Why does Amato recycle errors and lies on Ustica?
Giuliano Amato to Repubblica on the Ustica case: the re-proposition of accusations, myths and distortions that left the scene in criminal trials, when other magistrates examined these and other stories with a disenchanted eye in the preliminary investigation and in the newspapers. The speech by Gregory Alegi, historian, journalist and professor at Luiss
Who would say today that Enzo Tortora was a drug dealer affiliated with the Camorra? Who would say the proof is in a name in a racketeer's diary? Who would say the proof lies in his arrest? None, after his acquittal and demonstration of the sensational mistake of person made by the investigators.
This is the parallel that comes to mind after reading the astonishing statements to the Republic of Giuliano Amato, former holder of all possible positions in the Italian legal system: the re-proposition of accusations, myths and distortions that have left the scene in criminal trials, when other magistrates examined these and other stories bundled up in the preliminary investigation and in the newspapers with a disenchanted eye.
Because it is good to remember that nothing Amato said is new, exact or both together. Nothing he said escaped scrutiny and denials in the trial.
For one thing, the involvement of the MiG-23 that fell on the Sila has been denied by the Prosecutor of Crotone since 1989. The attempt to make the fall of the DC-9 Itavia coincide on June 27, 1980 (with the death of 81 people) with that of the MiG-23 of the following July 18 has always been one of the strong points of the "missile party", the conspiracy hypothesis that has hindered the acceptance of the technical truth for years. Because, at the outcome of the technical investigation, it was concluded beyond any reasonable doubt that over 90% of the wreck recovered has no traces of a missile.
Precisely for this reason, in the end the investigating judge Rosario Priore had clung to the fanciful hypothesis of the "near collision", according to which a fighter would have passed so close to the DC-9 as to break its wing. In the trial it was shown that the calculations had been made by underestimating the strength of the wing and overestimating the windage.
To these ascertained facts the ex all and more contrasts errors and distractions of all kinds. Bettino Craxi's warning to Gaddafi, for example, dates back to 1986: it concerns Operation El Dorado Canyon, when the US attacked Tripoli in response to the Libyan bomb that had killed American soldiers in a Berlin disco. If the memory error of an elderly socialist can be excused, it is less clear why the interviewer and the editorial staff omitted checks for which Wikipedia is enough.
The presence of Gaddafi on a fighter – it seems to see him, with overalls, mask, life jacket! – merges the MiG episode with one of the air battle scenarios. Too bad that there is no trace of this plane on the radars before and after the event. Specifically, in the process it was determined that there were no other aircraft within 60 miles (100km) of the DC-9.
To tell the truth, it is not the first time that Amato has intervened with a straight leg in the Ustica case. It was precisely his accusation of having hidden photographic evidence of the killing that led Judge Bucarelli to abstain from the investigation to sue Amato. This allowed the investigation to judge Priore, who had already dealt with it as a consultant to the massacre commission.
Years later, as prime minister, Amato asked Chirac to provide documentation on the disaster, arguing that he could not trust the Italian soldiers who, in his opinion, were lying. For the sake of completeness of the record, Bucarelli's lawsuit was filed in Perugia, which considered Amato's statements rendered as a parliamentary mandate and therefore unquestionable; the military were all and always acquitted of any accusation of perjury, high treason, attack on the functioning of the constitutional bodies. One could go on, at the risk of boring and confusing readers. I therefore take the liberty of referring to the book "Ustica: a civil injustice" , which I wrote in 2021 with General Leonardo Tricarico, where these and other facts are widely explained.
On closer inspection, the real news is that of the media offensive far from the anniversary of the disaster. First iI Tempo , then La Verità and now Repubblica . A sequence in crescendo, which forces us to ask ourselves why. The answer is not easy, but it must probably be sought in a political sphere. We must not forget that in the coming weeks the discussion of the bill establishing a commission of inquiry into terrorism and massacres since 1959 will begin.
Inconvenient facts long removed from public debate could emerge from this commission, for example on the connections between Italian and Middle Eastern terrorism or on the consequences of the so-called "Lodo Moro" which guaranteed impunity to Palestinian terrorists in Italy provided they abstained from carrying out actions on our territory. A commitment that the cases of the synagogue of Rome (1982) and Achille Lauro (1985) demonstrate was often violated. Just Ustica in 1980 could represent the first violation of the award, as suggested by the alarm sent on the morning of June 27 from Beirut by Colonel Stefano Giovannone.
Another, more vague, political explanation could be linked to the difficulty of the left opposition with the Meloni government. Recovering a central myth of the interpretation of the 80s or creating difficulties in the already awaited relationship with France are, from this point of view, both suggestive paths.
It would also be necessary to verify the actual status of the compensation payments established in the civil court to the property of the airline Itavia or other entitled subjects. These are checks that take time, but which the big daily newspapers could and should have done before re-launching old stories that have always remained unfounded as news.
It is precisely for this reason that thoughts turn to Tortora whose innocence no one doubts by returning to the infamous accusations to which he was subjected. For Ustica, on the other hand, the criminal trials, the contradictory examinations, the very long hearing seem to have never happened.
With the space reserved for Amato, we return not only to the unproven accusations, but even to the prevalence of the oral declaration without oath. A truly disturbing situation, which raises fears for trust in justice and institutions.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/mondo/perche-amato-ricicla-errori-e-bugie-su-ustica/ on Sat, 02 Sep 2023 13:06:19 +0000.