Giuseppe Di Lello The constitutional structure of the judicial system is functional to the realization of the principle of equality of all citizens before the law enshrined in Article 3: hence the independence and autonomy of the judiciary from any other power, its self-government, the courts subject only to the law, the mandatory penalty for the prosecutor, the court that the police have directly judicial the dismissal of judges, the equality between the prosecution and defense, and atro yet.
After an initial examination of the proposals of the Minister Alfano, and without being able to take account of subsequent amendments in iterating Member, you can certainly say that much of this reform, going to weaken the independence of the judiciary guarantor of law, undermines the principle of equality so far considered essential and therefore untouchable. If this is at least plausible, confronted with a reform "era" of justice by a majority that has the potential to implement it, but not to avoid a referendum without the shield of a quorum, one might already equipped to fight the referendum.
This would also be a good opportunity to return to discuss with the sovereign people of our justice, the foolish things that you should not do and make sense of things that should be asked, though not in the manner proposed by Berlusconi. We go for short, since the positive fall-negative on the principle of equality are fairly obvious.
One of the cornerstones of this reform is the power to investigate and "take" the news of crime removed from pm and given the exclusive autonomy to the police: from then on will be an executive body to decide what facts / crime pursue or ignore. The prosecutor always direct the judicial police, but only for the crime reports that this will have the goodness to put to it.
pm A weakened so is classified in a separate body from the judges (the separation of careers) to CSM with two equal composition among the laity who are judges appointed by Congress and chosen by lot, perhaps because of the virus by vaccinating participatory democracy . This separation is smuggled as a means to restore equality between the prosecution and defense, crippled by their connection with the judges and public prosecutors, forgetting that such equality is already fully secured by procedural means that the two parties before a court party, and that materializes with the many decisions that disregard, in acquittals or convictions, the requests pm: If the 'related' was the conditioning is not so. There is also to add that with the current legal system the way from prosecutors to those judges and vice versa is difficult and cases of transmigration are very rare. However, a separate body of pm and without the control of a CSM, now powerless, sooner or later will fall under the guidance of the executive: it's like that everywhere in Europe and the rest of the world and, sooner or later, you say do not see why it should not be in Italy.
In other countries, however, executive pay political price for justice guided by politics - he knows something about Sarkozy in recent days challenged by the events of its judges - as we, accustomed by now to read on a personal basis, we will have to resign also a measure of justice to the executive or parliamentary majorities, of any color they siano.Altro nodal point is the regulation by law of mandatory prosecution, with an indication of priority referred to the parliament. This priority does not result in the prosecution of some crimes, and thus a kind of amnesty improper for the same, but for such offenses will be allowed to defer: environmental, building, tax, accounting fraud, bribery simple protection health, wear, safety, etc..? There will be an exponential increase of crimes selected with a blatant slap to the victims, while it would be more correct to make a substantial decriminalization of the Criminal Code, always invoked, and never realized.
The two CSM will then be reduced to the rank of administrative offices, deprived of all power to the protection of judges and disciplinary procedures will be entrusted to a court 'politics' does away entirely with the principle of self-government of the judiciary . irrevocably of the acquittals in the first instance would be meaningful if limited to those with full formula (the accused has committed the offense or did not sussiste): è un tema prospettato con favore da parte di alcuni settori progressisti della magistratura. Esteso a tutti i proscioglimenti, rischia di travolgere anche processi archiviati per i quali, però, le indagini potrebbero essere riaperte con successo: sul punto ci si aspetta un chiarimento.La possibilità che un imputato assolto possa direttamente citare in giudizio il giudice apre una devastante e infinita stagione di conflittualità e intacca alla radice la serenità di chi giudica. Siccome c'è già oggi la responsabilità dei giudici per dolo o colpa grave, si vuole introdurre una sorta di responsabilità oggettiva per una qualsiasi decisione non gradita? Non credo che esista al mondo un ordinamento giudiziario che la preveda.
Reform then has no bearing on the functionality of the system remains slow and cumbersome. Indeed, the legislative proposals of this government just tend to make the longest criminal trial or a prescription to start to close and never end a sentence in a short time. The shortening of the time limitation, the draft law on the process short or the power of the parties to seek any form of evidence in court under penalty of nullity, tend more to the death of the process that the final ruling.
The much-vaunted European ask us shorter procedural times and certainly not more requirements. With this reform, "modernization", distorting the principle of equality, we are subverting a constitutional system which, for better or for worse, gave us the opportunity to be all equal before the law.
0 comments:
Post a Comment