On March 9, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni posted a video urging Italians to approve constitutional changes in a referendum that will be held on March 22 and 23. Though members of her right-wing government have promoted the measure for months, this was the first time that Meloni herself explicitly endorsed the justice reform. Many observers were surprised that it took her so long.
The reform will more clearly separate the roles of judges and prosecutors, which currently overlap, and introduce stricter monitoring organs for both. Critics say the changes are aimed at weakening the judiciary—a politically motivated move from a right-wing coalition that views the courts as too liberal. Supporters say it would make the judiciary more accountable.
On March 9, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni posted a video urging Italians to approve constitutional changes in a referendum that will be held on March 22 and 23. Though members of her right-wing government have promoted the measure for months, this was the first time that Meloni herself explicitly endorsed the justice reform. Many observers were surprised that it took her so long.
The reform will more clearly separate the roles of judges and prosecutors, which currently overlap, and introduce stricter monitoring organs for both. Critics say the changes are aimed at weakening the judiciary—a politically motivated move from a right-wing coalition that views the courts as too liberal. Supporters say it would make the judiciary more accountable.
By keeping a low profile and maintaining that the reform vote concerns the judicial system and not her cabinet’s popularity, Meloni hoped to prevent it from becoming a referendum on her government and shield her image in the event of defeat. It was also an attempt to avoid heightened polarization or a cabinet reshuffle. But that calculus seemed to shift when the United States and Israel launched their combined attack on Iran on Feb. 28.
With the Iran war—which is deeply unpopular among the Italian public—monopolizing media attention, interest has waned in a referendum in which the outcome hinges on participation. Meloni, who takes pride in what she has called her “privileged” relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump, has cautiously distanced herself from his movement. In a speech before the Senate on March 11, Meloni defined U.S.-Israeli attacks as part of a “structural crisis in the international system” in which “unilateral interventions outside the scope of international law are multiplying.”
She also condemned the killing of roughly 175 people in a missile strike on a girls’ elementary school in southern Iran on Feb. 28. An ongoing investigation has indicated that the strike was the result of a targeting error by the U.S. military, the New York Times reported.
Still, polls suggest that Meloni’s closeness to Trump—and, by extension, the war—is eroding her popularity. In this context, she cannot afford a second setback at the polls. Now, Meloni seems to be pushing the vote onto center stage.
Meloni introduced the constitutional reform last year to improve the notorious sluggishness of Italy’s judicial system. Trials can drag on for years, often getting discarded without a verdict. Critics on the right argue that this inefficiency is due, in part, to judges being too powerful. This stance is a legacy of former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who accused the courts of political bias while facing multiple corruption trials himself. The left, which long viewed the judiciary as a counterweight to Berlusconi’s power, tends to side with the courts.
The reform would reshape the judiciary by enforcing mandatory separation between judges and prosecutors. Theoretically, this would clarify prosecutors’ role as accusers and judges’ role as arbitrators and address concerns that judges with prosecutorial backgrounds might be more inclined to convict.
The proposed reforms would also restructure the Consiglio Superiore della Magistratura (CSM)—the judiciary’s self-governing body responsible for the hiring, promotion, and transfer of judges and prosecutors—by splitting it into two bodies, one for judges and the other for prosecutors. The CSM is currently composed of members elected by their peers within the judiciary, alongside lay members, such as law professors and experienced lawyers, who are selected by parliament.
Under the proposal, some judicial members would instead be chosen by lottery. The reforms would also establish a High Disciplinary Court to rule on alleged judicial misconduct, a role that is currently handled by the CSM. Supporters say these changes would make the judiciary more accountable and freer from conflicts of interest.
“The reform allows the judiciary to move toward a more transparent system of self-regulation than in the past, because the lottery eliminates power blocks and external influence,” said Andrea Del Corno, a lawyer in Milan and a member of the “yes” vote committee.
Del Corno argued against critics’ claim that introducing a lottery system would lower the CSM’s standards. Random selection, he said, could curb the influence of private organizations and politicized voting—a feature of the process in Italy, where candidates for CSM seats often run with affiliations to certain parties or “currents.”
“It’s far from perfect,” Del Corno said. “But I believe that this reform could mark a step forward for the judicial culture of this country.”
However, critics of the proposal argue that it would weaken the judiciary. Davide Steccanella, a Milan-based lawyer campaigning against the reform, said it has “a punitive intent toward judges and prosecutors.” He warned that establishing a lottery to appoint CSM members would set an “unreasonable double standard” if only applied to judges and prosecutors and not lay members, who make up one-third of the CSM.
In Steccanella’s view, this would erode the judiciary’s autonomy while allowing politicians, who would retain the power to select their own representatives via a majority vote in parliament, to remain untouched. “Either you apply a system to every member, or you don’t apply it at all,” he said.
Past conservative leaders have openly attacked the judiciary. But Meloni has taken a subtler approach, seeking to capitalize on public discontent with the justice system. Meloni has now pointed to controversial rulings to build support for reform. In her speech before the Senate on March 11, she cited the decision by Rome’s Court of Appeals to strike down her plan to deport migrants to Albania as evidence that the courts are too liberal.
Valerio Valentini, a political commentator and journalist for Il Post, said Meloni has “two bogeymen” of her own: Matteo Renzi and Berlusconi, both former prime ministers who pushed for judicial reform. Meloni does not want to end up like Renzi, whose political career collapsed after he invested his image in a failed referendum; she also wants to avoid repeating Berlusconi’s mistake by publicly clashing with the judiciary and creating a pro-justice system movement on the left.
For Meloni’s plan to succeed, her supporters need to turn out en masse at the polls to offset those who will take advantage of the referendum to vote against the government. However, the Iran war has raised more pressing issues for Italians, such as rising fuel prices, inflation, and the possibility of being dragged into the conflict.
“In the face of major events like a war, a referendum on the judiciary will always take a back seat,” said Paolo Natale, a sociologist at the University of Milan. “The less people talk about it, the fewer people will turn out to vote.”
Limited participation could hurt Meloni. Polls suggest that the referendum has a better chance of passing with a high voter turnout. Right-wing voters may be less interested because the vote does not, from their perspective, directly affect the government. Meanwhile, liberals appear more energized, both because they fear that the judicial reform would give more power to the government and because they interpret the referendum as vote against Meloni.
Natale said the prime minister is also paying the price for her closeness to Trump. Though Meloni often presents herself as a “Trump whisperer,” public opinion polling shows that Italians do not hold him in high regard. His approval rating among Italians dropped sharply following the attacks on Iran, from 35 percent this time last year to 19 percent as of polling published on March 16. Meloni’s accommodating relationship with Trump may be contributing to a decline in her own approval ratings, which have fallen from above 45 percent in November to 37.5 percent today.
Meloni’s government has pursued a few constitutional overhauls since taking power in 2022, but none of these attempts have advanced to the referendum stage. The upcoming vote could be Meloni’s final opportunity to make lasting constitutional change before the legislative term ends next year. On March 12, she told an audience in Milan that if the referendum does not pass, “we will most likely not have another chance.”
And though victory could strengthen Meloni’s government, defeat would—perhaps for the first time—call her aura of invincibility into question. So far, Meloni has resisted a trend plaguing most European leaders by holding on to support during her time in office; her party, Brothers of Italy, still leads in all polls.
A “no” victory in the referendum could be the first possible sign that the political winds are changing in Italy—and while Meloni has said that she will not resign in the event of a defeat, such a result could open the doors for opposition parties to create a formal alliance for the next elections, due in 2027. Whether Meloni can convince her supporters to show up in force at the polls remains to be seen.
