16 May 2008

Agcom partiality

There are manoevres against Travaglio and the programme “Anno Zero” so as not to disturb those who manoevre. The preliminary investigation started by Agcom {Authority for Communications} in such a hurry is just the latest attempt to stop anyone who still has the courage to recount the facts even if they are not pleasing to the caste of politicians. Basically it seems to be saying: attack one so as to put to sleep the critical conscience of a hundred.
It is still not clear what the charges against Travaglio would be, given that he is only telling us of well known facts and about which there has never been any indignation expressed. Episodes about which many citizens, thanks to the information that they received, can now form their own opinion and freely make judgements.
The Authority for Communications would do well to explain how it is that only on this occasion it has been so promptly and fantastically watchful, while on so many other occasions it seemed to be “inattentive” to such an extent that it has been up to others to think about being vigilant.

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Comments(1) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print

14 May 2008

Silvio Berlusconi’s speech

The speech of Silvio Berlusconi, the President of the Council to Parliament to ask for their trust in his government, in a pure “papist” and pseudo-moralistic style, reminds me of the fable of the spider that invites the fly into his web. I don’t know whether the Democratic Party will be a fool and fall in but it is certain that we of Italia dei Valori will not do so.

He has described the country of dreams and toy people that he would like to see, but he has not given an indication of how he is going to do that. His speech – full of “but also” seemed to be just an exercise of balance to fit everything as well as its contrary, in the hope of ingratiating himself with the majority and the opposition. North and South, workers and employers, entrepreneurs and Trades Unions, vulnerable social groups and strong ones, pacifists and warmongers, rigourists and wasters.

He says he wants dialogue with a single voice: his own! And that anyone who doesn’t think like him: “let him be struck down by the plague”: is just an indifferent, an advocate of violence, a populist, basically a person that disturbs the manoevres, to be isolated and condemned.

To get an idea, just read over his speech, full not of proposals for government but of “glaring omissions” on key questions, like the relaunch of the fight against tax evasion, the possibility for the justice system to function, the transparency of markets, the plurality of information, the fight against the “Caste”, the waste in the public administration, the slowness and the confusion of bureaucracy, the issue of the RAI as a public service, the scandalous affair Europa7-Rete4 and the associated respect for the directives and the verdict against the controlling bodies.

In his speech, Berlusconi placed the accent on the verb, “to grow”. He should have used the verb “to change”. Without change, growth cannot happen. The right verb is “change”.

To start again, it’s necessary to eliminate at the roots the causes that are blocking the country right now. Among these are the lack of the freedom of information, the widespread existence of organised crime, and the lack of the certainty of being punished.

Economics and ethics are two sides of the same coin. A strong economy cannot be separated from the “ethics of behaviour” and this is not the case in Italy with “ad personam” laws, with elected convicts in Parliament as the precise choice of the leader of the PDL.

A country that wants to attract foreign investments cannot allow itself to have shadows on those who have the primary responsibility in the banking system, as in the case of Cesare Geronzi.

Freedom of information is the basis of democracy. The recent verdict of the European Court of Justice says that Rete 4, owned by the President of the Council, must give up its frequencies to Europa 7, otherwise Italian citizens will pay, retroactively from 1 January 2006, each day, the sum of 300,000 euro in fines.

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Comments(2) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print

13 May 2008

Information Black Out

It’s really true that : The tongue ever turns to the aching tooth!

The attacks that the journalist Marco Travaglio is being subjected to simply for having reported the news about facts that are true and that have happened and that relate to no lesser person than the one with the second most important position in the State, the President of the Senate Schifani, show us that, as usual, when it comes to defending the Caste, the leaders of the parties on the Right and on the Left close ranks and become a single unit (as happened at the moment of the Great Pardon).

So I ask myself and I ask you: but if a journalist reveals circumstances that are not known to most of the citizens, is he fulfilling his own duty to report and provide criticism or not? If it turns out that Schifani was associated with people of the criminal world, then the President of the Senate, exactly because he in this high position, should explain his reasons or contest the facts. It is his moral duty.

And again I ask myself and this time I ask the many good thinkers of the Democratic Party: but do you know who they are these people Nino Mandalà and Benny D’Agostino who have been convicted for mafia? And do you know what it means to have been associated with these people in the golden times of the mafia, as Schifani was? Well then, where’s the harm if an independent journalist asks transparent questions and in the same transparent way informs the general public?

