I read an excellent article by a Magistrate on the Reform (% http://www.ilriformista.it/stories/Prima 20pagina/362053 /) with which I agree and propose again in the very important parts: the magistrate Guido Salvini says
The civil war will not have long-term ....... no winners or losers but losers are sure that ordinary citizens are entitled to a better justice. A country can progress if not permettere.È true that the reform was born polluted by a strong flavor of retaliation and that the insurmountable tare not to deal with the role that the organization of the courts of justice, and would be a minimum condition for reform "era." Thus, the reform seems more like a reform of the courts or the judges that a reform of justice and justifies the worst suspicions. But that said, and after the gaffe pm bellicose tone that has incited the basis of an "epochal response," the judiciary, because of the immense power which, multiplied by a long iron with some media that are d 'magic in the hands of many inviting the pleadings, can not even reject a rational reflection on itself for ever using the prime minister as an alibi. An attitude of the Church but would not reject outright secular changes just because they come from a government considered an enemy but a reflection whether or not the proposals relate to real problems if the solutions are beyond repair or wrong or better with some sensible discussion. And then, maybe, a lot has to be rejected. But there is enough to discuss.
not good that the civil liability of judges distance from the fault negligence generic. This would lead to "justice in defense" similar to the choice of some doctors, only for fear of liability, require more tests than necessary, expected and maybe not try working with some degree of risk, but perhaps crucial to save the patient. It would be better to make more effective and that the disciplinary responsibility, as we say in the project in some way there.
not good at preventing pm to challenge the judgments of acquittal as can be done by the defendant after a conviction. If there must be equal, it would be a serious imbalance. Rather than to avoid, as now, the eternal wait Court of Appeal is better to reduce the appeal courts from three to one, with only the power of confirmation or return in the first degree, thus multiplying the process concluded.
should remain the principle of mandatory prosecution. But apart from the unwritten law that he wants the trials against Berlusconi, who is right or not, you do earlier and lavishing their best resources, there is a problem. Survey or establishment of such a process can not depend on luck or the fact that this or that judge makes an investigation, or fixed before or after a process at will, or if he is interested or not the case. Regulated by law would be too hard, but you can introduce serious organizational principles similar to those of the Prosecutor of Turin Magdalene, who, without waiting for momentous reforms, set out in an order and timing of surveys to do.
then I too believe that in investigations where important interests are at stake, mafia corruption environment, it is very dangerous escape the judicial control of police prosecutors with the risk of recurrence of the slowness and the deviations of the past. But the principle should not be absolute. At least for minor offenses, those that affect the life of the area, you might give some initiative to Pg empowering, since the prosecutors have little time to deal with it. I remember - the examples are always useful - the case of a journalist in whose house had been stolen the computer with all the working material. He had suspicions about a couple of gardeners. He asked the local Police Station immediately to a search of their house but they no delegation of the prosecutor, could not move. Then he went to prosecutors but ....... and there was never searched. It was a small but important case for the ordinary citizen.
It's not a crime of lese-majeste to divide the CSM in Two ...... and still leaving the judges in more than lay people. Transfers, promotions, extra-judicial assignments are important not only for the competitor but also for end-users ie the people. We all know that the CSM is no longer dominated by the currents with their divisions and their customers - would maybe some kind of lottery - and am in the currents have a much greater weight to their numbers, which is about an eighth of that of the judges. It is difficult to understand why the professional value of a judge should be evaluated by pm, as do the opposite. There is a risk, sometimes very specific, content themselves with the judges in the courtroom the prosecutor knew that later, through them and the current dominated, may have an advantage in this or that contest. Nor is it a scandal
eliminate the disciplinary section of the CSM and replace it with a Court of Discipline independent, non-elective. Disciplinary proceedings for the accused and the effects they have on the processes of relief, are often more important than a criminal trial. Today, the first thing a judge accused shall address the council to intercede on his current advisor, always current, which is in the disciplinary section, pace and impartiality of those not belonging to any current outcasts, to which the management positions are virtually banned, and in proceedings disciplinary risk paying for everyone. That these actions of "alert" to be heard or not, it seems obvious that those elected to the CSM should never be able to judge their constituents.
At risk of being a deserter ,....... I would prefer to discuss rather than strike. Serve a table of Understanding with the presence of all, perhaps promoted by the Head of State. But I will prevail in our association, the refusal to block the most obscurantist message: listen to the enemy is already sinned, "nulla salus extra ecclesiam."
0 comments:
Post a Comment