Pretrial detention, Razzante: “Short circuit between information and justice. I’ll explain why the crackdown is right”

Norma Costa, Razzante: “I’ll explain why the crackdown is right”

There Costa normapproved yesterday evening in Council of Ministershas already set off alarm bells among the opposition and the most hardened judicial reporters. The main concern, it has emerged, is none other than the fear of a very limited freedom of the press. Or, to quote some newspapers, “gagged”.

This thought is also shared by the same National Federation of the Italian Press (Fnsi), which turns the question on the possibility of misunderstanding the reasons for a precautionary measure order without all the details of the case.

But there are also those who are against this point of view. Asked by Affaritaliani.itthe professor Ruben RazzanteProfessor of Information Law at the Catholic University of Milan and at Lumsa in Rome and author of a successful Manual on information rules, says he is in favor of the reform, provided it is applied with balance to avoid excessive limitations.

Professor, what changes for journalists with the approval of the Costa law?

Specifically, it will be forbidden to publish the text of the pretrial detention order until the preliminary investigations are concluded, or until the end of the preliminary hearing. With the new legislation, the orders can no longer be quoted in full, with a quotation mark so to speak, but only in extracts. Essentially, Article 114 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is modified.

But that’s not all. The legislative decree also removes the media’s ability to publish parts of wiretaps, as allowed in 2017 with the ad hoc law of the then Minister of Justice Andrea Orlando. In fact, it will be possible to publish only the indictment.

In your opinion, does the new rule really represent a gag on the press?

No, absolutely not. I actually think it is a rule of common sense. We need to put an end to the media pillorying to which so many people have been subjected. You can ruin other people’s lives in this way. Many have ended up in the crosshairs of the most avid journalists, perhaps without even being sent to trial, but still emerging from the eye of the storm with their lives ruined by media speculation.

Being able to flaunt the details of any individual’s private life to the four winds is a fact that can lead to very serious effects. I believe there is a continuous short circuit between information and justice. Newspapers too often violate people’s privacy: this behavior has now turned into a disease. The Costa law could prove to be an effective cure.

In short, more balance is needed. But what could be another solution besides the Costa rule?

It is difficult to find a better way to balance information and privacy. Then, it remains to be said that even the precautionary measures themselves in our country are used improperly

In what sense?

It seems to me that they serve more to make people resign, rather than for their real purpose. Precautionary measures should be used only and exclusively to ensure that the suspect does not flee, does not tamper with evidence and does not commit further crimes.

Do other democratic countries also have this kind of privacy-information problems?

The judicial news reporting in Italy is extremely spectacularized. In other countries they don’t think this way. There is much more attention to the rights of the people involved in the investigations.

Ultimately, what do you say to those who define the rule as a gag on freedom of the press?

I think there is a lot of inconsistency. Those who talk about liberticidal rules because you can no longer write anything about their adversaries, when their allies (or themselves) are hit, invoke respect for privacy and protection of the person