
It was also established in the appeal proceeding, Mrs. Resemary Martarello, president of the polling station No 1, supporting the legitimacy of the electoral process el'infondatezza the application at first instance.
were made in court in support of the argument of the appellant Mr. Alberto Bastianelli and the other candidates on the list Sordoni better specified in the epigraph.
The parties filed pleadings.
the public hearing on November 23, 2010 the case was held indecision.
1. The matter of the dispute concerns three separate complaints. The main Sordoni
appellant complains
1) the annulment of the award at first instance to the list "Together for San Vito - Sordoni List" with a preference at first challenged and not treated as given, and subsequently recognized as valid in the polling station No 1. It is on the board over the cross symbol on the list, even the expression of voting for a candidate named "Cyril", preceded by a spot which appears on a sign interpreted as S or 5;
2) the failure to provide two votes in Section No 2, the seat set aside. The first judges had properly considered the work of the Chamber, because in one case (Sassaroli card), the expression of the vote showed a clear sign of recognition in the other case, has been identified as the uncertainty of the will of the voter, because the vote was given to two different lists.
2. The party respondent (applicant Sartini), in turn, reiterated all the grounds of appeal set out in the first degree and declared absorbed, indirectly challenging the dismissal of the complaints related to the failure to grant preferences to the list of 2 Reformists and Democrats in the No 2, despite the fact that, according to a statement on the will of the voter would be clearly intelligible.
3. All of the above allegations are unfounded.
With regard to challenging the ruling in part on the cancellation of the card "Cyril", the appellant relies on the principle of support for the validity of the vote, enshrined in art. 69, 64 and DPR 570 of 1960, so the hypothesis of nullity are limited to cases where signs or errors were such as to indicate conclusively the will of the voter to recognize their vote.
In the opinion of the Board of the principle invoked in this case can not be applied.
There is still, in fact, a expression of preference: a) has a visible spot that recalls the attempt to make a deletion, b) on the stain has been drawn a sign curvilinear S-shaped c) the name Cyril did not match any candidate on the list Sordoni.
This is a complex of several irregularities which, considered in isolation, would not allow to reach the certainty about the will of the voter to make recognizable the vote, but, instead, accumulated in one context, assume that the requirement inexplicability rational plan, which requires to achieve the annulment of the vote.
The arguments of the appellant in point of fact does not appear suitable contrstano to that conclusion.
penned The similarity of the name "Cyril" with that of the candidate Cillo Thomas would take some relief if it proves positively that Mr. Cillo was commonly known as Cyril, but this assumption has not provided any proof, nor is it, as if to prove the contrary, that any of the 36 Cillo was attributed to the preferences expressed by the name of Cyril.
Neither argument can be drawn from the fact that the S appearing on the erasure, would actually be a 5, badly written, which corresponds to the number held by Mr. Cillo Sordoni list. Indeed, the sign in question seems to be interpreted as no less than 9 as 5.
The sentence appeal, therefore, deserves to be confirmed as the profile in question.
4. The same conclusion, however, must be received with respect to the other heads of the decision.
The 2 cards which the appellant claimed the award are correctly described by the first judges, and speaking out, one obvious recognizability (Sassaroli card), the other, with the casting of votes in the first and second box , denotes objective uncertainty on the will of the voter.
But equally undeniable is the indecipherable intention to vote in 2 cards which award is claimed by the Democrats and Reformists list. In both cases it is found a cross, whose features, while intersecting in the middle box "Democrats and Reformists" are accompanied by other signs of spill-over into other boxes, which, if anything, lay in the sense of wanting to cancel the vote.
also cross appeal must therefore be rejected.
5. The outcome of the trial shows locations of losing on both opposing sides, and this justifies the compensation of the costs of this instance.
definitively pronouncing on the appeal on the appeal and cross the main rejects them both;
compensation expenses;
ordered that this sentence is carried out by the administrative authority.
Decided in Rome in the chambers on day 23 November 2010 with the intervention of the judiciary:
Calogero Piscitello, President
Marzio Branca, Director, Extensor
Caringella Francis, Councillor
Carlo Saltelli, Councillor
Roberto Chieppa, Councillor
(Art. 89, para. 3, no. proc . Admin.)
