The silence of the “independent”

For a few weeks, in blissful solitude, the newspaper LA VERITA 'has been engaged in an operation to discover the exchange of messages between highly respected exponents of the judiciary. The result is an impressive, and certainly not a commendable, scenario of intertwining, cuffs, and pushers which are very similar, if not superimposable, to what we have experienced in other seasons regarding politicians. But the most squalid aspect of the story does not concern the hidden maneuvers, the pleasures under the table, the conditioning towards other powers of the State.

Although it is chilling to read, for example, of a deliberate intention to "intervene" against Salvini for the issue of blocking ports. And this, despite the declared awareness, manifested in certain messages by the world of togas itself, of the political, legitimate and non-criminal nature of the actions of a Minister of the Republic in defense of borders.

What most scandalizes what is emerging is summarized in two words: "silence" and "independence". The deafening silence of the mainstream media and the vile independence of the judiciary. Newspapers have always been – it is always said – supporters of a single line about wiretapping: always publish them and publish them all. In spite of their criminal relevance and even if they were going to ruin anyone's life, even if unrelated to investigations. All the more so if "anyone" was a political opponent, that is, unpopular with the Perfect Consensus Machine, of which the Great Press is an essential washer. Today, however, no.

Today, wiretapping no longer matters. When they hit the judiciary, like a high-speed train, the regime media discover the virtue of a modest silence-dissent. This makes one suspect that between those who inform and those who investigate, or judge, in our country there is a tacit non-belligerence agreement. We come now to the other magic word: "independence". The independence of the judiciary: supreme (and just) value to which – from tangentopoli onwards – supporters of a sort of moral superiority, of ethical primacy, of the judicial class compared to other powers (it goes without saying, corrupt) of the nation.

Well, there is a constant in all published messages: a frenetic, sometimes naive (if not downright clumsy), anxious to get "places" in favor of belonging to a "group" and to the detriment of the exponents of another "group" . It is all a seething of satisfaction or frustration in learning that "we" have beaten "them" or that "they" have fooled "us": in the race for a prosecutor's office or for a place at CSM. In practice, the very negation of the above value.

Because it is true that the supreme principle which a judge should be inspired by is independence; the only one able to guarantee suspects, and even condemned, that he was not (suspected and convicted, in fact) except in the supreme interest and exclusive service of Justice. But if the holders of the tremendous power to give or take away freedom act according to sectarian and clan logic, independence dies. Either you are independent of everything and everyone or you are not. Independence, in certain areas, cannot (should never) rhyme with belonging. And instead it happens. Especially in times when information rhymes with manipulation.

Francesco Carraro

Thanks to our Telegram channel you can stay updated on the publication of new articles of Economic Scenarios.

⇒ Sign up now

The article The silence of the "independent" comes from .

This is a machine translation of a post published on Scenari Economici at the URL on Sat, 30 May 2020 08:11:25 +0000.