ROMA – Psycho-aptitude tests? A “scar” against all Italian magistrates. And to say it is Salvatore Casciarothe secretary of the ANM, who belongs to the same current, independent judiciary, as the undersecretary to the presidency of the Council Alfredo Mantovano. Precisely the former toga now devoted to politics with Giorgia Meloni who proposed the tests and overcame the first “no” of the Keeper of the Seals Carlo Nordio, now hired, to keep his shaky chair upright, to the common belief that the tests are necessary to verify the sanity of his own former colleagues. But the ANM will not go on strike, requested only by the Article 101 group, which is not part of the majority of the ANM government.
We must start from here, from this word – a “scar” – to account for the reaction of the Italian judiciary gathered in the National Association of Magistrates which today gathers its “little parliament” in Rome. And the president Giuseppe Santalucia, leader of the left of Area, opens the proceedings with his usual calm tone. He immediately speaks of the tests as a “constitutional paradox” destined to immediately run into the serious anomaly of the violation of the enabling law, the Cartabia law on the judicial system, which made no mention of it. And again, tests whose “text” should perhaps appear in the Official Journal this weekend, two weeks after the Council of Ministers approved them.
As Santalucia says, tests are just “a rule that generates mistrust”. And the polls – the one published yesterday by Messenger on the same page of an interview with Nordio – are “his attempt to defend an indefensible norm”. Instead of addressing the judges’ real problems – the electronic app that doesn’t work, the family court in disrepair – here is the provocation of the tests. Santalucia asks: “Who establishes and takes responsibility for saying what the aptitudes of a magistrate are? Otherwise we are arbitrary, while the real objective is to control the ‘sick’ magistrate, his future performances, and attack his independence, impressing public opinion”.
No to strike
Will the ANM go on strike? This is proposed only by one faction of the judges, Article 101, in opposition to the government of the ANM itself. He asks Andrea Reale, as “yet another attack and provocation against the judiciary, otherwise we will have surrendered to politics and the base will thus judge the choice, while the strike is the minimum wage”. A request also supported by an appeal signed by two hundred magistrates without current, the so-called independent, of which Andrea Mirenda it is an expression to the CSM. But we can already say that, despite an avalanche of criticism against the tests, the strike will not take place. And Santalucia himself explains it: “All this makes us indignant, but medium-term action is necessary, without giving in to Italic realism with the idea that the tests will be of little importance, due to the impossibility of defining the same subject as seen the meager predictions of the text”.
Santalucia’s line is therefore not to take to the streets. “We must arm ourselves with good will, establish an alliance with the psychologists called into question, ask them to carry out the investigation which was not carried out in parliament, strengthen our opinions with technical opinions, also listen to the constitutionalists on the excess of delegation”. And then the strongest request: “We must urge the presidents of the House and Senate to remedy and remedy a rule that has no reason to exist.” A rule, in fact, which violates the delegation and therefore was not discussed at all in Parliament, but only proposed in parliamentary commissions as an amendment to legislative decrees. A minimalist procedure, certainly not the dozens of hearings held between the House and Senate on the suppression of abuse of office. After all, says Santalucia, “the former Minister of Justice Roberto Castelli in 2004 he had made a similar law on tests which was then eliminated due to the objective difficulty of giving substance to the proposal”.
The psychologists’ hearings
Obviously, among the hearings, there should be those of psychologists and psychoanalysts called into question as the real decision makers. And reading the words of the president of the Italian psychoanalysts Sarantis Thanopoulospublished by Justice question and reiterated in the interview with Valentina Stella in the newspaper The doubt of the National Forensic Council, it is clear that these tests are completely useless. Psychological professionals had already said this twenty years ago by rejecting the Castelli law with an appeal signed by 160 people.
But what are the most obvious test anomalies? Santalucia explains it in detail. Not just a decision that openly violates the delegation, because the Cartabia law on the judicial system did not provide for them in the slightest, therefore already in itself “unconstitutional”. A proposal that “downloads the management on the CSM, it is not clear what and for what purpose”. The only goal? It is to influence Italians, relying on some survey that answers the question “do you want a balanced or unbalanced judge?”. Polls, according to the president of the ANM, which “come from nowhere and aim only at propaganda”. On the contrary, the robes “do not carry out surveys, they do not appeal to the people, but they ask themselves what diseases preclude access. Because no one says it because no one knows.”
In the very heated debate, the words of are striking Toni Nicastro, deputy general prosecutor in Catania, Unicost robe, addressing the large painting in the ANM hall on the sixth floor of the Cassation building, which contains the names of the magistrates killed by the mafia, with a large bouquet of red roses next to it. “Dear Giovanni, dear Francesca, dear Paolo, but who made you do it? You died in vain, it wasn’t worth it.”
The president of the Democratic Judiciary Silvia Albano rejects tests that “do not serve to guarantee the quality of balance, while here there is a politically homogenizing objective, as when it was said that women could not enter the judiciary because they did not guarantee the necessary balance”. And again: “The government is usurping the power of Parliament and the Keeper of the Seals cannot fail to know it because everyone who studies at university knows it. The truth is that the tests come after months of attacks on the person of the magistrate, as against Iolanda Apostolico, to point out the non-application of measures unpleasant to the government. There is a plan to weaken all legality controls, such as those of the Court of Auditors, towards which there is intolerance”. But, in the end, he considers the idea of the strike “a boomerang”. And anyway, he adds Stefano Celli, also from MD, one cannot “go on strike today for a law that will come into force in 2026”. And, in any case, even against a “scarring” measure, we must also take into account what the mood of the Italians is “since we are no longer in 2004”.
Santalucia closes the debate on “what to do”. Motivating his no to the strike. He needs a “constructive reaction, but posing the problem of the next day” to a possible strike. The “need to protest is there”. Santalucia considers the idea of such a protest “very noble”, “but today we need a more complex reaction”, also in light of all the government’s choices. Instead, for the ANM leader, it is that we need to “peel the surface”, the reasons that led to this choice, because “I fear that the months to come will lead us to return to the topic of the strike”. Just think of the announcement, by Nordio himself, of the next government proposal for the separation of careers.
#ANM #appeal #Russa #Fontana #disfigurement #tests #judiciary #strike
– 2024-04-06 11:47:09
