top of page

State – Parliament – Government and Justice


We are libertarians but not anarchists.

Of course, a community needs organization, laws, rules, and people within the administration, the police and the judiciary who ensure that they are respected.

But the areas of life where the state must and/or can intervene (or not) in terms of “regulation” must be clearly defined!

In principle, the state has several essential tasks on which it must concentrate. These include, for example, the fight against poverty, social policy, education, health, justice, internal security, infrastructure and consumer protection.

But even in these areas, a good dose of “privatization” and self-responsibility can do no harm: for example by strengthening liberal medicine compared to the current planned economy.

On the other hand, there are areas where the state has a role to play, but must guarantee the greatest possible freedom to stakeholders: economy, self-employed, middle class, housing, family, agriculture, etc.

In the individual chapters we explain which measures or non-measures are important to us.




In principle, we want in all areas a SLIM state, which requires as few resources as possible, and which fulfils its essential tasks in an exemplary manner.

We support a well-trained public service that does that.

However, we also want absolute respect from civil servants towards the citizen, as well as the opposite: unnecessary procedures and obligations (e.g. repetitive documents that have to be produced again and again) are just as superfluous, as excessive, controls and disproportionate penalties, etc.

The citizen, for his part, must always strive to adopt a friendly and empathetic tone in his relations with administrations.

It is fundamental to consider the citizen as a “customer” of the state apparatus (and not as an “administrator”), and to treat them in this way.

As with the General Police Inspectorate, there should also be a body to which any citizen can file a disciplinary complaint, based on the German model known as ‘Dienstaufsichtsbeschwerde’ if they have been treated in a discriminatory or unfair manner.

Particularly in this era of great progress in terms of digitization, it should be possible for the administration to be able to directly access real estate data, cadastral extracts, approved diplomas, car papers, identity cards, passports, residence certificates, authorizations to commerce, through the registration numbers of citizens, and any other officially authorized documents (and of course with strict control of the admissibility of research through the connection files), instead of requiring them from each citizen at each request.




This would be a real “administrative simplification”… for the citizen!

With regard to Parliament, it must be said that there are far too few people exercising a profession there: this harms the perception of what is important for the citizens. But here, it is up to the voters to finally understand that nothing will change as long as they continue to vote for the same “known” people...

A step towards more “normality” would certainly be to increase “political leave” and thus make this mandate more attractive to working people.

Furthermore, it would not be wrong to elect deputies on a single list, which would imply the elimination of districts.

At the same time, the number of deputies could be reduced from 60 to 40, thus saving the budget.

The rules of the chamber organize, structure and control the work of the deputies in an exemplary manner and we can say that the chamber has been constituted in a strong and solid manner.

Let's now move on to the government: why are ministers almost always elected directly to the Chamber, when it is clear that they will not stay there and that “replacements” on their lists will then occupy these places?

But it is precisely through their function, as well as the exploitation of press conferences, inaugurations, social networks, advertising campaigns, etc., that they acquire such fame that they become essential.




Wouldn’t it be better if our MINISTERS were apolitical? Why can't a majority of MPs appoint competent individuals at the head of the various departments (although their number could obviously be reduced) who will not work according to party policy, but only in the interests of the country?

As administrators under the direction and control of the House, elected by the people as their representatives?

They should abandon any possible political affiliation, leave the ministry's communication to the government spokesperson and spend the time they save (because they don't inaugurate every flowerpot and don't show up at every village festival ) at their work.

We need fewer “jokes” and more ministers who are transparent, honest, loyal and committed to the common good (and not to the party that gave them this position)!

Such a “non-partisan” government would also facilitate legislative proposals, which would ipso facto be less politically and ideologically biased towards certain parties!

As for the third power of the state, the judiciary, the creation of the control body was an important and fair decision of our chamber! However, we must complain that too many senior judges are represented here and, unfortunately, a corporatist spirit cannot be ruled out.

Furthermore, we have a completely different vision of the prosecution, the public prosecutor's office, which, in our opinion, has nothing to do with the judiciary itself, but should be an administrative apparatus within the Ministry of Justice: the lawyers of the State. (Staatsanwalt)

So not present at the National Council of Justice either!




It is also incomprehensible that the citizen sees his accuser sitting at the same table as his judge.

It simply gives the wrong impression and many citizens feel that the prosecutor has more to say and has more influence than them or their defence.

Procedures should be radically simplified and shortened! It is not possible that we have to wait months or even years for a verdict in a case that is close to our hearts, either emotionally or financially.

Lawyers' fees must be regulated in a much clearer and more transparent manner. The German “litigation value” model and the payment of attorney's fees in the event of losing a case (instead of the rather arbitrary “procedural indemnity” which is applied today) would make access to justice more real for all citizens.




Access to the Constitutional Court must be expanded: both a deputy (immediately after the adoption of a law) and any citizen (if concerned) should be able to appeal to the highest and most important court of our country in case of suspicion that a law or regulation violates the constitution.

Any law deemed unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court must be repealed or reformed as soon as possible!

The first power (the Chamber), the second (the government) and the third (the judiciary) must always exist as the pillars of our entire system and be and remain irreproachable: this is the sacrifice necessary for the citizens to be able to absolutely have trust!

Judge with book
bottom of page