Legal cases against Tourism Minister Daniela Santanché in Milan are encountering significant delays. The preliminary hearing concerning aggravated fraud against Italy’s social security agency INPS was recently postponed, with Santanchè’s defence securing an adjournment for her courtroom questioning until October 17.
Simultaneously, the separate trial focusing on allegations of false financial reporting through social media communications regarding her Visibilia publishing group’s accounts was also postponed. Judges from Milan’s Second Criminal Court scheduled the next hearing for September 16.
This adjournment sparked a heated exchange between prosecutors and presiding judge Giuseppe Cernuto. Public prosecutors Marina Gravina and Luigi Luzi objected to the two-month delay, citing the “risk of the statute of limitations expiring” and stressing “the justice system’s interest in the reasonable duration of trials.” They warned, “At this pace, we risk going too far.”
When questioned about the postponement and potential statute of limitations issues, Minister Santanché stated, “I would prefer full acquittal, but that certainly doesn’t depend on me. Satisfied? I am satisfied when things are done well.”
Furthermore, at the outset of the hearing, the trial was narrowed as one defendant company, Visibilia srl in liquidation, was dismissed from the case. The judges ruled the indictment against the company, represented by lawyer Giovanni Morgese, was “null” due to “vagueness,” “generality,” and “compromising the right to a defence.” The related documents were returned to prosecutors, who had previously rewritten the charges at the court’s request. The trial continues for the remaining 16 defendants, including the minister.
Defence lawyers, including Federico Cecconi, Nicolò Pelanda, and Salvatore Pino (representing Santanché), also sought to exclude Giuseppe Zeno and other minor Visibilia partners from participating as civil parties for potential damages. The court, acknowledging the significance of the defence’s arguments, deferred a decision on this matter until September 16.
Prosecutor Gravina intervened, describing the case as “substantial,” partly due to “all the witnesses that need to be heard.” To “avoid the risk of prescription,” which has already affected the 2016 charges against Visibilia Editore (a company that settled), prosecutors urged the judges to decide on the civil parties issue “today or before the summer break.” Gravina emphasized this was “not just the Prosecutor’s interest, but the interest of justice for the reasonable duration of the trial.”
Presiding Judge Cernuto countered that the trial “could have started” earlier if the initial charges hadn’t required resolution. He cautioned that rushing a “trial like this” could cause problems later, stressing that “this phase must be developed in a reasoned manner.” He added, “The Court has other cases too, other trials, it doesn’t only have this one.”
Prosecutor Luzi requested that at least on September 16, following the resolution on civil parties, the trial’s evidentiary phase could begin with the admission of evidence and initial witnesses. The first hearing dates back to April 15, yet the evidentiary phase remains unstarted.
Calculations suggest the statute of limitations for these charges (concerning financial statements from 2016 to 2022) could expire five years after the July 2024 trial request. Compounding the time pressure, two judges on the panel are set to rotate to other functions in the coming months.
Riproduzione riservata © Copyright ANSA