Referendum 8-9 June: the game is played on participation, rather than on content
On June 8 and 9, Italians are called to vote in a referendum on five abrogative questions on the issues of work and citizenship . But the real test will not be the content of the ballots, but the turnout : only if more than 50% of those entitled to vote participate - a quorum rarely reached - will the referendums be effective. A test that risks turning into a victory for organized non-voting.
The quorum issueAccording to Article 75 of the Constitution, a referendum is not valid if it does not reach a quorum of 50% + 1 of voters. This means that the vote often lapses, even if the majority of voters are in favor. There have been nine referendums that have reached a quorum. The last time it happened was in 2011, when the four questions on public water, nuclear power and legitimate impediment achieved a turnout of 54.8% (and a percentage of votes in favor of over 95%). The last time a referendum was held, however, the quorum was not even reached: in 2022, for the five questions on justice, only 20% of voters went to the polls.
According to Ipsos projections, between 32% and 38% of Italian citizens could go to the polls for this vote, or between 18 and 22 million voters. Numbers not high enough to reach the quorum.
The referendum institution, designed to give citizens a direct voice on issues of national importance, is increasingly turning into a tactical tool . Instead of stimulating an open and transparent public debate, those opposed to referendum questions often choose the path of strategic abstention: they do not invite people to vote "No", but not to vote at all. This is a dynamic that empties democratic participation of meaning and betrays the original spirit of the referendum.
The majority of those who go to the polls, in fact, tend to express themselves in favor of the questions, but if the quorum of 50% +1 of those entitled to vote is not reached, the result has no value. The paradox is evident: a consultation in which the "Yes" vote clearly wins can still be annulled due to disinterest or, worse, political calculation. A frustrating mechanism for those who believe in participation as a form of active citizenship - as well as an enormous waste of public resources, considering the organizational costs of each referendum consultation.
In many European countries, such as Switzerland and the United Kingdom, there is no quorum. In these contexts, the vote of those who participate is fully recognized, and abstention is interpreted as a free choice, not as a weapon of sabotage. This approach makes voters responsible: those who vote, decide. Those who abstain, give up. A simple principle that strengthens democratic logic.
Youth abstentionism: double exclusionAccording to the data, young people in Italy participate less in electoral life. Turnout rates among those under 35 are consistently lower than those of older generations. Added to this is a further imbalance : young people are also demographically less numerous among those entitled to vote, due to the progressive aging of the population. The result is a democratic short circuit: those who have less of a voice also vote less. And so the younger generations risk seeing issues that concern them closely, such as precarious work, civil rights, citizenship, and ecological transition, systematically ignored – or at least put on the back burner.
This dynamic risks producing a perverse effect : the more young people feel marginalized, the more they become disaffected from participation. And the more they become disaffected, the less tools they have to influence the choices that will affect their lives in the decades to come. The risk is that of an unbalanced democracy, in which those who hold the greatest weight at the ballot box are the generations that have already benefited from the protections of the past, while future generations are left with the task of accepting the decisions of others without having had the opportunity to influence them.
In the case of the referendum, this imbalance weighs even more. Not voting means not only giving up one's right, but also hindering those who want to express themselves. For young people, it means abandoning one of the most direct and accessible tools to assert new demands in a politics that is often too oriented towards conservatism.
Luce
