08 October 2021
The lawyer Luca Di Donna he was too busy proposing himself as a facilitator for companies that wanted to access the rich direct assignments of Invitalia that he did not have time to participate in the activities of the Parliamentary Anti-Mafia Commission. His contribution to the Select Committee on “predatory activities of organized crime during the health emergency” was rather poor: just two meetings in one year. The decision to “self-suspend” from the Commission, after the news of the investigation into him, will not then be an insurmountable problem for the president Nicola Morra (M5s). The Honorable Member had given him the post at the Parliamentary Anti-Mafia Commission Paolo Lattanzio, now of the Democratic Party after a past as a grillino. Why was Di Donna chosen? “It was a proposal made on the basis of the curriculum. I saw some useful CVs for the job I was planning to do. So I proposed him, ”said Lattanzio yesterday, commenting on Di Donna’s self-suspension. “I did not know him personally, he is simply one of the top as university professors on these issues, has a scary resume, so it was one of the names we made », the ex grillino then added with satisfaction.
Although he has been a lawyer for just over 15 years, nothing is missing from Di Donna’s CV: an expert in bankruptcy law, corporate law, banking law, financial and insurance law, consultant for the internationalization of companies. Fallen from grace, in the wake of the best Italian tradition, the race to distance itself has now begun. “In the past I used to hang out with him, but since I became premier I have not attended it anymore. I do not know anything about his subsequent professional activity and I am absolutely unaware of any facts that are the subject of an investigation “, he hastened to declare Giuseppe Conte. These statements clash with what was reported yesterday by Antonio Saccone, a UDC parliamentarian, who was contacted earlier this year by Di Donna in an attempt to create a Count Ter. The affair has raised a political fuss and the center-right asks for clarification. “For several months Forza Italia has been asking for a parliamentary commission of inquiry on the management of the Covid emergency. What are we waiting for? It is citizens’ right to know if the public resources spent for this purpose have benefited the community or have only served to line someone’s pockets, ”says Gabriella Giammanco, vice president of Forza Italia in the Senate. «For some time there has been news relating to hypotheses of crime linked to this emergency. Ultimately the case of Donna’s lawyer re-emerged the existence of unscrupulous procedures regarding the purchase of Chinese masks by that Invitalia led by Arcuri. In the reconstruction of what has happened there are many things that do not add up, those who sit in Parliament have the duty to clarify ”, says Giammanco.
Di Donna is being investigated by the prosecutor of Rome for criminal association aimed at the trafficking of influences. The story arises from the complaint of Giovanni Buini, an entrepreneur who was supposed to sell surgical masks between March and April of last year, in full Covid emergency. On 30 April 2020 Buini had met Di Donna and the lawyer Gianluca Maria Esposito in Rome, who had proposed themselves as intermediaries with the commissioner structure. The two lawyers made him sign an agreement where a commission was recognized. Di Donna, Buini told the carabinieri, immediately expressed his closeness to Conte. At the next meeting on May 5, in the presence of the general of the financial police Enrico Tedeschi, serving at the Secret Service, Buini pulled back and the deal fell through. The masks that had been originally supplied were also returned to Buini. And this at a dramatic moment for the country where there were not half of them.
BETWEEN AMARA AND ALPA
The telephone interceptions of the carabinieri have brought to light numerous contacts between Domenico Arcuri and the two lawyers who at that time, it must be said, had no relationship with the Mise or Invitalia. The initial hypothesis of corruption was then classified as a trade in influences. But speaking of the investigation, there is also a little yellow. Yesterday we wrote that the Roman prosecutors Gennaro Varone and Fabrizio Tucci were coordinated by the adjunct Paolo Ielo. On reading, however, the search decree against Di Donna and Esposito, Ielo’s name has disappeared. Sources inside the Palace of Justice of the Capital have made it known that Ielo would have abstained. The reason? One hypothesis could be, as told by Libero on 30 September last, linked to the testimony of Piero Amara on the role of the lawyer Guido Alpa, a partner in Conte’s firm, and the positions he received from Condotte in extraordinary administration. In addition to Alpa, he had also received assignments from Domenico Ielo, the brother of the magistrate. One of the directors of Condotte is the lawyer Giovanni Bruno who has conferred advice, in addition to Ielo, to Di Donna. Bruno, like Conte, had also been a pupil of Alpa. Ielo had long ago conducted an investigation into Brunella Bruno, sister of Giovanni Bruno, who was later acquitted. Ielo had not challenged the acquittal which had become definitive. Brunella Bruno was defended by Amara, who was subsequently investigated in another proceeding by Ielo in 2016. Amara, now in prison, had therefore appointed the lawyer Salvino Mondello, friend and witness of Ielo’s wedding, as defender. An unprecedented overlapping of roles that would justify the abstention of the deputy prosecutor. “The former Covid19 emergency facility and Invitalia have never awarded contracts and supplies to companies with respect to which Di Donna or Esposito was in any way interested and to have operated according to regular and transparent procedures” he said in the yesterday evening the former commissioner structure led by Arcuri.