I valori, il diritto, la tecnica e il codice
Viviamo in un periodo storico in cui si fa strada l’idea che chiunque, a prescindere da una preparazione tecnica e dall’abilità, possa scrivere leggi e produrre diritto. E ci si dimentica, così, che non è un caso che il diritto sia stato definito “ ars boni et aequi ” e che i grandi codici siano stati elaborati da qualificati giuristi e non siano nati affatto dall’oggi al domani, senza delle serie discussioni, protratte anche per anni, alle spalle.
Francesco Carnelutti, uno dei più grandi giuristi italiani di sempre, scriveva nel 1950: “ma ciò che intus alit […] è poi il giudizio, che deve pronunciare e, prima, deve avere, almeno quanto il giudice, il legislatore . […] Quelli che lavorano nell’officina giudiziaria, fra altro, sono, secondo il modo di dire del mercato industriale, operai qualificati; ma nessuna qualifica, in senso tecnico, si richiede per diventare legislatore. Giudice non può essere, ma legislatore sì, uno che non s’intende né di diritto né di giustizia ”(grassetto mio).
È Everyone knows the problem of the lack of effectiveness of punishment in our country. Huge problem, because in fact, is denying the right to produce a vicious circle.
In fact, the practical inability to implement the principles and legal rules, as well as debasing the civilization of which they are imbued with values \u200b\u200band who wish to protect, may be responsible for up to pose as an element the potential criminogenic.
If justice is slow and inefficient, it is penalizing innocent, and they reinforce the criminals and the company, feeling helpless, lost confidence in the state and with a growing conviction that breaking the law pays (no più dissuasione, ma persuasione che delinquere paga); l’illegalità così aumenta e l’incapacità di affrontarla proporzionalmente si aggrava.
Ed è superfluo dire che il grado di civiltà di un Paese si misura sì sulla base di più indici, ma che tra questi riveste indubbia, e forse preminente, importanza proprio il grado di progresso che connota l’ordinamento penale e processualpenale, data l’estrema e primaria importanza dei valori che esso, da sempre e per sua natura, abbraccia.
Eppure oggi, che dell’illuminismo giuridico si sente molto bisogno (per non dire la riscoperta!), si sta marciando contro l’ideale delle norme poche, chiare, logiche, semplici ed efficaci.
La linee giuridiche del nostro tempo seguono questa triplice direzione: 1- destrutturazione; 2-decodificazione; 3- incapacità tecnico-linguistica.
Con la destrutturazione il sistema giuridico, inteso come meccanismo di coerenza e logica, si sfalda; con la decodificazione si creano delle “brecce” riempite di sotto sistemi normativi autonomi che assecondano una tendenza di “fuga dal codice” e alla dispersione; con l’incapacità tecnico-linguistica la comprensibilità e la conoscibilità delle norme diventano cose sempre più ardue.
Ipertrofia e logorrea legislativa, sciatteria tecnico-giuridica, complexity and vagueness of legislation, incomprehensibility, ambiguity, character casuistic laws, are, in fact, all items on the agenda.
every side, amongst scholars, voices are being raised by the complaint of the decay law reached by our system.
The experts and every person who comes into conflict with that reality as a result of his trial, is able to perceive this discomfort.
But no need to be lawyers, defendants or parties to the proceedings to warn him, being more than just browse a few pages of any textbook of law worthy of the name.
This is the time of "Free speech", understood as a negative "freedom speech" that leads to deterioration of the current legislative and the danger of turning into anarchy rules to which we must oppose with force.
is being created (or better re-creating, since historically this situation is not new) the natural environment of the "shyster" of all time, fans of the litigation, the pioneers of the "dum pendet Realise" and priests of the "lis et (not lux!) perpetual Luceat eis."
is a legislative jungle that ends to fall against the individual and be heard in that particular branch of law first and more strongly than others, touching his life, his liberty, his dignity: the criminal law and processualpenale.
