June 30, 2006

The season for lobbying is over

I’ve received many emails asking me why the president of Abertis, Isidre Fainè Casas, and the CEO, Salvador Alemany Mas have been meeting with the President of the Council, Romano Prodi and under secretary, Enrico Letta. It’s not the first time that the leaders of Abertis have asked for and obtained a meeting at Palazzo Chigi.

I can respond that in the future I will be happy to receive them, together with società Autostrade, at the Ministry of Infrastructure. We could discuss their ideas and how they could be made real and the necessary administrative acts. We could discuss precise responses to the points raised by the Council of State in relation to the 2,000,000,000 Euro that were not spent and to be made available for investments and the renegotiation of the current concession.

The time when public relations was the primary instrument for politics finished with the Berlusconi Government.
The components of this Government operate in full harmony, based on the principle of delegation to the persons responsible for the various ministries. The season for lobbying is over. The season of honey moons is over.
Abertis know my address. There’s no need for short cuts.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 29, 2006

ANAS Accounting

Today I have sent to the Procura della Repubblica di Roma {Prosecutors of the Republic in Rome} and to the Corte dei Conti {Court of Auditors} the information in my possession so that they can evaluate the position of ANAS.
ANAS responds to the Minister of Infrastructure and so my action is a necessary one.

There are two aspects that need to be examined attentively: if the information shows there has been false accounting, and false social communication and if a crime has been committed for the sum of about three million Euro paid to the members of the previous Board of Directors when in 2002 ANAS changed from being a public body to being a company with shareholders.

I can state right now that the management of the accounts of ANAS has been superficial and not really clear.
The difference between the amount stated in the accounts to be used for investments and how much has in fact been used is 5,000,000,000 Euro. The financial position of ANAS if there is no State intervention, would take ANAS to bankruptcy.

Unfortunately, the situation is serious and 11,600,000,000 Euro is needed to continue the current construction work on the roads started by ANAS and on the state railways. My precise duty as Minister is twofold: to find the necessary funds and to determine the causes of this massive hole in the finances. In effect, I need to understand how the money of the citizens has been spent.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 27, 2006

19 - Good bye to the magistracy/2

I’m continuing to publish some questions and answers from the book "Intervista su Tangentopoli" published by Laterza and edited by Giovanni Valentini.

GV: And whatever was it that happened in a few months that made you go back over the steps you had taken?
ADP: While I was on “leave of absence”, without even calling me in, the inspectorate of the Ministry of Grace and Justice asked for the inquiry into Di Pietro to be archived. That is what I had been asking for from the beginning. That is what should have been done.
The accusations against me didn’t seem to be credible from the evidence presented. In fact after a nightmare lasting two years, everything ended up in a bubble of soap. And this is where I happened to meet up with Silvio Berlusconi for the second time and for the final time. It was the Spring of 1995, if I remember it was February or March. He was no longer President of the Council. Dini was leading the government.
Berlusconi let me know that he wanted to see me, because anyway I was not in the magistracy and we could continue the discussion that was interrupted a year earlier. At that time, we were two people who could meet each other like normal citizens, without problems of incompatibility.
I couldn’t be reproached because as a magistrate I had issued a document inviting him to appear before me…
The encounter lasted just long enough for us to each realise that we were not made for each other…
After that I discovered from the Brescia documents that while he was trying to capture me with these proposals, Berlusconi was working in parallel to convince D’Adamo to accuse me, to make him say that I had favoured Pacini Battaglia for a good few thousand million.
Anyway about two months later, on April 1 1995, the Brescia enquiry about me was started. This was the beginning of a long Calvary in judicial offices and above all a squalid “killing” in the newspapers and the TV channels especially those in the Berlusconi sphere.

GV: How many trials did you have to go through?
ADP: There were 27 accusations against me in 10 trials. And I was always absolved with the same wording: “The fact did not exist”.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Interview about Tangentopoli
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 26, 2006

The tragedy of the Catania-Siracusa

photo ansa.it

I gave an interview to Umberto Rosso of la Repubblica about the tragedy related to the collapse of a bridge on the Catania-Siracusa motorway.

UR: Minister Di Pietro, on the day that the closure of the ANAS construction site was announced, there was a dramatic work accident.
ADP: It’s the “general contractor” system that’s not working. The race against time to hand over a completed unit of work means that safety at work is being ignored. And then we cry for those who died. As for the closure, it’s too easy to say that the money has finished.

UR: What does that mean?
ADP: It means that I want to know why and how the money has finished.

UR: And have you discovered that?
ADP: A few weeks ago I had sent out a cry of alarm myself about the lack of cash in ANAS’s coffers. Since then I certainly haven’t been idle. In this first phase of activity as Minister of Infrastructure, I have thus been busy finding out the situation before taking action.

UR: Have you thus discovered how the coffers come to be empty?
ADP: For a multitude of reasons. These include the improper use of money, for reasons that are different from those for which it was allocated.

UR: These are serious accusations, especially coming from a Minister with the name of Antonio Di Pietro.
ADP: I have come across a series of situations and threads to be followed up. These are lines that are criminal, civil, administrative and accounting.

