[ad_1]
The crack begins to widen. as well defense of the state, which represents the government, opens the possibility of granting the conditional freedom those sentenced to life imprisonment who have not cooperated with justice. And he does so by practically changing his position during the public hearing before the Constitutional Court: he has not asked for further consideration. inadmissible the request of the Supreme Court, that is, to declare unconstitutional the norm that prohibits the convicted until the end of the sentence never for acts of mafia me terrorism to access parole if they do not collaborate with the judiciary. But he invited the Council to issue a sentence that is called in jargon interpretative of rejection: the court does not declare the rule on life imprisonment unconstitutional, but recognizes the supervising judge the power to evaluate at your discretion on a case-by-case basis. It means that if the judge wants, he can also grant probation to the staunch bosses, those who keep me secrets of the massacres, provided they have served 26 years in prison. And without ever showing any intention of collaborating with justice. A change of position, that of the defense of the State, which was probably also influenced by Change of line of the government on the subject.
Di Matteo: “They dismantle the system to fight the mafia” – The verdict is expected in the Consultation, scheduled for tomorrow, when the judges will be locked in the council room. But the position of the state attorney already provokes the judge’s comment. Antonino Di Matteo, an expert anti-mafia investigator elected today as a toga councilor of the CSM. “Little by little, in the general silence, some of the main objectives of the massacre campaign of 1992-1994 with what disassembly of the general contrast system to mafia organizations conceived and desired by Giovanni falcone“Says the magistrate, questioned by fattoquotidiano.it. An eventual decision of acceptance of the Council, in fact, would open the way in fact to the possible abolition of life imprisonment, which is one of the points included in the paper. Totò Riina, the list of requests to the state to stop the massacres of 1992 and 1994.
Di Matteo: “This is how the objectives of the massacres are achieved” – In the so-called “impervious prisonInvented for massacre bosses, therefore there is a risk of another spike coming. Possible also thanks to the change in the line of the State Prosecutor’s Office, since initially, when it had been presented to the courts for inputs from the previous government, it had requested to testify inadmissibility or the lack of foundation of the constitutionality question raised by the Supreme Court. At today’s public hearing, however, the state attorney Ettore Figliolia advised the court another hypothesis: a interpretive judgment of the Rejection Council, that leaving the rule as it is, without declaring it unconstitutional, “secure discretionary space“To the supervising judge allowing you to get to the bottom of the reasons why the perpetual prisoner does not cooperate. In practice, according to the State’s defense, the judge must evaluate the possibility of granting conditional release to an employer who has never been sentenced to sentence, even if he has no intention of collaborating with justice. “The Control Judge must specifically verify what are the reasons that do not allow carrying out this collaborative conduct in the terms desired by the same judge,” he said. Daughter, asking the judges “a constitutionally oriented interpretation of these norms could allow to pass to an exegesis of the norm.” According to the state attorney, “the Government cannot fail to take into due consideration both the principles evoked by the Constitutional Court not with prayer. 253 of 2019, that of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Viola “, of June 13, 2019. These principles must be properly exploited, weighed, calibrated with respect to the peculiarities of conditional freedom, peculiarities that can be deduced from the reading of article 177 of the Penal Code “. Reference is made to the judgment of the Council that had opened the concession of premium permissions for the irreducible convicts, and for the European Court of Human Rights that he had asked Italy to completely rewrite the rule on life imprisonment. For this reason, the state attorney asked the Council to “opt for all forms of automaticity”, but to ensure “a discretionary space for the decisive magistrate in terms of verifying the reasons for the lack of cooperation, which is a condition for obtaining the benefit.”
