It is not uncommon in Italy for the highest courts to make decisions that the legislature has put off for years.

This happened again on Wednesday with the judgment of the constitutional court on the right to a name.

The court's four women and eleven men threw Article 262 out of the civil code without replacement because it violates the Italian constitution and also the European Convention on Human Rights.

Matthias Rub

Political correspondent for Italy, the Vatican, Albania and Malta based in Rome.

  • Follow I follow

Contrary to the constitutional principle of gender equality, the 1942 article stipulated that a child born legitimately or illegitimately, as well as an adopted child, automatically bears the surname of the father if the father recognizes the child as his.

Until now, women have not had the opportunity to give their own family name to biological or adopted children.

At best, it was possible for mothers to apply for a double surname together with their husband or partner, although their surname always followed that of their father.

Since women in Italy retain their surnames even after marriage, Italian mothers in most cases bore different surnames from their children.

In the event of a disagreement, the child is given both surnames

After the verdict, which was generally praised as overdue and historic, this blatant case of discrimination is now over.

"In line with the principle of equality and in the interest of the child, both parents must have the opportunity to choose a surname, which is a fundamental element of personal identity," the judgment reads.

Now both married and unmarried parents can choose their children's surnames themselves.

In the event of a disagreement, the child is given both surnames, and a court decides on their order.

At the same time, the constitutional judges called on Parliament to finally create a contemporary and, above all, constitutional naming law on the basis of their judgement.

Several bills have been before Parliament for years.

The decision of the constitutional court was necessary because of several lawsuits that mothers and parents had brought against the antiquated naming rights.

Particular attention was paid to the proceedings of an unmarried couple from South Tyrol who wanted to have one of their children registered at the registry office with only the short German surname of the mother, because this harmonized better with the child's short German first name than with the father's polysyllabic Italian surname.

Because of Article 262, which has now been deleted by the Constitutional Court, this “harmonious” naming, which was expressly desired by both parents, was not possible.

Julia Unterberger, member of the Senate in Rome for the Christian Democratic South Tyrolean People's Party (SVP), praised the verdict as a "milestone for gender equality".

The decision of the constitutional judges corresponds to several bills introduced in parliament, including the one she wrote herself.

Unterberger hopes that the Senate Judiciary Commission will soon be able to agree on a joint draft law to finally create a new naming law based on the decision of the Constitutional Court.

It is ironic that it was precisely the desire of a couple from South Tyrol to give their child a German first and last name that has now led to the historic judgment of the Constitutional Court and should push ahead with the overdue reform of Italian naming law.