UR: Have you already informed the competent authorities?
ADP: On Tuesday I will talk about this at the meeting of the Public Works Committee called first in the Lower House then in the Upper House. I will ask the presidents to consider keeping secret this part of what I have to say. It will be up to them to decide whether to do that.

UR: Was this “improper use” of ANAS money that you are denouncing something that happened under the management of the Berlusconi government?
ADP: I can’t say more. It is certainly something very serious, and I will talk about it in detail with the Parliamentary committees. It almost seems that the Centre Left has no wish to complete the construction work, but those others have even eaten the Coliseum…..

UR: Will you also talk about the Catania-Siracusa accident in Parliament?
ADP: I have organised a ministerial inspection and I expect to get the dossier about the causes today. Generally, I believe that it is the new model of awarding contracts that is not working, since it is based only on the logic of wild deregulation.

UR: The “general contractor” system means a risk to safety at work?
ADP: The system entrusts to a single entity all the steps to bring about a particular construction. That includes the measures put in place for safety and for ensuring that regulations for accident prevention are adhered to. But almost always, the general contractors find themselves to be in a situation of conflict of interests.

UR: What does that mean?
ADP: The race to finish the work to be handed over leaves the safety of the workers in second place.

UR: How do you think you can change that, Minster?
ADP: By having a third party in charge of managing the money and of watching over safety. This would be someone standing between the commissioning body and the general contractor. Today it’s as though you had the majority shareholder of a company selecting who is to audit the accounts. In that case the auditors would obviously not go against the accounts of the “owners” of the company. And in the construction sites, unfortunately, only the interests of those who have won the contract are those that count. They have all the cards in their hand.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Work
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 25, 2006

The TAV and the European Community

In the last few weeks I have met with the president of the Mountain Community of the Lower Valle di Susa Antonio Ferrentino, the president of the Observatory Mario Virano and the European Commissioner Loyola De Palacio to talk about the TAV in Val di Susa.
I believe this work to be important, but I consider to be legitimate the requests of the people of the valley to be part of the decision-making process. To start off with a “no” to the TAV that is “a priori” and ideological cannot obviously be part of a true discussion and the evaluation of the different possibilities must be considered with objectivity by all.

The TAV is considered to be a priority by the Government and by the European Community and the European Community will provide 1,000,000,000 Euro to get the work started. It is important to point out that this money is provided by Europe specifically for the High Speed project. Thus it will be given to Italy only if the project goes ahead. The lack of funds for road works to be carried out by ANAS is another matter. Money for this must be found through financial activity as soon as possible so that the work is not held up indefinitely.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 23, 2006

18 - Good bye to the magistracy/1

I’m continuing to publish some questions and answers from the book "Intervista su Tangentopoli" published by Laterza and edited by Giovanni Valentini.

GV:...Well in the end, what was the real reason that made you resign from the magistracy?
ADP: I decided to leave the role of prosecutor so that I could defend myself better. With my hands free and without the responsibility of carrying out investigations, I should have had a better possibility to fight against the calumnies and the defamations that were coming thick and fast against me. And I did manage to do this.
I wanted to bring home my honour at all costs. It was the only thing that interested me. In my heart I said: “as soon as I have concluded the Enimont enquiry, I will go. I absolutely must save Mani Pulite. My story as a man and as a magistrate is in that.”
What would have been left of the symbolic value of the enquiry if I too had been convicted? Those who had organised my delegitimisation were not at all interested in my personal position. They were motivated by having the possibility of saying: “See. We are all equal. You see, we are all guilty, no one is guilty. Let’s put an end to this affair and then we can resign ourselves. That’s how the world turns round.”

GV: That’s why on 6 December 1994 you took off your toga in the courtroom at the end of the interrogation of Cusani and you left the magistracy…

ADP: Take care. Let’s not get confused. On 6 December 1994 I didn’t resign from the magistracy. I took leave of absence. It was six months later in June 1995 that I resigned.
My initial intention was not to leave the magistracy, but to go though the procedures against me and then to return to the magistracy. That’s why I made a formal request to the CSM to be given leave of absence like many other colleagues in the judiciary or in Parliament when they have ministerial or institutional responsibilities.
It was senator Francesco Cossiga who advised me to become a consultant for the Parliamentary Committee on Slaughters. At his suggestion, I got in contact with the president Giovanni Pellegrino and that’s how I started my new job.
For a few months I was in “stand by” at the Senate and I was mostly busy with drafting a weighty report about the “Uno bianca” event involving the kidnappings and murders committed by police officers. In the meantime I wanted to see what happened…

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Interview about Tangentopoli
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 21, 2006

Decree against phone intercepts

The Minister of Justice is looking into a decree to limit the scope of telephone intercepts and the distribution of the recorded conversations after the umpteenth Italian scandal has revealed intercepts of conversations with Vittorio Emanuele and with Salvatore Sottile. In relation to this he is supported by the leader of the Centre Right who has declared: “Enough with barbarous practices”.

