I say to Corriere: more efficient justice without eliminating crime

Dear Aldo,
I believe even the left wing mayors agree with the government to end abuse of office because only those who work in the area know that whatever happens is the fault of the mayor who has the honor of being first Citizens, but after all everything that happens in this area is his fault, even if it was hail.
Tommaso Pennella gstaad

I do not agree with this move by the government. The abolition of abuse of office does not seem to me to be based on guarantees, but almost as a kind of impunity. What do you think?
Marco Gati

Dear readers,
Many of you have expressed your criticism and appreciation of judicial reform. To be honest, I don’t think that the fact that convictions for abuse of office are so rare is a good reason to abolish the crime. A report to better define its contours, reformulate it and avoid prosecution. Another delete it. Europe is no longer asking us for impunity, but on the contrary for more rigor in the fight against corruption. And not that we have to do it to please some euro bureaucrat. We owe it to the respectable Italians. And we owe it to the European citizens who, voluntarily or involuntarily, have agreed to finance us – that is the Pnrr: common European debt – and rightly demand of our country, as of others, minimum standards of efficiency and honesty. Ensuring them would give us a stronger position to assert our interests in Europe, starting with the demand for a common tax system that spares us the mockery of tax havens within the Union from Ireland to Luxembourg. Facing an investigation or a legal proceeding does not automatically mean being dishonest. It is true that we must intervene in the Italian judiciary. But the first and most important criterion of any reform must be that it works better. Today, the judiciary uses preventive detention before establishing responsibility, and responsibilities are often not clarified. We need investments, funds, men, staff training.