In a recent gathering at the Palace of Justice in Milan, three esteemed legal scholars and practitioners, Ennio Amodio, Gaetano Pecorella, and Oreste Dominioni, convened to articulate their arguments in favor of the referendum concerning the separation of judicial careers. Drawing on their extensive experience, which includes the tumultuous period of Mani Pulite, they emphasize the historical intertwining of judges and public prosecutors that has shaped Italy's judicial landscape. Their insights highlight the necessity of reform in a system where the conventional boundaries between these roles have often become blurred.

The speakers recount their personal observations from a critical era when judicial integrity was frequently called into question, citing instances like Judge Antonio Di Pietro's controversial practices. They argue that the close relationship between judges and prosecutors has not only complicated judicial proceedings but has also prompted public distrust in the legal system. As they delve into the implications of their proposed reforms, it is clear that they perceive the separation of careers as a necessary step towards restoring the public's faith in the judiciary, which they argue has a moral obligation to evolve and adapt.

However, the dialogue has been met with a hostile reception from opponents of the reform. The trio notes the aggressive backlash and derogatory remarks aimed at proponents of the separation, underscoring a growing divisiveness in public discourse. Despite this, they remain resolute in their defense of reform, portraying it as a step towards a more civilized and accountable judicial process, rather than just a technical adjustment to the existing legal framework.