In response to my perplexity about the help asked for from the Centre Right to limit the action of the magistrates, the Minister of Justice has declared: “If Di Pietro wants to be the Minister in place of me, he’s welcome to do so. But let him stop being permanently a judge.”

I have already written this and I repeat it again: The Centre Left has NOT been elected to do an amnesty, but to make the machinery of the justice system more efficient. It has NOT been elected to stop the investigations but to abolish the laws approved by majority blows in the previous legislature. Do we want to recall what was said to the citizens during the election campaign? Do we want to re-read the manifesto of the Unione?

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (1) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 20, 2006

Reducing costs of the Infrastructure Ministry

Efficiency and cost reduction of central public administration are two of the objectives that Italia dei Valori has for this legislature.

Within the ambit of my role as Minister of Infrastructure I have started to evaluate potential cost saving areas. My first decision has been to internalise the service of controlling public works. The previous minister had entrusted this activity to 8 external consultants, thus doubling up on competencies that were already present within the Ministry and demotivating internal personnel.

The cost of each consultant is 200,000 euro for the activity plus 250,000 euro for various costs plus 187,000 euro for expenses. The consultants make use of offices within the ministry and have a secretary.
Some of them had previously worked in the ministry and they had been placed off the payroll to continue the same activity with a much higher cost to the administration.

637.000 euro multiplied by 8 consultants produces a saving for the State of over 5,000,000 euro.

From 30 June, the activities that are today undertaken by the consultants will be handled by competent officials and the external collaboration will be stopped.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (1) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 18, 2006

17 - Berlusconi’s Empire

I’m continuing to publish some questions and answers from the book "Intervista su Tangentopoli" published by Laterza and edited by Giovanni Valentini.

GV: However, it’s certain that Berlusconi had an incredible number of confiscations and searches.
ADP: But it’s also true that he has a constellation of about a thousand operating companies that are effectively headed up by him. This is said by his brother Paolo whilst being interrogated in August 1994: “We are a holding made up of all the companies, but they are all making reference to our family and the one who takes the decisions in the end is Silvio.”
So it’s not the fault of the Milan judges or of the Palermo judges if every time that there’s an investigation into one of these companies, they end up investigating the person who is in fact the one in overall control. It’s not the fault of the judges that they have a thousand companies. How many Italians have a thousand companies that are headed up by a single family?

GV: There won’t be a thousand “black holes” , a thousand mysterious objects…
ADP: The whole of Berlusconi’s empire came about in a really unusual way. To get an idea about the evolution of the companies in the group, there’s a document to be read from cover to cover. This was prepared by Francesco Giuffrida, an employee of Banca d'Italia and it was presented to the prosecutors in Palermo. This was done at the request of the antimafia directorate of the area in the course of the criminal investigation n.6031/94.
So that each of us can understand the origins, it’s enough to look at the first few lines: “… 19 June 1978 'Holding Italiana 1' was created in Milan. The other companies had the same name but they each had an identifying sequence number (2, 23). The start up capital was 20 million for each one. (thus more than 40 million in cash was put into the companies at that time.) The founding partners were Minna Armando (accountant, putting in 2 million for each company) and Crocitto Nicla (housewife, putting in 18 million for each company). Ms Crocitta was named as the sole administrator when each company was set up. However it can be deduced from talking to the witnesses that the sole effective owner of the companies was Silvio Berlusconi …”
So I ask: why does an entrepreneur need to use these systems of cover right from the start? And then, why did Berlusconi make such a massive use of off-shore companies? Certainly, the law permits it. But then if you want to be a top level politician it’s obligatory that you explain to the Italians what all these companies are used for.
In fact, it’s not enough that you explain. You must also show the documentation and you can no longer behave as you did when you opposed the foreign rogatory letters that were written by the magistrates. Otherwise your credibility disappears

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Interview about Tangentopoli
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

The Democratic Party

photo Adnkronos

As leader of Italia dei Valori, I have sent a letter to the leaders of the DS, Piero Fassino, the leader of the Margherita, Piero Fassino and to the Premier Romano Prodi. The topic is a new Democratic Party. A few paragraphs are shown here.

“These days, among the political priorities planned by your parties you are once more proposing the fundamental question of creating a Democratic Party. This is given a great deal of appreciation by myself and by Italia dei Valori. My party hopes that a single party will soon be formed. A party that unites the different political forces within our coalition. This will overcome the individualism of the parties and it will build a common political path that will last.
In the light of the current election law, every party can put conditions on the others. This is a situation to be changed because now Italians are asking for bi-polarism, for the stability of the politics of alternatives.
The dialogue concerning the creation of a new Democratic party must involve all political forces of the coalition and it is important to involve civil society too. The Democratic Party must start from this. That way it won’t just be a simple adding together of two party secretaries.
I believe that the Democratic Party must consider the different cultures: democratic-catholic, socialist, liberal, and reformist in equal measure in the process of coming together. I am delighted that among the urgent political activity you have set the creation of a new party. I believe that seriousness is a mark of our coalition. This is why I am underlining the willingness of Italia dei Valori to participate in the start of this important activity and we recognise that the initial steps may be the most important and the most delicate.”

