On The Morning today, November 5, 2007, Carlo Alemi, President of the Court of Naples, delights us with his recipe machine saves judicial " The of evidence in court is a great thing, but it also long passages, like listening to dozens of texts and defendants in tight contradictory. All with the inability to support two or three hearings of the same process in a week. Sometimes I happen to attend a postponement of hearings ranging from month to month. Woe to touch the guarantees, but we need action. An example? What is the point of a plea bargain to a sentence in the Court of Appeal? To lighten the judicial offices I would start from here, the agreements between the prosecution and defense on appeal: it would be better to eliminate the agreed. "Now, beyond the understanding of the recipe is not easy (because of writing, of course ... not sure for lack of exhibition capacity of the President), is there any good soul could explain why the appeal process definitions in art. 599 cpp unwieldy judicial offices? Honestly, until today, I was convinced of the contrary ... I had heard similar solutions defined as procedural rites defatigatori even. Mha! However, it remains even more perplexed when the very Head of the Judicial Office, which, and coincidentally, just the Court of Naples, complains of attend hearings of references ranging from month to month ! Do something, please, Dear President! But how: She is to complain to us, citizens and experts, the failure of your organization? I have the impression that if such an attitude was expressed in a private company, would have already catered to dismiss from office entrusted to it. But it scares me even more that she can not even find a solution that is not ... plea bargain on appeal or limitation of the investigation hearing, complaining also of ' inability to support two or three hearings of the same process in a week : always with grace, but who or what prevents celebrate more of the same process hearings in a week? ? It does not appear the case in his lucid interview ... perhaps that his colleagues complain about working too much? Are assured: the Minister of Justice Mastella just said (always found on today's newspapers) that ' is unfair that the judiciary is still deprived of the normal adjustment of salary, which, incidentally, has already given up, to the extent 30% last year »...« My commitment will be directed to fight for it to be restored to the ordinary treatment of the judiciary, even in the face of parliamentary amendments to the source, who wished to address the issue appreciably, insufficient to arrive at solutions to remedy a situation that is, the evidence, not just . Here is the real recipe! Genius of a minister! The salaries ... were adjusted wages! Now it's completely different, completely different music ... now that you get to work!
