The Lie of the Week:
Chirac's immunity is equal to the Lodo AlfanoCondividi
Today at 8:53 - Simone Pomi -
After the trial of the former French President Jacques Chirac all the cavalry-Berlusconi media started to repeat the old story used to maturity: The immunity was intended to allow France to the President to work in peace and serenity, the same thing that was made in Italy with the Lodo Alfano, and that the Constitutional Court but has canceled. Chirac is under investigation for false assumptions made when he was mayor Paris (1995/1996). As the Republic Presidiante Alps gained immunity thwart his dispute with the Justice for 12 years, even blocking their prescription. All true, and so similar to Italy and thus unfairly then inserted under the heading "the lie of the week"?
No. This time the situation is different, almost opposite and that is a true fact (the comparison between the French and immunities of the Lodo Alfano) adrift in a sea of \u200b\u200blies (the very different context of the two countries ).
The first point is the public position of the two involved. Chirac was President of the Republic, Berlusconi Chairman of the Board. In France, the immunity is only for the head of state and since the difference between the two republics, very close "their executive power" here are other reasons more compelling and less bureaucratic.
The second are the types of crimes with which both the connection and its role. Chirac is under investigation for alleged "political crimes" arising from his tenure as mayor of the French capital. Certainly not an excuse but very different from the various crimes with which Berlusconi, almost all of which are made by contractor and not related to his role or political life. The third
immediately connected to the second point is the chronology of events. Chirac was joined by these investigations in 1997 when he was in full presidential term. Berlusconi has often been investigated and indicted before he was elected prime minister, as for example in the recent case of Mills.
fourth and final point is the use of their role to get "privileges" and thus short way to save themselves from their own legal problems.
Chirac in his 12 years as president has never dreamed of the law decriminalizing the offense or that only as half the prescription. The Knight and his government but in the last 15 years have done well too many of these abuses:
Law 367/2001. Letters rogatory.
Law 383/2001 (So-called "Tremonti bis").
n.61/2001 Law (corporate law reform).
Law 248/2002 ("Law Cirami on reasonable suspicion")
Decree-Law No. 282/2002 (so called "football-saving decree").
Law 289/2002 (Finance Act 2003).
Law n.140/2003 (so-called "Lodo Schifani).
Decree-Law n.352/2003 (so-called "Decree-save Rete 4).
n.350/2003 Law (Finanziaria 2004). Law 311/2004 (Finanziaria 2005).
Law 112/2004 (so-called "Gasparri Law").
Law n.308/2004. Extension of building amnesty protected areas.
Law 251/2005 (so-called "ex Cirielli).
Legislative Decree 252, 2005 (Consolidated Supplementary Welfare).
Law 46/2006 ("Law Shee").
Law n.124/2008 (so-called "Lodo Alfano").
Decree-Law No. 185/2008.
increase from 10 to 20 percent of its share of action that any company can buy and hold portfolio.
Bill on the "short trial".
(planned)
(source and more explanation)
Here are the facts as truth only to be turned over and used to swallow the citizen with a barrage of lies, incredible. Italy
Awake!
http://2piu2uguale5.ilcannocchiale.it/post/2385047.html
------------------------
POLICY.
The former president: "I do not use appeals to join, but agree to Saviano"
Concerned about the health of our democracy, "Manipulation rules"
Ciampi: "Just read on a personal
Berlusconi delegitimize the institutions" of
MASSIMO GIANNINI Carlo Azeglio Ciampi
"We live a sad time. In the final years of my life, really did not imagine having to watch such a barbarity of political action, an assault so brutal and systematic institutions and values \u200b\u200bin which I believed ...». The first thing that strikes you, in the words of Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, is the bitterness. Deep bitterness of the fate of Italy and the conditions of our democracy. And never
as on this occasion the former head of state, a true "noble father" of the Republic, launches its indictment of those responsible for this "barbarism" and this "aggression": Silvio Berlusconi his government and his majority, who are tearing down to "pick hits" the principles on which stands the Constitution, that "our civil Bible."
"You see - reasons Ciampi - my bitterness comes from the realization of what is happening everyday now on justice, not only on justice. There has been a real deterioration of collective values, you feel a sense of constant manipulation of the rules an inexorable loss of those who are the cardinal points of our civil life. " Applies to all: not only the relations between politics and the judiciary. The relations between the executive and Parliament between the government and the presidency, and organs between premier warranty from the Constitutional Court. The whole institutional system, according to Ciampi, is exposed to a work of gradual "deconstruction". "Here is no longer a question of political battle, which can also be harsh, as is natural in any democracy. Here are the references to destabilize the most solid building democratic institutions that is, humble themselves and the values \u200b\u200bthat the institutions they represent. This is my bitter reflection ...".
Ciampi, perhaps for the first time, speaks bluntly of the Knight, and what has been and is in this "decaying landscape." "I remember a good book Marc Lazar, released a couple of years ago, where I used to come and Berlusconi as recounted details of a pendulum: on the one hand Ciampi, the man who defends the institutions, and across Berlusconi, the man to delegitimize the institutions. Never before today I would say that this picture sums up perfectly what I think. I have lived my whole life in institutions and the institutions that are the heart of democracy. And do not forget the lessons of Vincenzo Cuoco on the Neapolitan Revolution of 1797: the happiness of the people are no longer necessary orders that the men, the institutions beyond the boundaries of generations. But then, to the viability of the institutions, we need men and their civic passions, their ideals of democracy. And I, today, this is what I see lacking in those who govern us ...".
