This essay examines the thirty-year trajectory of constitutional revision attempts in Italy, analyzing the transition from large-scale, comprehensive "organic" reform projects to "selective" or "targeted" interventions. The author highlights how organic reforms of the second part of the Basic Law (ranging from bicameral committees to the Berlusconi and Renzi-Boschi reforms) have consistently failed due to intense partisan polarization, which transformed the constitutional referendums into political plebiscites on the proposing governments. Conversely, targeted reforms (such as the balanced budget requirement, the reduction in the number of MPs, and the introduction of environmental, insular, and sporting principles) achieved greater success because they were easily understood by the electorate, though they occasionally resulted in purely symbolic or distortive measures. Ultimately, the text focuses on recent dynamics, including structural proposals on the direct election of the Prime Minister (premierato) and the separation of judicial careers, the latter rejected in the March 2026 referendum. The failure of this "minimalist" approach applied to high-impact institutional reforms reopens the debate between stability and change, raising the risk of a "petrification" of the Constitution or a growing rift between the formal text and material reality.
Il saggio esamina la parabola trentennale dei tentativi di revisione costituzionale in Italia, analizzando la transizione dai grandi progetti di riforma "organica" e onnicomprensiva agli interventi "selettivi" o "puntuali". L'autore evidenzia come le riforme organiche della seconda parte della Carta (dalle Commissioni bicamerali alle riforme Berlusconi e Renzi-Boschi) abbiano costantemente fallito, a causa della forte polarizzazione partitica che ha trasformato i relativi referendum costituzionali in plebisciti politici sui governi proponenti. Al contrario, le riforme puntuali (quali l'equilibrio di bilancio, la riduzione del numero dei parlamentari e l'introduzione dei principi ambientali, insulari e sportivi) hanno riscontrato maggior successo poiché facilmente intellegibili dal corpo elettorale, sebbene abbiano talvolta prodotto misure meramente simboliche o distorsive. Infine, l'opera si sofferma sulle dinamiche più recenti, come i progetti strutturali sul premierato e sulla separazione delle carriere dei magistrati, quest'ultima bocciata nel referendum del marzo 2026. Il fallimento di questo approccio "minimalista" applicato a riforme di forte impatto istituzionale riapre il dibattito tra stabilità e mutamento, sollevando il rischio di una "pietrificazione" della Costituzione o di uno scostamento tra il testo formale e la realtà materiale
Un cantiere aperto: tentativi, fallimenti e riforme in trent'anni di revisione costituzionale / Savastano, Federico Maria. - (2026), pp. 39-58. - CULTURA.
Un cantiere aperto: tentativi, fallimenti e riforme in trent'anni di revisione costituzionale
SAVASTANO, Federico Maria
2026
Abstract
This essay examines the thirty-year trajectory of constitutional revision attempts in Italy, analyzing the transition from large-scale, comprehensive "organic" reform projects to "selective" or "targeted" interventions. The author highlights how organic reforms of the second part of the Basic Law (ranging from bicameral committees to the Berlusconi and Renzi-Boschi reforms) have consistently failed due to intense partisan polarization, which transformed the constitutional referendums into political plebiscites on the proposing governments. Conversely, targeted reforms (such as the balanced budget requirement, the reduction in the number of MPs, and the introduction of environmental, insular, and sporting principles) achieved greater success because they were easily understood by the electorate, though they occasionally resulted in purely symbolic or distortive measures. Ultimately, the text focuses on recent dynamics, including structural proposals on the direct election of the Prime Minister (premierato) and the separation of judicial careers, the latter rejected in the March 2026 referendum. The failure of this "minimalist" approach applied to high-impact institutional reforms reopens the debate between stability and change, raising the risk of a "petrification" of the Constitution or a growing rift between the formal text and material reality.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


