The reform of the High Council of the Judiciary was a “necessary reform”, “we absolutely could not do without it”. “Surely any reform would not have fully satisfied everyone’s expectations. On certain things there was a point of compromise which, perhaps, had to be mediated more with those who live in the judiciary or who have experienced certain distortions in the first person”. Speaking with Adnkronos is Monica Forte, President of the Lombardy Regional Anti-Mafia Commission, in the aftermath of the interview with CSM adviser Nino Di Matteo who harshly criticized the reform, speaking of a “dangerous desire for revenge on the judiciary”. “It is true that in some blocks of amendments that were presented it was recognizable what Councilor Di Matteo defined as a sort of ‘punishment’ or ‘revenge’ against the judiciary. This was quite evident – says Forte – Yes tempted to certainly mediate. Even in the separation of careers, we have moved on to making it possible four times to switch from one function to another, then as we have progressed with the amendments, we have substantially reached the minimum wage . Here perhaps an effort could be made. The minimum limit is being left, the one for which a person who decides after the internship to be an investigating magistrate or judge, has a possible ‘slot’, when instead over a long career more passages of the magistrate should be allowed “. And speaking again of the reform of the CSM, Monica Forte explains:” I believe that when politics intervenes on issues of this kind, a but perhaps he should have listened to those who experience it from the inside. I know that Minister Cartabia has tried in every way to mediate between the various political parties, but I would have also listened more to those on whom the reform itself will have an impact “. Then, Monica Forte, speaking of the length of the trials and of the prison overcrowding, she said she was convinced that “something had to be done”. “Because I believe that there was a risk that the judicial system would not only be blocked, but that it would totally lose credibility on the part of the citizens”. “As for the referendum questions – he says – the issue is whether it is correct or not that certain technical issues can be submitted to a referendum question, especially when the question is so difficult to understand, so complex that the vote will inevitably turn into simple political indications by the own party of reference while not understanding the technical meaning. For me this was a job that should not be done “. And he reiterates that” we had an obligation to intervene because Europe asks us to do so and because we were continuously sanctioned “.” As regards the judiciary, it is evident how the latest scandals concerned a part of the judiciary, in my opinion also posed a question of credibility, which is a theme that I share with that of politics “.” I believe that justice and, therefore, also the role of the magistrate – he adds – must be addressed with the right sense of balance and with the right equidistance, between those who rant and always have a penalizing attitude towards the accused, saving a priori the apparatus of the judiciary, and those who always rant against the magistrates and for the exclusive protection of the accused. Justice lies in the middle, in an equidistant situation “.
Welcome! Log into your account
Recover your password
A password will be e-mailed to you.