Tax justice, President Leone: “CSM has never talked to us, I’m sorry”

Tax justice reform is upon us. An agreement has been reached between the Ministry of Economy and Justice and by tomorrow the pool of experts will have to write down a draft of the bill to be brought to the CDM. The president of the Tax Justice Council, Antonio Leone, intervenes with the Adnkronos, who in dwelling on some points of the reform, comments on the silence of the CSM after the resolution of the CPGT of last March 22, in which he asked for an interview with the Superior Council of the Judiciary and after his speech on the occasion of the inauguration of the judicial year, last April 5, in which Leone stated that he perceived in the CSM proposal an aura of suspicion towards the magistrates who perform the function of tax judge and a prejudice negative in tax justice. “The Superior Council of the Judiciary in recent years has never wanted to have, as foreseen by various provisions, any dialogue with the Presidency Council of Tax Justice. The reason should be asked of them. Personally, I am very sorry”, says Leone. “Only by chance, in recent days, we learned that they had elaborated this proposal, which was then approved, to amend the circular on extrajudicial appointments – he recalls – Given that it was the legislator, and not the CSM, who wanted the ordinary judges to be able to carry out the function of tax judge, I believe that at the basis of the decision there are the usual current dynamics “. Meaning what? “The elections for the renewal of the CSM are approaching and some associative groups do not look favorably on a magistrate writing sentences for another jurisdiction thus rendering a service to the Treasury and to the taxpaying citizen. On the other hand, without any problem, he can write books and being a paid lecturer “. Is the Presidency Council included in the reform? “In my opinion, any reform must enhance the role of the Presidency Council for tax justice so that it can protect the autonomy and independence of tax judges. The independence of the judge in the exercise of his functions must be ensured, as reads the second paragraph of article 108 of the Constitution, also to special judges “, replies President Leone. Should tax justice remain under the aegis of the Mef? “Unfortunately, the CPGT does not have today the same tasks and prerogatives as the self-governing bodies of the other jurisdictions – he observes – If there were not this inequality, there would be no need for any separation between the tax commissions and the Mef, since the CPGT could do it provides a ‘barrier’ to any possible interference, even if only apparent “. For the Cassation it is thought of a cut of the disputes with a facilitated definition of the backward causes. What do you think? “The issue of the backlog in the Supreme Court is very complex. There are two factors to consider. On the one hand, the Constitution provides that the citizen can always appeal to the Supreme Court for vices of legitimacy. On the other hand, the tax judgment, being very fast in the first and second instance, it has the consequence of congesting the Supreme Court even more. It seems a paradox but it is so – he notes – I hope that the solution is not then that of putting ‘stakes’ to slow down the tax judgment in the merit phase “. Then entering into the merits of the reform of the Superior Council of the Judiciary, of which Leone was a member from 2014 to 2018, the president of the Council of Tax Justice commented to Adnkronos:” The reform that Parliament is preparing to approve will still give more power to the currents of the judiciary. From what I have read, the constituencies will be drawn close to the elections. What does it mean? also a minimum of ‘seeking consensus’, in essence campaigning, to make oneself known. To make up for this handicap, the currents will necessarily have to intervene who, with the middle managers in the territories, will give indications to vote to colleagues “.” He explains otherwise – he urges – how a judge serving in Trieste can take votes in the district, so much for example, from Catanzaro where no one has ever seen his face? It seems to me a really great result! “The failure to provide for the incompatibility of the deputy attorneys general of the Cassation in the electoral law has also been contested:” Today a member of the Attorney General of the Cassation, the office in charge of the disciplinary action, can, if elected to Csm, to become part of that disciplinary section. Result? The evening before the vote he instructed the disciplinary measures against his colleagues in the Supreme Court and the next morning, having won the elections for the CSM, he becomes their judge. It seems to me an incompatibility as big as a house and it is surprising that no one wanted to remedy it – he remarks – After all, our Italy thrives on incompatibility and contradictions, but that the ‘house of justice’ is a bit too much “. (by Roberta Lanzara)