What’s the point in attacking Travaglio just for telling the truth? Instead of getting angry with him, wouldn’t it be better to take the opportunity to set up a detailed and truthful information campaign about who is in Parliament, in the Government or in the other institutions controlled by politics? Or otherwise is the silence due to the fact that even in the ranks of the Centre Left there are embarrassing positions that make it better to pretend there’s nothing and to align themselves with the adversary in the hope that one day they will return the favour?

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Comments(3) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print

12 May 2008

Solidarity with Marco Travaglio

Today Marco Travaglio has received very severe criticism, from both the majority and from those who should be the opposition because he has simply reported facts about Renato Schifani, President of the Senate.

I’m showing solidarity with Marco Travaglio because he has simply done his duty giving an account of the facts.

Episodes that cannot be changed or kept quiet just because, from one day to the next, a person becomes President of the Senate or, and just for this reason, wipe out with a sweep of the sponge his whole history and his whole past.

A journalist who tells the story by citing specific episodes, does not need anyone to contradict him. However, giving arguments that contradict each other must be done by politicians when they come face to face.

The reporter reports what happened. Paradoxically it would mean that every time he writes about or reports the story of a robbery, it should be possible to hear the version from the robber.

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Comments(9) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print

11 May 2008

Schifani Renato Giuseppe

Herewith is the "identity card" of the current Leader of the Senate, as drawn from "If you know them, then you avoid them", the book published by Chiarelettere and written by Peter Gomez and Marco Travaglio.
Schifani Renato Giuseppe (FI)
Registry: Born in Palermo on 11 May 1950.
Curriculum: Degree in Law; attorney; FI Group Leader in the Senate since 2001; 3 legislatures (1996, 2001, 2006).
Particular achievements: Bearing his name, as well as that of the Ulivo’s senator, Antonio Maccanico, is the law passed in June 2003 aimed at blocking the prosecution of Silvio Berlusconi: the Maccanico-Schifani law was promulgated with the excuse of needing to make the “top five government representatives” immune from prosecution (although the other four incumbents were not affected by any form of legal prosecution at the time). The legislation was however declared to be unconstitutional in the sitting of 13 January 2004. The former Minister of Justice, Palermo native Filippo Mancuso, defined Schifani as "the Prince of the credit recovery Court", even though it appears that, in the past, Schifani was mostly involved as a specialist in matters concerning urban planning. During the Eighties he was a partner in the Villabate company, together with Enrico La Loggia, Nino Mandalà, who was later sentenced to 8 years imprisonment for dealing with the mafia and another 4 for improper allocation of assets, as well as businessman Benny D'Agostino, who was later sentenced for third party involvement in dealings with the mafia. According to reformed offender Francesco Campanella, during the Nineties:
the Villabate urban planning scheme, which was the basic planning tool as regards the planned shopping mall and which involved the interests of certain mafia members and politicians, was apparently agreed by Antonio Mandalà and La Loggia. The operation appears to have envisaged the commissioning of one of their own trusted planners, namely engineer Guzzardo, and an appointment as the Mayor’s urban planning expert. In exchange, La Loggia, Schifani and Guzzardo were to have shared out the planning and consultancy fees amongst themselves. The Villabate urban planning scheme was then drawn up according to instructions provided by the very same Antonino and Nicola Mandalà [Antonino’s son who, for a couple of years, handled the movements and period in hiding of Bernardo Provenzano, ed.], on the basis of the instructions received from the mafia family members and in terms of the agreed bribes.
Schifani, who was in fact an urban planning consultant for the Villabate Municipality, and La Loggia had stated that they would be taking legal action against Campanella.

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Comments(0) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print

10 May 2008

Respect for the voters

Here is one of my interviews, as printed in today’s edition of La Repubblica, regarding the current situation regarding politics within the opposition.

Antonio Di Pietro: The pact with the Democratic Party? It will only be broken if they throw us out. Not on the basis of the shadow government or the chairmanship of the RAI Vigilance Committee. All we are hearing are provocative statements. I am asking myself whether Veltroni is wanting to head up only the Democratic Party or the coalition as a whole because, if this is so, the Italia dei valori party is strong enough to go it alone.