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 16, 2006

No to waste

Today I went from Rome to Brussels on a regular flight to take part in a meeting of the liberal democrat party. To save money I travelled economy class. Certain online newspapers are treating that as news. It shouldn’t be news. It should be normal. I can add that the ticket was paid for by Italia dei Valori and I used no special privilege associated with being a Minister.
In fact I believe that using State money to conduct activity for one’s own party should be considered to be misuse of funds by a public official.

Italy needs to save money. The previous government left behind only holes in balance sheets and creative accounting without worrying the former Minister Tremonti. When he is invited to speak on programmes he obviously has great difficulty in explaining the reasons for a public debt that is about to reach 5% and of a primary surplus at a miniscule 0.4%.

Italy needs to focus its limited resources on innovation and on the most urgent activities. Everyone must play their part. As clearly stated during the election campaign, Italia dei Valori will fight for a State structure that is efficient and without waste, starting from tiny things like the reduction in the number of State cars and escorts.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 15, 2006

The new Agreement for Motorways

Today there was the second meeting between Autostrade {company managing the Motorways} and ANAS {Azienda Nazionale Autonoma delle Strade Statali = company managing the State roads} with the intention of checking up on an agreement. I do hope it’s possible to find an agreement. If it were to happen that Autostrade does not accept a renegotiation of the Convention, or something of the same value, this would be going against what is correct in the institutional context and they would have to accept responsibility for this.

The rewriting of the Convention has even been suggested by the independent committee established by ANAS. It will certainly take time and given its importance it’s certainly right that all the different aspects can be evaluated without having time constraints.

If the merger were to happen before 30 June without a new Convention being approved by the Minister, this would be an “at risk” operation and I believe that Abertis and Autostrade must take this into account.

During yesterday’s hearing in the Lower House I stated certain points relating to Autostrade and they are summarised here:
- construction companies cannot be part of the collection of companies making up the resulting company for evident conflict of interests according to the ministerial decree 16/5/1997;
- investment policies resulting from the merger must not be penalising in relation to the investment obligations set out in the Convention;
- Autostrade’s cash of about 2,000,000,000 Euro must be speedily used on motorway work. It is currently managed by the company as pure finance. (The Authority has discovered that Autostrade has put into action only 2,100,000,000 of the projected 4,100,000,000 investment programme.);
- there is a need to re-examine the motorway percentages that can be charged to the concessionaire and on receipts from advertising and sub-concessions;
- inclusion of adequate and proportionate sanctions, that are today deficient, if Autostrade does not fulfil its obligations.
Anyway a study is now underway to find an efficient system of controls so that it will be possible to effectively and speedily manage the relationships with concessionaires.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 13, 2006

16 - Berlusconi

I’m continuing to publish some questions and answers from the book "Intervista su Tangentopoli" published by Laterza and edited by Giovanni Valentini.

GV: Even Silvio Berlusconi frequently complained that he was persecuted and sustained that his companies were scrutinised more than any others. Did you focus on him because he was a friend of Craxi? Is this why you concentrated so decidedly on him?
ADP: Focus on him? We gave much more attention to other people. It’s not true that we investigated a single company and not others. Berlusconi was one of those I investigated for 3 or 4 cases of corruption. For these he was convicted and then on appeal he was allowed off on the grounds of “prescrizione” {time delay too long}. We arrested and interrogated dozens of managers and directors of Fiat, even at the top levels like Romiti, Mattioli and many others.
At Fiat we discovered about 40,000,000,000 in bribes. This was the so-called 'tesoretto'. In Berlusconi’s case we took action at the start for only 300,000,000 in bribes. Then as the investigation proceeded we discovered many other things, starting from the financial transactions in the Iberian account that finished up in his “off-shore holdings”.
However he started to shout out straight away and he never wanted to accept the trial process. Unlike him, those in Fiat and many other business people presented their own reasons and those of their companies in their trials, as I also did when I too was investigated.
For example, the former CEO of Fiat, Cesare Romiti ended up in front of the Supreme Court for false accounting, but he always maintained a behaviour of loyalty in relation to the magistrates and the trial proceedings relating to him never had a particularly high profile in the press.

GV: In fact, are you saying that Berlusconi put into practice a specific communication strategy?
ADP: Well, it’s clear to me that he chose an approach to the trial that was different from many others in his position.
In fact, he used the same strategy as his friend Craxi: “No one can judge me and whoever does that is either a communist or a plotter.”
Like Craxi, Berlusconi decided to attack and he kept to the line that the action taken by the magistrates was a political action against him and not the obligatory action in line with criminal proceedings taken by magistrates who had decided to carry out their duty.
His action was a true media campaign with massive spending and massive use of personnel. Using the TV channels and newspapers that he owned, he managed to sow the seed of doubt in public opinion. In the public imagination, he managed to transform the defendants into victims and to change their judges into attackers.
The result is what we can all see. Everyone has lost their memory about what happened in the years of the First Republic and already there are those who say “it was better when it was worse”. A great education for future generations! And this is the statesman who should be leading us in the Second Republic? Do me a favour!

