Reporting of Nicola Pasqualato
Of Benedetto Lattanzi e Valentino Maimone
Carlo Nordio was one of the most respected and prominent investigating magistrates of the last three decades in Italy. Owner of investigations that are as burning as they are fundamental (from the Red Brigades to kidnappings, from the Venetian Tangentopoli to the Mose), he was deputy prosecutor in Venice. His guaranteeist and counter-current positions on the role of the public prosecutor have often earned him praise. We had the opportunity to interview him during "Innocents in handcuffs", the Day dedicated to the victims of judicial errors organized with the Radical Party. What emerged was a long and interesting overview of some of the most delicate aspects of the role of the magistrate in current justice, including judicial errors. This time we publish the part dedicated to the civil liability of the magistrate.

Doctor Nordio, if the magistrate makes a mistake, he is not directly responsible for his mistakes. How do you evaluate the law on the civil liability of judges?

Let's start with a premise: that of a magistrate is a job so physiologically exposed to errors, that it would be absurd to demand personal compensation for the damage. There are two cases, but, in which in my opinion the magistrate should respond directly.

Which?

Attention: I am not referring to civil liability, but to the rules of ethics and career. A first case is when the magistrate does not know the laws, because it doesn't update itself and ends up applying the wrong law. The second is when he doesn't know the process, that is, he doesn't read the cards as he should. In this case we are faced with inexcusable errors, but it would be useless to think of being able to correct them by making the judge who committed them pay money, also because the magistrate is always insured, therefore it would not even be directly affected in the slightest in the wallet.

So how should it be sanctioned?, according to Carlo Nordio?

He should be severely sanctioned as his career progresses, until his dismissal. If you're wrong, falling into one of the two examples I just gave, and that mistake is demonstrated, your career will lose out.

In his experience, do you think you have ever contributed to the conviction of an innocent person?

I have always been very cautious in the use of precautionary custody. But at the same time I'm sure I made many mistakes, releasing, acquitting or causing guilty persons to be acquitted, because when in doubt one does not incarcerate oneself, but he always acquits himself. However, there is one case in particular that I remember: circa 25 years ago, during the Tangentopoli in Veneto, I helped arrange pre-trial detention in prison for a person who later turned out to be innocent. That detention order was legitimate, it was also confirmed by the Supreme Court, but with hindsight I have asked myself several times whether it was not only legitimate but also appropriate.

What would Prosecutor Carlo Nordio say to a young magistrate who is embarking on an investigative career to avoid mistakes?

I always give just one piece of advice to my very young colleagues who are about to enter the prosecutor's office: better to read one less law book and one more general culture book. And I'm not just referring to Kafka's "Trial" or the "Story of the Infamous Column", but also to Shakespeare's tragedies, to the works of Goethe. Only general culture can provide the magistrate with two fundamental riches: humility and common sense. If the PM has these two qualities, greatly reduces the possibility of misusing the enormous power given to him. Younger people especially run the risk of being intoxicated by the extraordinary power to limit a citizen's personal freedom. The only limit is the awareness of the possibility of making mistakes. And this can only come from a solid general culture.
Source: www.errorigiudiziari.com