Repubblica: Marco Follini says: Di Pietro out of the alliance, the Udc in.
Antonio Di Pietro: Let’s put it this way, today is the day that the Berlusconi government has been sworn in and we of the Italia dei valori party are concerned about this, above all else. We are saying that the new executive clearly displays the personal touch of the premier himself, above all in the certain important areas such as Communications, which does not even have its own Ministry, and Justice, which has been entrusted to one of the Cavaliere’s closest allies, whose Curriculum Vitae contains little else in his favour. We will refrain from commenting any further, however, as regards certain other issues, we will not allow ourselves to be overcome by any preconceptions.

Repubblica: Are you saying that you will be voting with the Government in certain cases?
Antonio Di Pietro: If they are able to find the necessary resources in order to eliminate Local Property Taxes or to increase salaries, to name but two examples, then we will most certainly support them.

Repubblica: We were talking about Follini.
Antonio Di Pietro: Every day we read certain provocations, which we refuse to dignify with any response. We made a deal with the voters, more so than with the Democratic Party. There is a leader of the coalition, which we acknowledge, however, should he persist in considering only his own party, then he must accept accountability for these actions.

Repubblica: But was it not precisely you that broke the pact by refusing to be part of a united group in Parliament?
Antonio Di Pietro: They make the rules and we, who obtained 43 seats in Parliament, cannot be independent? Please let’s be serious... And furthermore, every step in the process regarding the groups was discussed and agreed with the Democratic Party.

Repubblica: And yet you have not been consulted as regards the shadow government, nor as regards the chairmanship of the RAI Vigilance Committee, something that is very close to your heart.
Antonio Di Pietro: We are waiting for some sign, a signal of some sort. However, we are not about to break our alliance with them, even should we be left out in the cold. We have the strength to go it alone, this is true, but we are not prepared to betray the voters. Our commitment to them remains unchanged. I am sorry if this upsets anyone who was expecting some sort of retribution against the Democratic Party.

Repubblica: So, does this mean that you are giving up the fight?
Antonio Di Pietro: Absolutely not.

Repubblica: How should the RAI Vigilance Committee be managed?
Antonio Di Pietro: Certainly not along the lines of the Petruccioli model. We have already given enough as regards the “buddy-boy” decisions that were made in the past, which left us with an information system that is skewed and with ongoing conflicts of interest. Guarantees do not imply “a piece for me and one for you”, but rather they involve complying with European Laws. We refuse to stand idly by in this regard and, in early June, we will be going to the Euro Parliament to lodge a complaint regarding the Italian regulations. We certainly cannot realistically expect Gasparri himself to resolve the problems of the Gasparri Law...

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Comments(0) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print

8 May 2008

Vain Hope

I’m publishing a brief statement I made today at the end of the consultation at the Quirinale with the President of the Republic, on the topic of justice.
”If it’s true, as it is true that you can identify a good day first thing in the morning, we will understand already in the next few hours what this government and its President of the Council intend to do when we can see the name of the Minister of Justice. Because by looking at that name we will be able to understand what real space will be given to a commitment related to the fundamental topics why the Centre Right has won the elections giving the Italians to believe that it can do better than us in dealing with justice and security.
If there really turns out to be a clear rethink, and thus solid action in relation to security interventions, Italia dei Valori will give its own contributions in terms of ideas, solutions and support. Naturally, knowing who we are dealing with, first we want to be able to read the documents, to evaluate them and then take action.”

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Comments(0) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print

7 May 2008

State Schizophrenia

I’m publishing Marco Travaglio’s article called "Europa7, lo Stato copia Mediaset" {Europa7, the State copies Mediaset}.

Today the Council of State, after 9 years of legal battles in Italy and in Europe, will decide the amount to be paid by the State in recompense to Europa7 for the failure to assign frequencies to them and whether to finally let them broadcast nationally. In the discussion, the government is represented by the State Advocacy Service. They have surprisingly been given the task by the Minister of Communications, Paolo Gentiloni and asked to reject the requests of the publisher Francesco Di Stefano and to defend the status quo: that is the Gasparri law and the right of Rete4 to occupy the frequencies even without a concession (lost by Mediaset and won by Europa7 in 1999).


