Roberto Speranza has serious responsibilities in the mismanagement of the pandemic, especially the AstraZeneca issue and the missed autopsies
As already anticipated in these days by the press, the Health Minister Roberto Speranza risks being investigated in Bergamo for having lied to the prosecutors regarding the failure to apply the 2006 pandemic plan. We are still in the hypothesis, so much so that the Bergamo Public Prosecutor’s denied that the Minister is being investigated, the fact is that Speranza probably managed the first phase of the pandemic – the one that saw Bergamo as the Lazzaretto of Europe – so it seems approximate and navigating on sight.
The investigation by the Bergamo Public Prosecutor’s Office (but in general the work of the judiciary as a whole) does not, however, want to deepen the real crux of the matter, which – in our opinion – is not just the failure to implement the pandemic plan. Speranza’s responsibilities are other and far more serious.
First of all the AstraZeneca question (Vaxzevria)
With official press release dated 9 February 2021 n. 29, Roberto Speranza solemnly affirmed: “Today the first doses of the Astrazeneca vaccine arrive in all Italian regions. They will be administered to the population between 18 and 55 years old […]”. Declaration confirmed by the Ministry of Health with circular of 7 April 2021, in which it was only said that it was preferable to use this vaccine for the people over 60 years.
On 10 June 2021 he died at the age of 18 Camilla Canepa di Sestri Levante, who got vaccinated on May 25 on a voluntary basis with AstraZeneca, since the Ministry had said it could be done. Camilla died, the government first allowed vaccinations with AstraZeneca only 55 years of age and older, then it has gradually removed completely from circulation.
So if that kind of vaccine was dangerous for young people, why was it initially recommended for the 18-55 age group? Hope did not even listen to the remarks of Aifa – Italian Medicines Agency – which again on May 26, 2021 warned everyone about the fact that they occurred adverse cases caused by AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines of “cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (TSVC) and / or thrombosis of splanchnic veins, often associated with the presence of thrombus in multiple sites it’s at thrombocytopenia, with severe bleeding and sometimes signs of disseminated intravascular coagulation “observed” almost exclusively within about three weeks of vaccination in healthy subjects under the age of 60, predominantly women ” [documento Aifa su Complicanze tromboemboliche post-vaccinazione anti-COVID-19 del 26/5/2021].
Why have the Ministry of Health and the Regions organized the so-called OpenDays to allow 18-year-olds (especially maturing) to get vaccinated on a voluntary basis with AstraZeneca? Why were Aifa’s warnings not heeded? Having guaranteed that AstraZeneca was safe from 18 to 55 years of age integrates the hypothesis of manslaughter pursuant to art. 589 of the Criminal Code, since the Minister is guilty of grave negligence – i.e. evident negligence – of having authorized that type of vaccine also to eighteen-year-olds, only to withdraw it following the death of Camilla, a death – as admitted today – related to the vaccine .
Missed autopsies
Between the end of February and mid-April 2020 the dead were about twenty thousand. What to do with it? They all burned them. For cremation to be lawful, pursuant to Law no. 130/2001, the will – written or oral – expressed by the deceased, or by the spouse or, failing that, the closest relatives is required. Did everything happen regularly? Are we sure that these authorizations have been given and collected in compliance with the law? The judiciary so far did not investigate this question.
Concerning the cremation, theordinance of the Ministry of Health published on 8 April 2020, where in article C) num. 1 reads: “for the entire period of the emergency phase autopsies or diagnostic findings should not be carried out in full-blown cases of Covid-19, whether they died while being hospitalized in a hospital ward or if they died at home “.
Apart from thelegal anomaly which sees a simple ministerial order override a state law, here the problem is above all criminal. Cremation prevents the autopsy, that is, the legitimate search for the reasons for death, damaging the subjective right of relatives to know the causes of the death. It could therefore be configured the hypothesis of destruction, suppression or removal of a corpse pursuant to art. 411 of the Criminal Code.
Were there such authorizations for cremation by the sick or by the closest relatives? If so, were they collected regularly when the patient was still conscious, capable of understanding and willing? Have any authorizations from relatives been released in freedom or under duress, even if only moral? So far, no one has ever asked these questions. Nobody even wondered why the minister did everything he could to avoid autopsies.
Other than failure to implement the pandemic plan, here the hypotheses of crime exist and are much more serious! But no one, not even the judiciary, really wants to go to the bottom. Hope is still in his place without anyone having yet confronted him with any responsibilities he may have. We are not justicialists, far from it (we even wrote a book on the need for greater procedural guarantees), but at least on these two issues the judiciary should clarify as soon as possible, otherwise Camilla died in vain.
#Astrazeneca #vaccines #missed #autopsies #responsibilities #Speranza
