Aspergers More Condition_symptoms

L'amarezza del presidente emerito della Repubblica Ciampi "Aberrante episodio di torsione del sistema democratico"

"E' il massacro delle istituzioni ora proteggiamo il Quirinale"

di MASSIMO GIANNINI

ROMA - Benvenuti nella Repubblica del Male Minore. Cos'altro si può dire di un Paese che ormai, per assecondare i disegni plebiscitari di chi lo governa, è costretto ogni giorno ad un nuovo strappo delle regole della civiltà politica e giuridica, nella falsa e autoassolutoria convinzione di aver evitato un Male Maggiore? Carlo Azeglio Ciampi non trova altre formule: "La strage delle illusioni, il massacro delle istituzioni...". Ancora una volta, l'ex presidente della Repubblica parla con profonda amarezza di quello che accade nel Palazzo. Dopo il Lodo Alfano, il processo breve, lo scudo fiscale, il legittimo impedimento, il decreto salva-liste è solo l'ultimo, "aberrante episodio di torsione del nostro sistema democratico". Il "pasticciaccio di Palazzo Chigi" non è andato giù all'ex capo dello Stato, che considera il rimedio adottato (cioè il provvedimento urgent launched last Friday) at high risk of unconstitutionality. And the resounding ruling yesterday evening by the Lazio Regional Administrative Court, which dismissed the appeal for the release of the list of the PDL in the Lazio region, does not come by chance: "This confirms that by that decree, the government does what the Constitution forbids, that is intervene on a matter within the competence of the Regions. We only hope that at this point no further complications occur ...", he says.

After the appeal already made by several regional governments, it could even happen that, with the elections already held, the See also considers the decree illegal, with a final verdict, and at that point really appealed. This worries Ciampi: "The result, in theory, would invalidate the entire election result. The risk is there, unfortunately. One can only hope that the worst will not happen, because at that point the country would plunge into chaos that I dare not imagine ...". The chairman emeritus not say it explicitly, but his reasoning is clear that some doubt he would have had, on road legal and political order of a seemingly "interpretation", but in fact actually "innovative" in the electoral legislation.

a disturbing question now arises: this disaster have been avoided? And if so, who had the power to avoid it? Said more bluntly: Giorgio Napolitano could not autorizzare la presentazione del decreto legge del governo? Ciampi vuole evitare conflitti con il suo successore, al quale lo lega un rapporto di affetto e di stima: "Non mi piace mai giudicare per periodi ipotetici dell'irrealtà. Allo stesso tempo, trovo sbagliato dire adesso "io avrei fatto, io avrei detto...". Ognuno decide secondo le proprie sensibilità e secondo le necessità dettate dal momento. Napolitano ha deciso così. Ora, quel che è fatto è fatto. Lo ripeto: a questo punto è stata imboccata una strada, e speriamo solo che ci porti a un risultato positivo...". Ma in questa occasione non si può negare che il Quirinale sia dovuto passare per la cruna di un ago particolarmente stretta, e che secondo molti ne sia uscito non proprio al meglio. In rete e sui blog imperversano le critiche: Scalfaro e Ciampi, si legge, non avrebbero mai messo la firma su questo "scempio". Al predecessore di Napolitano questo gioco non piace: "Queste sono cose dette un po' a sproposito". Come non gli piacciono le rischieste di impeachment che piovono sull'inquilino del Colle dall'Idv: "Ma che senso ha, adesso, sparare sul quartier generale? Al punto in cui siamo, è nell'interesse di tutti non alimentare la polemica sul Quirinale, e semmai adoperarsi per proteggere ancora di più la massima istituzione del Paese...".

Premesso questo, Ciampi non si nega una netta censura politica di quanto è accaduto: "Io credo che la soluzione migliore sarebbe stata quella to postpone the election date. But to do this would have required a political will, obviously, is not in the majority. But above all I believe it would be necessary, first of all, that the government recognize publicly, in front of the country and the Parliament had made a serious mistake. It would have been necessary if they take responsibility, apologizing to the voters and elected officials. From here we had to leave at which point, I'm sure everyone would work to resolve the problem, and the opposition would give its willingness to agree. We need to fight at all costs for this solution to the crisis, and nail on this path who had caused it. But unfortunately the majority, Once again, he decided to flee from its responsibilities, and force the hand. "The results are there for all to see:" Again, we are witnessing the gradual depletion of the institutions dismay, the integral values \u200b\u200bof oblivion, the total degradation Rules: This is the evil dark and deep that is corroding Italy.

on this slippery slope, where it will stop sliding and the Civic Republican landslide? "You see - observe Ciampi - just a little while ago I was rereading the De senectute Cicero: we would need the wisdom, love for civilization, the attention of the public good. But if we look at the actions taken and the values \u200b\u200bprofessed by those who govern us see override the exact opposite. "Aggression to institutional bodies, defense of personal interests: the essence of Berlusconi - according to the former head of state -" is in re ipsa, ie is in the things he says and does the Presiding Council : you can see and hear, to realize where this country is going. "A few months ago Ciampi had evoked, on this newspaper, the ancient principle of the Neapolitan Revolution of Vincenzo Cuoco on the happiness of peoples" to whom they are most needed orders that the men ", and then the old motto dear to the Rosselli brothers," not to give up ", then rideclinato by Francesco Saverio Borrelli in the famous" resist, resist, resist. "

Today, the former president back on these "moral urgency", to reiterate that many are still

"acts of courage," if we want to defend our democracy and our Constitution. "My parents are there, are the signatures that I did not want me apporrre on some laws that were made during the seven years, and then I have been criticized in Parliament as if it were acts" seditious "or decision" side. "But they were only inspired by the principles of civil life where I have always believed, and resting on the synthesis of virtuous values \u200b\u200band institutions." Between 2001 and 2006, Ciampi was unable to return to the Chambers-shame all the laws of the second Berlusconi government, because some of them lacked the vice of "manifest unconstitutionality" which alone can justify the refusal of signature by the head of state. But the reform Gasparri on the broadcasting system to reform the judiciary Castelli, Ciampi spoke some "no" heavy.

Despite this, he also touches now see that that form of "pedagogy Republican," necessary but not sufficient, it served little or nothing. "What can I say? Unfortunately, this is the dramatic Italian landscape, neither handsome nor easy. And this is also my biggest regret of old: on the threshold of 90 years, I realize with disappointment that this is not Italy that dreamed of 20 years. Then we woke up in the morning convinced that, however, things had gone, we made a step forward. Today we get up in the morning, and every day we realize that we have taken another step back. It 's very sad for me as a nonuagenario. But who is younger than me should not lose heart, and above all must not stop fighting. "Ciampi Next Saturday will not go to the streets to march in procession against the" Mess "Berlusconi:" I never joined in demonstrations , and at the legs I would stand ...", he says. But who knows, maybe with twenty years younger he would go too.

March 9, 2010