“The decision of the Council that eliminates the censorship on the letters between the detainees at 41 bis and their lawyers deserves to be applauded”. defense also the right to communicate confidentially with their lawyer, even if the prisoner is restricted to a hard prison regime. Conversely, there would be an unreasonable compromise of the right of defense. “An unexceptionable sentence – comments Ocf – for which some comments we have read are astonishing, according to which in this way the mafia would be favored and the 41 bis bosses could thus more easily circumvent the restrictions by continuing to manage the clans from prison, perhaps by ordering the commission Not only that. This kind of underlining discredits an entire category, the forensic one, which by the mere fact of ensuring the constitutionally guaranteed right to a recluse boss, would automatically lend itself to conveying the orders of organized crime “. The OCF then underlines that there are specific rules that punish certain behaviors: if a lawyer, rather than a prison police officer or a doctor from the prison infirmary, would lend themselves to transfer the criminal will of the prisoner, they would be accomplices and would be punished for consequence. “In short, certain arguments suffer from some form of moral double standards – concludes the OCF coordinator Giovanni Malinconico – we complain about the violation of human rights in rogue countries, hunger strikes are held in favor of inmates from distant countries, but then yes he would like to recreate the exact same situation with us. Human rights as such are inalienable and must be recognized to anyone for the sole fact of belonging to the human race, they cannot be compressed by pursuing the usefulness of the moment: this is what differentiates a civilized country from a dictatorship “.