July 31, 2006

The slaughter at Cana

The rights of Israel are sacrosanct. But in the same way, so are the rights of the Lebanese and of the Palestinians. The State of Israel is put more at risk by inconsiderate bombing, wanted by its government, than by every other threat.

If everyone remembers 11 September, many will remember 30 July. At Cana in Lebanon, a building housing Lebanese families moved from elsewhere, was bombed. The number of people who died is 60, and this includes 36 children of whom 15 were disabled.

This bloodbath happened after the killing of hundreds of civilians and the death of 4 United Nations officials.
Israel is going beyond every limit and at this time it’s not possible to be equidistant.

Its aggression against the Lebanon is to be condemned without distinction. Israel must pull back and the United Nations must send a buffer zone force. Israel’s attitude can cause unexpected effects in the whole area. This could range from a new development of terrorism to the entrance of Syria and Iran into the theatre of war.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (4) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

July 29, 2006

Those who voted for the pardon

The vote of the members of the Lower House is public and therefore by definition, everyone has the right to know how the individual parliamentarians have voted. Information about the voting is to be found on the website of the Lower House in the document Indice Elenco N.2. The names found there are given here in this post.

It would be serious if anyone wanted to hide from the electors the names of those who voted for the pardon.
Here are the names of those who voted to throw in the sponge:

Democrazia Socialista
Barani, Catone, De Luca Francesco, Del Bue, Nardi.

Forza Italia
Adornato, Alfano Angelino, Alfano Gioacchino, Aprea, Aracu, Armosino, Azzolini, Baiamonte, Baldelli, Berlusconi, Bernardo, Berruti, Bertolini, Biancofiore, Bocciardo, Bonaiuti, Bondi, Boniver, Boscetto, Brancher, Bruno, Brusco, Caligiuri, Campa, Carfagna, Carlucci, Casero, Ceccacci, Ceroni, Cesaro, Cicchitto, Cicu, Colucci, Conte Gianfranco, Costa, Craxi, Crimi, Dell’elce, Della Vedova, Di Cagno Abbrescia, Di Centa, Di Virgilio, Fabbri, Fallica, Fasolino, Fedele, Ferrigno, Fini Giuseppe, Fitto, Floresta, Fontana Gregorio, Franzoso, Fratta Pasini, Galli, Garagnani, Gardini, Gelmini, Germana’, Giacomoni, Giro, Giudice, Iannarilli, Jannone, La Loggia, Lainati, Laurini, Lazzari, Lenna, Leone, Licastro Scardino, Lupi, Marinello, Marras, Martusciello, Mazzaracchio, Milanato, Minardo, Mistrello Destro, Misuraca, Mondello, Mormino, Moroni, Nan, Napoli Osvaldo, Palmieri, Palumbo, Paoletti Tangheroni, Paroli, Pecorella, Pelino, Pepe Mario, Pescante, Picchi, Pili, Pizzolante, Ponzo, Prestigiacomo, Ravetto, Rivolta, Rossi Luciano, Russo Paolo, Santelli, Sanza, Scajola, Simeoni, Stagno D’alcontres, Stradella, Testoni, Tondo, Tortoli, Ugge’, Valducci, Valentini, Verdini, Verro, Vitali, Vito Alfredo, Vito Elio, Zanetta, Zorzato.

Italia Dei Valori
Rossi Gasparrini.

La Rosa Nel Pugno
Antinucci, Beltrandi, Bonino, Boselli, Buemi, Buglio, Capezzone, Crema, D’elia, Di Gioia, Mancini, Mellano, Piazza Angelo, Poretti, Schietroma, Turci, Turco, Villetti.

Misto
Brugger, Neri, Nucara, Oliva, Rao, Reina, Widmann, Zeller.

Rifondazione Comunista
Acerbo, Burgio, Cannavo’, Cardano, Caruso, Cogodi, De Cristofaro, De Simone, Deiana, Dioguardi, Duranti, Falomi, Farina Daniele, Ferrara, Folena, Forgione, Frias, Giordano, Guadagno, Iacomino, Khalil, Locatelli, Lombardi, Mantovani, Mascia, Migliore, Mungo, Olivieri, Pegolo, Perugia, Provera, Ricci Andrea, Ricci Mario, Rocchi, Russo Franco, Siniscalchi, Smeriglio, Sperandio, Zipponi.

Udc
Adolfo, Alfano Ciro, Barbieri, Bosi, Capitanio Santolini, Casini, Cesa, Ciocchetti, Compagnon, Conti Riccardo, D’agro’, D’alia, Delfino, Dionisi, Drago, Forlani, Formisano, Galati, Galletti, Giovanardi, Greco, Lucchese, Marcazzan, Martinello, Mazzoni, Mele, Mereu, Peretti, Romano, Ronconi, Ruvolo, Tabacci, Tassone, Tucci, Vietti, Volonte’, Zinzi.

