“It is a bad signal, the policy passes a law against the magistrates.” So the National Association of Magistrates said the approval of the reform on the civil liability of judges, stressing that all this happens while there is a “rampant corruption.”
In order to proceed with a text that invests a matter on which hangs an infringement procedure in the European Union for non-application of Community law and for which Italy was likely to pay a fine estimated at 37 million, the government gave a negative opinion on all the amendments. The text is passed with 265 yes, 51 no and 63 abstentions. Abstentions League, Fi, Sel, FDI and Alternative Free. M5S voted against.
But the application of the new standard – and he admits the same Justice Minister Andrea Orlando – will be monitored in practice. “We will evaluate the effects secularly – ensures Keeper – and we are ready to correct some points.” A ‘cutting in retrospect, then, is not to be excluded. “But I think that will be enough case law to clarify that many of the dangers feared no parallel,” says Orlando.
Risks such as the rain of appeals, now that no longer serves a preventive step to assess their eligibility ; and that the misrepresentation of the facts and the evidence is one of the hypotheses that claim damages. The new law reforming the law Vassalli 1988 while maintaining the setting of vicarious liability: the citizen mentions that the State may take action against the judge.
But compared to Vassalli, will expand the opportunity for citizens to appeal; it raises the threshold of economic compensation for the damage, which can be up to half the salary of the judge; is eliminated filter eligibility of appeals; responsibility shoot even in cases of gross negligence and misrepresentation of facts and evidence.
One point that, with the filter, did discuss even today, especially the Five Stars, although the Senate had voted in favor, making a credit with the guarantees to improve the text in the House, said today the deputy M5S Alfonso Bonafede. But the law – he adds – is “an intimidation to judges.”
“I reject the argument of intimidation,” replied the minister in the House. “Who speaks of misrepresentation of facts and evidence as an extension of improper, I say that this is an indication of the European, and does not produce an automatic on the magistrate, who may be called upon only in the event of inexcusable negligence.”
In fact in the report accompanying the text were inserted “correctives, the elements of clarification – explained the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Donatella Ferranti – that on the basis of an interpretation constitutionally, that explicit the damage is only in the case where the misrepresentation is’ macroscopic and evident. “
Adding that should be enough to” lock down the text, “assures Ferranti. Another point discussed, the filter. “It is the flagship of the bill,” he summarized the Deputy Minister for Justice Enrico Costa in the afternoon before the House, soon after the meeting of the Committee of the nine. The Five Stars are afraid now a rain of appeals against judgments of the courts, a boomerang effect with the courts clogged.
But Costa and the government did not think so. And above all, remember Coast, which defines the text “balanced and respectful of the autonomy of the judiciary”, the filter has so far, in fact, sterilized the norm, and “has led to a number of causes very low compensation, estimated between 4:07 , not more. ”
Tuesday, February 24, 2015, 22:37 – Last Updated: 23:28
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
No comments:
Post a Comment