(To Carlo Nordio) It may seem paradoxical that an Italian military ship is kept under control by the carabinieri to avoid undesirable landings. In reality it is only an apparent paradox, because the reasons of hygiene, or public order, also apply to the armed forces. It is hardly necessary to remember that the decisions, according to the various moments and the various alarms, belong to the competent ministers and in particular to that of the Interior.
However, if we pass from the apparent paradoxes to the real ones, we are spoiled for choice. We can, for the sake of brevity, list the main ones. First of all, relations with the judiciary. The Public Prosecutor of Agrigento, equipped with a protective mask and galoshes, boarded the "Diciotti" among the television targets.
To us, old-fashioned magistrates, the gesture recalls that of a Milan prosecutor who forty years ago, during an anti-theft operation, exhibited a pistol at his waist, causing panic among the insiders given that for entering the judiciary does not require the shooting exam and often, among the inexperienced, the weapon shoots alone. Now, the initiative of the Prosecutor of Agrigento is certainly commendable, however we allow ourselves to remind him, again by virtue of our seniority, that the boundaries between diligent diligence and reckless exhibitionism are subtle and uncertain.
Also because the magistrate did not limit himself to this operation which, according to the code, he could very well have delegated to the judicial police, but also hypothesized an investigation for illegal arrest and even for kidnapping. A bold thesis for both crimes: the first, in fact, is triggered when there is an arrest, and here it appears that no one has been arrested; the second occurs when the deprivation of personal liberty is illegitimate, otherwise judges who deprive the defendants of liberty by sending them to jail would also end up under investigation. And in this case it is very difficult to define a purely political decision as illegitimate, at the discretion of the minister.
Notwithstanding the fact that, precisely for this reason, if there was a crime, the investigations would be the responsibility of the relevant court pursuant to Article 96 of the Constitution. Finally, it may raise concerns that, in the face of serious and repeated violations of the laws in force on immigration, instead of identifying and prosecuting smugglers and traffickers, the indictment of a minister is hypothesized for an attitude, which can it is part of an agreement approved by the sovereign parliament.
Once again, we are faced with the postman biting the dog. Then there was the intervention of the Speaker of the House. A purely political intervention, which improperly overlaps the prerogatives of the minister, who assumes political responsibility for it. Fico justified himself by invoking freedom of speech and humanitarian principles. Sara.
for the rest of the editorial go to Il Gazzettino of the Veneto
source The Gazzettino of the Veneto