Udeur
Adenti, Affronti, Capotosti, Cioffi, D’elpidio, Fabris, Giuditta, Li Causi, Morrone, Picano, Pisacane, Satta.

Ulivo
Albonetti, Allam, Amato, Amendola, Amici, Attili, Aurisicchio, Bandoli, Baratella, Barbi, Bellanova, Benvenuto, Benzoni, Bersani, Betta, Bianchi, Bianco, Bimbi, Bindi, Bocci, Boffa, Bordo, Brandolini, Bressa, Bucchino, Buffo, Burchiellaro, Burtone, Caldarola, Calgaro, Capodicasa, Carbonella, Cardinale, Carta, Castagnetti, Ceccuzzi, Cesario, Chianale, Chiaromonte, Chicchi, Chiti, Cialente, Codurelli, Colasio, Cordoni, Cosentino Lionello, Crisafulli, Crisci, Cuperlo, D’alema, D’antona, D’antoni, Damiano, Dato, De Biasi, De Brasi, De Castro, De Piccoli, Delbono, Di Girolamo, Di Salvo, Duilio, Fadda, Farina Gianni, Farinone, Fasciani, Fassino, Fedi, Ferrari, Fiano, Filippeschi, Fincato, Fiorio, Fioroni, Fistarol, Fluvi, Fogliardi, Fontana Cinzia, Franceschini, Franci, Froner, Fumagalli, Galeazzi, Gambescia, Garofani, Gentili, Gentiloni, Ghizzoni, Giachetti, Giacomelli, Giovanelli, Giulietti, Gozi, Grassi, Grillini, Iannuzzi, Incostante, Intrieri, Lanzillotta, Laratta, Leddi Maiola, Lenzi, Leoni, Letta, Levi, Lomaglio, Longhi, Lovelli, Luca’, Lulli, Luongo, Lusetti, Maderloni, Mantini, Maran, Marantelli, Marcenaro, Marchi, Mariani, Marino, Marone, Martella, Mattarella, Melandri, Merlo Giorgio, Merloni, Meta, Migliavacca, Miglioli, Milana, Minniti, Misiani, Monaco, Morri, Mosella, Motta, Musi, Mussi, Naccarato, Nannicini, Narducci, Nicchi, Oliverio, Orlando Andrea, Ottone, Papini, Parisi, Pedulli, Pertoldi, Pettinari, Pinotti, Piro, Piscitello, Pollastrini, Prodi, Quartiani, Ranieri, Realacci, Rigoni, Rossi Nicola, Rotondo, Ruggeri, Rugghia, Rusconi, Ruta, Rutelli, Samperi, Sanga, Sanna, Santagata, Sasso, Schirru, Scotto, Sereni, Servodio, Sircana, Soro, Spini, Sposetti, Squeglia, Stramaccioni, Strizzolo, Suppa, Tanoni, Tenaglia, Testa, Tolotti, Tomaselli, Trupia, Vannucci, Velo, Ventura, Verini, Vichi, Vico, Villari, Viola, Violante, Visco, Volpini, Zaccaria, Zanotti, Zucchi, Zunino.

Verdi
Balducci, Boato, Boco, Bonelli, Cassola, Cento, De Zulueta, Francescato, Fundaro’, Lion, Pecoraro Scanio, Pellegrino, Piazza Camillo, Poletti, Trepiccione, Zanella.

Italia dei Valori is not giving up. The battle to exclude from the pardon the serious crimes is transferring to the Senate, the Upper House, where the discussion will happen hurriedly on Saturday afternoon with voting taking place on Saturday night. This seems like something that happens when people have something to hide.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (4) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

July 27, 2006

Citizens without representation

Many people of the Unione have told me they feel solidarity with me for my wish to exclude financial crimes, company crimes and corruption from the pardon.

They have done this in private. In parliament almost all of them have behaved differently, bending to the directives of the party.
This is one of the more negative consequences of the electoral law wanted by the CDL that has prevented citizens to vote for their candidate.
It was possible to choose only the election symbol with closed lists of faithful nominated by the party. The parties chose who sits in parliament not the electors.

It is disturbing, really disturbing, to see the Unione denying by its actions, with this pardon, the election programme that it presented to the citizens and for which it was elected. The citizens count for less than zero. They cannot choose their representatives and they cannot even ensure that the election manifesto of the government is respected.

What is the use today of the institution of Parliament? How distant is it from the electorate? That’s a question that we politicians must ask ourselves. And it’s necessary that we give responses soon.
A survey carried out on the website of la Repubblica asks who is in favour of including corruption and crimes by public officials in the pardon. Of the 75,000 people who replied, 96% said “No”. I believe that the response to a national referendum would be similar.

