The “Trani System” had moved to Taranto, coming to touch various proceedings concerning theIlva. The “Trani System”, in fact, it was the “Capristo System”: a spider’s web of relationships which held together magistrates, lawyers, consultants and came to lick top-level politicians to open “Illegitimate investigations” or ‘soften’ the proceedings in exchange for favorite and attempts to appointment. A “Clearance of functions” which sees in the center – according to the reconstruction from power of attorney, endorsed by the investigating judge of the Lucanian court Antonello Amodeo – the former prosecutor of Trani and Taranto, Carlo Maria Capristo, Eni’s former lawyer, Piero Amara, the policeman Filippo Paradiso, the lawyer Giacomo Ragno e Nicola Nicoletti, partner of Pwc and Ilva’s consultant in extraordinary administration.
Among the accusations addressed to the main suspects – 12 in all – by the offices headed by Francesco Curcio also that of having, in exchange for favors, fixed (or attempted to fix) proceedings concerning the former Ilva of Taranto, including released from seizures of blast furnaces after death of two workers. This is the heart of the investigation of the power of attorney who brought Amara and Paradiso to jail, already serving in the offices of direct collaboration of the various undersecretaries to the Prime Minister, with Prodi, as with Berlusconi, and at the Ministry of the Interior, as a collaborator of the secretariat of Matteo Piantedosi, then head of cabinet of Matteo Salvini, and then ended up in the secretariat of Carlo Sibilia. Instead, house arrest for Ragno, already sentenced to 2 years and 8 months in the survey on “Trani System” which concerned the pm Antonio Savasta e Michele Nardi, and for Nicoletti. The investigating judge instead ordered theresidence obligation for Capristo, already arrested a May 2020 as part of another investigation and then returned free while he is a process.
Amara, in the opinion of the prosecutor, was “Active subject” of the corruption in judicial acts “Both in Trani and in Taranto”, while Capristo has “Sold permanently” to Amara his “judicial function”. Paradiso, on the other hand, had the role of “intermediary” on “behalf and in the interest” of Amara vis-à-vis the former prosecutor. According to the approach of the investigators, the alleged “Enslavement” of Capristo stemmed from the attempt to obtain favorite through the two, which were produced in an “incessant activity of recommendation, persuasion, solicitation carried out ”in his favor on“ members of the Csm (known to them directly or indirectly) and / or on subjects deemed capable of influencing the latter “when the former magistrate was interested in vacant management positions. In return, again according to the accusation, Capristo on the one hand tried to “Credit” Amara as a lawyer of Eni and on the other hand it softened the positions of the prosecutor in the proceedings in which Amara was involved as a lawyer.
The former prosecutor of Trani is also being investigated in the investigation Antonio Savasta, the former investigating judge Michele Nardi (convicted of corruption in judicial acts in another investigation and for which the investigating judge rejected the precautionary measure requested by the prosecutor), the entrepreneur Flavio D’Introno, the carabiniere Martino Marancia, the consultant Massimiliano Soave e Franco Balducci. In various ways, corruption in judicial acts, corruption in the exercise of functions, corruption for acts contrary to official duties, extortion, abuse of office and aiding and abetting are contested. The investigation coordinated by the prosecutor of Potenza, Francesco Curcio, had been partially anticipated last June by Ilfattoquotidiano.it in a long reconstruction of what happened in recent years in the context of a proceeding on the former Ilva. The investigation revolves around the choice of Amara as an advisor to the legal structure of Ilva in As and participates in the so-called “negotiation” with the power of attorney to achieve that plea bargain than a few years earlier, the pool of magistrates then led by Franco Sebastio, had rejected.
Among the accusations reported in the indictment formulated by the prosecutor there is also that in fact the legal staff of Ilva raises the stakes by offering the payment of a fine of 3 million euros, 8 months of judicial commissioner e 241 million euros of confiscation (instead of the 9 proposed in the first instance) as a profit from the crime to be allocated to quenching and tempering of the iron and steel plant of Taranto. But the judges of the Assize Court considered “the penalties agreed with the representatives of the public prosecution” are “extremely inadequate and in no way responding to dutiful canons of proportionality with respect to extreme severity of the disputed facts “.