Meloni’s bid to overhaul Italy’s justice system wins backing from lawmakers – politico.eu

Report on Italian Judicial Reform and its Implications for SDG 16

Overview of the Proposed Reform

The Italian government has advanced a significant constitutional reform aimed at restructuring its judicial system. The proposal’s core components are designed to alter the foundational structure of judicial and prosecutorial careers, impacting the nation’s progress toward Sustainable Development Goal 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

• Separation of Career Paths: The reform seeks to create entirely separate career tracks for judges and prosecutors, eliminating the current practice of mobility between the two roles.
• Establishment of Distinct Governing Councils: It proposes the creation of two separate governing bodies. One council would be responsible for judges and the other for prosecutors, managing all appointments, promotions, transfers, and disciplinary procedures for their respective branches.

Alignment with Sustainable Development Goal 16

The government frames the reform as a critical step toward achieving key targets within SDG 16, particularly Target 16.6, which calls for the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels.

• Enhanced Accountability and Efficiency: Proponents argue that the changes will improve accountability and operational efficiency within the judiciary, thereby strengthening the institution.
• Institutional Reset: The Prime Minister has positioned the reform as part of a broader institutional reset, intended to create more robust and effective governance structures in line with the principles of SDG 16.

Stakeholder Perspectives and SDG 16 Concerns

Opposition parties and judicial associations have raised significant concerns that the reform could undermine the principles of SDG 16, particularly the promotion of the rule of law (Target 16.3) and the development of independent institutions.

• Erosion of Prosecutorial Independence: Critics warn that separating the career paths and councils in this manner could weaken the independence of prosecutors, making them more susceptible to political influence. This directly challenges the integrity of a strong and impartial justice system.
• Politicization of the Judiciary: There is a stated fear that the reform could lead to the politicization of the judiciary, compromising its role as an independent pillar of the state and hindering the development of accountable and transparent institutions (Target 16.6).
• Concentration of Executive Power: Protests from opposition senators highlight concerns that the reform grants “full powers” to the executive branch, which could disrupt the institutional checks and balances necessary for responsive and inclusive decision-making (Target 16.7).

Legislative Process and Future Outlook

The reform has navigated a crucial phase of its legislative journey, with its ultimate implementation now dependent on public consensus. This process underscores the participatory aspect of governance central to SDG 16.

1. The constitutional amendment was approved by the Senate, marking the completion of its final parliamentary step.
2. Prime Minister Meloni described the vote as a “historic milestone,” stating that the government and parliament had fulfilled their roles.
3. The reform will now be subject to a confirmatory referendum, placing the final decision with the Italian citizenry.
4. The outcome of the referendum will determine whether these structural changes to one of Italy’s core institutions are implemented, with significant long-term implications for the nation’s commitment to justice and strong institutions as outlined in SDG 16.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article directly addresses SDG 16 by focusing on a major reform of a key national institution: the judiciary. The entire discussion revolves around the structure, governance, and independence of the judicial system in Italy. The proposed changes to create separate career paths and governing councils for judges and prosecutors are fundamental to the functioning of justice. The debate between the government, which claims the reform will improve “accountability and efficiency,” and critics, who fear it will “weaken prosecutorial independence and politicize the judiciary,” is central to the goal of building effective and accountable institutions.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

1. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   This target is relevant because the reform’s core debate is about the integrity of the rule of law. Critics’ warnings that the changes could “weaken prosecutorial independence” and “politicize the judiciary” suggest a potential threat to the impartial application of law, which is a cornerstone of the rule of law. The government’s stated aim to improve “efficiency” can be linked to improving access to justice, but the controversy highlights the tension in ensuring that efficiency does not compromise judicial independence.

2. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   This is the most prominent target in the article. The Italian government explicitly frames the reform as a measure to “improve accountability and efficiency within the judicial system.” The proposal to create “distinct governing councils… responsible for appointments, promotions, transfers and disciplinary procedures” is a direct attempt to restructure the institution for this purpose. Conversely, the opposition’s fear that the reform grants “full powers to the executive” challenges the notion that it will lead to a more accountable and transparent system, suggesting it could instead make the judiciary more accountable to political powers rather than the law.

3. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.

   The article highlights the process of institutional reform, which reflects this target. It mentions that the reform required “multiple votes” in parliament, including the “Senate approval.” Crucially, it states that “The reform now moves to a confirmatory referendum, where Italians will decide its fate.” This referendum is a direct mechanism for participatory and representative decision-making, allowing citizens to have the final say on a fundamental change to their country’s institutions. The protests by opposition senators also represent a form of participation in the decision-making process.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Judicial Independence

   While not a formal UN indicator with a numerical value, the concept of judicial independence is the central implied metric in the article. The entire debate is a proxy for measuring this. The concerns raised by “opposition parties and judicial associations” that the reform could “weaken prosecutorial independence and politicize the judiciary” point to this as the key indicator of the reform’s success or failure in upholding the principles of SDG 16.

2. Separation of Powers

   The article implies this as a critical indicator. The opposition’s protest against “granting what they called ‘full powers’ to the executive” directly references the principle of separation of powers between the executive and judicial branches. The proposed reform, which alters the governance structure of the judiciary, can be evaluated based on whether it strengthens or weakens this separation, thus serving as a measure of institutional integrity.

3. Existence of Mechanisms for Public Participation in Constitutional Reform

   The article explicitly mentions an indicator for Target 16.7. The statement that the reform will be decided by a “confirmatory referendum” serves as a direct, observable indicator of a participatory decision-making process. The existence and use of such a referendum mechanism can be measured to assess a country’s commitment to inclusive governance on fundamental institutional matters.

Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: politico.eu