After the failure justice referendumit would be nice not to talk nonsense about “crisis of democracy”. First of all, because the mass rejection of the referendum can be a very political act, given the legitimacy of the struggle to eliminate the necessary quorum. And this, by eye, is what happened last Sunday. Citizens did not go to vote not because, as they wanted to assure promoters, the issue was censored by the media.

In fact, as Nando Pagnoncelli points out, 82% of voters knew about the referendum vote. The desertion – the highest in the republic’s history with a turnout of 20% – is a rejection of overly technical issues and a refusal to become an instrument of genuine, obscene civil strife between parties and the judiciary. How can one think of asking citizens for or against the exclusion of lawyers from judicial councils? Or even consult with them about the procedures for allowing magistrates to apply for CSM? As for the already legendary division of career, the Italians, more prudent than their representatives, however, would like the Parliament, which has a very significant government majority, to decide for itself, without interfering with its Sundays by the sea. It was a confrontation between two powers, constantly losing confidence, who claim to have entrusted us with the solution of their problems. In addition, among the overly complicated questions, the promoters also inserted a really embarrassing question, indicative of the repeated self-justification of the will of the parties: one that provided, in case of victory Yes, a discretionary and no longer automatic application of the law of Severino. Basically, allowing offenders and those convicted of serious crimes to become candidates.

In short, no haruspex was needed to predict the collapse of these referendum. But it doesn’t take much from here to celebrate the funeral of direct democracy. So I’m trying to interpret the collective sentiment of those who didn’t go to vote: we want simple, direct referendums that aim at broad, sincere, clear questions. As it was with abortions and divorces, with atomic energy and public water supply. What would it be like with euthanasia and cannabis (if you knew how to phrase the questions…).

The most important issues on which we all have our own ideas, and if so, we will be happy to vote even in August. The rest of the parliament will return to legislative activity. Is justice slow, illegitimate, non-transparent? There is a reorganization plan written by Minister Kartabiya. The parties don’t like it? Change it. Without groping for the transformation of citizens into the perpetrators of sad ordeals.