The “ad personam” laws that the CDL wanted in relation to the justice system, must be revoked. Now. In the next few weeks. This government has no more time.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (29) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

July 24, 2006

In piazza Montecitorio against the pardon

Tomorrow from 9:00am in front of Montecitorio, Italia dei Valori is organising a sit in to protest against the pardon law that is about to be passed by Parliament.

Among those present will be all the Italia dei Valori parliamentarians, professor Pancho Pardi, Marco Travaglio, the Friends of Beppe Grillo’s Blog and all those who are against this law that throws in the sponge on 10 years of criminal activity in the fields of the economy and finance.

The law on the pardon, created to free up the prisons, was widened to cover the crimes of false accounting, corruption, tax and finance crimes and crimes relating to the Public Administration.

We are faced with people throwing in the sponge, a really serious action that is only being partially reported and often in a biased way by newspapers and TV channels.

Italians need to make their voices heard loud and clear. They must do this in all legitimate ways. They must do this to avoid the umpteenth step back from real democracy.


P.S. In la Repubblica there’s a survey about the pardon law.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (14) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

A general test of a two sided government

On Monday there’s a vote on the pardon law. The Unione and the CDL will vote for it to be approved with a big majority. The pardon law will include financial crimes, corruption, false accounting even in relation to the Public Administration. Everyone is in agreement because everyone in one way or another is involved. This pardon was not in the manifesto of the Unione and it is a favour done to large swathes of the CDL. It is a general test of the governability of the country.

To the Council of Ministers I expressed my absolute disapproval and that of Italia dei Valori. I have proposed that I should resign as a minister to the indifference of my colleagues. Out of a sense of responsibility to the country I cannot withdraw support and run the risk of early elections and the return of Berlusconi.

If I resign as Minister I can no longer be useful to the citizens for the development of the infrastructure of the country. If I don’t resign and don’t withdraw Italia dei Valori from the government I am hostage to a situation that disgusts me. Politicians are always further away from the citizens. But I believe instead that politicians must be at the service of the citizens and explain the reasons for their choices with absolute clarity.

I dream of a different country, without the internal logic of the parties. Today I’m facing a choice: leave my position as Minister or stay with it. I would like to listen to your voices. I would like to listen to you who are following me in this blog. Write to me. Before I decide I will read all your comments.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (10) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

July 23, 2006

The Charter of Motorway Rights

I am currently examining the preparation of a Charter of Rights of Motorway Users. The charter will be drawn up with the participation of consumer associations, of motorway concessionaires and of representatives of the Ministry of Infrastructure. The charter will contain the rights of the users of stretches of motorway and it will define any compensation that could be due to them.

Purely as an example: if the journey time were to increase markedly for road works for a long period of time, as is the case on the Milano-Torino, then it’s possible that the citizen would have the right to compensation in the form of a reduction in the toll paid. If the costs of collecting the toll payment go down for the concessionary, the citizen must have a benefit and not a disbenefit, as happens now for the Telepass for which there is an additional charge. If the safety conditions are not guaranteed, if there is an accident, the citizen must have help available from mechanics who are responsible to the Ministry.

The Charter will thus have to respond to safety and equity criteria so that the citizens can see that their rights are respected.

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

July 20, 2006

The right to a home

Yesterday I wrote to the President of the Council, Romano Prodi, to the Minister of the Interior, Giuliano Amato to the Minister of the Economy and Finance, Tommaso Padoa Schioppa. The Bersani decree, decree 233 of 4 July 2006 is about to be made a law. I asked them to insert a clause that defers for three months the conditions for eviction in the cities with more than a million inhabitants (Milano, Rome, Naples). This was fixed by the decree of 1 February 2006 and was converted to law n. 86 on 1 February 2006.

This arrangement involves no costs to the State accounts as it is possible to use financial resources set aside by previous legislation but not yet utilised.
The resources available are about 99 million Euro and will be distributed according to a decree from the Ministry of Infrastructure, to the cities that are the centres of metropolitan areas to help that part of the population that is in particular conditions of economic and social disadvantage.

A home has changed from being a social right to being a luxury. Values of the buildings and rents have gone up in recent years in an indiscriminate way. The government can intervene and must do so. It must establish a permanent observatory to monitor the price of property and to take steps to limit unjustified increases.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Society
Commenti (3) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

July 19, 2006

Open Letter to the Unione

Today I have written a letter to the leader of the Unione on the theme of the pardon.

”I am writing on an important issue that is very pressing for me as a person who voted for the Centre Left but above all as the president of Italia dei Valori, a party that is an integral part of the Government majority.

It’s about the pardon and the package that is about to be passed by Parliament. The reform, as it has been formulated allows for the insertion among the crimes even those against the public administration (corruption, crimes committed by public officials in accepting bribes or misappropriating money, abuse of office etc.), finance crimes (false accounting, tax fraud, embezzlement, rigging the market, etc.): and company crimes (bankruptcy etc.): that I maintain is inadmissible for the credibility of our coalition.

