A-Infos (en) Italy, Sicilia Libertaria #468 - REFLECTION ON THE REFERENDUM. - Take off the mask (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

This article certainly won't be your chance to learn the results of the 
constitutional referendum on justice. --- So, will this No victory 
change anything for us mere mortals? And would anything have changed if 
the Yes vote had won? Maybe not. So, why even talk about it? What use is 
it? Well, behind the campaign and the referendum result lies something 
broader that is worth analyzing.
Let's start with the underlying fact: the government wanted a 
constitutional reform regarding the functioning of the justice system, 
and this referendum resulted, which was presented (emphasis on the 
imperfect tense) as purely technical. At stake was the functioning and 
organization of the higher institutions that report to the Italian 
judiciary, seeking to erode the independence of the judiciary as much as 
possible, adhering to the canons of the infamous "constitutionality," 
and operating in a subtle manner, not overtly respectful of its 
objectives. Indeed, to cut a long story short, the disassembly of the 
CSM and the creation of a new, superior super-body, half elected by the 
parliamentary majority (let's keep this in mind) and half drawn by lot, 
was at least a tool for laying the foundations for a new course, in 
which politics could gradually intrude into the judiciary. A political 
"battle" that (without reviving fascism's mania for total control) dates 
back to Silvio Berlusconi's desires, in his eternal struggle against the 
"red robes" (sic!).

But let's be honest: Regardless of the consensus achieved by the current 
right in the last elections, would its electorate have been interested 
in a purely technical question concerning the higher institutions of the 
judiciary? This polemical question isn't so malicious, considering that, 
for many months, the debate on the referendum failed to take off.

The center-left had rightly expressed its timid dissent, the government 
basically kept quiet about it... and everything remained largely silent 
until the pivotal moment of Minister Nordio's speech, at the end of 
2025, in which he expressed surprise that the center-left could appear 
opposed to the reform, given that "it would also be in the opposition's 
interest, if they were to win the elections and govern." So, 
immediately, "the mask fell"; this is the goal of the reform: to ensure 
that government policy can have a greater influence on the judiciary. 
But let's move forward a few months later, to the period of 
January-February 2026, and here is Nordio himself arguing that the 
referendum had nothing to do with the functioning of judicial 
proceedings and therefore had nothing directly to do with citizens; 
statements echoed by Lega Senator Giulia Bongiorno, even more 
colorfully: "Only an ignoramus could think that this reform should 
impact the timing and efficiency of justice." So why should we vote Yes? 
So, all the ingredients are in place. Now it's clear: the greatest 
exponents of the No camp were precisely the right-wingers (sic!). They 
essentially did and undid everything on their own, right from the start. 
But, as we all know, "he who gives up is doomed"-you never give up.

They turned a technical referendum into a political ultimatum, turning 
it into a hubbub, believing they would prevail, just as they did in the 
general election. And, mind you, the same hypocrisy was also exploited 
by the center-left, including those who shouted about the Constitution 
needing to be safeguarded, while yesterday they abolished Article 18, 
spitting on it, for example.

To make up for the lost gap, after months of potentially wasted 
propaganda and the few damnably self-sabotaging statements (taken 
verbatim by the opposition to bolster the No camp), the government then 
tried to play yet another card of vulgar, manipulative, and simplistic 
propaganda. From there, a mega-galactic election campaign for the Yes 
vote began. Askatasuna? Blame the magistrates, vote Yes. Family in the 
woods? Vote Yes. Garlasco? Vote Yes. Sore throat? Cough? Vote Yes in the 
referendum! Hey, wasn't it a technical issue that didn't impact "the 
timing and efficiency of justice"? Perhaps the previous polemical 
question wasn't so malicious, then.

It only took one day, and here was the "reshuffle," the forced 
resignation of Delmastro, Bartolozzi, and Santanché, guilty of being 
unpresentable... we wonder: but if the Yes vote had won, would they have 
been presentable? Would Giorgia "Disciamo" Meloni have, let's say, 
brought, let's say invited, let's say even forced these shady 
characters, dobodighé, to resign?

So, in the end, what can we say about this referendum? Well, perhaps 
there's a glimmer of hope, at least that if you're constantly talking 
big, it won't stick.

Alessandro Usai

http://www.sicilialibertaria.it/wp-content/uploads/aprile2026_compressed.pdf
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en