Parliament approves reform to change how the judiciary is governed
The Minister of Justice, Carlo Nordio, presented to the Italian Senate the foundations of a legislative proposal aimed at transforming the model of administering the judicial power. The government coalition managed to approve a resolution supporting the project, paving its way to the Chamber of Deputies for its final discussion. Opposition parties expressed outright rejection, arguing that the initiative involves interfering with the independence of judges. ⚖️
Key changes in the governance of judges
The executive's central proposal consists of altering the mechanism for electing members of the Superior Council of the Magistracy (CSM). The main change lies in the fact that members who are judges would be designated by their colleagues through regional constituencies, instead of a single national voting process. As Nordio explained, this method strengthens the autonomy of the judicial career by making it harder for nationally organized factions to control electoral outcomes.
Key points of the reform:- Change the election system for judicial members of the CSM from national to one by constituencies.
- The stated objective is to protect the autonomy of the judiciary from pressure groups.
- The legislative text already has the formal approval of the Senate through a resolution of impetus.
This reform modernizes and gives more independence to the judicial power, distancing it from spurious influences.
A debate marked by political division
The day in the upper house reflected a clear fracture between parliamentary blocs. The parties supporting the government defended the need to update the system, insisting that it grants greater independence to judges. On the contrary, the opposition united their voices to reject the initiative, warning that it could fragment and weaken the corporate unity of the judiciary in the country, as well as open the door to greater political influence.
Opposing positions in the hemicycle:- The government coalition supports the project, considering it a necessary modernization.
- Opposition groups reject it, seeing it as a risk of politicizing and dividing judges.
- The approved text is a resolution urging the government to proceed with the legislative initiative.
The work continues in the courts
While the political debate on who should lead the judges occupies the parliamentary agenda, activity in the courts continues normally. The expectation from the judiciary is that, regardless of the origin of the rules, they be clear and applied equitably to all citizens, thus preserving the essence of the rule of law. 🏛️