If the problem is that our prisons are too full, then I don’t understand why at all costs we have to include among those people who will benefit from the pardon, even those who have committed crimes of this type.

On the other hand, I fear, in fact I am sure, that this is the umpteenth action by the Casa della Libertà to remove the guilt from people and personalities with judicial situations that are not really clear and who are concerned precisely with this type of crime. I cannot believe that the majority wants to descend to pacts exactly on these issues that we have been criticising and fighting for five years and that we said we wanted to change.

Italia dei Valori today accepts that among the actions to be taken in relation to laws about the system of justice, it accepts that the measure in discussion, the granting of a pardon is necessary. We recognise that the prisons are too full and have reached their limits.

For this reason, for the responsibility that we have today as a player in the majority coalition and for the programme that we have signed up to with the coalition, we want to go forward. But we could never accept that one of the first actions in relation to the justice system, adopted by the Centre Left majority is that of freeing Previti when for years we have been fighting against the law about legitimate suspicion, the ex-Cirielli law, the depenalisation of false accounting and the Pecorella law.

As a person who voted for the Centre Left I could never understand such a choice.

As president of Italia dei Valori and member of the majority coalition I will never be able to accept this. And the resulting consequences are clear.
Antonio Di Pietro

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (5) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

July 18, 2006

Vincenzo Visco and the Guardia di Finanza

The top personnel of the Lombardy Guardia di Finanza will be transferred or given other roles. Some of the most important investigations, including those concerning Parmalat, Unipol and Antoveneta are carried out by the Procura di Milano {Milan prosecutors’ office} in direct collaboration with the Guardia di Finanza. It is legitimate that citizens should know the reasons for this important decision taken by the deputy economy minister Vincenzo Visco.

There must be no kind of doubt about the removal of State officials who have played a decisive role in some of the most important investigations of recent years. I note the declaration made by Vincenzo Visco: “I categorically deny any reference to the Unipol case in the activities arranged by the general command of the Guardia di Finanza. This is a falsity constructed by art”. But this does not convince me.

The magistrates of the Milan prosecutors’ office met with the top personnel of the Guardia di Finanza on Monday. Before that, they wrote you a letter warning you not to go ahead with the transfers so that the delicate investigations could be completed. In just a few days, we have witnessed an agreement across the board in the Justice Committee for the law granting a pardon to be extended to finance crimes. Straight after that we see the decapitation of the Lombardy Guardia di Finanza. Is this a coincidence?

Dear colleague, I ask you to clear this up publicly or to do so in the parliamentary committee. Let us know the reasons for this decision so that the citizens will not consider this a move motivated by the need to throw sand into the Unipol investigations, as they are doing at the moment. It can also avoid conflict with the magistrates.

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

July 17, 2006

Respecting the rules

I’m publishing the text of the interview given today to il Corriere della Sera on the topics of liberalisation and the pardon for financial crimes.

ADP: By intervening in the field of liberalisation, the government is doing what it has been asked to do: allow for the growth of competition, eliminate a whole heap of privileges. All the categories that understand and want to contribute to improving this approach will be listened to. But if the search for consensus is only useful for drawing things out, then we must continue on our path, because, it’s on this point that the credibility of the government and the ruling majority balances.
CdS: However in the face of the protests of the taxi drivers, isn’t the doctrine of “governing by consensus“ put in crisis? Isn’t this a doctrine that the Centre Left has adopted as a general principle?
ADP: Let’s avoid misunderstanding: consensus is a useful tool if it helps to take decisions that are useful to the general interest and everyone is in agreement. If the ones in front of us want to defend themselves and not the higher interest, then dialogue is not possible. The government is doing all that is possible for the taxi drivers.
CdS: After the white cars {taxis} it’ll be the turn of the pharmacists, the lawyers and the other categories involved. Isn’t there a risk to go from consensus to general disagreement?
ADP: If you ask the taxi drivers they will say that it is right to take action in relation to the lawyers, if you ask the notaries, they are keen to do something about the banks. Liberalisation is good only for the others. This is a signal that we have chosen the right path.
Then it’s possible to have discussions. I’ve encountered many pharmacists and they have expressed their fear that the new measures will mean that pharmacies will disappear from small villages and make the surveillance of the use of pharmaceuticals less widespread. These fears are just and can be faced up to if the objective is not simply to leave things unchanged.
CdS: However, many critics of the Bersani package say that it does not go far enough to affect the real economic powers and in the case of pharmaceuticals in the supermarkets, that it actually favours them.
ADP: We are carrying out liberalisation as we have been asked to do and we will continue to do. Other actions will follow. I can assure you that we will not be influenced by anyone just because of their large or small privileges.
CdS: The government’s message is clear: but already at the first pass in the Productive Activities Committee the initial difficulties are being seen. Do you think you will manage to get it to go all the way?
ADP: That is why I’m saying that it’s not just for the government but the whole of the majority coalition is playing for its credibility. The measures were part of the political manifesto, our political programme, and no one can now pull back. In fact I’ve been annoyed by seeing in a few cases that the search for particular visibility has been happening to the detriment of the coalition.
CdS: In relation to the compactness of the Unione {governing coalition}: the presence of financial crimes as beneficiaries of the pardon has created a reaction from yourself and from Italia dei Valori.
ADP: It is depressing how the first parliamentary action of the Centre Left is turned upside down. It is necessary and it has a precise objective to reduce the prison population. However someone wants to throw in among the other crimes those when a public official misuses the money or property of others, crimes against the public administration and tax crimes.
I’m talking of turning things upside down because while there are three thousand people in prison because they had no “permission to stay” document, I have no information about prisoners who are there for tax crimes. This is something that not even the Berlusconi government has done. Italia dei Valori was created precisely to get the rules respected. If it were to become reality we could never accept it.
CdS: Are you saying that you would leave the coalition?
ADP: We don’t do blackmail. We would support the coalition. But I certainly couldn’t be in government with them.
CdS: So you would resign?
ADP: Definitely, I would resign.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Commenti (4) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