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Interview about Tangentopoli
Commenti (1) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 12, 2006

The referendum

On 25 and 26 June there’ll be the referendum.

The position of Italia dei Valori is against the proposed modifications to the constitution as explained in detail in the box on the right that’s marked “NO”.
Having said this I am astounded by the declarations of some well known political leaders of both the coalitions about what will happen after the referendum. I am astounded by their declarations about modifications to the text put forward for confirmation that would be put into effect by the parties irrespective of the actual result of the referendum.

Whether there’s a win for Yes or a win for No.
This attitude is an expression of politics that is separate from the citizens, indifferent to the citizens, to their vote, to their will. The referendum is the maximum expression of the popular vote and the politicians must adhere to this concept. Otherwise, why should Italians go out to vote, if anyway their decision is to be changed without their consent?
I maintain, to respect the will of the people, that the outcome of every referendum must be adopted without any qualification.

Furthermore, I believe that it should be made impossible to change the result of a referendum as happened in the previous legislature with the CDL and the election law.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 11, 2006

15 -Craxi

I’m continuing to publish some questions and answers from the book "Intervista su Tangentopoli" published by Laterza and edited by Giovanni Valentini.

GV: How many times did you meet Craxi before the trial? Is it true that there was a certain “feeling” between you and him?
ADP: I had 4 or 5 investigational interviews with Craxi. Let’s call them interrogations as they were all recorded and they took place in the presence of his lawyers. At first they were conducted in Amato’s home. Not President Amato but Nicol� Amato, the former director of the prisons who having become a lawyer had taken on his defence. Later they were carried on in a building of the Secret Services in Rome.

It was there that Craxi told me about his information in relation to the financing of the PCI by the Soviet Union. It was there that he told me about a recording, made shortly before in his office relating to the lawyer avvocato Pezzi who is now dead. At the time of the recording Pezzi was the defence lawyer for Luigi Carnevale who was a leading member of the PCI in Milan he was also a member of the Board of Directors of the Milan Metro and had confessed to bribes that had circulated in that environment.
I used Craxi’s information to proceed against the members of the Communist Party, but the “soviet” documentation referred to distant financing that was so far back in time that it was already irreversibly “prescritto”.
In relation to that it would be interesting to understand why Craxi, when he was President of the Council, and thus a public official, why he didn’t hand over those documents to the magistrates. At that time the facts could have been followed up. Ah, the blessed first Republic!
Even the recording of the interview with avvocato Pezzi didn’t contain important information about specific people. It turned out that Pezzi had told Craxi generic facts received from Carnevale, according to whom even the PCI was involved in bribes.
But even we knew this, and we had arrested Carnevale and had interrogated a number of his party companions. And then we certainly couldn’t use the tape, recorded secretly, that contained declarations made by a lawyer about one of his clients.

GV: On a more personal level, how do you remember those meetings with the socialist leader?
ADP: I still remember that Craxi was smoking. He smoked and smoked. There were hours and hours of dialogue, of confrontations, of discussion about soviet funds to the Italian Communist Party (the PCI) and how the PCI was involved in the bribes.
He went round and round on these topics like a falcon on the prey. However he never came down to capture it. He never came down to concrete facts. He didn’t give names, dates, circumstances, provide evidence, except for topics that were so far back in time that it was no longer possible to follow them up as crimes.
More than talking to me, I had the impression that he was intending to send messages to the political world. I couldn’t allow myself to be involved in his game of suspects. After a bit, his minuet finished.
Craxi realised that I was not useful to his tactic and that I wouldn’t follow him in his performance. And so he started to say that not even I wanted to investigate the communists and that the Milan Prosecution operated double standards.
But blessed Craxi (his name was Benedetto and he certainly seems to have been blessed)! If you knew something about facts that could still be brought to trial, why didn’t you say loud and clear? Then I would have been able to show you how I could carry out investigations!

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Interview about Tangentopoli
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 08, 2006

De Gregorio

Today I am embarrassed to write this letter. Senator De Gregorio has been elected as President of the Senate Defence Committee with the votes of the CDL. He says he has done this for patriotic reasons. I don’t believe this. He’s done it because it’s in his interests. Someone has written that I should choose my travelling companions better. It’s possible that they are right. But I would like to underline the fact that Italia dei Valori is the only party that does not accept in its ranks, parliamentarians of the Lower or Upper Houses with convictions and it is fighting for this to become the practice in the two Houses of Parliament. As regards De Gregorio, he has made a mistake and he has admitted that he made a mistake, but the majority of the Unione is 2 votes in the Senate.

Do we want to paralyse the country, go back to vote, all for the presidency of a committee, expelling De Gregorio from the party and from the coalition?

