One part is “useless“, The other is”dangerous“. Nino Di Matteo repeats to the Justice Commission of the Senate the judgment given to Done on the reform of the High Council of the Judiciary and of the law on the judiciary, under discussion in Palazzo Madama after the OK arrived in the Chamber. Called to hear the Minister of Justice’s bill Marta Cartabiathe former anti-mafia prosecutor and councilor of the Palazzo dei Marescialli reiterates that the new system for electing toga members – a binominal majority with proportional correction – will not serve “to resolve the pathology improper current conditioning of the CSM activity “, but rather” it could end up strengthen power majority association groups with respect to the so-called independent candidacies “. The only solution to “disrupt the pathology of candidacies”, he says, is “that of tempered draw“, That is the drawing by lot of a multiple of the members to be elected, to which over four togas out of ten say they are in favor but which the Keeper considers contrary to the Constitution.
On the other hand, one of the dangerous contents of the reform is the separation (in fact) of functions between judges and prosecutors, with the transition that will become possible only once and within the first ten years of his career: a rule in which Di Matteo sees “the danger of transforming the prosecutor into a sort of police lawyerof gradual removal of the prosecutors from the perspective of jurisdiction, in the inevitable direction of the possible dependence on the executive“. Moreover, he recalls, “the question of the passage from one function to another has become statistically irrelevant: in recent years only 1.7% of prosecutors have asked to pass to the judging function “, only” 0.2% of judges to the prosecutor. I am always convinced that the performance of both functions is a factor in enriching the professionalism of the magistrate. And the thesis of the flattening of the judges towards the prosecutor seems to me absolutely false“.
Negative judgment also on dossier for the evaluation of the magistratewhich will contain, among other things, the statistics on the percentage of confirmation of sentences in subsequent stages of judgment (for the judges) and acceptance of the requests for conviction and precautionary measures (for the prosecutors): the effect will be “that of bureaucratize further the judiciary, of to hierarchize further the judicial offices, to make the individual magistrate more pay attention to the numbers and at statistics than to really do justice “. The prosecutors, Di Matteo warns, will be “more fearful in dealing with investigations and processes that physiologically do not have, and cannot, have a foregone conclusion“. Finally, the possibility for lawyers to vote on the evaluation of the professionalism of judges in the judicial councils (the “local sections” of the CSM) was rejected: the same lawyer who in the morning “defended his client in a murder or massacre, in the afternoon, to the judicial council “would be called” to give the opinion for the evaluation of the professionalism of those who represented the indictment in that process or whoever has issued the sentence“, Di Matteo warns.