Justice reform is already at risk of deadlock

Justice reform is already at risk of deadlock

Carlo Nordio seems determined to proceed with the reform of justice, following the government’s program to the letter, even though he has decided to advance gradually, presenting a package of rules that is just the beginning of a process that will have a deeper and much greater impact on our court system. In effect, the text is limited to annulling the crime of abuse of power, tightening the links in interceptions, curbing the application of precautionary measures and intervening in the controversial matter of influence peddling. But this coy guarantor approach was enough to unleash all hell, so much so that the prime minister was forced to ensure the government was ready to amend the bill in Parliament. We can, therefore, already speak of a false start, because the Justice Minister’s evident non-detriment was added to the complaints of a part of the majority that openly distanced themselves from the Justice Minister, who ended up being accused of his statements as a jurist. opposition and Anm more than as a minister.

The Demastro and Santanchè cases, as well as the case involving La Russa’s son, added fuel to the fire, and in this climate an entirely ideological clash is announced in Parliament, in line with the worst traditions of past legislatures. It is necessary to say clearly: this reform should be defended by the entire center-right, to maintain a solemn commitment assumed with the voters, but the feeling is that Nordio has experienced it almost as a foreign body, so much so that he already seems reduced politically to a San Sebastian pierced with spears (a former prosecutor even called him incompetent) and, therefore, a lame duck. At this rate, however, the centre-right runs the risk of yet another failure of justice and, unfortunately, all the signs are there: the furtive intervention of the Quirinale, which first summoned the heads of the judiciary and then the prime minister, was intended to silence controversy, but his moral persuasion also served to rewrite the reform, with the denunciation of some critical issues that clash with international treaties of constitutional relevance, namely on the abolition of abuse of power and influence peddling. However, they are two crimes that have been discussed for years because of their imprecision that leaves the field free for judicial incursions, and it is no coincidence that mayors of all political parties are in favor of their cancellation.

This very strong anti-reformist current is wrapped in good and shareable intentions: to place the confrontation of justice within the limits of institutional correctness; to eliminate the conflicts that poison the relations between the powers of the State so as not to catapult Italy back into a season of permanent conflict with the clothes like in Berlusconi’s time; avoid new conflicts with Europe. Yes, but if the EU must be followed when it argues that abolishing the abuse of power favors corruption, it must be heard in the same way on external competition in mafia associations: the European Court of Human Rights, intervening in the Contrada case, in fact established that “the crime was not sufficiently clear or predictable”, thus reaffirming that the law must always be binding. Instead, a technical-legal reflection by Nordio on the evanescence of this crime was enough to give rise to anti-mafia professionals. And the reference to the Commission for the reform of the penal code, made up of magistrates, academics and lawyers, unanimous in the conclusion that the external competition should be typified with an ad hoc rule, to overcome the current uncertainty of application, was not taken advantage of. Let’s hope we are wrong, therefore, but the air we breathe is all behind: emblematic in this sense is the fact that Forza Italia prohibits comments and polemics against the Public Ministry of Florence for the investigation of the 1993 mafia massacres. justicialista gained strength again, dusting off the legend according to which the reform was copied from Licio Gelli, and denouncing the “political lies of the judiciary”. In short: there is no trace of Mattarella’s warning after the Palamara scandal (there is a risk – he said – of “severely negative consequences for the prestige and authority of the entire judicial order”). The fault is always and only with politics. That keeps getting hurt.

Source: IL Tempo