Ferrua writes, one of the greatest contemporary masters of the criminal trial: "[...] here a state of chaos that interpretation on the one hand, increases the discretion of the court, often able to motivate with equal persuasive force opposing solutions but, on the other hand, leaves a sword of Damocles hanging over the fate of the process, the unpredictable outcome of the exceptions that a zealous defense alert and know immediately articulate. Inevitable at this point la forte accentuazione della variabile sociale – oggi anche etnica – in quanto a sopportare il peso dell’incertezza normativa, senza la contropartita dei vantaggi che le sono connessi, restano solo gli imputati sprovvisti di un’adeguata assistenza legale”.
Qualcuno disse che “non conoscere la propria storia è come non essere mai cresciuti”.
Ebbene, negli ultimi anni in Italia siamo cresciuti davvero poco.
Certezza del diritto, norme chiare, coerenti, precise, poche (Voltaire), brevi, concise, che non contengono “né dettagli inutili né espressioni vaghe né troppo elaborati ragionamenti esplicativi”(Montesquieu), systematic, complete: these are concepts that we have to recover.
But how?
I think to answer this question we should think about "how" and "where".
I mean starting from the second, the "where", which must be identified in that set of rules called Code.
It is not simply a place where we collect the rules, but a place with certain characteristics. And these are precisely the systematic features, completeness, internal consistency, unity of language, the presence of a few rules, clear and brief. By contrast, code is not trivial and assembled a simple set of rules, obscure and confused, full of references to other rules maybe ill connectable to the first, giving rise to gaps and aporia.
and chaos emerges the need for legislative codification. So it has been and always will be.
contains the words of Gaspare Falsitta, a lawyer for tax law among the most esteemed in Italy, "Code means moving from the jungle to the legislative legal system, from the chaos of a vineyard to vineyard Renzo well cultivated and weed free, with screws placed in well-ordered and political rows. Coding and creation of the system are so captivated by the instrumental relationship: encoding in order di espungere il superfluo e il vano e di creare un testo legislativo fondamentale e stabile, che abbracci le norme di una branca del diritto sistematicamente disposte in un tutto organico”.
Il nostro “dove”, perciò, è il codice, inteso come fondamenta di civiltà, di logicità, coerenza e, in definitiva, di certezza del diritto .
Ma se è questa semplicità e unità linguistica, sistematica, geografica che andiamo cercando, dobbiamo ora capire “come” trovare e raggiungere questo luogo.
E la risposta è il giurista .
Come scrissi qualche tempo fa, un’affermazione di onestà intellettuale si impone: il diritto è, ed è sempre stato, cosa per giuristi.
Nessuno si farebbe aggiustare la macchina da un dottore e curare da un meccanico, come nessuno si farebbe costruire la casa da un avvocato e difendere in giudizio da un muratore per la banale ragione che è il meccanico che sa aggiustare la macchina e il dottore che sa come curarvi, così come è il muratore che sa costruire le case e l’avvocato che sa come difendervi in giudizio.
Lo stesso ragionamento vale per il diritto e il giurista.
Tractent fabrilia fabri , questo è il principio, tanto banale quanto negletto, che guida e anima la nostra riflessione.
The wording of the rules (and really talk about formulation ", even before the" content ") should be entrusted to people who know the system of law, who know the" system of norms "as a whole and that are equipped with the skills and technical language that allows them to intervene in that system and to write a law in a clear, simple and correct terminology, according to the teaching Enlightenment.
Even the best of intentions if it is translated by a legislature prepared and attentive in good standards, it will create problems.
It is worth remembering that one thing is the 'idea' which is the basis of a rule and another is the "same standard", because only the latter, ultimately, is the law and rule the society, as the 'idea' is undoubtedly useful to interpret.
If the above principle, therefore, will not become an anchor, will continue to remain a confusion in roles and legislation.
is useful to reflect the words of Voltaire: "The law has improved so much that there is no coutume (French customary rule, nda), which has several commentators, and all, as Obviously, a different view. " And again: "Your customary law of Paris is interpreted differently by twenty-four commentaries, so it is twenty-four times proven that it is ill-conceived."
