“The referendum is also necessary to verify the adhesion republican Italy by the Venetian Popolo, since the plebiscite – plebiscite and therefore not referendum – of the 1866, carried out with all sorts of pressure and in a regime of legality quite different from that guaranteed at the beginning of the third millennium by international institutions and by the democracy matured by the experience of world wars, he was referring to a quite different political-institutional situation, since it was the Kingdom of Italy born in March of 1861 and not of the Italian Republic as defined and implemented by the Constitution which entered into force in 1948.”
The original textit's here http://www.consiglioveneto.it/crvportal/pdf/pratiche/9/pdl/PDL_0342/1000_5Ftesto_20presentato.pdf , read page 3 , fifth paragraph.
Let's see the main elements:
1) the plebiscite of 1866 it was not a referendum
2) the plebiscite of 1866 he was not free but “carried out with all sorts of pressure”
3) the plebiscite of 1866 it has no legality similar to that of the current international institutions (that is, it is not valid!)
4) the plebiscite of 1866 it was for the annexation to the Kingdom of Italy and not to the Italian Republic (I'm 2 different states !)
5) The referendum is necessary for “to verify” the accession of the Venetian people to the Italian republic
He’ it is already clear that the text calls into question the legal possession of Veneto by the Italian Republic.
In fact, the treaty of 1866 speaks of Lombardy-Veneto .
Add that with the LEGISLATIVE DECREE 13 December 2010, n. 212, entered into force on 16 December 2010, the Italian State has repealed many regulations, including Royal Decree no. 3300 of 4 November 1866 which stated in Art. 1.â € ?? The provinces of Venice and Mantua are an integral part of the Kingdom of Italy.â € ?? . Law 3841 of 18 luglio 1867 of conversion of the Reg. Decree n. 3330/1866 has also lapsed as a rule prior to 1 January 1970 as required by law no. 246 of the 28 November 2005.
So the question becomes : as legal title of possession of the Lombardo-Veneto possesses the Italian Republic?
Answer: NOBODY , even more if the phrase is highlighted ” plebiscite of 1866, carried out with all sorts of pressure”, that is, invalid.
Here, then, is the referendum for the independence of Veneto (which he would probably lose with new frauds that are difficult to prove) it would lead to the result exactly opposite to what the separatists believe: A NEW ANNEX OF VENETO
It wouldn't even be the first case. In Italy we already have a striking case of a referendum done to obtain the opposite of what the supporters believe. In 2011 I denounced the so-called referendum on water (with the slogan “common good water”) it was a scam, that in reality , if he had won, in fact he would have done the opposite of what he said. In fact, all the committees of the common good water were convinced that if the Yes won the water (the water pipes) it would not have been privatized.
Reading the question of the referendum on water, I discovered that the referendum canceled the public ownership of the pipes provided for by the previous law, and at the same time it did not prevent the privatization of the service alone (not of the property ) which would have remained in force as European standards. At a distance of 2 years, many municipalities including Padua, Parma etc. THEY ARE SELLING THEIR SHAREHOLDINGS IN THE COMPANIES TO MULTINATIONALS’ PUBLIC WATER, carrying out the privatization of the pipes.
HERE IT IS NOT’ STRANGE THAT THE REFERENDUM FOR THE INDEPENDENCE OF VENETO IS USED TO MAKE A NEW ANNEX.
IT'S A SCAM PROBABLY ORGANIZED BY HIDDEN MASONRY WHO DON'T KNOW ANYMORE’ HOW TO KEEP THE VENETI SLAVES. Â (I am available for a public debate, but those of the Venetian Independence and the Veneto State do not want to)
The legal reality is that Lombardy-Venetia is already sovereign, but it's a busy state.
WE CAN EXERCISE OUR SOVEREIGNTY’ IN INSTITUTIONS OF SELF-GOVERNMENT IN A PEACEFUL WAY WITHOUT REFERENDUM.