The reform of the judiciary, “if maintained in its structure, would not contribute to strengthening the independence of the judiciary, but rather its self-referentiality, creating a power without counterweights and balances, risking moreover to fuel a struggle between factions”.

You support it Republic future in a note. Repubblica Futura immediately gave ample willingness to compare. we believe necessary changes to make the text presented at first reading acceptable “.

For Nicola Renzi’s party, “the adoption of the text as presented, in fact, we believe, would be even worse than the current situation. self-governing body of the judiciary within which no longer sit politicians in office, and in the same way of providing for intermediate sanctions for judges, on the other hand, many aspects present in the law cannot be shared.

Meanwhile, the exorbitant role of the Managing Magistrate, designed as a real dominus of the Court, even becoming an “organ” of the judiciary, thus going beyond the current setting that calls it to much more limited and circumscribed tasks. Furthermore the difference between Serie A and Serie B magistrates, with different rights, active and passive voting, in the preparatory decisions for the formation of the Plenary Judicial Council. still, the elimination of the Ordinary Judicial Council, a body composed today only of magistrates which in our opinion must remain the institutional seat in which the magistrates – all – can freely confront each other. L’subjection of the Tax Prosecutor to the Executive of the Court (an intolerable principle, given the tasks of one and the other), combined, moreover, with its total lack of authority from the choices of judicial policy “.

Another critical aspect is “the role of the Commission for Justice Affairs, which essentially becomes a pleonastic tinsel devoid of any use; not to mention that of the Secretary of State for Justice who, if the reform as written, enters into force, could lapse and no longer be appointed, given the total irrelevance of his powers. Again, the composition of the new Plenary Judicial Council, which, with the method of majority designations, will only do that spasmodically increase the current logic, inducing the Court of the Republic to the mechanisms of neighboring Italy, which seem to have demonstrated all their danger “.

And again: “The hypertrophic role given to the Law Commissioners, to the detriment of all the Magistrates. From the only comparison with the majority in which our political force participated (the second which was held, unfortunately, was in which availability already communicated well in advance of not being able to attend, due to commitments commitments to seize a willingness to confront. the magistrates in the Plenary Judicial Council are not magistrates serving at the Court, but their delegates; as well as a qualified quorum necessary also for all ‘election of these delegates, like those of the political party …) seemed to us excellent ideas “.

“We are convinced – writes Rf – therefore that from a serious and constructive comparison a truly ameliorative reform can be born, capable of acknowledging the recommendations of multilateral bodies – not only GRECO – and combining them with the social, cultural and historical needs of our We are waiting to see the proposals for the approval of the law, which the competent Secretariat of State has undertaken to submit to us, trusting that from this first comparison some of our decisions and ideas have been taken into consideration.

For the party “a reform as conceived would not improve at all, on the contrary. For this reason we hope that all the political forces continue the discussion, sharing as of now the deadline for the discussion of the law in second reading, in the January-February session. (if we manage to complete the comparison sooner, so much the better!). desired by a few, we will have lost a new opportunity to prevail and all the San Marino citizens will pay the price “, concludes the note.