Complete guide to the justice referendum: separation of careers, CSM and High Court draw. Find out what would change if the «YES» vote wins and why a quorum is not needed.
The image is that of an urn waiting, motionless, in five thousand sections scattered across the country. It is not the usual electoral call to arms; it is a silent melee with the Constitutional Charter. On Sunday 22nd and Monday 23rd March, Italy sits at the table of a match that does not allow draws, where the deck of cards has been reshuffled by a reform that promises to change the characteristics of the judicial order.
Unlike the repeal referendums, here there is no anxiety about quorum: the law does not require a minimum participation of 50% plus one of the voters to make the consultation valid. This is a confirmatory referendum ex article 138where the silence of those who stay at home has no veto power. Even if only one person went to vote, their “Yes” or “No” would write history, making every single ballot a decisive weight for the future of the institutions.
The three tracks of reform
The heart of the dispute beats on three tracks that run parallel towards a horizon of rupture with the past. There separation of careers it is the first, the loudest. If the reform were to pass, the border between those who accuse and those who judge would become an insurmountable wall from the first day of the competition. A crossroads with no return: either prosecutor or judge. The umbilical cord that today allows, albeit with tight links, the transition from one function to another would be definitively severed, in the name of the judge’s impartiality which the “Yes” supporters consider the only barrier to an excessive cultural closeness between accusation and judgement.
The draw and the end of the currents
The second track dismantles the current architecture of self-government. The Superior Council of the Judiciaryif the yes vote wins, it will split: no longer a single body, but two, one for the judges and one for the prosecutors. The real revolution, however, lies in the selection method. The reform introduces the draw for the choice of professional members, a move designed to disintegrate the power of the currents within the judiciary. It is a controlled leap into the dark, where merit and political affiliation give way to statistical randomness, in an attempt to restore virginity to an organ often accused of dividing logic.
The High Court disciplinary and professional supervision
The last piece of the mosaic is the institution ofHigh Disciplinary Court. This is a new body, external to the two CSM, which would have the exclusive task of judging magistrates for professional offences. A magistrates’ court, for magistrates, but free from the management of careers and transfers. Those who contest the reform see in this body a danger to the independence of the judiciary, fearing that the mixed composition could open the door to conditioning by political power.
Voting for this referendum is not a technical question for legal experts. It is a choice of field on the nature of Italian democracy. It is decided whether the structure imagined by the founding fathers in 1948 is still capable of withstanding the impact of modernity or whether, instead, a structural shock is needed to realign the checks and balances between the powers of the State. Between those who fear a weakening of the judiciary and those who dream of a more balanced justice, the word now turns to that silence that precedes the opening of the polls.
When you vote for the referendum on justice
Polling stations open on Sunday 22 March, from 7am to 11pm, and Monday 23rd from 7am to 3pm. At the polling station you must show up with a valid voter card and identity document. The counting will begin at 3pm and the first exit poll data will arrive.