I don’t feel like it, out of respect for the emergency that this country must handle right now. De Gregorio has given me ample reassurances that I hope he will stick to, of loyal future conduct as a Senator and as the President of the Defence Committee in relation to the Unione and this right now is where I want to stand.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (2) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 07, 2006

14 – The PSI

I’m continuing to publish some questions and answers from the book "Intervista su Tangentopoli" published by Laterza and edited by Giovanni Valentini.

GV: Let’s change direction. On the one hand you have been accused of having been particularly careful in relation to the PCI-PDS, on the other hand they have said that you waged political persecution against the PSI.
ADP: Even this story of the PSI can be cleared up once and for all. It was not our choice that in the affairs that we were investigating the PSI was hit more than the others.
It’s simply a question of the geographical area that was within our jurisdiction. I am convinced that in the same conditions of time and place – the famous coincidence of circumstances that we talked about at the beginning – if instead of in Milan, the pool had been working in Naples, it would have been in the position to do a feast of investigations into the big names in the zone, perhaps into Pomicino or De Lorenzo, De Mita or Di Donato.
We didn’t investigate Craxi for personal idiosyncrasies, but because our work as magistrates was rooted in Milan, in a reality where he had a strong presence. Everyone knows: Milan was the stronghold of Craxian power. We couldn’t simply pretend not to see that.

GV: However from Milan, you arrived as far as Rome….
ADP: Yes, certainly. It’s true that we also investigated the other parties and the leaders of the other parties. But we investigated them because they were involved in investigations that started within the Milan jurisdiction.
It’s not my fault that Craxi had his offices in Piazza del Duomo. It’s not my fault that Milan was the centre of his interests. It’s not my fault that he was involved in the Milan Metro, nor is it my fault that many business people came to Milan to pay the bribes to the administrative secretary of the PSI, Balsamo, in Craxi’s office in Piazza del Duomo.
Let’s not invert the terms of the issue. Craxi used an expression: “Milan to drink” (Milano da bere). It’s not my fault if it was he that drunk more than others.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Interview about Tangentopoli
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 06, 2006

Conflict of Interests

Many comments and many letters reminded me that during the election campaign I declared the elimination of the conflict of interests has to be a priority of the Centre Left Government. I have not forgotten that.
Citizens can get the impression that the problem is not a priority for the Government and perhaps not even a problem as such because in the many (too many) declarations of Ministers and undersecretaries the topic has not been covered.
Instead it’s the amnesty that they want. But did the citizens vote for the first action of this Government to be an Amnesty?
Let’s not kid ourselves.
If the Centre Left Government had declared BEFORE 9 April that it wanted an Amnesty it would have lost the elections in a big way.
But we, we politicians, to whom do we answer if it’s not to the voters? That’s enough of intrigues and tactic-isms.
The country needs renewal, courage, a step change from the past. Italia dei Valori in the coming weeks will present a draft law to resolve the problem of the conflict of interests. It’ll do this so that no longer can anyone govern, influence, and deceive the Italians people using the media for political propaganda.
I will keep you up to date on this site about the passage of this draft law, about who is supporting it and who is hindering it.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 05, 2006

13 - Red Cooperatives

I’m continuing to publish some questions and answers from the book "Intervista su Tangentopoli" published by Laterza and edited by Giovanni Valentini.

GV: Apart from the personal stories and tragedies, in your investigation, did you find out how the parties shared out the money from the bribes? Was there a rule, some criteria? Those opposing Mani Pulite make out that you didn’t inquire into the PCI {Italian Communist Party} with the same energy that you used for the DC {Christian Democrats} or the PSI {Italian Socialist Party}.

ADP: That’s completely false. Whoever had the face to say something so idiotic is either ignorant (in the technical sense of the word – someone who doesn’t know what is in the trial documents), or has been led astray by the psychological bombing from the usual mass media and TV channels owned by the bosses.
Or still further it might be someone who explicitly in bad faith is talking like that for personal gain or for partisan reasons.
Let’s say straight away that the political system divided the bribes into 4 parts: one went to the DC, on to the PSI, one went to the other powers of the 5-party government in that particular zone (and they then had to divide it up among themselves according to their political weight in each formation) and the last part went to the PCI, usually in the form of work to the Cooperatives that operated in the orbit of the party.
And sometimes with payments of real cash bribes in envelopes, for which we have always taken action each time that we discovered them, in spite of any presumed favouritism.

GV: What does it mean exactly to say “in the form of work”?
ADP: The red Cooperatives didn’t accept money or bribes. In fact, they may have paid them. And in fact their lawyers, when incriminated were considered to be corrupters and not corrupted.
A particular commercial activity was guaranteed to them: that is to say, purchases, contracts. This is the substantial difference. This is why for certain contracts the Co-ops were not brought to trial in the same way. Formally there was no crime. This is simply because they received an order to perform work as a sub-contractor or in an association of companies and the work was carried out effectively.
There was thus an authentic return for the money and the interests of the party were to provide work for the working class.
The accusation against the pool {the team of magistrates} that they favoured the PCI has no foundation neither in heaven nor on earth. Where we found wads of cash offered as bribes we did not hesitate for a moment to bring to justice those responsible. It is not our fault that the PCI often used a different method that produced agreement, a method that can be morally questionable but that is criminally irrelevant.
And we have to keep to the law, not to the Gospels!

