No formal objection regarding the Court of Cassation Public Prosecutor’s decision to hold a disciplinary hearing against Milan judge Clementina Forleo, Public Prosecutor in the Unipol-Bnl inquiry.

Everything officially correct …just like in the script.

However, it leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth when one realises that, once again, the one that forced to bear the brunt is always, and only, the one that is simply trying to do his/her duty without “keeping an eye peeled” or exhibiting fear or reverence for anyone in particular.
And so, in these rare cases, it happens that an inordinate number of personalities, bodies and institutions move in unison in order to dig up, dissect every spoken and written phrase and inspect every action under the microscope in search of the minute speck, the quibble required in order to justify criticism against the one that, in the end, “must” be shown to be inept and unreliable.
Equally, the final outcome is a foregone conclusion, irrespective of the actual intention of the person that, even in good faith, participates in this exercise in personal demolition. By logical consequence and transient propriety, everything that that courageous judge is doing, or has done (and is therefore questioned), is deemed to be unbelievable and must, therefore, simply be archived.
However, all is not yet lost. Judge Forleo, like Public Prosecutor De Magistris, still have the opportunity to make their voice heard in the institutions (starting with the Upper Council of the Magistrature) and to defend their actions. The aim is to reaffirm the right-duty of every magistrate to motivate his/her provisions in accordance with their conscience and independent conviction and not on the basis of convenience or of the people involved.
In the interests of clarity, therefore, if we were to sift through thousands of judicial provisions regarding ordinary citizens, we would surely find an infinite number of expressions or statements used by the judges, which could raise the same criticisms that are being levelled in the case of Forleo. Nobody, speaking of ordinary citizens, would dream of making accusations against the judges for the expressions used in motivating their provisions. Instead, in this case, as in all of the cases involving the Palace and the High Castes, all the highest powers of the State (starting with Parliament) have sprung into action. With the help of the media, public attention has been cleverly diverted away from the real objective of the investigations, namely the guilt in terms of the web of intrigue that emerged from the tapped telephone conversations and the the judge that wanted to read and assess them, rather than the local clever dicks that were seeking sponsors and protection for their financial escapades.