There Court of Auditors does not allow additional third actions of the visa agreement between the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport and the Messina Strait Company which regulates the relationship between the same company as concessionaire of the Straits Bridge works and MIT, as granting administration and supervision. The accounting court itself announced this in an official statement, stating that “the reasons, which are currently being drafted, will be announced within thirty days, by special resolution“. Soon after came the first hot comment from Matteo Salvini:”Not surprising: this was an inevitable consequence of the Court of Auditors’ first visit. Our experts have tried to clarify all points. I remain determined and confident“, said the vice president of the Council.
Notes from the Court of Auditors
“Middle part of legitimacy checks The Court of Auditors, following the results of the Chamber Board after its meeting today, November 17, 2025, does not allow the decision of August 1, 2025, n. 190, Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport – we read in the notes – with the approval of the Ministry of Economy and Finance, adopted based on article 2 paragraph 8 legislative decree dated 31 March 2023, n. 35, amended, with amendments, by law of May 26, 2023, n. 58, contains ‘Urgent provisions for the creation of stable relations between Sicily and Calabria’. Approval III Additional measures at the convention of 30 December 2003, n. 3077, between the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport and the spa company Stretto di Messina“. The additional action in question is closely related to the Cipess resolution of August in question resource allocation and executive project approval The Straits Bridge and Auditor’s Court had rejected its legitimacy on 29 October.
What is the reason?
“The failure to register the inter-ministerial decision approving the third additional law on the Strait Bridge came at the end of extensive discussions held today before the Court of Auditors where, first of all, the initial issue regarding the exceptional impact that the failure to register the Cipess resolution had on today’s decision arose. MIT remains confident in the continuation of the administrative process waiting for the Court’s reasons“. That’s MIT’s note. Now we have to wait another thirty days to find out the reasons for the Court of Auditors’ decision. However, from the reasons for rejecting the Cipess resolution, we can hypothesize why the minister’s decision did not overcome these bureaucratic obstacles. The Court has already expressed its doubts about the decision. economic scope of work and cost-benefit estimates. At the same time, it may have identified procedural issues, such as the transmission of documents via links (“many documents are sent via links“) and the lack/unbiasedness of some requested technical opinions.
Another reason for the rejection of the MIT-Strait of Messina Convention may be related to European law on public procurement, in particular the directives establishing rules in the event of modifications to public contracts exceeding a certain threshold (+50% of costs compared to the original contract) or the need for new tenders.
