A simple permit to use a room in the Cagliari Courthouse has escalated into a dispute pitting lawyers and magistrates against each other. At the center of the dispute is the Aula Magna, granted to the Committee for the No vote in the referendum on Justice Reform: a decision that immediately sparked controversy.
Lawyers were the first to take a stand. The Cagliari Bar Council requested the revocation of the permit , deeming it inappropriate for a venue that symbolizes judicial neutrality to host an initiative tied to a political debate and referendum. This sentiment was shared and echoed by the Regional Union of Bar Associations of Sardinia, which advocated the need to carefully separate political debate from the institutional spaces of justice. The Union also criticized several reactions that followed the request for revocation, deeming them offensive and disrespectful toward the legal profession.
The National Association of Magistrates' Association responded promptly. The Sardinian branch of the National Magistrates' Association, which promoted the No Committee, expressed "bitterness" over the Order's initiative. The magistrates emphasized that the committee is nonpartisan, open to civil society, and that the judiciary's freedom of expression must be respected even within the courts. Hence, they urged the public to avoid a confrontation that, at an already tense time nationwide, risks fueling a climate of confrontation deemed "dangerous and senseless."
The Cagliari Criminal Bar Association also intervened, expressing its full solidarity with the Order's president, Matteo Pinna, following a letter from the president of the Cagliari Court deemed too harsh in tone.
Criminal lawyers dispute the idea that the National Association of Magistrates and the referendum committee should be considered on the same level and reiterate that the Aula Magna should not host activities that might suggest the court's political involvement. According to the Criminal Chamber, jurisdictional spaces should remain neutral, protected from any potential bias. However, despite their differing positions, both lawyers and magistrates express hope for a more peaceful discussion.
