Referendum, Schlein: "From the government a muscular demonstration against the Constitutional Charter"

“The right-wing government – he explains Elly Schleinin an interview with ‘Rinascita’ talking about referendum on justice – he wanted to do one muscle test on the Constitution. In parliament we countered it by reporting the macroscopic errorsthe contradictions, the gaps of one wrong and harmful reform. This constitutional reform left Parliament exactly as it entered it: the government locked it down and they didn’t agree to change even a comma, they didn’t accept any changes, neither from the opposition nor from the majority parliamentarians. It had never happened in the history of the Republic, a serious and unacceptable method. Seven articles of the Constitution are modified and two are repealed in one fell swoop.”

“The reform – explains the secretary of the Democratic Party – weakens theindependence of the judiciarya fundamental principle that does not protect judges but all citizens. This is not one justice reform because it doesn’t affect the real problems: it doesn’t speed up trials, it doesn’t hire the staff that’s missing, it doesn’t stabilize 12,000 precarious justice workers that the government risks leaving at home from June. It does not improve the use of alternative measures to detention and does not affect the prison overcrowdingwhich reached peaks of 138.5% with a record suicide rate, both among inmates and among prison police officers. This reform does not improve theefficiency of justice for the citizens, even Minister Nordio admits it.”

The separation of functions and the CSM

Per Schlein “la separation of functions introduced by reforma Cartabia it allows judges to become prosecutors or vice versa only once in their entire career, in the first 10 years and when changing territory. A choice made by between 20 and 40 judges per year out of over 9000. The Constitution cannot be changed for the fate of 40 people per year.”

“In the past, appropriate legislative interventions have been made, such as when the incompatibility was established whereby the members of the Csmwho deal with disciplinary matters cannot also deal with appointments. If the government’s objective had been to strengthen the separation of careers – he reasons Schlein –they could have intervened by law, for example by creating two separate competitions. But it is clear that the objective is another: to change the Constitution and split the Csmin three to weaken the independence of the judiciary”.

The draw and democratic representation

“Il draw to choose the members of a body of constitutional importance does not exist in any other country in the world – continues the dem secretary -. Let’s ask ourselves why. Today the CSM is elective and authoritativetomorrow he would be drawn and weaker. To the detriment of the principle of separation of powers which is a democratic foundation to protect citizens. Who among us would entrust a delicate task or our representation to the draw? It means abdicating the effort of choosing the most competent and authoritative people to fill a high role. It means giving up representation to rely on a sort of lottery. The draw does not eliminate the currents, it eliminates the democratic representation. And with potentially paradoxical results: all members of the same area could be drawn, or all men with serious damage to their health could be drawn. gender equality. What’s more, it is a asymmetric draw. Because the professional members would be drawn at random among the over 9000 magistrates, while the lay members would be drawn from a list voted by Parliament, where there is a political majority. It is clear that politics would have more weight, not less,” concludes Schlein.