Piero Calabrò – a long-time ex magistrate – in the light of what Juventus’ defensive structure was in the appeal to the Sports Guarantee College at Coni, what struck you most about the line drawn by the pool of Juventus lawyers?
«It is essential to understand the reasons that prompted Juventus to formulate the request for annulment of the sentence. They are many and of various nature, also of merit, or in the substance of things. But there are also procedural and procedural ones, to demonstrate that the judgment for revocation which then determined the 15 points was made outside the parameters established by law ».
In your opinion, what is the situation in which the Sports Guarantee College will have the most difficulty in endorsing the reflections that led the Federal Court of Appeal to punish Juventus?
«There are more points on which the Collegio di Garanzia dello Sport will not be able to turn a blind eye. One in particular, which had been raised even before knowing the reasons, is that now we are talking about clockwork justice: think, for example, of the disqualification of Mourinho for which it was then decided to suspend it. It is the demonstration that you can use the times you want: if you want to motivate with urgency for the reason of the sporting competition it is done, if instead you want to take more time here is another way …, as happened with other types of capital gains, however. But what is even more incredible is that the judgment had already been given and new facts would have had to be presented to revoke it. Well, there were no new facts! The federal prosecutor already knew about the interceptions, they had been published in the newspapers as often happens in Italy, there had been a hearing for the request for a precautionary measure from some subjects, which was however rejected. There was no news. The federal prosecutor could have waited in no hurry for all the interceptions to be revealed with the filing of the documents and then possibly set up a proceeding against Juve. Instead he wanted to anticipate the times without obtaining the condemnation of the bianconeri. Then after a few months he decided that the interceptions are new facts and that they can legitimize the revocation, so the Federal Court of Appeals erroneously in my opinion went after him. This was well underlined by the Juve defense. Also because at this rate, if more interceptions come out every three months, there will never be a definitive sentence so that the previous one can always be revoked: it is clear that in this way we are completely outside the certainty of the law which is fundamental ».