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Interview about Tangentopoli
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

No to an Amnesty

I’ve already stated my position relating to an amnesty on this site.
Today I have restated my position in an interview with la Repubblica that I’m publishing below.

ADP: The Minister of Justice is dealing with the problem by taking hold of the tale rather than the head. The problem of the prisons is a serious one and cannot be resolved by going among the prisoners on a feast day and announcing an amnesty….

CF: Minister, why do you not agree with an act of clemency for the prisoners?
ADP: Because an Amnesty is not a solution to the problem, but an abdication of the State based on rights. It’s the rule of law giving way. It is giving in to a system of logic that Italia dei Valori has never shared. At the limit, a pardon would be better.

CF: Where is “the head” of the problem of the prisons where the Minister should start to deal with the overpopulation of the prisons?
ADP: To start with, it is a mistake to make announcements about something that the Government hasn’t discussed and about which Parliament has not been informed. You can have a proposal each day. Regarding an Amnesty there are already thirty draft laws that have been presented. Then however, those proposals need approval….

CF: So far it’s a question of method. How would you resolve the prison problem emergency with 62,000 prisoners packed into 209 institutions?
ADP: With an Amnesty you would have 20,000 poor people out on the streets and in a few months they would be back inside again. It’s a palliative cure not a solution. What’s needed instead is a plan that redefines the prison system, the requalification of those who are there and a rethink about the real function of prison that right now is merely for punishment and not about socialisation. Furthermore, what are needed are measures that apply punishment alternative to prison. I’m thinking for example of work that is socially useful that certain sections of the prison population could carry out.

CF: That’s a complex project. Some response is needed immediately.
ADP: However it’s necessary to start in an organic way in relation to the prison system. The Minister of Justice should first of all make the justice system work.

CF: The prisoners are another problem…
ADP: The excess numbers are also due to the fact that 40% of the prisoners are on remand and have not been convicted. Thus, the Minister of Justice must first ensure the efficient running of the tribunals and the prosecutor’s offices. He must supply the money needed for paper, transport and personnel. Then he must reform the civil and criminal trial so that trial times can be reduced. This will cut the risk of “prescription” {when the time limit for a particular offence runs out before the trial is concluded and so no penalty can be applied}

CF: The last amnesty-pardon package was in 1990 That’s 16 years ago…
ADP: Why did they say at that time? “Never again with these abnormal procedures!” And a two-thirds majority was introduced. I don’t see why we should repeat that now.

CF: Have you ever talked about an Amnesty in the government?
ADP: We have never talked about it. This is the position of Italia dei Valori. I think it is very clear. We say: “little prison because of few crimes”. It’s not useful to let people out of prison when society puts them in a position to offend again, without a home and without work.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

A Letter from Sicily

I’m publishing a letter from a young man from Sicily addressed to the President of the Region of Sicily, Cuffaro.

“ Dear President Cuffaro,
I’m writing to you now that you have been re-elected to lead our region to look in depth at a question that I have asked you in the past. I am Benny Calasanzio, resident at S. Margherita Belice but I’m a student at Padua. I’m writing to you to express my opinion (protected by article 21) to express my total disagreement, and even more my disgust largely justified as regards your “warning to those who defame” that’s present on your Internet site www.totocuffaro.it

Honoured President, you give warning that in-depth research is being carried out on the internet aimed at finding and bringing to criminal or civil courts all those that defame you.

On this point, even though I remain firmly convinced that liberty is a good that cannot be taken away nor censored, and even though I believe that a politician must accept criticism, even harsh and of doubtful content, I could even accept your words, without sharing your opinion. What leaves me astonished and indignant is the point following your ”programme manifesto against those who defame”.
When you say that the money resulting from actions for defamation that you foresee yourself winning will be given to the families of victims of the mafia, you are offending those families and no one gives you the right to rise up as an antimafia benefactor especially considering the problems you have with the judicial system. Can I also remind you that the response to an action for defamation that is lost can also be an action for calumny.
President, the one writing to you, has had an uncle and a grandfather filled with shot from the mafia because they didn’t agree to a request to sell a small lime factory at Lucca Sicula, more than 10 years ago and they were immediately recognised as “innocent victims of the mafia”. They died because they did not give in to a mafia logic, for having rebelled, and having held on to their liberty, their refusal to compromise, their wish to continue to breathe the perfume of liberty, not the stink of the mafia pact.

President, the one writing to you, has spoken about the rule of law and trust in the system of justice from a stage, in front of schools, and children, together with Rita Borsellino during a meeting of the Antimafia Caravan, and I am convinced and I will remain so, that, the one writing to you, President, has without doubt, more right than you to say that the mafia is terrible, or at least has the reputation and the honour to say so.

My indignation is the result of your words and still more from your actions. You are on trial for favouring the mafia. The same mafia that has killed members of the Borsellino family who are much less important than the judge, they are my relatives.

