Prime Minister: “Reform not against robes”. On the La Russa case: “I would not have intervened”
“I’ve read a lot of pretty curious stuff, but from my point of view there is no conflict with the judiciary. There is definitely not from me. Anyone who, let’s say so, trusts in the return of the clash between politics and the judiciary, which we have seen in other eras, I fear that he will be disappointed “. So the Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni in a press conference at the end of the NATO summit in Vilnius.
“In these hours, some statements by the National Association of Magistrates have surprised me”, it is surprising that “in some of these statements these objectives written in our program have been linked” on the reform of the justice system as “a clash between the government and the judiciary. Almost as if these positions of ours, which are precisely positions that we have always pursued, had a sort of punitive intent on the part of the government towards the judiciary. I honestly do not understand how to strengthen the impartiality of the judge – which is the reason that moves for example, the issue of separation of careers – it’s a way to attack the judiciary: I don’t agree”, said Meloni.
“For us, for me, a greater efficiency of the judiciary is a way to guarantee efficiency – he goes on – to defend the principle of impartiality. What is the connection? That is, what is the connection of a controversy that can arise on a fact specific and say ‘then the separation of careers is a punitive fact’. In short, I believe that there is a risk of slipping into a debate that does not help. Because I do not think that what the government has in its program in terms of reform should be put together of justice and the choices that the magistrates make, so I advise prudence. But in any case, they are two completely different matters. We need to distinguish and there is no willingness on the part of the government to open a conflict”.
“We intend to keep the commitments we have made with the Italiansyes, and we do not intend to do it against the magistrates, on the contrary we hope to be able to do it with the contribution of the magistrates, because I am convinced that the vast majority of magistrates in Italy are aware of the fact that there are corrective measures to be carried out and want to collaborate , lend a hand, offer one’s point of view, offer one’s proposals, as always happens in normal nations. I think this is the right way to proceed, not that, as it seems from some somewhat apocalyptic statements of some members of the Association”, to represent themselves “as a sort of guardians of good against evil, because it doesn’t seem to me in short that this is the world we want to live in, right? The world we want to live in is a world in which everyone has their own responsibilities, assumes them, tries to collaborate for the overall good of the nation, which is what I try to do every day”.
Melons he “identifies” with the note attributed to Palazzo Chigi sources with which, last week, the government intervened in the Delmastro and Santanché cases, asking if the judiciary hadn’t gone down in the electoral campaign for the European elections. “Oh look, the subject of Chigi’s note cannot be referred to the La Russa subject in any way – he specified – but it is referable to the two things I said here”, he says, recalling the Delmastro and Santanché cases.
“The coercive charge against Undersecretary Delmastro – he reiterated – in my opinion is objectively something that I look at with astonishment, I repeat, when faced with a request for dismissal from a public prosecutor”. It is “legally permissible but it is a choice, so I consider it as a choice” which “almost never happens. When it happens against an undersecretary for an act which in any case also concerns the exercise of his mandate, I I assume awareness and that is exactly what I said regarding the guarantee notice against Minister Santanchè, because in a rule of law whoever is under investigation does not find out before the newspapers that they are, and the fact that it has already happened in the past does not makes it normal. The point is that we have now come to consider normal” events “that shouldn’t exist in a state of law. I don’t go into the merits of individual cases, I can at least go more into the merits of Del Mastro’s because I know the story is better”, however “I start from the assumption that things have to work according to certain rules, because if those rules are skipped, one has to ask why”.
The Russian case
“As a mother, I understand very well the suffering of President Ignazio La Russa” for the case involving his son Leonardo Apache, “even if I would not have intervened on the merits of the matter. I tend to sympathize, by nature, with a girl who decides to report” having suffered sexual violence. “Then we will have to go into the merits” and “I hope that politics will stay out of it”, said Meloni. “I don’t ask myself the problem of timing – he continued – what I can do is remember that as a government we approved the bill on violence against women a few weeks ago”, a measure that “was appreciated as an important step forward of the victims. So, it’s our work that speaks for us.” “I hope I have clarified my point of view on this matter, to avoid carrying forward above all alleged clashes, which from my point of view do not exist. I simply try to do my job in the best possible way: and for me the best of modi is to carry out a program that the Italians have asked us to carry out,” he added.
“A notice of guarantee does not lead to the resignation of a minister, even more so in these ways”, said the prime minister. “Minister Santanchè’s issue is not, on the other hand, a political issue, in the sense that it is an extra-political issue which concerns his activity, his role not as a minister – which, moreover, in my opinion, he is carrying out very well – but one a very complex question that must be seen on the merits. When the merits are known as a whole” the sums will be drawn, “but I also believe that the merits belong to the courtrooms not to the television broadcasts”, he underlined.
For Meloni, “the anomaly in the affair of Minister Santanchè lies in the fact that the minister is not notified of the investigation, but the same investigation is notified by a newspaper on the day when Minister Santanchè goes to report to the Chamber. I don’t think that this is normal. I ask you if you think it is normal, because if it were normal we will have a real problem in terms of the rule of law. This is the question I asked, it is not about the merits: the merits will be seen, yes he will evaluate it when it is known in its complexity. But in terms of procedure, something does not work and do you know what the problem is? – asked the premier to the journalist who asked him the question – That when something does not work in terms of procedure, it becomes even more difficult serenely evaluate the merits. When the question becomes political, because it is found in a newspaper that we say is owned by an entrepreneur who, in my opinion, is not exactly in a position to give an moral on debts, well, something does not work and therefore I point out a problem of procedure, okay?”
“The question of Undersecretary Delmastro is a question that objectively struck me a lot. It is certainly a political question. Del Mastro is Undersecretary of Justice, therefore it concerns a member of the government in the exercise of his mandate. A compulsory indictment is ordered against him against the opinion of the public prosecutor, among other things of a prosecutor not exactly used to, let’s say, making discounts, the way I see it. Meanwhile, I asked how many cases of compulsory indictment there were in our legal system, I was told statistically irrelevant,” the premier said.
“The way I see it – he continued – in a trial of parties, the impartiality of the judge means that the judge should not replace the prosecutor by requiring him to formulate the charge when he does not intend to prosecute. I say this because I believe that these are the meaning of the statements of the Ministry of Justice on the subject in question”. To those who ask her if, in the future, she intends to intervene on the subject of compulsory indictment, “I will talk about it with Nordio – she replied – who knows much more than me”.