30 March 2026•Update: 06 April 2026
The author is an Italian expert on political science and international relations. She is the scientific director of the Observatory in Türkiye by Rome-based think tank CeSPI.
ISTANBUL
On March 23, 2026, Italian citizens were called to vote on a distinctive referendum concerning a constitutional reform centered on the judiciary. The reform centered on the separation of career paths between judges and public prosecutors, the splitting of the High Council of the Judiciary into two distinct bodies, and the creation of a new High Disciplinary Court to oversee judges. The referendum — known as the "Nordio Reform" after Justice Minister Carlo Nordio — was the outcome of a longstanding debate within the Italian political spectrum. It ultimately emerged as the Meloni government's key proposal, aimed at "modernizing Italy." The referendum was intended to reshape Italy's institutional architecture. However, it soon became a political battleground over the consistency and independence of institutional powers within the framework of Italian democracy, turning into a de facto vote on Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's political strength.
The Italians say "No"
After almost four years in power, the Meloni government sought to make the judiciary system "more modern, more meritocratic, more autonomous, more accountable," aiming to leave a permanent imprint on Italy's institutional system. The confirmatory constitutional referendum required no quorum to be valid; hence, any turnout would have produced a legally binding result. Italians turned out in unexpectedly high numbers, with roughly 59% of eligible voters casting a ballot, making it the most participated constitutional referendum in over two decades. This figure carries significant weight for a country where referendums traditionally struggle to mobilize the public. However, the final verdict went far beyond the technical aspects of constitutional law. The "No" camp secured around 53.5 percent against approximately 46.5 percent for the "Yes." In an era of widespread civic disengagement, this level of participation constituted a political statement, sending a concrete signal to the government. The "No" did not simply signal a defense of the status quo; it was a deliberate choice between two visions of justice: one envisioning strict separation of powers to prevent conflicts of interest, the other prioritizing the independence of the judiciary over exposing prosecutors to political pressures. As independence prevailed over reorganization, it can be argued that conservatism won out in ensuring that no power goes unchecked. The opposition to the "Nordio Reform" could also be read through the lens of a living memory, constructed as a safeguard against any authoritarian drift. Nevertheless, the electoral campaign and the manner in which this reform was pursued in the final weeks revealed severe political polarization and social division, exposing the limits and fragilities of combative narratives. The "Yes" front's rhetoric was indeed quite harsh, and it crossed a line when some officials referred to prosecutors as a "para-mafia mechanism" and spoke about the need to get rid of judges whom they described as "execution squads."
International and domestic reverberations
Another factor that influenced the voting outcome was Meloni's posture in the current international crisis. The referendum did not take place in a vacuum; rather, it unfolded during one of the most dramatic international crises in recent memory. The US-Israel war on Iran has largely occupied Italy's public attention, casting a shadow over Meloni's political standing. Over the years, Giorgia Meloni has positioned herself as a privileged interlocutor of Donald Trump, leveraging her ideological proximity to the MAGA movement to act as a bridge between Washington and European capitals. However, the attack on Iran revealed Rome as a peripheral player in US strategic decision-making. The war monopolized media coverage at precisely the moment the referendum campaign was gaining momentum, heightening Italians' concerns about their national security and economic spillovers. In this hectic climate, the opposition capitalized on the circumstances, framing the vote as a broader judgment on Meloni's leadership. Thus, the image of Prime Minister Meloni as a pillar of domestic stability and a credible player in an increasingly volatile international landscape began to crack. As a founding member of the European Union, one of the largest European economies, and a major actor in the wider Mediterranean — including as a security pillar on the region's southern flank -- Italy now finds itself in need of relaunching a pragmatic approach by demonstrating both strength and vision. The tenure of Meloni's power will depend on this as well, especially ahead of next year's parliamentary elections. There is no doubt that this referendum marks Meloni's first major setback since she came to power in October 2022; the first reverberations have already been felt, most visibly through the resignations of several ministers and key government figures. Internal tensions are evident, and the uncertainty over the future direction of key coalition parties is unmistakable. However, a weakened Meloni government -- consumed by domestic survival struggles -- risks becoming a less reliable partner in terms of stability and credibility. At a moment when Europe and the broader region desperately need coherent and confident leadership, Italy's political fragility is not merely an Italian problem; it may amplify challenges well beyond its own borders.
*Opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Anadolu's editorial policy.