A fact that is quite individual: the Unione had promised to repeal the Gasparri law and on 31 January the European Court of Justice gave its support to the rights of Europa7 against those of Rete4. But that’s not enough. To defend Rete4, the State Advocacy Service representing the Prodi government copied in its memo, whole pages taken from that of the Mediaset lawyers. . Not to cite their hypotheses in inverted commas. But to take them on as their own, without even giving details about where they came from. The Berlusconi group officially is not one of the parties to the discussion: Europa7, for the failure to assign the frequencies, has cited the State through the Ministry of Communications and the Authority overseeing Communications. But Mediaset intervened anyway with a memo, knowing well that, if the frequencies were to be assigned to Europa7, it would be Rete4 to lose them. And the State Advocate, Maurizio Di Carlo, what does he do? Cut and paste of the Mediaset memo, without even trying to camouflage this authentic privatization of the institution at the service of the “Biscione”. The whole thing, even before Berlusconi is back in government for the third time.

Read and compare the memo by the State Advocacy Service (55 pages) and by Mediaset (78 pages). The complete text is given on www.voglioscendere.it. It’s a tragicomic party game of “Spot the difference”. The most obvious is that the State defends Rete4 with even more passion than Mediaset does. For the rest, page after page plucked exactly as it is from the documents of the Berlusconian company. A few examples: Pagine 9 of the State Advocacy document: ten lines (from 7 to 17) copied from page 49 of the Mediaset memo (lines 1-15). Page 5 (from line 20) to Page 6 (up to line 18) of the State Advocacy are identical to pages 60 (from line 3), 61 (all the page) and 62 (up to line 11) in the Mediaset document. Pages 17 (from line 7) and 18 (up to line13) of the State Advocacy document are the same as pages 60 (from line 3), 61 (all the page) and 62 (up to line22) in the Mediaset document. Page 53 (lines 4-23) State Advocacy document is plagiarized from pages 39 (from line 9) and 40 (up to line5) in the Mediaset document. On page 35 (lines 27-31) of the State Advocacy document, there are the same words as on page 47 (lines 17-22) in the Mediaset document. And so on. Once there’s a “thus” missed out. In another place there’s a “in relation to this” instead of “firstly”. All the rest, including erroneous punctuation (many commas between the subject and the verb), is identical. The same is true for the conclusions with outcomes that are at times comical.

According to the State Advocacy Service, if Europa7 has not had the frequencies, it’s their fault: they should have “acquired them even on their own initiative” (and where? And how? With weapons in their hands?), given that the State: “didn’t have the actual availability of the frequencies” (obviously: they allowed them to be kept by Telepiù nero and Rete4, by now without the concession). And anyway – Di Carlo added – by dis-applying the Maccanico law and the Gasparri law and turning off the analogue frequencies for Rete4 would not mean the automatic transfer to Europa7 (and to whom, thank you?).

Basically the State is ignoring the recent verdict of the European Court in Luxembourg, requested by the very same Council of State, according to which the community regulations “are an obstacle to a national system of regulations whose application means that an operator that owns a concession finds it impossible to transmit because a lack of frequencies assigned on the basis of objective criteria, that are transparent, non-discriminatory and proportional.”

Thus, it’s enough that the “transitory regime set up in favour of the existing networks” to the disadvantage of Europa7, in accordance with the Maccanico law, of the “save-Rete4”, of the Gasparri law, of the Gentiloni draft law (that never became law). All the laws that should be repealed.
They are not: “the free provision of services” protected by community regulations – writes the European Court – “they need not just the concession of the authorisation to broadcast, but also the assigning of the frequencies”, otherwise, “an operator cannot make use of the rights given to it by community law for the access to the TV market”. With this verdict in their hands, the lawyers Grandinetti and Pace working for Europa7 ask the Council of State for the frequencies and recompense for the damage suffered.
The “emerging damage”, that is the money spent so far for the investments required by law for anyone who wins a concession (more than 120 million euro). And the “lucro cessante”, that is the loss of profits of the TV that was never born (more than 2 billion euro). Always assuming that the Council will give a verdict telling the State to finally assign the frequencies to them.
Otherwise Europa7 would die for ever and Di Stefano would have the right to the value of the whole company. The government of the Unione, by means of the State Advocacy Service, talks in playback: text and music from Mediaset. No reimbursement. No frequencies. Long live Gasparri. Rete4 sine die. Everything as before, as ever. Berlusconi would not have known how to do better.”

Posted by Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Comments(5) | Write a comment | Sign-up | Send to a friend | Print