“Justice reform, I’m going ahead. Evaders have never been legitimized»- Corriere.it

Carlo Nordio, from a former magistrate who became Minister of Justice seems to have opened a new season of conflict with his former colleagues.

“I think and hope not. I have been expressing and writing about my intentions for 25 years, and they derive precisely from the desire to have a more efficient justice and from the great respect for the judiciary, of which I still feel I am a part. After all, Amantium irae, amoris integratio est: the quarrels of lovers are an integration of love».

But you accused the magistrates of interference. Do you really think that they shouldn’t comment on laws, like politicians on sentences?

«There is a way and a way to disagree with the bills and the tenor of the sentences. In the case of this reform, very strong terms were used even before the text was known, just as at other times some politicians have commented on certain sentences as subversive. I would like everyone to tone down».

His declarations on the taxman, however, seem to go in another direction; aren’t you afraid that they might encourage those who don’t pay or don’t want to pay taxes anymore?

«I have read that the secretary of the Pd Elly Schlein maintains that she legitimates tax evaders, but she has been deceived by some newspapers which have deliberately altered the things I said to Luiss. Since one of the few qualities that I recognize is that of being clear, I won’t say that I was misrepresented: they really altered my words, pronounced among other things before the Milan prosecutor, and various generals of the Guardia di Finanza. The speech, although made off the cuff, is recorded: I say that our tax system has gone so mad that even the most honest businessman who pays all taxes is always exposed to investigations. It is this system that favors tax evaders, not those like me who denounce it. Tax evasion is fought with regulatory simplification and a more certain and loyal relationship between the State and the taxpayer. And this is the meaning of the reform illustrated by Deputy Minister Leo”.

You have accused the Mani Pulite pool of having triggered the conflict with politics with the guarantee notice to Berlusconi “notified in the press” in 1994. Have you forgotten the ad personam laws?

«It’s one thing to start, another to feed. Berlusconi certainly wasted time and opportunity with ad personam laws, useless among other things, which I myself repeatedly criticized in my editorials of the time. But the avalanche of proceedings to which he was subjected, and an invitation to appear notified in the press during an international conference, triggered a fatal short circuit. The nemesis then wanted him to be the victim of a retroactive interpretation, contra personam, of the Severino law ».

Going back to your reform, why hasn’t one of the criticisms of the repeal of the abuse of office by almost all the intervening magistrates been accepted?

«For the reasons explained by other authoritative jurists, from Sabino Cassese to Luciano Violante. Because all the mayors and councilors are oppressed by it, without having done anything wrong; because the citizen is the final victim of this defensive administration which does not give answers quickly; and because if out of 5,000 trials only 9 convictions arrive, among other things for related crimes, it means that the law, after twenty years of changes, is a failure”.

According to the prosecutor Raffaele Cantone, acts of corruption are often discovered precisely through investigations into abuse of office.

«Cantone is a very good magistrate and enjoys my highest esteem. But it represents Xenophanes’ saying well, that if a triangle could speak it would describe God made in a triangle: that is, everyone sees things under the more or less distorting lens of their own functions. And in fact the administrators see it in the opposite way. Like the separation of careers: for many magistrates it is a catastrophe, for lawyers a panacea. The legislator must have a broader perspective and pursue the collective interest”.

To avoid the «fear of the signature» on the part of the administrators, shouldn’t politics consider a guarantee notice (or even a conviction in the first degree) an impediment to continuing the work, rather than abolishing the crime?

“I wish it were possible, but it’s a losing battle. In fact we will intervene, later, with a reform of the code of penal procedure, also on guarantee information, in the sense you wished».

Aren’t you afraid of censures from the European Union on the abolition of this crime and for the further restriction of trafficking in influence?

“No. We convincingly explained to European Commissioner Didier Reynders the overall arsenal of our punishable crimes, which leave no gaps in protection. Nonetheless, as announced by Senator Giulia Bongiorno, the entire complex of crimes against the public administration needs to be revisited. We have already done this with the trafficking of influences, better adapting the case to the principles of peremptory nature, specificity and clarity. It is currently so evanescent as to be unenforceable. Our Legislative Office has done painstaking work, evaluating the pros and cons of each innovation, according to a certain political orientation which, as always, is the result of evaluations between the various components. In the end, the text obtained absolute unanimity, and there was even a small round of applause at the Council of Ministers».

Why is a panel of three judges needed to order an arrest in prison? Wasn’t the collegial review court enough?

«Because the review court, which very often cancels pre-trial detention orders, intervenes when the damage has already been done. Ten days in prison for anyone who shouldn’t have been incarcerated is atrocious suffering. Better safe than sorry.”

The interrogation before the arrest has numerous exceptions: has the mountain given birth to a mouse?

«It seems to us a principle of civilization and rationality. Of course, the entire system of preventive detention will have to be remodulated, but this will happen when we create a liberal code like the one that Giuliano Vassalli, a highly decorated hero of the Resistance and a great jurist, had wanted, and which instead was distorted from the outset”.

Why can only the wiretaps reported in a judge’s order be published?

«Because article 15 of the Constitution is mandatory on the secrecy of communications, which exceptionally can be limited by a reasoned provision of the judge. What is left out is gossip, and it is an outrage against the Constitution itself. It amazes me that so many who call her the most beautiful in the world forget this principle. Secrecy is the other side of freedom, voting is secret precisely because it must be free».

But if other documents that are no longer secret contain elements of public interest, why can’t they be disclosed?

«Precisely because article 15 of the Constitution says so. And then this concept of public interest is so vague that it can also include the most intimate spheres of individuals. The same applies to certain documents which are included in the trial file, such as the victim’s medical records or child pornography photographs. Do we want to publish those too?».

The Political Diary newsletter

If you want to stay updated on political news, subscribe to the newsletter “Political Diary”. It is dedicated to Corriere della Sera subscribers and arrives twice a week at 12. Just click here.