Now, it is obvious that, however well structured and written, a provision is likely to be interpreted in multiple ways, so that Voltaire's statement is naïve, not a lawyer. However, it has a kernel of truth is not negligible and indeed prominent in the books that fill the massive legal libraries. "It's the weight of culture", and maybe someone will say, for a part, is right. But the other part is the weight of incompetence a legislature that creates problems of interpretation, being unable to be clearly and unequivocally express his will or, worse still, to realize the true extent of what, with her voice, it imposes.
therefore clear that our "how" is identified by a law expert, the lawyer, I would like to point out that the democratic spirit that animates me who can not draw, however, a solution in which the central position on the legislative output Parliament is always elected by the people which, according to the constitution, is sovereign (Article 1 of the Constitution).
Far be it from me, therefore, any concept of educational elitism and for the simple reason that, as always, history teaches us, from there to the paternalistic, authoritarian or even, the pace is terribly short.
The point, then, becomes redefined the "principle of legality" in the sense, of course, to support those who decide the laws, as elected by the citizens, those who can write and know how to indicate proposals, suggestions and criticism technically qualified .
Now, though, as cautioned above, we must be careful not to give too much power to the lawyer in order to avert the danger which is to make a legislature, we should not attribute too little, resulting in degradation of the role.
And why the technicians of the law, or rather, the best among them, can take a real weight, in my opinion is to go through the establishment of a new constitutional body, which might be called "Council of Jurists."
This collegial body should have powers exercisable at the request of Parliament or office, consisting of technical advice and to issue bills, and be elected by the professors of faculties of law.
In this way, we believe that we can achieve a productive game of checks and balances between the legislative and legal powers of the banner of a more serious lawmaking and beneficiary's first citizens.
The Council of Jurists, as structured in this proposal would not, and consistently, to make this decision, but budget, with its contribution, the power of Parliament surely from a technical point of view but also because of its authority From the point of view of the weight of the choices made by the legislature on public opinion.
said that from a technical point, I conclude with a consideration of practical and that is that you can not disregard the fact that every rule must be immersed in a society made up of people who will be responsible for its implementation.
And for this to happen without problems, it takes a certain mentality and the necessary human and material resources.
the best possible standards will never produce the desired effect if it is not even introduced to a world that is the best of possible worlds, or at least it looks like this.
Calamandrei said: "A new law of the case, even if it represents the ultimate of scientific perfection, not as a necessary consequence the improvement of justice, if it does not deal hill practical possibilities of the society in which it must operate" .
First, then, must be given internalized by all, especially by those judges who the search for truth, according to the method that most reasonably leads to it is the purpose of the process.
Leading the minds of legislators, lawyers and judges must be the logic of intellectual honesty.
" Amicus Plato, magis veritas friend."
And then should not forget that every action, as guided by the same rule can be accomplished in different ways and with different attitudes.
was written correctly that "it often happens that the guarantees of the citizen are more apparent than real, so that we must consider defense of liberty costume plus civilian law enforcement agencies che non le vere e proprie regole giuridiche”(Pisapia).
Accanto a ciò, va poi considerato che senza risorse materiali non è possibile fare nulla.
Un sistema giudiziario senza investimenti non sarà mai in grado di funzionare in maniera efficiente ed anche questo contribuirà a aumentare il circolo vizioso di cui si parlava all’inizio.
Purtroppo, sappiamo che la scarsezza di mezzi ha caratterizzato e continua a caratterizzare la nostra realtà giudiziaria.
Certo, su questo punto come su altri, a molti di noi è dato di fare poco in maniera diretta.
Ma qualcosa di comunque molto importante la possiamo fare ed è make us feel that we have the right, constitutionally protected, and why, if it is the future of our country, ourselves and those around us the thing we really care, then we also have a moral duty, which, among all the duties, is the noblest and strongest.
Alessandro Marchetti
