Gregoretti, in Catania the latest example of the political change suffered by the judiciary – Libero Quotidiano

While the focus remains on the Catania court where the Gup reserves the decision whether or not to send the former owner of the Interior to trial, after having heard the Prime Minister, Minister Lamorgese, Luigi Di Maio and Danilo Toninelli, It would be worthwhile to open a reflection, beyond the Salvini issue, on the mother of all the anomalies of our political-institutional system, or on the increasingly altered relations – within the limits of constitutional legitimacy – between sovereignty – understood as the space in which political decision and jurisdiction are expressed.

In this sense, the earthquake that is affecting the judicial world, with the Palamara case, could be the right opportunity to take advantage of to attack the motives that underlie a battle that has poisoned the public sphere of our country for decades. Unfortunately, judging by the behavior of part of the political class (Pd and pentastellati) in the Salvini-Gregoretti case, we fear that a critical reconsideration of the state of relations between the two delicate state powers will be postponed again. We prefer to continue ignoring what the historian Luciano Cafagna prophetically, already in the fiery months of Tangentopoli, in ’92 -’93, points out as a “great avalanche destined to overwhelm all national political activity, progressively removing it from the spirit and procedures of a liberal democracy “.

It will be difficult for those preparing to write the Italian history of the last decades avoid dealing with a particular coincidence in the first chapter: the Italian judiciary is affected by a true genetic mutation when the generation formed in fury arrives at its ranks. of 68 and, therefore, ideologically convinced of the need to expand, for political purposes, the perimeter of judicial action. So that from being an official in charge of applying the laws, the figure of the magistrate becomes a “guardian of ethics and legality.” It goes without saying that such a change did not come about solely due to a heavy invasion of the field by new and young magistrates. The fundamental reason for what happened lies in the fragility of the political class, which due to opportunism or simple cowardice, was unable to defend its sovereignty and return the legitimate scepter of command to the “Prince”.

Furthermore, as sociologists dealing with complex organizations well know, it is not uncommon for a bureaucratic body – the judiciary – to be tempted to invade the field of others when it perceives the weakness of other subjects or public notices. to be able to count on the complicity of a part of them. And it is precisely what is at the base of the Italian anomaly. Getting out of it is a company that requires great political courage, a quality that a large part of our political class shows they do not possess. In fact, a part of it, with experience in justice, continues to contribute today with blatant opportunism – the Salvini case is an example – to strengthen what scholars call the “process of politicization of judicial activity.”

In such a context, it is more than legitimate to raise the suspicion that a cornerstone of the liberal democratic state, that is, the egalitarian application of the law without reference to the political part, is destined in Italy to function alternatively. The hope, to put it metaphorically, is that there may still be a “judge in Berlin.”