Two weeks out from a referendum to “reform” the judiciary, which nobody believes will actually improve the functioning of the legal system, the power plays between the “yes” and “no” sides continue.
Readers will recall my earlier accounts of the proposal to remove the independence of the investigating magistrates, an independence entrenched in the 1948 Italian Constitution following the experience of Fascist justice under Mussolini.
There was early support for the referendum – who would not want to see a reduction in independent criminal investigation powers that could be used against you!
However, there are signs that support is waning, possibly because Italians can see the current US experience where criminal investigations are being politicised under Trump.
Supporters of the “yes” vote are waiting for Prime Minister Meloni to ignite the campaign. Unfortunately, she is busy managing the fallout from Donald Trump’s policies.
Trump’s loss of interest in the war in Ukraine means that Italy and the EU have to spend more time and money on the issue, while his tumultuous tariff wars are seriously affecting Italian and EU trade.
Now his attack on Iran has brought the Middle East war to the Mediterranean shores.
There have also been a few recent setbacks for the Meloni government campaign.
On February 6, in response to a citizen-initiated application, the Italian constitutional court ruled that the government had to change the wording of the referendum question.
The initial proposal was an anodyne question about approving the law approved by the parliament in October 2025.
Now, at the direction of the court, the question must spell out the Constitutional changes by adding:
“… modifying articles 87(10), 102(1), 104, 105, 106(3), 107(1) and 110(1) of the Constitution.”
Then, on February 15, the government tried to turn up the heat on the judges. The Italian Attorney General Nordio’s chief of staff, Giusi Bartolozzi – unkindly referred to in the newspapers as “the tsarina” – sent a letter to the head of the Association of Judges and Magistrates demanding that they hand over the names of all persons who had donated to the “no” campaign.
The request was justified in the name of transparency, to make it possible to see if these donors received special treatment in the courts afterwards.
The head of the association returned the letter with a six-line reply that included advice that the letter had been sent to the wrong address.
First, it was pointed out that the funding of the “no” campaign was managed by an independent committee at arm’s length from the association.
Second, it was noted that no request had been made to the “yes” campaign about their donors when their committee included some investigating magistrates.
Finally, it was pointed out that the request asked recipients to violate EU data privacy and protection laws.
Last week, a mini-survey in a supermarket in Bologna, admittedly a centre-left voting city, found that many of the citizens resented being asked to vote on such complex and technical issues.
They were relying on legal friends, online commentators or high-profile comedians to understand the issues, and most intended to vote “no”.
The survey did find one voter who was clear that they were going to vote “yes”, simply on the basis that they loved Giorgia Meloni.
Voting is not compulsory.