Italians went to the polls in record numbers on March 22 and 23, 2026, to decide the fate of a sweeping constitutional referendum aimed at overhauling the country’s justice system—a vote that quickly morphed into a de facto confidence test for Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government. With almost all ballots counted, the result was clear: the proposed reforms were rejected, as about 53.7% of voters marked No and 46.3% voted Yes, according to figures from Italy’s interior ministry reported by multiple news outlets, including ANSA and Anadolu Agency.
Turnout was robust, with nearly 59% (58.93%) of eligible voters casting ballots across 61,431 out of 61,533 sections, as reported by Eligendo and ANSA. This level of participation was well above the 39.37% recorded at the same time during the 2020 constitutional referendum to cut the number of MPs, signaling heightened public engagement with the issue at hand. Emilia Romagna led regional turnout at 66.67%, while Sicily lagged at 46.15%.
More than 45 million Italians were expected at the polls, joined by another 5.5 million voting from abroad, making for a total electorate of over 51 million. Italians living overseas, registered with Aire (the registry office for residents abroad), voted by mail, with ballots sent to Rome and then distributed to decentralized offices in Milan, Bologna, Florence, and Naples.
However, the smooth running of the vote was challenged by a wave of staff defections. In Rome, 20% of polling station presidents and tellers had to be replaced, while Florence sounded the alarm as about half the necessary staff were absent. Naples and Messina also faced similar shortages, requiring last-minute replacements to ensure polling stations remained open.
The referendum itself proposed fundamental changes to Italy’s justice system. Voters were asked whether they approved of amendments that would separate the career paths of judges and prosecutors, split the High Council of the Judiciary (CSM) into two distinct bodies, and select members by sortition—a lottery—rather than traditional election. The reforms also included the creation of a high court to discipline members of the judiciary, a change that proponents argued would enhance impartiality and efficiency.
Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who had staked significant political capital on the outcome, was a vocal advocate for the Yes campaign. She framed the referendum as a battle between her government and what she called entrenched left-wing factions within the judiciary. In the final days of the campaign, Meloni’s rhetoric grew sharper, accusing judges of blocking her government’s efforts to crack down on crime and irregular immigration. As reported by The Guardian, she warned that rejecting the reforms would mean more immigrants, rapists, paedophiles and drug dealers being freed and that a failed ballot would result in even more negligent judges and even more surreal sentences.
Her government’s campaign was not without controversy. A flyer posted by Meloni’s Brothers of Italy party on Facebook, later removed, urged voters to support the reforms with the claim: Judges block the deportations of rapists. Where are the feminists? Vote yes – there will not be another opportunity. Critics argued that such inflammatory messaging overshadowed substantive debate about the complex legal issues at stake.
Opposition to the reforms was fierce and vocal. Many critics, including former Prime Minister Matteo Renzi and Five Star Movement leader Giuseppe Conte, saw the proposals as an attempt to weaken the independence of the judiciary and increase government control, drawing parallels to the erosion of judicial autonomy in countries like Hungary. Renzi called the result a resounding defeat for Meloni, while Conte declared, We did it, long live the Constitution!
Legal experts and judges also weighed in. Luigi Li Gotti, a criminal lawyer and former justice undersecretary, expressed concern that the reforms would weaken prosecutors and indirectly influence investigations, especially into corruption and organized crime. Antonella Attardo, a civil judge in Milan, lamented the lack of public understanding of the technical changes, saying, The fear is very much about what will come afterwards, particularly if future laws further shift power toward the executive branch.
The campaign’s tone was set by sharp exchanges from both sides. Justice Minister Carlo Nordio described the judiciary’s supreme council as a para-mafia system, while his chief of staff likened it to a firing squad. These remarks, coupled with Meloni’s own statements, intensified the sense that the referendum was less about legal technicalities and more about broader questions of power and political direction in Italy.
Despite the government’s efforts—including Meloni’s outreach to younger voters via a podcast appearance—the No camp gained momentum as voting day approached. Polls conducted before the blackout period showed a tight race, but with the opposition edging ahead. Exit polls released after the close of voting stations on Monday echoed this trend. The Opinio Italia consortium for RAI put the No vote at 49-53%, with Yes at 47-51%. A YouTrend poll for Sky TG24 reported similar figures.
Ultimately, as the results came in, Meloni conceded defeat. In a video message, she acknowledged, The Italians have decided. And we respect this decision, adding that the government would move forward with responsibility and determination. The outcome marked the fifth constitutional referendum in the history of the Italian Republic, and its implications were immediately seized upon by political observers.
For Meloni, the referendum loss is more than just a legislative setback—it’s a blow to her standing ahead of the 2027 general election. As Mattia Diletti, a politics professor at Sapienza University in Rome, observed, It has become a political referendum and is a power issue for her. It is essentially a choice between Giorgia Meloni or the judges. While Meloni remains popular, this result complicates her path forward and may force a recalibration of her government’s constitutional ambitions.
For Italy’s justice system and its defenders, the outcome represents a reaffirmation of judicial independence in the face of political pressure. And for the millions of Italians who turned out to vote—at home and abroad—it was a reminder that in the country’s often turbulent democracy, the ballot box remains the final arbiter of constitutional change.