Italian Voters Reject Meloni's Judicial Reform in Constitutional Referendum

On March 23, the halls of a Naples courthouse echoed with the anti-fascist resistance anthem "Bella Ciao." Approximately 50 magistrates gathered to monitor the vote count of a highly anticipated constitutional referendum, erupting into song once it became clear that Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's proposed judicial overhaul had been defeated.

With a robust voter turnout of roughly 60%, the Italian electorate delivered a decisive verdict: 54% voted against the reform, while 46% supported it. This outcome serves as a significant stress test for Meloni's executive branch, leaving her politically vulnerable, particularly to coalition partners who favor reopening dialogue with Russia—a shift that could have profound implications for Western support of Ukraine.

A System Plagued by Delays

The rejected reform was born out of a genuine crisis. According to the European Commission's EU Justice Scoreboard, Italy ranks lowest in the bloc for judicial efficiency. The system suffers from a chronic shortage of judges, an overabundance of lawyers, exorbitant legal costs, and notoriously lengthy appellate processes.

On average, concluding a legal case in Italy takes about 350 days, outperforming only Malta (400 days), Cyprus (603 days), and Greece (630 days). Furthermore, reaching a first-instance court decision takes approximately 500 days, placing Italy near the absolute bottom of the rankings alongside Greece and Croatia. Despite these grim statistics, the system had recently shown slight improvement, shaving 20 days off the average case processing time.

The Government's Radical Proposal

Determined to enact sweeping changes, Meloni's government pushed a constitutional reform through the Italian Senate on October 30, 2025. The legislation aimed to fundamentally restructure the judiciary by completely separating the career paths of judges and prosecutors. Under the existing system, both roles fall under the same training and career progression rules.

The proposed overhaul included several key changes:

• Establishing separate entrance exams and autonomous career trajectories for judges and prosecutors, with no possibility of transferring between the two roles.
• Creating two distinct High Councils—one for judges and one for prosecutors—to replace the unified self-governing body.
• Replacing the traditional election system for self-governing bodies with a lottery system to diminish the influence of professional factions.
• Establishing a new High Disciplinary Court.

Judicial Backlash and Political Fallout

While Prime Minister Meloni championed the Senate's approval as a historic milestone toward an efficient, citizen-oriented justice system, the judiciary vehemently disagreed. The proposed changes sparked widespread outrage among legal professionals, culminating in a magistrate strike in early 2026.

Opponents argued that separating the prosecutor's office was a politicized move. They feared prosecutors would become overly aligned with the police force, compromising the impartiality of legal proceedings. Furthermore, critics warned that the new prosecutor's council could fall under the heavy-handed control of the executive branch.

This mistrust was compounded by the government's fraught relationship with the courts. Meloni's administration has frequently clashed with the judiciary over migration policies and major infrastructure projects, and several sitting ministers are currently facing investigations.

Because the legislation passed the parliament last October with only a simple majority rather than a constitutional one, it automatically triggered the mandatory public referendum. Ultimately, the Italian public sided with the magistrates, halting the reform and dealing a significant political blow to the Prime Minister.