Anm takes on rough position to protect the prestige assertively injured in the face of a press article (Valerio Murgano in PQM, number 62, of 5 April) of analysis of a period of recent Calabrian judicial history that we have not left behind. Ann does not tolerate that you talk about it as a season of intolerable abuse. But if the truth is hidden, violated, mistreated, then someone must assume the courage to restore it. And this is what he was in charge of doing the number of PQM, not only with the “offending” article, but dedicating the entire insert to the need to clarify, numbers in hand, which in spite of the television monologues in which it is stated – wrongly – that the war on the evil conducted in the last 8 years in Calabria has not produced side effects, in reality the rate of innocent victims (and of companies) sacrificed on the altar of the struggle has taken on a record dimensions, as the 2024 report of the Ministry of Justice certifies.
Without truth, there can be no justice. This is why the attempt to rewrite the history, to archive that season by supporting – without contradictory and on national communication channels – that judicial chemotherapy, although aggressive, has maintained the healthy cells of the social and economic tissue, is not acceptable to rewrite ex post. This is not the case. And we know it well, everyone. Numbers in hand, in the last 8 years the freedoms of many innocent citizens have been sucked into the judicial media chopper with devastating effects. And if all this could happen, it is because in spite of a strong, muscle prosecutor’s office, the counterweight of a judge equally strong in the most delicate phase, the precautionary, where personal, family, social, political and economic scars no longer remained were missing. We therefore understand the difficulties of Anm, but the story imposes itself with its evidence, not only numerical, and we must accept the effective, serious and stringent criticism of the very sensitive point of the lack of independence of the judge from the public prosecutor.
Because there can be no change of pace, cultural first of all, if the conception of jurisdiction that inspires the associated judiciary sees the judge participating, co -responsible and guarantor of the implementation of the punitive claim, more than custodian of individual freedoms. The criticism that challenges the paternalistic idea of the role of the judge (the one that killed the accusatory process) and which comes, in this glimpse of contemporary history, from the non -paying lawyers of the criminal chambers (associated to be free and to free themselves from the most welcome to the powerful, condition of a lawyer from an anteroom firmly kept to the bridle), is bad. Because it does not escape any careful observer of the internal structure of the judiciary that the strict interdependence and interchangeability, in the common belonging to the identical apparatus, of the judge and the public actor, is a condition for the conservation of the enormous accumulated power by breaking the banks of the subjection to the law.
The observations on the merciless numbers produced by cultural and functional collateral are disruptivedeadly effectiveness compared to the holding of the public speech fueled by the associated judiciary in the ongoing political battle. And the associated judiciary is right to worry about it. Because Anm of Catanzaro, who believes he can isolate critical positions such as out of tune voices, seeks space in the public debate in a region toysillated by crime but at the same time mortified by the drastic remedies that have further weakened and disintegrated the social and economic fabric. Because in these parts the lack of actual independence- with courageous exceptions sometimes paid at a high price- has left many victims in flesh and blood on the ground and it is not the subject of the prerogative of buttons from the living room. From the promotion of the celebrated, a change of march would be desirable, an attitude of greater respect towards the carriers of purulent plagues that do not suffer less knowing that they were produced with the noble intent to cauterize the social fabric enhanced by crime. And also of greater respect for the institutions that should contribute to the quality of the justice service.
If the judicial councils have transformed into useless undergoing centers, it is because it has not worked – on the contrary, a serious verification mechanism of professionalism cannot work – without an independent representation of the lawyer capable of activating effective and equal comparison. If Anm were accustomed to the equal comparison, it would be noticed that a representation of the lawyer capable of free criticism would be a precious value within the judicial council. The pro tempore president of the democratic judiciary said it well a few years ago, Cinzia Barillà, doubting that the lawyers if equipped with greater weight, they would be able to practice it, a certain widespread awaited cultural subordination of the institutional representatives of the lawyer. Now he cannot expect that he does not notice annoyance in front of the lawyer who without reverential fear, he exercises the right of criticism. But we do not believe it is convenient for the representatives of power (order?) Of the state, claiming to establish the right measure and the rules of engagement of the public debate, not even the magistrates were a fragile category. They would lose even more in credibility, they would only appear interested in defending positions of privilege acquired by exerting terrible power without adequate counterweight.