The magistrates of the Turin prosecutor’s office signed the request for indictment in the proceeding on the accounts of the Juventus. The act, in addition to the now former president Andrea Agnelli and his vice Pavel Nedvedit concerns eleven other peopleand follows the one contained in the notice of conclusion of the preliminary investigations that had been notified to the suspects on 24 October: the artificial capital gains for 155 million euros, the fake news on the salary maneuver, the operating losses lower than the real ones. False corporate communications, market manipulation, fraudulent declarations with the use of invoices for non-existent transactions, obstacle to the supervisory authorities. The Public Prosecutor’s Office also renounced the appeal against the investigating judge’s decision not to grant the measures pre-trial detention: the prosecutors had previously requested the disqualification from office for Agnelli and other executives, motivating it with the risk of approving another distorted balance sheet (recurrence of the crime), a requirement that ceased with the resignation of the president and the board of directors.

Meanwhile the Juventus play early. “Based on a solid set of opinions from leading legal and accounting professionals – reads an official note – the Juventus board has reached, with compactness, the unanimous conclusion from the nine directors in office as of 28 November 2022, that the accounting treatment recommended in the disputed financial statements is one of those allowed by the applicable accounting standards, and the disputes of the Prosecutor’s Office they do not appear to be founded“. The club, which reiterates its belief that it has always operated correctly, also looks to sports justice: “due to the absence of any alteration of the balance sheets, the conclusions of the sports authorities (which have already expressed themselves, with regard to the capital gains , in favor of Juventus) will not change: in the absence of any accounting alteration, each sports sanction would be completely unfounded.”