Justice in San Marino, according to Libera “there is still a lot to do”
“Libera notes with satisfaction the report by Greco, which expressed a positive opinion on 10 responses to the recommendations it had submitted to the Republic of San Marino, but at the same time regrets that four of the recommendations, referring in particular to the rules against corruption and conflict of interest, has not found an adequate response “.
He declares it Free, explaining in a press release that “with regard to issues concerning the organization of justice, four issues are fully agreed” by the opposition party itself, namely “the exclusion of the presence of politicians within the Judicial Council, a self-governing body of the judiciary; the gradation of the sanctioning measures reserved for magistrates; the introduction of the third degree of judgment; the launch of reasoning on the alternative to custodial sentences, including the principle that the execution of the sentence must take place in the country of residence.
Libera claims to have presented, “in the course of the debates on justice, summary documents of its positions and as many as 25 ameliorative amendments, since it was not possible to discuss the essential elements of the reforms directly with the Secretary of State”, then “rejects the accusations made by the secretary of state and some members of the majority, who accuse the opposition of not having been cooperative and indeed should have swallowed the functions of the judiciary ”.
Libera’s opposition “remains that inherent in the balance, or rather the imbalance between powers, which the reform introduces, giving the judiciary the undisputed power to decide on its own staff, on its new workloads, up to the sanctioning measures against individual judges “.
And again: “In a small state, the complex question of the balance and separation of powers, even for a body like the Greek used to analyze large countries, is not considered in its essence. In San Marino there is only one ‘proxy’ and an inevitable natural union between those who govern the administration of justice and those who exercise jurisdiction: this highlights the risk of generating interest ”.
The Greek, “Judging large countries, it is faced with governing bodies with independent control powers separated by space and the knowledge of the people; This is not the case for a small state where, in order to limit the exercise of powers, it is necessary to enhance a circularity that does not allow any institutional body to be at the top and therefore without control “.
“This is a principle that guarantees democracy in the small state”, emphasizes Libera, who then adds: “The reform, on the other hand, reaches the paradox that it can also be lawyers who exercise their profession who govern the judiciary, generating an evident conflict of interest “.
Il Greco, “in the 14 recommendations addressed to San Marino, he combined two major themes: that of the organization of justice and that, equally delicate, of corruption or rather the possibility of mixing individuals in determining a spurious path in the exercise of powers, both the legislative one carried out by the councilors, but also the judicial one carried out by the magistrates “.
“If on the first issue, that of justice, the objectives have been achieved, and for this reason, we reiterate it we are pleased, on the second there is still a lot to do because the questions relating to the role of the individual advisers still remain unanswered”, he says. finally Free.