Italy’s referendum flop sends a warning to the left

Mayor of Rome Roberto Gualtieri casting his vote. Lapresse

Italy’s latest referendums fell short of reaching the required turnout. Political scientist Giorgio Malet of the Swiss federal technology institute ETH Zurich explains why Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s no show at the ballot box was hardly a surprise and what this says about the state of direct democracy in Italy.  

As has so often been the case in the past 30 years, Italy’s latest referendums flopped due to low turnout. Just 30% of eligible voters cast their ballots over the Pentecost weekend, well short of the 50% needed for the results to count. 

Many observers saw the failed quorum looming, but the opposition – a mix of trade unions and centre-left parties – still held out hope. For them, the referendums were a litmus test for Italy’s right-wing government. 

What did Italy vote on?

Giorgio Malet is a senior researcher and SNSF Ambizione Fellow at ETH Zurich. Vera Leysinger / Swi Swissinfo.ch

Still, around 14 million Italians went to the polls over Pentecost to vote on five issuesExternal link, four of which aimed at reversing parts of a 2010 labour market reform, while the fifth sought to reduce the residency requirement for Italian citizenship from 10 to five years.  

The result revealed an inconvenient truth. While between 86% and 88% of those who voted backed the first four questions, only 65% voted in favour of the citizenship referendum. 

For political scientist Giorgio Malet this is a “message to the left”, a sign that part of its own electorate opposes a more liberal citizenship law. 

“It’s a lesson and a warning, perhaps also for left-wing politicians abroad: a section of the left that voted is against easing citizenship for immigrants,” says Malet, who has also studied how Brexit has affected EU support in other countries.  

It was mainly leftist voters who turned up at the polls in Italy, as during the election campaign, the political right had urged people to abstain or even boycott the vote. 

Why did Giorgia Meloni not show up? 

Even though Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni was among the majority who declined to vote, she still made a symbolic appearance at a polling station.  

Her opponents slammed Meloni for urging people to stay home instead of voting ‘No’. But according to Malet, it fits the logic of Italian election campaigns. “For the other side, it is a strategically sensible decision,” he explains. 

Campaigning for abstention makes perfect sense and so does criticising your opponents for doing just that. “It is part of the political game in Italy,” says Malet. “Especially if you look at the last 30 years as turnout rates [have] plummeted.”  

There are two types of binding referendums in Italy. One is the rarer constitutional referendumExternal link, which does not require a minimum turnout and is held to vote on constitutional amendments passed by parliament. 

But on June 8 and 9, Italy voted in the more common abrogative referendums which aim to repeal existing laws. They require 500,000 signatures to be launched and – unlike constitutional referendums – are only valid if at least half of eligible voters cast their ballots, a threshold that is hardly ever met.   

When Italian referendums actually worked 

The last time an abrogative referendum past the turnout hurdle was in 2011, when Italians voted on water privatisation, nuclear power and legal immunity for high-ranking politicians. Back then, around 95% voted in favour of all issues which marked the beginning of the end for Silvio Berlusconi’s last government.  

Malet says that in the 1970s and 1980s, the abrogative referendum played an important role in giving Italian politics a powerful veto tool. Today, however, he views this popular right more skeptically.  

“We have seen an increase in referendums as a reaction to the crisis in the Italian party system. But can the referendum fix the crisis in the party system?,” Malet wonders. 

The core purpose of abrogative referendums are to repeal laws, but lately, Malet argues, their use has been altered creatively to also push new political agendas. 

The difference between Italy and Switzerland

Malet questions how elements of direct democracy should be designed to complement a representative system like Italy’s. “A more frequent use of the abrogative referendum does not help address the current problems of the representative system, and specifically the struggle of political parties in aggregating voters’ demands and the declining role of parliaments in the policymaking process,” he explains. 

From his perspective, direct democratic rights carry a different weight in Italy compared to Switzerland, where he views them as fundamental to the government’s political legitimacy. “In Italy, the parliament can control the government with a vote of confidence. In Switzerland, the government is more independent from parliament,” he explains. “Accordingly, the Swiss political system has a greater need for political legitimacy through referendums between elections.” 

In Italy, by contrast, the government’s legitimacy is granted by parliament, making the political system less reliant on direct democracy. 

Edited by Reto Gysi von Wartburg 

Adapted from German by Billi Bierling/ac