Berlusconi, the truth about the plots in Palamara’s list of heads


Last two days of work, closed in his lawyers’ office, filing, adding, reasoning. Now Luca Palamara is ready. And tomorrow morning he will deposit the act that officially marks the beginning of the clash with the High Council of the Judiciary: the list of witnesses that the Roman prosecutor, former Unicost leader and former president of the National Magistrates Association, asks to be interrogated by the disciplinary section of the CSM when the proceedings against him, Palamara, and the other five magistrates under accusation will begin on 21 July. They are the five former members of the CSM who had to resign last year following the disclosure of the first interceptions on the happy market of nominations and favors in which the currents of the judges have transformed the Superior Council.

Meanwhile, other waves of wiretapping have painted an even more devastating picture. For this reason, the list of witnesses who will be indicated by Palamara assumes a crucial importance. Because it will be a very long list, one speaks of one hundred and twenty names: all necessary, according to Palamara, to ascertain thoroughly the transversal nature of the degradation within the CSM, the participation of all currents in the system; and above all to understand how and why the Perugia investigation began, who inspired and governed it. If this is not understood, Palamara says, it is impossible to correctly evaluate the enormous amount of interceptions made by the Guardia di Finanza. Understand the meaning. Explain the holes, the alterations.

Palamara’s mega-list of texts puts the disciplinary section of the CSM in an apparently dead-end situation. Because if he says no, as a part of the CSM would like, to almost all the witnesses asked by the accused, and he reduces the list to the bone, he lends himself to the obvious suspicion of being satisfied with a minimal truth, of wanting to cover up the responsibilities of the currents that today ask for Palamara’s head after knocking on his door for years; and gives breath to the thesis of the former president of the ANM who believes – in essence – to pay his opposition to the maneuvers of the left on the Rome prosecutor’s office. If, on the other hand, the disciplinary section accepts Palamara’s requests, the trial that begins on the 21st is likely to turn into a ten-year process of CSM history, in which the underground agreements that led to the division of all the most important offices would emerge judicial authorities in the country, in league with political forces and sometimes with the direct intervention of the Quirinale. In short, a catastrophe. And to clear the climate at Palazzo dei Marescialli, seat of the Council, certainly do not contribute to the latest releases of Palamara, who says he is ready to also talk about the trials of Silvio Berlusconi and their management.

The topic is made hot by the records of the judge of Cassation Amedeo Franco describing the Knight’s conviction for tax fraud as a prepackaged and direct process from above. But the theme is broader, and also directly concerns the CSM: because there are flurry promotions on the table arranged by the Council for many of the robes that in recent years have participated in various capacities in the sentences of the former prime minister; but also, specularly, the inauspicious fate of the few judges who signed acquittals. In Milan, for example, all the judges who acquitted Berlusconi had to change the air for one reason or another.

That in the face of this chaos, the CSM no longer know what fish to take, the fact that ten days after the hearing still does not know who will be the members of the section, that is, the “judges” of Palamara. The vice president of the CSM, David Ermini, has already had to pull out because his name also appears in the interceptions. Piercamillo Davigo was rejected by Palamara for some of his statements which sounded, according to the prosecutor, as an early sentence. The other day, some alternate members were appointed, with the risk – denounced by the lay member Alessio Lanzi – that a custom court would be built. In short, it is still unclear whether everything will end with a formality with a foregone conclusion or if the process will truly become the process of a system: as the Cusani trial was for the parties of the First Republic.

Source link


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here