Is this, perhaps, another vulnerability of the Santoriello and CONI Guarantee Board affair. Magistrates should be super partes, not only when they play a judging role, but also when they are the protagonists of investigations or inquiries. Certainly their role is regulated by law, but there would also be an unwritten duty, namely that of maintaining exemplary behavior in favor of the institutions. Otherwise, the institutions don’t make us look good, and God knows they need them.
Gazzetta – ‘Santoriello can skip the preliminary hearing’
The more than inappropriate expressions of Dr. Santoriello, i tweet skill of some members of the CONI Board of Guarantee against a team, a person, a family seem more in tune with a bar of fans or a curve of ultras. And then the question arises: but why weren’t the magistrates in question called to milder advice, weren’t they warned that in this way they would debase the institutions of which they belong and question the credibility of their role?
If we start from the consideration that independence (of powers) does not automatically mean license and that the judiciary has too often confused this independence with corporatism, we would take it too far. Here, we just say that the remedy, both in the Santoriello case and in the case of the CONI Board, was worse than the disease. As regards the Public Prosecutor of Turin, the President of the National Magistrates Association Dr. Giuseppe Saint Lucia he hastened to declare that not only is Dr. Santoriello not objectionable “even if, for serious reasons of convenience, the prosecutors have a duty to abstain”. In this case, then, it is an “important” investigation, the result of “teamwork”. Meh! Since it’s a team effort if a member of the team makes a mistake, does he stay in his place? And then who decides to abstain or not: the conscience of the prosecutor or a superior of him? In short, this non-challengeability seems, at first glance, a dancer. To “acquit” the Neapolitan magistrate in question from expressions openly dictated by hatred, the President of the ANM does worse: it elevates hate to a viable category in sport, especially soccer. Not bad as a civics lesson.
Even at CONI, another perhaps worse mess. Is it possible to count among your judges people who allow themselves to mock and insult a team and their respective presidents? We repeat they are not ordinary people, they are not fans, but of course if you consider hatred as an acceptable requirement, who takes it out of our minds that it is indeed an extra element for making a resume? It is said that the CONI keyboard haters will no longer be part of the Panel called to judge the Juventus appeal. But why? What did they do wrong? Hatred is cleared through customs, insults are allowed and careers are guaranteed. Or not?