July 16, 2006

A pardon for those who corrupt

The citizens have chosen the Centre Left to finally turn over a new leaf after years in which the concept of justice has been declining until it has almost completely disappeared. Laws that are ad personam (made for a particular individual), amnesties, delegitimisation of the magistracy, exaltation of impunity.
Italian citizens that vote for us, and I feel that I can speak for all the Centre Left and not just Italia dei Valori, have done this also to change the state of affairs of guaranteeing impunity to those who corrupt and evade taxes, with Parliament turning a blind eye.
On this point, on this wish of the electorate, I believe that the secretaries of the parties in the Centre Left coalition and even Romano Prodi cannot but be in agreement.
If we are in Parliament, if we are Ministers, undersecretaries, presidents of the two Houses of Parliaments, it is only because the Italians, even with a tiny majority of the votes, wanted a change for a new Italy, a clean Italy.
And now what are we doing today? We are ignoring those who voted for us, we are occupying our comfortable armchairs and we are discussing a draft law about a pardon that would set free those who are responsible for corruption, crimes committed by public officials in accepting bribes or misappropriating money, and false accounting.These are people who never go to prison; this is more than a pardon to free up the prisons. To pardon these people would be a scandal! There are even party leaders, both of the Centre Left and Centre Right, waiting to be sentenced, for whom it would be possible to open up the doors of prison soon.
Italia dei Valori will vote against this draft law.
If it were to be approved, this law would be cheating the citizens. It is not a great route to take for a government that wants to last 5 years.

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

July 15, 2006

Framework Law: 115,000,000,000 Euro are missing

Today I presented I presented a document to the Council of Ministers. It is the document that integrates with the Documento di programmazione economica finanziaria (DPEF) {Economic and Financial Planning Document} for the public works in that part of the framework law that is the responsibility of the Ministry of Infrastructure. The introduction is attached.
Basically, to complete the original programme that was set out in 2001, about 115,000,000,000 Euro are missing. This is due in part to the lack of funds, and in part to the 38% increase in the value of the work for extensions that were not originally planned and for increase in the cost of the raw materials.
In this serious situation, I have given priority to those public works that have necessarily to be finished off and that have already reached a state of near completion.
In the next few days, I will make the whole document available online.
Whilst looking at the state of activity of the public works and at the investments made, a very deep asymmetry becomes apparent between the North and the Centre and South of the country. In fact, 77% of the total investment is located in the North, as against 13% in the Centre and 10% in the south.
This is a logic of investments that is contrary to the creation of an integrated transport system and one that introduces disequilibrium and problems at a national level.

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

July 14, 2006

22 - The Tangentopoli Commission

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

GV: What about the Parliamentary Commission on Tangentopoli, that we heard so much clamour about?
ADP: In the form it was originally proposed, it was the biggest political con trick of those years. Firstly, it wasn’t easy to see what use it could have: it was said that Parliament had to study the phenomenon but in fact the phenomenon was very well understood.
The truth is that they wanted to put the trials on trial, to put on trial the magistrates that had dared to investigate politicians. They wanted to investigate (and perhaps even accuse of having committed crimes) those who had investigated them.After the Lower House had already approved a text that would have been suicidal for the credibility of the institutions, luckily in the Senate they made certain modifications that put things back in place. This was also following my very firm stand and my public statements. But then this is why nothing actually was done.
GV: So in the end nothing was done?
ADP: No, considering that for the Berlusconian troops in Parliament the only reason they wanted the Parliamentary Commission on
Tangentopoli was to put the magistrates in a position of being accused.
Once the text of the draft law no longer allowed for that tool to be used, they allowed its parliamentary progress to finish.
And while doing this, among other things, they found friends also on the benches of the Centre Left, starting from the heirs of the Socialist Party. For the Sdi {Socialisti democratici italiani} members, this blessed Commission seemed to be the conditio sine qua non to give their support to the second D’Alema government.
This is why they made an enormous noise. But then, D’Alema went and Giuliano Amato arrived and the socialists became part of the government. They too managed to fit nicely into the comfortable armchairs of power and no one has talked about the Parliamentary Commission on.