Day by day, documents for the inquiry are deposited and they increase the seriousness of your position and day after day you become still more morally less adequate to have the title of President. The most recent document deposited would seem to show the existence of a mole that you placed in the prosecutors office in relation to the investigation into Campanello who repented and was helping Bernardo Provenzano).

I ask myself how, rationally and without polemics, you can turn to the families who are victims in mourning because of mafia crimes when, by referring to the current investigations, you are under investigation for crimes that it seems were helping the mafia. That is incoherent and unjust for those families and it may be legal according to the law but certainly not according to ethics and morality.

I ask you , honoured President, as regards my family, to not make us beneficiaries of those donations that you intend to make to those families that are still crying for their relatives who have been killed, by a criminal association from which the institutions should stay at a distance and should fight with every means and in every moment.

I ask you to leave us alone in our grief. Alone with those who truly and daily are doing something against the mafia. I invite the other families who share in the same grief to do likewise and to refuse any help coming from a President who before turning to us should clear up his situation in the courts to see whether or not he has been involved in crimes in favour of the mafia.

Wishing you good work, Benny Calasanzio”.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 02, 2006

The TAV in Val di Susa

Before the elections I already gave my thoughts about the TAV in Val di Susa on this site.
I don’t think the journalists have read what I wrote at that time and one of the proofs is, for example, today’s headline in il Corriere della Sera: “Di Pietro and the TAV: I will do the work” that doesn’t correspond to my thoughts.
The TAV in Val di Susa can be put into action only if certain conditions are met: the safety of the people of the valley, the possibility of expenditure for an activity that could cost 12,000,000,000 Euro, the strengthening of the existing railway line as an alternative to the tunnel.

The activity isn’t really about high speed but above all it’s about improving the capacity to transport goods with the construction of a tunnel 53 kilometres long that it is expected will take 15 years to construct.
To get a more precise idea about the situation, I have fixed a meeting at the ministry with the President of the Mountain Community Ferrentino and I have already had a meeting with the President of the Observatory, Mario Virano.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

June 01, 2006

Gros Pietro’s answers

Saturday 27 May Gros-Pietro, the President of Autostrade was interviewed by the journalist Massimo Mucchetti for il Corriere della Sera.

However, my comment on the interview is positive because it allows the citizens and the Autostrade shareholders to have a more complete idea about the possible merger with the Spanish company Abertis.

But I would like to pick up on some of the questions asked by Mucchetti and I would like to ask for more complete and structured answers designed not for an audience of ministers but for the audience of all Italians who want to know about the merger in greater depth. Below I’m publishing Mucchetti’s questions and Gros Pietro’s replies.

“ MM: The merger with Abertis changes the assets. But on 18 November 2002, you assured ANAS that the control of the concessionary would remain with Schema28, and that is with Benetton and partners.

Gros-Pietro: That letter was not a commitment. It was useful to explain the effects of the company restructuring. Following the Tender Offer. Anyway we didn’t indicate a deadline.

MM: Without which that assurance would be intended for the whole leght of concession?
Gros-Pietro: It would be an unacceptable limitation on the right to ownership. If the State imposes conditions, they must write them out. The post privatisation lock-up was for 36 months, not an infinite time.

MM: Construction companies and Fiat were excluded from the competition for Autostrade. With the merger, however, the industrial partner will be the construction company Florentino Perez.
Gros-Pietro: The exclusion of the construction companies was imposed by the European Union, as a guarantee of the regularity of the competition for contracts for the work on the "Variante di valico". Now that that work has started, that reasoning has less validity.
On the other hand, the Italian Government has nothing against the presence of construction companies in motorway concessionaries: the Spanish Ferrovial is in the new Cremona-Mantova, Gavio is in the Asti-Cuneo, Toto is with us in the Autostrada dei Parchi.

MM: With the Tender Offer of 2003, you unloaded 8,000,000,000 of debts onto the concessionaries. This was done, not to develop the business, but to increase the income of the partners. The banks imposed conditions on additional investments. What changes with the merger?
Gros-Pietro: By substituting a part of the equity with low cost debts, we have reduced the cost of capital. With the merger, the ratio of the commitments (existing debts and investments to be done) and the gross margin, goes down from 8.4 to 8 and it decreases more rapidly after that.
...

MM: Why did you conclude the agreement when Italy had no Government in the fullness of its powers thus giving the impression of a “done thing”?
Gros-Pietro: According to Spanish law, the shareholders meeting for the merger must be held within 6 months of the approval of the last certificated accounts, thus by 30 June. We had to be quick.
...

MM: Autostrade had a rate of return on the investments of 11%. That is really high considering the low industrial risk. The new Pedemontana Lombarda is not starting because the return on project financing is 7%...
Gros-Pietro: We could even bring it down to below 11% if the political system could manage to reduce times and risks of the new work. These are the real problems, not the nationality of the companies.”
The responses given are evasive or not relevant. However it is important that they are complete and exhaustive if the merger with Abertis is to be authorised.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa