Ingroia: “The State absolves itself on the negotiation process”

“If I had to define this sentence, I would like to make a semi-literary quotation ‘Chronicle of an announced sentence'”

“If I had to define this sentence, I would like to make a semi-literary quotation ‘Chronicle of an announced sentence’. Because it had been announced and foretold that the Italian state intended to absolve itself. There had already been an anticipation in the appeal sentence of the negotiation process of Palermo, in which it was recognized that the negotiation had taken place and that there had been a threat against the state, but that only the mafiosi were answerable and not the men of the state who had acted as a vehicle. , according to the second level judges, it does not constitute a crime. Now, in the Cassation, there has been a further leap forward in the self-acquittal of the Italian State. And that is, now the men of the State are acquitted for not having committed the crime”. Speaking to Adnkronos is the former assistant prosecutor of Palermo Antonio Ingroia, who left the judiciary and is now a criminal lawyer. It was he who represented the prosecution in the first instance trial, at least until he left the prosecutor’s office to move to South America, Guatemala, where he was a member of the Commission for Impunity.

“So – he explains after hearing the news of the acquittal for generals and politicians – the fact exists. There was also the threat that constitutes the premise of the negotiation, a threat which, however, now the judges of Cassation say is not a threat accomplished, but a threat attempted. Thus it remains without criminal consequences for anyone. Even the mafiosi for whom the crime is declared time-barred. It seems to me a contradictory sentence, because for better or worse the appeal sentence had its own logic, albeit questionable “.

For Ingroia “there was a threat, there was negotiation and the mafiosi responded to this, because the men of the state had done it “for a good purpose”, an approach we do not share but with a logic”. “We will read the reasons to understand the logic of the judges of the Supreme Court – adds the former magistrate to Adnkronos – but if the fact exists, so much so that Mori and De Donno are acquitted for not having committed the crime, this fact What channels did it go through?”

“What are the channels through which the crime was committed? This is not very clear. We will read the reasons for the sentence – continues Antonio Ingroia – It is possible that we want to question the ‘papello’. So the declarations of the collaborators on the ‘papello’. It is not very clear. What is certain is that the outcome of this procedural affair is not encouraging for the citizens. This sentence has established that an attempt was made to threaten the State, that there was a negotiation but at the end in the end, no one is responsible for it, neither the men of the state nor the mafia. In short, it is not a good signal that the state sends to the citizens”.