Meloni’s referendum gamble backfires – The Hindu

On March 23, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s far-right government in Italy faced its most serious setback yet when it lost a referendum on judicial reforms with around 54% of the public voting “No” to the proposed changes while 46% voted “Yes”. The turnout for the referendum was also higher than expected, with almost 60% of the population showing up at the ballot box. While the referendum was fundamentally about the justice system, it had been politicised as a mandate on the government as a whole, with the result giving critics and the Opposition in Italy a strong leg to stand on as the country heads for elections next year.

Clash with the judiciary

Ms. Meloni’s reforms aimed to restructure Italy’s fiercely independent judiciary. It proposed to segregate the career paths of prosecutors and judges, by dividing their overarching governing body, the Superior Council of the Judiciary, into two separate bodies. This would have mandated that prosecutors and judges decide at the very beginning of their careers what they want to be, with a later switch being impossible. The reforms also put forth a new appointments system, where judges/prosecutors would be appointed to key posts in their respective governing bodies by way of a lot system, replacing the earlier mode of elections. It would also allow Parliament to choose a specific number of members to these bodies, also through a lot system. Moreover, these governing bodies would be stripped of their disciplinary powers and a completely different disciplinary court would be set up to monitor the conduct of judges.

Ms. Meloni claimed that these reforms were necessary in order to guarantee impartiality and improve the functioning of Italy’s justice system. She said that it would make the judicial process “more modern, more meritocratic, more autonomous, more accountable and, above all, free from political constraints”. In fact, when the results of the referendum came out, Ms. Meloni, while conceding defeat, lamented the decision as a “a ‌lost chance to ‌modernise ​Italy”.

Her government has been fiercely critical of what it calls the judiciary’s overreach in policies involving migration and security. For example, in 2024, when a Rome Court ruled against the government’s decision to detain migrants in Albania, as part of a deal with the country to house migrants there while claims were being processed in Italy, Ms. Meloni lashed out that the ruling was prejudicial. About a week before the referendum, she had stated that rejecting the changes would mean “more negligent magistrates” who put public safety at risk, by advancing their careers by releasing “more illegal immigrants, rapists, paedophiles and drug dealers”.

Ms. Meloni said the reforms were necessary to root out ‘leftwing factions’ in the judiciary. Many of her cabinet members have also attacked the judiciary such as Justice Minister Carlo Nordio, who referred to the judiciary’s supreme council as a “para-mafia system”.

The reforms, as can be expected, have been very unpopular within the judiciary itself with magistrates protesting and striking against it. The Italian National Association of Judges had strongly opposed the reform, with its president stating that it would weaken control over sensitive investigations and undermine constitutional principles. The European Commission also cautioned against the reforms in its 2024 Rule of Law Report stating that the reforms posed threats to judicial independence in Italy and that the randomised lot system was not adequate to properly represent the judicial class.

Magistrates have maintained that by separating the two judicial classes, the government wants to exert more control over prosecutors, in order to curb dissent and make it harder to prosecute high-profile cases. Judicial bodies have claimed that Ms. Meloni is using the garb of “impartiality and efficiency” to compromise the judiciary and bend it to her will. Just as in the case of the Albania deal, as courts kept ruling against migrant centres in Albania, Ms. Meloni tried to work around it by introducing more new decrees.

A set precedent

Ms. Meloni’s government has been one of the most stable governments in Italy after a long time. She was leading opinion polls four years into her coming to power in 2022, which is very unusual for Italian politics and politicians. However, her crusade against the judiciary has brought back echoes from the past, specifically the regime of Silvio Berlusconi, the disgraced late former Prime Minister of Italy. He himself faced multiple criminal trials on charges of bribery, corruption, underage sex, etc., and accused magistrates of political persecution. Berlusconi had also tried to bring in reforms to separate prosecutors and judges as well as proposals to reinstate full parliamentary immunity.

The Opposition has taken this moment as a public denouncement of the government’s legitimacy. While Ms. Meloni has repeatedly claimed that she would not resign no matter what the verdict is, former Prime Minister and head of the Five Star Movement Giuseppe Conte told the media that “it’s an eviction notice for this government after four years”.

The Prime Minister has already started damage control by seeking the resignations of Justice Ministry Undersecretary Andrea Delmastro and Chief of Staff Giusi Bartolozzi, both of whom have corruption charges against them, and have quit their offices now. It remains to be seen how much the referendum has hurt Ms. Meloni’s standing among the public, especially as economic and energy pressures rise due to the war between the U.S.-Israel and Iran.