The last chapter of this nefarious "Rewriting" of our formal constitution and obviously concerns the material justice, Alfano, and now the bill on the process by which the short-premier, to clear the two processes that concern him, he scorched earth of the entire judiciary power. On this conviction of Ciampi is without appeal: "The reforms are made by citizens, not for individuals. I always thought, and today I am more convinced than ever: enough with the ad personam" laws, which do not resolve people's problems and do not help the country to improve. " Fa more, the former president. It goes to reflect on what might happen if and when this new law is approved, shame: "I do not give advice to anyone, least of all those who I succeeded the Quirinale. But the head of state, including its powers, has one of the promulgation. If a law is not not signing it. It should not be used as an argument for always so that the promulgation if Parliament rejected the law to re-approve the first time, the president is forced to sign it. Meanwhile promulgation of the law at first reading: The Constitution expressly provides that presidential prerogative. The use: a way to send a strong message to those who want to alter the rules, the Parliament and the public. "Ciampi Napolitano does not name, but it makes an implicit reference to Francesco Saverio Borrelli:" I think for those who care institutions today, the only rule that respects both that of "quantum potes": do what you can. In other words: hold on. "
He himself, in his seven years on the Hill, has resisted several times behind the Knight. From the Gasparri law for the tv to the reform of the judiciary of Castles:" It is true, but I only did the my duty. There is one thing, which I regret to this day: my only message to the Chambers, the pluralism of broadcasting and information. Then it was a crucial issue for the quality of our democracy. The Parliament has not picked it up, and since then has not done anything. Today, just watching TV to realize, that theme is even more serious. A real emergency ".
But so dark, according to Ciampi, there is also some glimmer of light. For example, the call to" Republic "by Roberto Saviano, who asks the prime minister to withdraw the law sull'abbreviazione process, the "rule of privilege." "I - says the president emeritus of the Republic - for the role I played I do not use sign calls. But I agree with from beginning to end to Saviano. Meet one of the principles that have guided me throughout life. And the fact that he got so many acceptances represents hope, especially for young people. It's the old motto of the Rosselli brothers: Do not give up. They paid with their lives for faithfulness to this principle. Here and now, in Italy, there is no game in people's lives. But there are values \u200b\u200bfor which we fought and which we believed. At stake is the good democracy: trust me, it is enough to not give up. "
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ @ @ @
That grillino Carlo Azeglio
Marco Travaglio
Ahiahiahi, Mrs. Longari, where we will end. Now it also says a former President of the Republic, former governor of the Bank of Italy, a senator for life, Giorgio Napolitano should or could at least stop sign laws shame. a man who speaks some of the bounce, as the Gasparri-1 on TV, sort Castelli judiciary and Sheehan (which abolished the appeal of the prosecutor, but not the accused). But others, such as the Order-saving Rete 4 that allowed Berlusconi to avoid shutting down its TV unfair (provided by the Court of Look of 2002) was signed on Christmas Eve 2003 by a beneficiary, the promulgated. But even for him there is a limit to everything. Even all'indecenza. "I - pushed in the interview with Republic - I do not give advice to anyone, least of all to those who have succeeded at the Quirinale. But then he gives them all right: "The head of state, including its powers, has one of the promulgation. If a law is wrong, not signing. " Article 74 of the Constitution says just that: "The President of the Republic, before promulgating the law, motivated by a message to the Chambers may request a new debate. If the Houses once more pass the bill, it must be promulgated. " Does not specify that to be rejected, must be "manifestly unconstitutional", as it supports the current occupant of the Quirinale. On 23 July 2008, when less than 24 hours Alfano promulgated the law passed by the House and Senate from 25 days to give impunity to the premier, the Hill gave a bizarre statement: "The benchmark for the decision of the Head of State is No decision was 24 of 2004 in which the Constitutional Court declared the constitutional illegitimacy of article. 1 of Law No 140 of 20.06.2003 (the award Schifani, ed) which provided for the suspension of trials which invested the highest offices of state. At first sight, which is for the head of state at this stage, the bill approved June 27 by the Council of Ministers was found to correspond to the observations made in that sentence. " We now know that was not true at all: the Consulta rejected the Alfano just referring to the decision that rejected the Schifani and who said what made her say the Quirinale. Unlike the Hill, where 100 were realized from the beginning of eminent jurists and retired four presidents in an appeal that of Consulta Alfano called the "manifestly unconstitutional", but also comedians such as Grillo, Di Pietro as politicians, newspaper editors as Flores d'Arcais and Padellaro. The latter expressed "deep unease" on the drive, and gotten the rebukes of the Democratic Party, the reformatory, the Fireman's Night and all the trumpets of the "do not pull the jacket to the head of state." Nonsense that are back to ring when the newspaper sent the Quirinale Without the signatures of 80 000 readers in the appeal not to sign the mafia shame the tax shield. Result: The press office of the Quirinale sent us a letter piqued (as you're allowed?). Meanwhile, the head of Been summoned a citizen who dared to ask them to sign it all: "So, if you do not sign a law, I refer the same." Ciampi now known arsonist, invites you to "resist": "You should not use that argument as much, if Parliament refused to re-approve the law, the president is forced to sign it. Meanwhile promulgation of the law at first reading, to send a strong message to those who want to alter the rules, the Parliament and the public. " Also because, if a law is unconstitutional in the second reading, the President may, however, refuse to promulgate it and resign. The Constitution is a bit 'more important than a chair.
0 comments:
Post a Comment