If we don’t like Giovanni Brusca’s release, it is because we aspire to revenge

It “Scannacristiani” It is free. For Giovanni Brusca the doors of the prison have opened after serving 25 years of sentence and the thoughts of each of us go back in time. The massacre of Capaci, the bomb, the remote control, the hill above the highway full of cigarette butts where he was stationed, the shock and the straight-backed response from Palermo and then the rush of the mobile wheels to the police station, with the men of the weapon in mefisto who delivered “u verru” (the pig) to justice, under the eyes of a city that, never before, has seen itself united in a common desire for legality.

I read the comments of everyone, of politics, of the relatives of the victims of the mafia, of the magistrates of the time and of ordinary citizens, to whom the sudden release of the boss of San Giuseppe Jato caused mixed feelings towards justice.

A piece of news that comes in the middle of the discussion aboutlife imprisonment and that it seems to me an excellent opportunity, having overcome the first and inevitable emotional reactions, to reflect on the issue of collaborators of justice, on their management, on penalties and rewards and above all on the idea of ​​the State that we have, that we would have or that we would like.

Let’s start with an objective fact: Brusca is free because this is the law. Those who speak of “state shame” are moved by human sentiments, but the real shame would have been not respecting a norm that Falcone wanted. Living in a state of law means respecting the laws and above all that the laws are valid for everyone, even for those who dissolve children in acid. But if we don’t like this system, if we believe that justice must be a bending reed in the wind ad personam, if we believe that the state must move on the basis of feelings of revenge, playing on the same level as the mafia, then it is time to say it, it is time to choose who we want to be and what role do we want to have in the game against the mafia.

I don’t think so, as he says Pietro Grasso, that the state with Brusca has won three times. We would not yet be bogged down in the season of the massacres if the pig had said everything, if his statements had always been fully confirmed by the findings and if we knew what happened to his fortune. If his “repentance” is deep and sincere, I don’t even ask myself this. The repentant law is based on a do ut des and regardless of the morality, faith and inner torment of each repentant, “giving in order to have” is still in fact. If it is legitimate for the state, why shouldn’t it be legitimate for a Mafia collaborator? In any case, it is true that Brusca has made his contribution, even net of the things that do not add up and, faced with this, the State has made a commitment. Unlike all the other collaborators, Brusca has never used house arrest (we should ask ourselves why), but now that the protection of his life is out, it is the responsibility of the state, such as finding him a house, paying him a salary and helping him reintegrate. in society by finding him a job. It is the one that implicitly provides for what most loudly defend: life imprisonment. If you do not speak, stay inside and do not enjoy any benefit, if you speak we will come to meet you. Do ut des.

If we don’t like this, we need to find the courage to admit that we don’t like life imprisonment either and not because the rulings of the Council and the European Court of Human Rights tell us so. We are against it because we want more, because in reality we aspire to revenge. So I make my own the words of Angelo Provenzano who, seeing his father reduced to a vegetable die, behind a now useless dividing glass imposed by 41bis, said: “Better the death penalty”. I would like to emphasize, for the most “Lentini”, that personally I would never approve the death penalty and I don’t even think that it was the son of Binnu, but his remains a good allegory. Each of us can think of it as he wants, but if what we have in common is the sense of the State, it is precisely this institution that has to ask ourselves what he limits between the punishment inflicted by justice, the persistence endorsed for reasons of public opinion and the strategies of “conversion to collaboration”.

The bosses of that season, time is slowly taking them away. The mysteries remain, the horror experienced in those years, the incurable pain of family members and an idea of ​​the mafia, increasingly distant in time, to which we clung, convinced that we have an anti-mafia emblem tattooed on the forehead. We see it as Buscetta told it to us and we continue to fight it with the tools of the time, including the impedimental life sentence, which we like and dislike depending on the perspectives (whether in credit or debit).

The National Anti-Mafia Prosecutor, Federico Cafiero De Raho, underlines that Giovanni Brusca’s liberation is one victory of the state “Because it is by applying the law also to the mafia that the state wins”. And he adds that to counter the mafias “more and more effective tools are needed to beat them not only when they use violence to gain control of the territories or to condition the state, but also to prevent them from infiltrating the economy and politics”. I read it as an invitation, you can not go on just wiretapping and collaborators. Not with today’s mafia that runs fast, that makes no noise, that more than the territories controls the assets and that of big bosses to life imprisonment, impediment or not, does not have any. At most fugitives or in voluntary exile, in the Caymans.

PREV Case Yara, Bossetti defense denied access to artifacts
NEXT MAKE an appointment in the garden in the Assets of Lombardy on Saturday 5th and Sunday 6th June