Caselli’s unlikely remorse
Sooner or later I expect some remorse from Caselli for the insistence with which he has so many times claimed Giulio Andreotti's guilt for mafia crimes
If it were true, as I hope, that the European directive just approved in the Chamber on the presumption of innocence, already established in our Constitution at least in words, will have to be translated, as the deputy Enrico Costa said, contesting the minimalist version given by the grillini , will mark the end of media trials, prosecutors' press conferences and the names emphatically given to certain investigations, such as the famous "clean hands" of thirty years ago against all the presumably dirty hands of politicians who came under fire; if all this were true, I repeat, I should finally breathe a sigh of relief. And do not join the skepticism of those who have already doubted that the directive, no matter how much effort can be expected from a guaranteeing Minister of Justice like Marta Cartabia, will never, or who knows when, translate into some concrete provision that punishes repeat offenders. Which of course should be understood as voted magistrates, destined and whatever else to continue in certain habits. But I'm afraid I won't be able to cultivate the optimism of the will rather than the pessimism of reason, as the unfortunate Antonio Gramsci urged to do.
In my pessimism of reason I also struggle to imagine, in the face of the vote of the Chamber and what may follow, the remorse of some of the magistrates just glorified on the front pages of many newspapers in anticipation of the conviction of the accused against whom we have just a process has also begun sanctified by the state television cameras. I do not mention names because also in this case, as in others complained here, it is not a problem of names but of method, having already seen and heard stories of the kind denounced and optimistically given up by deputy Costa.
A name, however, allow me to do so to complain about certain practices that are not really compatible with the European directive, in particular with that part in which it is forbidden to consider a person guilty about whom "judicial decisions other than those on guilt" have been expressed in the competent fora. . I mention his name – which is that of Gian Carlo Caselli – for the great esteem I have of him, apart from the dissent on what I will shortly come back to contest him, and for the courage with which he has dealt with phenomena in the exercise of his functions terrible as terrorism first and then the mafia.
Well, sooner or later I expect from Caselli, precisely because of the esteem that I confirm, a bit of remorse for the insistence with which – arguing with anyone who spoke or wrote about the final acquittal, in Cassation, of Giulio Andreotti from crimes of the mafia challenged him, in spite also of that decree law at risk of constitutional illegitimacy with which he had sent back to jail mafia who had come out of it for the so-called expiry of the terms of their "precautionary" custody – he has many times claimed the guilt, instead, of former Prime Minister. Which would have been acquitted only for subsequent events – if I remember correctly – in 1980, proving proven, according to him, but the previous facts or relationships with members of the Mafia are prescribed.
I am sorry, I repeat, for the esteem I have of Caselli and not only for having been among the journalists with whom he has argued, that he continued to support the thesis of the acquittal practically in half even after the defense lawyers of the still alive former defendant they replied politely once, reporting a quotation mark of the voluminous sentence of the Cassation. It recognized equal credibility, that is, nothing for the purposes of a final judgment, both in a guilty reading of the facts and reports prior to 1980 and in an innocentist one.
I remember with regret, to say the least, the refusal oppostomi by the editor of the newspaper on which the controversy with the former head of the Palermo Prosecutor's Office took place at the request to reply to his reasoning with that call from Andreotti's lawyers, who were famously Franco Coppi and Giulia Good morning. That refusal was motivated more or less in this way: I do not want to close this controversy without leaving the last word to Caselli, to whom, however, denying my answer, he curiously did not even grant a reply. To which I certainly would not have opposed both for reasons of style and for the respect due to the contractual and moral skills of the director.
Now, years after the incident, thanks to the correctness, and to the very name of the Doubt newspaper, and its editor, and finally to the topicality of the question re-proposed by the European directive on the presumption of innocence, I want to hope to finally see Caselli stop supporting the acquittal only in half of Andreotti's good soul. Moreover, just as a good soul he cannot physically defend himself, I fear not even in a séance. Of which, moreover, I am not an expert or just a casual participant, as happened to Romano Prodi during the kidnapping of Aldo Moro.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/mondo/caselli-andreotti-giustizia/ on Sat, 03 Apr 2021 05:58:14 +0000.