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

July 13, 2006

The spoils system

The change of the people in the very senior positions in the companies controlled by the State, or spoils system, is common practice when a new government coalition takes office.

The spoils system is often used to place people trusted by the parties of the government into key positions.
However, the removal of a director means there are very high costs: millions of Euro in terms of an exit package.

This cost is paid by the citizens, since they are the shareholders of the State companies.

We need to ask the question whether we can discuss the current system of changing the whole of the top management of the public services. The current system is costly and inefficient and is seen by public opinion as a way of occupying every powerful space. Thus it must be possible to terminate the mandate of the managers, but based on very clear criteria: Have they achieved positive and measurable results? If they haven’t, then just like a minister who is dismissed, they should be sent away without an exit package. The government body to which they refer must be authorised to put this into action.

Another topic relating to the spoils system is the level of pay of the people in top positions in State companies. This must be at a level that is in proportion to the real contribution they make to the company. It should not be based on the political importance that the person has for any particular party.

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

July 11, 2006

Giorgio Ambrosoli

Today is 11 July. Twenty seven years have passed since the murder of a great servant of the State. He’s a man defined as a “bourgeois hero”: Giorgio Ambrosoli, killed by a mafia assassin with 3 shots from a Magnum 357 to the heart. Five years earlier he had been appointed liquidator of Michele Sindona’s Banca Privata Italiana.

He knew the risk he was taking on when he accepted the appointment. He knew about collusion between Sindona, some Italian politicians and the mafia. He accepted out of a spirit of service to the State and he went ahead to get to the bottom of things. Thanks to his work, Michele Sindona was arrested. The politicians that protected Sindona, the ones who didn’t lift a finger to save the life of Ambrosoli, the ones who are signed up to the P2, who obstructed him, are still in circulation.

A few years before his death, Giorgio Ambrosoli wrote a short testament-letter to his wife. Certain passages are given here to honour his memory.

“Dearest Anna,
Today is 25.2.1975 and I am ready for the deposition of the state of debts of the Banca Privata Italiana. This is an act that will obviously not satisfy many people and it has cost a lot of effort.
I’m not afraid for myself because I can’t see other possibilities other than pressure to get me substituted. But it’s certain that affairs like that of Verzotto (Christian Democrat senator) and the very fact of having to deal with people of every colour and kind doesn’t indeed give me peace. Without a doubt, whatever happens, I will pay very dearly for this position: I knew that before taking it on and so there’s no regret at all, because for me it’s been a unique occasion to do something for the country. However, whatever happens, you know what you have to do and I’m certain that you will do it really well. It will be up to you to bring up the young ones and to let them grow in the respect of those values that we believe in…. That they are aware of their duty towards themselves, towards their family in the transcendent sense that I have towards the country that is called Italy or is called Europe.
…
Giorgio”.

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

July 10, 2006

21 – The ‘political solution’

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

GV: At this point, let’s try to draw a line between the past and the future. Wouldn’t it be the moment to relaunch your old idea of a “political solution” to make a final exit from Tangentopoli?
ADP: It’s a statement that I hear repeated often. But in my opinion it can mean everything or nothing. In fact in the real intentions of some people, it means just one thing: let’s have a great amnesty, let’s bury the thing, those who have given have given, those who have taken have taken.
What a shameful situation! This doesn’t mean that it is impossible to find a solution. At that time, we certainly did try to indicate some reasonable solutions but we were immediately accused (especially by Berlusconi and his followers) and then actually denounced for attempting to subvert the Constitution. This was really because we would have interfered with other State powers.
We need to remember what was happening at the time. It was 1994. We were right in the middle of Mani Pulite and, out of a sense of decency, it wasn’t possible to resolve everything by throwing in the sponge, to pretend that nothing had happened. On one hand it was necessary to sort things out with the justice system and on the other hand to give a breather to the economy and to get the contracts off the ground again, to get those big companies that were involved in the investigation back into economic activity.
Questions like this were put to us, the pool of magistrates, and we replied as citizens on a cultural level, in the universities, in debates and in conferences.
On 3 September 1994 in a conference organised by Studio Ambrosetti at Cernobbio, I spoke about a proposal that had been formulated with my colleagues. The proposal combined the respect for the rule of law and the needs of the economy. The idea was to have a transition time of 6 months to apply a special clause of “impunity” for those who confessed to a crime, gave back anything taken illegally and as a consequence they would not be allowed to hold public office.