The case at the center of the Council hearing – Today’s public hearing was reached after the Supreme Court raised an objection of constitutionality when expressing itself on the case of Salvatore Francesco Pezzino, Mafioso from Partinico, in the province of Palermo. Convicted of mafia and murder, he spent a total of 30 years in prison: in 1999 he obtained semi-release, only to lose it in 2000 when he was again charged with other crimes. Considered a “model prisoner“, In 2018 Pezzino asked the Surveillance Court of L’Aquila to recognize it there conditional freedom, provided for all inmates who have served 26 years in prison, except, in fact, those convicted of gangster crimes who did not cooperate with justice. Prohibition provided by article 4-bis of the penitentiary system, and by decree law 306 of 1992, inspired by Giovanni falcone already with a decree of the previous year, and approved after the Capaci massacre to try to break the breaking of the silence of our thing, at the beginning of the pump season. Two cracks have recently been opened on Article 4-bis: the one represented by the ECHR ruling that rejected it in its entirety – asking Italy to rewrite it – and the 2019 ruling on the granting of permits from the same Council. Two cracks which could now be enlarged.
The lawyer’s request: “Never at the end of the sentence” – “It is not possible to think of throwing away the key for some types of prisoners. To do so would be a surrender of the state, “said the lawyer. Giovanna Beatrice Araniti, Pezzino’s lawyer, the man at the center of the case that led the Supreme Court to raise the question of constitutionality. “He has served more than 30 years in prison,” says the lawyer, but precisely because he does not cooperate, “he is unable to get the surveillance court to evaluate his progress.” Denying this possibility to him and the others sentenced to life imprisonment means “labeling this category of prisoners as not resocializable”, marking them with a “scarlet letter“Not only that: the change of convict, according to the lawyer,” cannot be measured with collaboration with justice, “which does not even guarantee” a sure repentance, “says Araniti, recalling the cases of” noble collaborators of justice “after mentioning the names of their associates, they returned to the crime. According to the lawyer, those sentenced to life imprisonment” ask to have the opportunity to prove that they are different people. “
The public hearing at the Council – The judge presenting the sentence is Nicolò Zanon. Elected a member of the MSC in 2010 on the recommendation of People of liberties, then appointed to the Council by Giorgio Napolitano, Zanon also acted as speaker in the sentence that he defined in October 2019 unconstitutional the part of article 4bis on the prohibition of access to premium permissionsIn other words, the first step in prison benefits, for those sentenced to life imprisonment who have not collaborated with the Judiciary. At that time he also sat in the Consultation Marta Cartabia placeholder image, today guardian of a government that seems to have changed its line on life imprisonment, compared to that of the previous executive. Since she is in via Arenula, the Keeper of the Seals has not spoken on the specific issue, but her position on the function of reinforcing the sentence is widely known. Yesterday it was the undersecretary who spoke Francesco Paolo Sisto, of Go Italy, who said bluntly: “Life imprisonment should not be linked to collaboration with the judicial system.: I cannot cooperate but I have ended relationships or I cooperate and I have not ended them. “Position very different from that of Alfonso Bonafede, the former 5-star goalkeeper who did not agree with the ECHR decision on life imprisonment, explaining that he wanted assert the “reasons for a choice made by the State many years ago, establishing that a person can also access benefits, provided, however, that they collaborate with justice.” In short, the line has changed in governance. And at the same time, the position of the State Attorney’s Office also changed.
Who awaits the sentence? Pending the decision of the Council there are mainly 1,271 detainees in the “end of sentence never“Who would like to have access to parole without collaborating with justice. Among these are certainly the brothers Giuseppe me Filippo Graviano, the chiefs who keep the secrets of the 92 and 93 massacres. Sentenced tolife sentence for the bombs that killed Falcone me Bag, for the bombs that exploded in 1993 in Rome, Milan and Florence, for the murder of the priest Don Puglisi Pine, have been in prison since 1994 but are still relatively young: Philip 59, Joseph 56. “Still have hope“He said recently – referring to the second – Salvatore Baiardo, the man who took over the inaction of the Graviano family in northern Italy in the early nineties. “What hope?” Asked the correspondent for the report’s broadcast. “That life sentence is repealed. That is still their only hope, ”was Baiardo’s reply. It will be a coincidence but one of the first rank gangsters to ask for the concession permit, based on the decision of the 2019 Consultation, was Filippo Graviano. He does not pretend to collaborate with the magistrates, or unravel the mysteries of the bombs, but he claims to have dissociated from Cosa Nostra. A version that can also be used to request parole.
[ad_2]
