• Arab Revolts
• Constitutional Review
• Egitto
• Egypt
• giustizia costituzionale
• Marocco
• Morocco
• Primavere arabe
• Tunisia
• Tunisia

Il presente lavoro è volto a verificare se l’ondata delle Primavere arabe, inaugurate nel 2011, abbia, effettivamente, comportato la realizzazione di uno Stato di diritto in alcuni degli ordinamenti che ha interessato, quali l'Egitto, il Marocco e la Tunisia.
Essendo, infatti, la giustizia costituzionale un elemento essenziale dello Stato di diritto, sarà necessario valutare se essa, sebbene contemplata all’interno dei dettati costituzionali di tutti e tre gli ordinamenti oggetto di studio, prima degli eventi del 2011, fosse rimasta — o meno — un elemento puramente nominale nel corso dei regimi autoritari che si sono susseguiti nell’area del Maghreb e in Egitto.
Pertanto, si esaminerà, da un lato, quali sono state le esigenze ad aver indotto i costituenti a istituire organi deputati al controllo di conformità costituzionale delle leggi e, dall’altro lato, se questi ultimi siano stati plasmati sull’impronta dei modelli occidentali di giustizia costituzionale o se, catturando disparati dettagli dai plurimi archetipi, gli ordinamenti in esame abbiano edificato un proprio prototipo.
Tale indagine sarà, quindi, volta a cogliere se i trapianti giuridici, laddove vi siano stati, abbiano avuto, in considerazione del contesto sociale e culturale in cui essi hanno operato, esiti più o meno efficaci di — eventuali — modelli autoctoni.
Sarà, quindi, non privo di rilievo apprezzare il ruolo che i tre organi di giustizia costituzionale in esame avevano ricoperto, prima degli eventi del 2011, per percepire se, in base alle funzioni e ai poteri ad essi attribuiti, essi fossero riusciti, in contesti autoritari, a svolgere un ruolo contro-maggioritario o avessero, comunque, contribuito all’affermazione di principi democratici.
Dopo aver percorso un’analisi storica dei tre sistemi di giustizia costituzionale, si esaminerà, dunque, il ruolo delle Corti costituzionali nel consolidamento della democrazia, della Tunisia, dell’Egitto, e del Marocco per appurare se le modifiche costituzionali, che hanno fatto seguito agli eventi rivoluzionari, abbiano trasformato prima facie sia le competenze degli organi costituzionali sulla scorta del principio di separazione dei poteri, sia il ruolo delle Corti in relazione alle istanze democratiche e ai diritti conseguentemente riconosciuti dalle Carte costituzionali.

The main purpose of Constitutional Review is limiting power — in particular the legislative one — in order to protect both the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution and the democratic institutional structures.
Obviously, its role is of central importance in any system, but it is perhaps even more decisive in democracies that are going through a process of consolidation.
In the Middle East and North Africa, the freedoms typical of the rule of law were claimed by demonstrators, bearers of multifaceted ideologies and members of heterogeneous political parties, through an unfinished revolt, which began in 2011 and that reverberated, in the following years and with varying vigor, in the various North African States.
The present work was aimed at verifying whether said wave of revolts actually led to the creation of a rule of law in some of the jurisdictions it touched, such as Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia.
The choice to restrict the study to the aforementioned State realities is explained, first of all, by the fact that they - prior to being connected by the same revolutionary event — had not been foreign to the concept of constitutional review; indeed, even before the events of 2011, the Constitutions of Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia contemplated three different models of bodies with this particular power; secondly, these are systems which, in drawing up their new Constitutions, have corrected — or at least attempted to modify — the already existing bodies endowed with power of Constitutional Review; finally, all three States under study have had difficulties in consolidating their democracies, despite the Constitutional changes that were introduced — at least on a formal level — following the Arab Revolts, and that aimed at guaranteeing the creation of a rule of law.
Since Constitutional Review represents an essential element of the rule of law, it was necessary to verify whether, before the events of 2011, despite being contemplated in the Constitutions of all three systems under study, it had remained — or not — a purely nominal element during the authoritarian regimes in Egypt and in the Maghreb area.
It was, therefore, not without importance to appreciate the role that the three constitutional review bodies under examination had covered before the events of 2011, to perceive whether, based on the functions and powers attributed to them, they had succeeded, in authoritarian contexts, in playing a counter-majority role or had somehow contributed to the affirmation of democratic principles.
After an historical analysis of the three models of constitutional review, it was assessed whether, in the process of transition from authoritarianism to democracy following the Arab Spring, the Judges of the laws in each of the examined systems — having their constituents strengthened or modified the functions and competences of these bodies - played a key role in the affirmation and consolidation of democratic principles.
Therefore, it was examined the role of Constitutional Courts in the consolidation of democracy in Tunisia, Egypt and Morocco — to which the first, second and third chapter were respectively dedicated — to see whether the constitutional amendments which followed the revolutionary events have prima facie transformed both the competences of the constitutional bodies, on the basis of the principle of separation of powers, and the role of the Courts in relation to the democratic demands and the rights consequently recognized by the Constitutional Charters.