“I think it’s a victory like the partisan struggle or the narrow victory in the referendum for the Republic [over] the monarchy [in 1946].” An enthused Giovanni Bachelet, a leader of the successful “No” campaign in Italy’s recent referendum on judicial reform, could be forgiven for hyping its significance. Where those past struggles laid the foundation of the modern Italian Constitution, this vote merely preserved the existing text.
Yet the comments by Bachelet, a longtime critic of right-wing tycoon Silvio Berlusconi’s assaults on the justice system, also pointed to a fundamental factor in this result. As shown in past referendums, most Italians dislike their government using short-lived electoral mandates to rewrite the Republic’s foundational text.
The result was hard to predict; polls even a couple months back had placed Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s “Yes” side in a strong lead. Her government proposed a separation of the careers of judges and prosecutors (thus stopping anyone fulfilling both roles) while also creating oversight bodies formed by sortition (random selection) rather than election.
If all this was not exactly a power grab, it did mean quashing the judiciary’s political voice, shutting up what right-wing leaders since Berlusconi have seen as a troublesome group. It also meant achieving a long-cherished goal of Meloni’s post-fascist party: having a role in (re)writing the constitution first drafted by the parties of the Resistance. The postwar ancestors of Meloni’s party long advocated sortition over party-political “factionalism.”
After a polling blackout imposed before the referendum — and much amateur, online psephology interpreting the initial turnout figures from Sunday and Monday morning’s votes — the ultimate result is a clear victory for “No,” on over 54 percent support and around a 60 percent turnout.
This was higher than the turnout in the most recent government-proposed constitutional…
Auteur: David Broder
