Italy and Hungary provide distinctive examples of presidential roles, revealing both similarities and differences. In both countries, the head of state primarily holds a ceremonial position, yet their powers to appoint officials differ. A comparison of the legal frameworks clarifies how these appointment powers function, their limits, and their role within each government system.
According to Article 92(2) of the Italian Constitution, the President of Italy appoints the President of the Council of Ministers (Prime Minister) although the Constitution does not specify the procedure for selecting a candidate. The President usually bases his choice on the political composition of Italy’s Parliament, especially in the Chamber of Deputies, before deciding. While it's not a strict rule, Article 94(1) mentions that "The Government must have the confidence of both Houses," which encourages the President pick someone who is likely to receive parliamentary support.
Although regular ministers are chosen based on the Prime Minister's suggestions, in politically unstable situations or in the absence of a clear parliamentary majority, the President exercises significant discretion. Additionally, in special cases such as concerns about a candidate meeting constitutional requirements or securing public support, the Constitution grants the President discretionary authority to make decisions.
In Hungary, the rules for choosing government leaders are specified in Articles 9, 6, and 18 of Hungary’s Fundamental Law. These articles explain the role of the President and Prime Minister in selecting key executive officials.
According to Article 9(4)(a), the President proposes a candidate for Prime Minister to the National Assembly. The candidate must receive approval from a majority of the National Assembly, as specified in Article 16. Therefore, the President does not directly choose the Prime Minister but rather nominates a candidate for parliamentary approval.
In everyday practice, the President’s nominee usually matches the preferences of the parliamentary majority. Although not strictly required by the Constitution, this is a well-supported constitutional convention. This custom or tradition helps ensure the Prime Minister has the necessary backing to effectively lead the government and establish important policies.
Once elected by simple majority, the Prime Minister holds significant authority in forming his government. Under Article 18(2), the President appoints ministers based on the Prime Minister's recommendations. This grants the Prime Minister the power to determine cabinet composition, while the President’s role is limited to formal approval. The Fundamental Law mandates this process, leaving no discretion to the President once procedural requirements are fulfilled.
In both Italy and Hungary, the procedures for selecting leaders are clearly defined but differ in practice. In Italy, the President may exercise discretion in appointing the Prime Minister, especially during periods of political instability or when no clear parliamentary majority exists. The President typically consults with party leaders and prioritizes maintaining national stability. While ministerial appointments generally proceed smoothly, occasional discussions or disagreements may arise.
In Hungary, the President generally nominates the Prime Minister candidate who commands the greatest support in the newly elected Parliament. Ministerial appointments follow a prescribed procedure, requiring the President to appoint ministers based solely on the Prime Minister’s recommendations, without exercising personal discretion.
Both countries have systems to ensure decisions are legally well-founded and certain. In Italy, the government must win a "vote of confidence" as stated in Article 94, which acts as a safety measure even after the President's decisions. Ministers can only be chosen if the Prime Minister suggests them, and it's rare for the President to say no. In Hungary, strict rules act as safeguards. The legal procedures for choosing and appointing these public officials must be followed. The President's function is mostly symbolic, ensuring decisions remain consistent and unbiased.
Italy and Hungary share similar constitutional principles, but they apply them differently in practice and legal traditions. In both countries, appointing ministers is an official act. In Italy, the President can sometimes choose a Prime Minister with some flexibility, especially when parliament is divided. In Hungary, however, the President mostly follows a set procedure and can only nominate someone supported by the parliamentary majority.
The approach to interpreting laws also differs. Italian constitutional interpretation is often guided by principles and teleological reasoning, allowing for more flexibility in practice. In contrast, Hungarian practice adheres more strictly to the black letter of the law.
The roles of the Presidents in Italy and Hungary may look similar, but their actual powers are quite different. In Italy, the President may exercise discretion in appointing the Prime Minister, especially when no single party or coalition has a clear parliamentary majority. Both countries use their systems to maintain democracy and clarity in laws through constitutional safeguards. These differences show how constitutional design and law interpretation shape the leader's role in forming the government, balancing formal roles with real institutional functions.