GV: These were some of the points in the 'pacchetto Flick', the package proposed by the Minister of Justice in the Prodi government.
ADP: A few years later Flick picked up some of our ideas, but he wanted to go further, he wanted to arrive at a conditional amnesty.

GV: What exactly is the difference between the impunity clause and the conditional amnesty?
ADP: The ‘impunity clause’ means that the crime exists, it is admitted and recognised, but the main punishment is made good: but the obligation to give back anything taken illicitly remains. The amnesty, on the other hand, does not verify the facts, in some way it ignores the crime and practically cancels it and it also cancels any additional consequences: it really is a matter of throwing in the sponge. Precisely so as to avoid that consequence, Flick made the restitution of the damage a condition of the amnesty. That is why it was not passed.

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

The DPEF and empty coffers

Straight away the government has had to face up to empty coffers and to the economic emergency. The Documento di programmazione economica e finanziaria (Dpef) {Economic and Financial Programme Document} is an important response to the grave situation that Italy finds itself in. The 35 thousand million project involving 20 to bring the accounts back to health and 15 for development, is the first step in a five year articulated plan. The plan aims to get a zero deficit and to get the public debt to below 10 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
If State finance is to be brought back to a healthy situation and to avoid bankruptcy, it's inevitable that changes need to be made to the most important spending items in the budget. 80% of this is made up of spending on local bodies, on pensions, on public administration and on health. Citizens will be called to make sacrifices, but these must be equably distributed. To do this there will be severe and efficient measures against tax evasion that has reached intolerable levels in Italy. Citizens and companies must furthermore, be able to access efficient services for energy, telecommunications, and transport at competitive costs.
In relation to my direct responsibility, I am studying for the Ferrovie dello Stato {State Railways} the separation of the infrastructure (the rails) and the vehicles (the trains) so as to restore competition to the system and thus to give advantages to the citizens.

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

July 07, 2006

Sismi and the kidnapping of Abu Omar

Two Sismi {Italian secret service} officials, Marco Mancini and Gustavo Pignero have been arrested for collaborating in the abduction of a person with the additional factor of abusing their power as public officials, for the kidnapping of the Egyptian, Abu Omar in Milan in December 2003. Abu Omar is still detained in Egypt.

The Milan magistrates that issued the arrest warrant have correctly carried out their duty as no one, not even the secret services can act above the law.
However the importance and the legitimacy of the secret services must be underlined. In every democratic State they are essential to protect the security of the country and in particular in the face of terrorism.

The Italian secret services have acted in agreement with the CIA. It is not credible that the American secret services have kidnapped a person in a foreign State without the prior authorisation of George Bush and that he had not told the Italian government. The Sismi officials are responsible only if they acted independently of the institutional powers without receiving orders from the former President of the Council.

If this is not the case, and it is more likely that it is not, then Silvio Berlusconi, accepting his responsibility, must go as soon as possible to the magistrates and if there are national security issues at stake, he must claim State secrecy.

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

July 06, 2006

20 – Tangentopoli is not finished

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 a fact that corruption continues and that Tangentopoli is not finished. What’s the moral that we can see there?
ADP: Good. That’s true. It means that the justice system has failed but that’s not the failure of the Clean Hands project.
And the justice system has failed not really because the magistrates have arrested innocent people but above all because of this political class. I don’t want to hide the fact that even among the magistrates, as among any group of people there are idol ones and visionaries. The political class embodies the interests of private individuals, those of the trial and those that are personal to members of the Pole as well as the political interests of social normalisation that is headed up by the Centre Left.
In recent years, all the energies have been focused on making legislation that favours the defendants rather than towards identifying the best tools that can be used in trials to ascertain the truth.
In parallel with the creation of rules about the rights of defence for the defendant, there should have been work on improving the way a trial can be concluded by reducing the degrees of judgement and making it a norm that alternative rites can be applied. The judicial offices should have been given the means, the tools and the trial reforms so that the truth can be reached rather than impunity. There should have been new norms dealing with crimes against the public administration and about the phenomenon of corruption. Above all the certainty of punishment should have been made effective so that those who misbehave know that they will finish up in prison and will stay there. In a prison that is more human and more decent, yes, but still a prison for those whom crime is the meaning of life.
These and many others should have been the objectives and the actions that the Centre Left government should have set out to achieve as soon as they were installed in Palazzo Chigi. They should have done that rather than chasing after the continual requests and unsustainable compromises of the current Berlusconian.

