interview: Maximiliano Crocamo
Italy will hold a national referendum on March 22–23 on a sweeping overhaul of its justice system, a vote that has ignited a fierce confrontation between Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government, the country’s magistrates and opposition leaders — and that could reshape the judiciary ahead of general elections in 2027.
At the center of the proposed constitutional reform is a structural break with longstanding practice: the separation of career paths for judges and prosecutors.
Under Italy’s current system, aspiring magistrates sit for a single public examination that qualifies them for both roles. After entering the judiciary, they choose whether to serve as judges or prosecutors and may switch once within the first nine years of their careers. The reform would end that flexibility, establishing two distinct professional tracks from the outset and barring movement between them.
Parliament approved the measure in October, but because it amends the Constitution it must now be confirmed by popular vote.
Government officials say the change would reinforce impartiality by reducing conflicts of interest and dismantling what they describe as entrenched networks within the judiciary. Ms. Meloni, whose relations with Italy’s courts have often been strained, has accused magistrates of obstructing her agenda on issues ranging from immigration to infrastructure.
“Those who think that everything is fine in the justice system will vote against the reform,” she said in October. “Those who think it can improve will vote yes.”
Critics, however, warn that the proposal risks weakening judicial independence. The National Association of Magistrates has led opposition to the plan, joined by center-left parties including the Partito Democratico and the Movimento 5 Stelle.
Elly Schlein, leader of the Democratic Party, called the reform a “power grab,” arguing that it would allow the government to place itself “above the laws and the constitution.” Giuseppe Conte, head of the Five Star Movement, said the administration “wants full powers” and pledged vigorous resistance.
The debate over separating judicial and prosecutorial careers has circulated for decades in Italian politics. Supporters on the center-right argue that distinct tracks would foster specialization and clearer institutional boundaries. For Forza Italia, the reform revives a long-standing cause associated with its late founder, Silvio Berlusconi, who frequently portrayed himself as the target of politicized prosecutions.
The overhaul would also restructure judicial governance. Italy’s current High Council of the Judiciary oversees appointments, promotions and discipline for all magistrates. Under the proposal, it would be split into two separate councils — one for judges and one for prosecutors — while a newly created high disciplinary court would handle sanctions.
Andrea Conzutti, a postdoctoral researcher in constitutional law at the University of Trieste, explained to our viewers that the reform touches the institutional architecture of the judiciary rather than individual cases. “This is not about a single trial or a specific investigation,” he said. “It concerns the balance between powers of the state and the way judicial careers are conceived within the Constitution.”
The timing of the referendum has itself been contested. The government initially pushed for an early March vote, while critics sought a later date to allow more time for public debate and mobilization.
The outcome now looms as both a test of public trust in the justice system and a measure of political support for Ms. Meloni’s coalition. Whatever the result, the vote is likely to leave a lasting mark on Italy’s legal and institutional landscape.
