The cries of the Berlusconi government Manzoni Oggi su
La Tribuna di Treviso è stato pubblicato un interessante articolo a firma del dottor Massimo De Luca sulla riforma della giustizia che il governo di Silvio Berlusconi intende fare. Ne ho parlato con l'avv. Agostino La Rana (cassazionista) per proporre ai lettori di questo blog alcune riflessioni. Purtroppo, come fa notare l'avv. Agostino La Rana, non si possono ancora elaborare delle riflessioni di carattere tecnico perché il testo finale della riforma non è ancora disponibile.
Avv. Agostino La Rana, in un articolo pubblicato su La Tribuna di Treviso (14 marzo 2011), il dr. Massimo De Luca scrive che nell'attuale testo governativo di riforma costituzionale si stabilisce che i magistrati, like other state officials are directly responsible for acts committed in violation of rights. According to her, as in fact will translate these intentions ?
A judge can be wrong, of course. And the mistakes you pay, of course. Currently, the court pays for itself acted willfully, that is, with the intention of making a mistake, very remote possibility, this, that would require, for example, evidence of corruption. The Government, referring also to a referendum on the civil liability of judges in 1987 (whose results were nullified) proposes that the court compensate the errors caused by negligence, that negligence or incompetence. It is currently impossible to predict how the Government intends to translate this regard. On this issue
Silvio Berlusconi, may register a popular consensus even more to the same parliamentary majority it has. It is, however, a question: what is popular is automatically right? What is your opinion?
"Who will you, Jesus or Barabbas?" Asked Pontius Pilate. And the people chose Barabbas to save, which means that (even) the people can make mistakes. But what is the alternative? Churchill said that democracy is the system "less worse".
Dr. De Luca points out that the judge is the arbiter of conflicts and the unsuccessful party is always unhappy with the decision, and will nearly always be convinced that the court erred in assessing the rules and facts. In particular, in a penal trial the offender will always have reason to complain of the sentence. I ask: if this were to pass reform, we should expect a flood of actions against judges by those who have been convicted in a proceeding ?
When the answer is impossible because the Government has not presented a reform but a declaration of principles similar to the cries Manzoni.
According to her, the fact that we should do this reform, may indicate that in our system there are not enough guarantees for a fair trial ?
The process is just an abstraction, the perfect utopia.
In his article, Dr. Massimo De Luca says, should pass this reform, the judge would be affected and opt for the decision not expose him to possible action by the parties, or at least the stronger party. What do you think?
What has this view depends on the individual judge. As he wrote Manzoni, "the courage, if one has not, not if you can give."
Minister Alfano argues that the activity of a magistrate should be compared to that of a doctor. What are your considerations ?
Some might compare the activity Alfano of the Minister to that of an undertaker.
In conclusion, she said, as a plurimputato Silvio Berlusconi can handle - an ethical and moral - an issue such as the reform of the justice ?
If you have the popular support of the majority of Italians, certainly yes.