GV: But is it not true, senator Di Pietro, that you had too much faith in the “judicial way” to the Second Republic and that today we are paying the consequences?
ADP: Ah yes. We’ll see that the fault is not of the one who committed the crimes but of the one who discovered them. We need to get a full understanding on this point. We didn’t carry out our investigation to arrive at a Second Republic using the judicial way.
The Second Republic could have been the consequence resulting from the verification of the facts about the crimes committed by the protagonists of the First Republic. Let’s not mix up cause and effect.
The presupposition of the investigations was the verification of who was guilty before the law. The result is that the new political class, instead of taking on the need to celebrate the trials, they got busy approving norms to ensure the impunity of those who should have been tried.

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

July 05, 2006

Motorway concessions

Privatisations and concessions have been put into effect by the Italian State in the last 10 years at conditions that are often disadvantageous.

This is a situation that has moved resources of the State and thus of the citizens, to give advantages to finance and business people. The State has played the part of an inverted Robin Hood. It hasn’t robbed from the citizens, but in fact it has impoverished them of goods that they owned without giving them any real benefits in exchange. To this it must be added that control instruments to make the concessions work are missing.

I have arranged a meeting this afternoon with Aiscat. This is a grouping of dozens of motorway concessionaires that are controlled by ANAS on behalf of the Ministry of Infrastructure. The reason for the meeting is the discussion of the current situation that is balanced too far in favour of the concessionaires. This is a situation that cannot continue.

I will propose to Aiscat the institution of a framework contract with new regulations that the concessionaires must work within. For each individual concessionaire a special contract will be prepared with the support of a work group involving representatives of the concessionaires, of the Ministry, of consumer associations, of motorway users, and of taxpayers.

These latter three categories for me are essential even though they have been ignored in the past. They are necessary to make these concessions fair. This same route should obviously be followed by the Autostrade company if it wants to conclude its merger project.

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

The thirst of the Eolie

The mayors of the Eolie archipelago are taking action against the reduction of water that is brought in water transport ships. There’s a planned reduction from 1,750,000 cubic metres of water a year to 1,400,000. Water comes in the ships from Naples on a journey that is long and costly and I hope not for private interests.
Water, not only for the Eolie, is a good that is ever more rare and more costly. Apart from the current situation that will definitely be resolved, it’s necessary to invest in systems that will make the Eolie less dependent on water supplies by ship. This also applies to other places. Investment in desalination plants must be evaluated as soon as possible and put into effect. 
Now that there is this emergency, likely to be followed by many others, it is the right moment to start a plan that allows the Eolie to be autonomous from the point of view of water supplies but also energy supplies using solar energy. I will talk to Minister Bersani about this. I know that he is very much alert to these issues.

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

July 03, 2006

Income due to position

Last Friday, the Council of Ministers took an important step in favour of the citizens with a series of liberalisations that have eliminated the historic incomes due to position.

It is one step on the route to liberalising the Italian economy from corporate interests and to fight inflation. The steps concern pharmacies, bank accounts, transport, acts of public notaries, insurance, and rules relating to the activities of accountants and professionals.

When any income due to position is under discussion it is obvious that the categories of people affected, for example the taxi drivers, the pharmacists, and the public notaries, in some way feel defrauded of a right. But the free market does not run on this sort of income and the Government is obliged to protect the plurality of the citizens not a single category.

In the set of measures taken, the power of the Authorities to provide sanctions has been strengthened and it can now be up to 10% of the amount invoiced instead of the 3% that it was previously. This is an important decision that will in the future be accompanied by other strong government measures in relation to the de facto monopolies of the utilities. In particular I’m referring to telecommunications and energy, the sectors that for tariffs and for the quality of service provided, must conform to Europe as soon as possible.

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

July 02, 2006

Transparent Ministries

In the next few weeks, I will set up a new part of this site for the list of public works that my Ministry will start or conclude. It will be divided into regions and will start with the most important.
For each activity there will be a public space available for the comments of the citizens, just as there is now for each of my articles. For each activity, information will be given about the progress and any variations that are happening.
I believe that the Ministries, starting from my own must be transparent and visible to the citizens and that they should welcome their suggestions and criticisms and as far as possible should give responses to these.
Public works are done for the citizens. They have no other function. It is right that the citizens can make contributions with their ideas and reflections. My Ministry will not fail to take these into consideration.

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

The Centres for Initial Welcome

The Centri di Prima Accoglienza (CPT) {Centres for Initial Welcome} were set up for those who come into our country clandestinely. The clandestines that are looked after there can later be allowed to stay in Italy, for example for political or humanitarian reasons, or they can be expelled.
These Centres are necessary.
A situation in which thousands of people from outside the European Community illegally enter Italy and move around the streets without documents, without work, without the means of subsistence, is not possible. This evaluation is not one of the Right nor of the Left, it is simply good sense. To dismantle these Centres would not resolve anything and in fact it would only increase the traffic of clandestines.
But the conditions of life of the people who are detained there must absolutely be improved. We talk in fact of assistance and not of lager or prison.
In the next few weeks Italia dei Valori will visit some of these Centres and reports of its impressions will be published on this site.

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