Today I share some thoughts about the proposed reform of the Italian judiciary, and after many comments and discussions that followed, I feel it is worth setting out my position clearly for the English-speaking community living in Italy who are also entitled to vote.

Voting on the Italian Judiciary: Yes or No? 🏛️⚖️
From what I understand, and how the current Italian system differs from the English one:
In Italy, judges and public prosecutors belong to the same professional order, managed by the CSM, with internal factions and a certain degree of political influence. This can create conflicts between those who judge and those who investigate.

In England, on the other hand, judges and prosecutors are separate. Judicial appointments are independent and based on merit, without internal factions. Clear roles and transparency come first.

What would change with a “Yes” in the referendum?
Separate career paths for judges and prosecutors.
Greater transparency and meritocracy in appointments.
A reduction in the influence of internal factions and political pressure.

⚠️ Attention: we would not become exactly like England, but we would move closer to a clearer and more merit-based system.
Yes = reform and separation
No = everything remains as it is today
Understood?
Sunday 22 March polling stations will be open from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
Monday 23 March voting will take place from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

To begin with, I have serious doubts about the level of transparency in the proposed changes. Under the reform, some members of the Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura (CSM) — the body that governs the judiciary — would be selected by sortition, essentially drawn by lot. In addition, the so-called “lay” members would come from a list provided by the government. For me, this already raises concerns. A system that is supposed to safeguard the independence of the judiciary should be visibly transparent and clearly independent from political influence.

Beyond the technical aspects of the reform — which are often complex and not particularly engaging for the average citizen — the argument that most strongly pushes me toward voting NO concerns the proposed separation of careers between prosecutors and judges.

From what I understand, this change would in practice affect only a handful of magistrates each year, perhaps no more than around ten who move between prosecutorial and judicial roles. This raises an obvious question: is it really necessary to alter the structure of the system for such a small number of cases?

There is also a historical aspect that I personally find troubling. The separation of careers was one of the points mentioned in the well-known P2 programme associated with Licio Gelli, which caused enormous controversy in Italy in the 1980s. Even if the context today is different, that historical association alone makes many people understandably cautious.

For these reasons, and after reflecting on the discussion that followed my post, I remain unconvinced by the reform.

When the time comes, I intend to vote NO.

And I will end with a light but pointed remark: in Europe, one Orbán is enough.

Cheers 🥂