Nello Rossi: “The reform of justice? Velvet gloves with white collars in a Wild West logic”

«Velvet gloves for white-collar workers in a Wild West logic», says Nello Rossi, former magistrate, leading exponent of the Democratic Magistrates, now director of the magazine Questione Giustizia.

How do you evaluate the proposal on abuse of office?

«The path of total repeal was chosen, including the obligation to abstain in the presence of one’s own interest or that of a close relative. A puzzling solution. In the implementation of the Pnrr the new procurement code allows direct assignments of up to 150 thousand euros, the conflict of interest is rendered criminally irrelevant ».

With what effects?

«An unscrupulous public administrator will be able to do what he wants immune from criminal consequences in a Wild West logic. Contracts given directly to close relatives, friends or political clients. Even with shameless favoritism ».

Don’t you think it will reduce the “fear of the signature”?

“I observe a singular short circuit. On the one hand, administrative controls are reduced, arguing that if there are crimes, the criminal magistrate will intervene. On the other hand, crimes are eliminated and rewritten, saying that administrative controls will suffice. A game of three cards: in reality they are both weakened».

And the reform of the trade in influence?

«Honestly, many magistrates complained about the wording. The problem is whether the government really wants to improve it. It eliminates conduct based on the boast of a privileged relationship with the political or administrative decision-maker and leaves alive only that based on an actually existing relationship, to be ascertained in criminal proceedings. But sometimes self-styled fixers are no less dangerous and do no less damage than the “professional” ones».

Is the hold of wiretaps a gag?

«The area of ​​bans is increasing, but no progress is being made to make them effective. I don’t think it’s the right way to avoid abuses, which have almost disappeared in recent years. And publication in the investigation phase is limited to wiretaps that have the judge’s imprinting».

Is it a guarantee measure?

«A heavy limitation for the right to information. A part of reality is amputated. And the judge becomes the sole arbiter of the publication of elements of the investigation. There may be interesting if not decisive interceptions, which the judge does not report in the provisions. Is it right to ban their publication, even if they are no longer secret? What if they contain proof of the suspect’s innocence or useful information for the majority of citizens? Even a “Dreyfus-like” innocentist campaign would be nipped in the bud.

And the rules on the protection of non-suspected third parties in the transcription of wiretaps?

«This protection will end up being valid only for trials with excellent suspects. In those against drug dealers, terrorists and street criminals, no one will actually ask the question”.

Nordio strongly supported the interrogation before arrest, to protect the suspect.

«The American model, seen on TV with the arrest of Trump. But for the mafia, terrorism, blood crimes, weapons and violence, as well as in cases of escape danger and evidence pollution, the old surprise precautionary measure remains in place. The new rules will mainly apply to white-collar workers. White gloves just for them.’

The ANM criticizes the limits to the prosecutors’ appeal against acquittal sentences.

«On this point I have always angered many of my colleagues. I am in favor of the unappealability of acquittals, for an obvious logical and juridical reason. If the first judge has acquitted the defendant nourishing at least a reasonable doubt about his guilt, it is not sufficient that the judge of appeal has a contrary opinion. One more thing is needed: to demonstrate that the first instance sentence is unreasonable or the result of serious violations of the law. To do this, the prosecutor should only be able to appeal to the Cassation”.

What about the 2006 Consulta ruling, which canceled the law wanted by Berlusconi?

“The climate has changed. There has been an evolution in doctrine and jurisprudence. In all likelihood today the Consulta would not cancel the unappealability”.

Is this bill a tribute to Berlusconi?

“The connection is politically and juridically crude. Let’s leave the freebies alone and look at the substance. This bill is a further piece of a right-wing government’s penal policy, until now mainly managed by the Ministry of the Interior, which aims to create a double track: a tough fist for violent and street crime; special treatment for economic and administrative crimes, those of “gentlemen””.

There is talk of “judicial persecution”. Renzi has accused the Democratic Magistrates of having concocted it.

“Persecution has been a political leitmotiv for thirty years. And everyone is free to have his opinion about it. On the other hand, it is false and defamatory to state that the disparate judicial initiatives of different offices are the unitary plot of a conspiracy. And that it was managed by the Democratic Judiciary. As everyone knows, very many of the magistrates, and among them the most prominent, who promoted those investigations did not belong to Md».

Is the “red robes” theme back in fashion?

«It is waved cynically like a bogeyman, a red flag to stir up the bull of right-wing public opinion. It will be necessary to put an end to this unworthy vulgate. And says a prosecutor of Md who years ago dutifully requested and obtained the filing of a complaint for market manipulation against Berlusconi in the Alitalia case.