INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM, TRAVEL AND HOSPITALITY LAW through the reform of Law 217/83 with Law 135/01. However, it was a considerable failure, precisely because it coincided temporally with the constitutional reform15. Even the second attempt at reorganization, which occurred a decade later with Legislative Decree on September 23, 2011, the Tourism Code, did not allow for significant progress in the field of professions. This was not so much due to constitutional issues16, but rather because the various tourism professions were not clearly identified in Article 6. This provision, by adopting the definition of Article 7, fifth paragraph of Law 135/2001, has indeed confined itself to defining tourist professions in general: activities "aimed at providing services for the promotion of tourist activities, as well as hospitality, assistance, accompaniment, and guidance services, aimed at enabling tourists to make the best use of their journey and vacation, also in terms of knowledge of the visited places”. From 2011 to the present, Article 6 of the Tourism Code has been the sole state legislative reference to professions, as both Law 135 of 2001 and Article 10, fourth paragraph, of Legislative Decree No. 7 of 2007, which outlined certain principles regarding the regulation of guides and tourist escorts in relation to European regulations, were simultaneously repealed with the Tourism Code17. And that is why, as we have observed, in the absence of an effective state regulation that defined and regulated various tourist professional figures, the Regions felt free to legislate in areas where they had no authority. In their renewed regulations, they gave rise to new tourism professions and established professional registers, violating the principles of the freedom to 15 The state law of March 29, 2001, number 135, reforming the framework law 217/83, was enacted shortly before the reform of Title V of the Constitution, when the State still had concurrent competence. The implementing decree for the same law, the DPCM of December 13, 2002 (later partially annulled by the DPR of April 27, 2004), was instead issued in 2002, when the State had already lost some of its competencies. The implementation process has thus become so complicated that it has resulted in a deadlock. On the topic refer to M. Malo, The annulment of the presidential decree (rectius dpcm) 13 September 2002 for the part relating to tourist guides (L'annullamento del dpr (rectius dpcm) 13 settembre 2002 per la parte relativa alle guide turistiche), in Dir. Tur., 3/2004, p. 273 and seq. 16 The censorship of sentence 80/2012 of the Constitutional Court affected most of the provisions of the Decree, but not article 6 of the Tourism Code, as the matter of professions falls under state competence, although concurrent. 17 If some limited reference to tourist professions had survived in the State-Regions Agreement incorporated into the DPCM of September 13, 2002 (the implementing decree of Law 135 of 2001, not repealed by the Tourism Code), with the DPR of April 27, 2004, letters g and n of Article 1 of the aforementioned Agreement, which concerned the modalities of exercise and the authorization exams for tourist professions, were annulled.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==