sabato 10 settembre 2016

"Strategy of Tension"

 Justice in Focus Symposium
Cooper Union - 09/10/2016
Presentation by Judge Ferdinando Imposimato
Honorary President of the Supreme Court of Italy

Ladies and Gentleman, before making my speech about the Strategy of Tension, that I want to dedicate to the 9/11 and world victims of terrorism, I need to thank the organizers, attorneys and experts, for putting on this important event, at the wonderful John Cooper Union University.
I apologize for my English in advance, but will do my best for all of you here and around the world.
One of the greatest ancient historians, the Greek Tucidide, once said:
"We must know our past to understand the present and be able to predict the future".
Our history, as we know it, is polluted with fabrication, silence and misinformation, starting from the true masters of the massacres and political crimes. This is because modern democracies, often masking tyrannical regimes, use the media as instruments of disinformation and distortion of people's consciences, to feed mass-fear for preemptive wars. There is no future without justice.
Speaking of the Strategy of Tension, we cannot be influenced by the trials and verdicts of guilty or not guilty, or by inert behavior of the Nations involved. There are often two truths, the historical and the judicial truth, which do not coincide with one another.
The historical truth is often only the probable truth, but we cannot build the history only on the base of scientific and mathematical evidence, that often it is impossible to get.
Before speaking about nine eleven, I would like to describe the birth of the Strategy of Tension in Italy, which dates back to 1947, the banditry of Giuliano, who supported of the separation of Sicily from Italy and Italy's annexation by the United States.
The first massacre that happened in Italy during a period stretching more than half a century was that of Portella della Ginestra on May 1st.
In April, the People's Block party won the elections in Sicily against the Christian Democratic Party or Democrazia Cristiana. This victory alarmed the landowners, the Italian politicians and the United States. In response, on May 1st, Giuliano's men fired a series of machine-gun rounds at the demonstrators, killing adults and children in the process. There were also some Italian politicians amongst the instigators of the massacre. The United States government for its part provided weapons and financial support to the authors of this attack. The American consul in Rome was accused of having provided weapons. The American Michael Stern confirmed that the U.S. had supplied Giuliano with weapons. Portella della Ginestra was always reproduced during the strategy of tension, that would involve the Mafia, politics and institutions.

The NATO bases in Italy

NATO's purpose was to defend Europe against a possible attack by the Soviet Union, but NATO also pursued other tasks interfering in many countries internal politics, using terrorist attacks and organized crime.
The neofascist terrorist Roberto Cavallaro, admitted to be a member of Gladio. He claimed that the Gladio structure was a group of army officers who used civilians, with the aim to provoke chaos and a forced reaction by the military. The Italian Premier, a NATO General and officers all met at Michele Sindona's house who was a known Mafioso and member of the P2, the Italian Masonic lodge.
The Parliamentary commission on the P2 freemasonry, chaired by Tina Anselmi, wrote in 1960: “the P2 lodge, led by Licio Gelli, conspired with criminal organizations such as the Mafia and terrorist groups, helping U.S. government interference in Italian policies. Gelli invoked "extreme measures" as the tools for "unorthodox war".

Gladio / Stay Behind

According to the Italian Parliament, Gladio was a military organization belonging to the Deep State, which interfered systematically with Italian Democracy, destroying or preventing progressive governments. The Parliamentary Commission, led by the honorable Republican Libero Gualtieri, declared that “Gladio / Stay Behind was an illegal organization operating under U.S. Government control. He added that it was led in Italy by the American inteligence services which had an agreement with the Italian Secret services for using Gladio/Stay Behind as an instrument for the strategy of tension”. Gualtieri was threatened by terrorists because of his investigation on Gladio/Stay Behind. He assessed that: All of the Gladio operations had prior approval from the US Government, which was kept informed by the U.S. Ambassador.

The secret 1967 and 1969 REPORTS on the Strategy of Tension

As an investigating Judge, I wondered: does the Deep State really exist and if so, what is its role in the strategy of tension? I did not receive an answer to my question until many years after that.
Then in 2012, I discovered three important from 1967 and 1969 regarding the Deep State, the Strategy of Tension and the Hidden War.
At the trial for the Piazza Fontana massacre carried out by terrorists, which saw Emilio Alessandrini as prosecutor, Senator and friend Judge Gerardo D'Ambrosio from Napoli, gave me a conclusive speech in 2012 with those three important documents I mentioned. These documents had been hidden in a Montebelluna bank by Giovanni Ventura who belonged to the terrorist group Ordine Nuovo and by a secret agent named Zeta who were both accused of the Piazza Fontana attack. These documents mentioned the Deep State Government and pression services like the Bilderberg Group.
The 1967 document stated: "the charges of interference in the internal politics of European countries against the U.S. intelligence are absolutely true." The report added: "American dollars that were supposed to maintain the Cold War effort, were being sent to left wing and Catholic organizations."
The document revealed the names of leaders who were running this global plot.
"If the root of this international plot is located in Washington, then many more holes are located in Rome and in the Vatican."
The report recognized that: "the international pressure groups are bringing the free world into disorientation and into a general chaos," and that was the strategy of tension.
The May 1969 document clarified the political project in Italy: "The return to a central operation that would be carried out through the:
A) creation of a favorable public opinion, changing the top management at RAI TV, and the purchase of the press releases by financial groups.
B) waves of terrorist attacks to convince public opinion of the danger of keeping a socialist approach, with industrial groups in northern Italy grubstaking isolated groups of neo-fascists to set off devastating bombs.
The report ends with a dark and ominous quote from Robert Kennedy, the new candidate of the so-called liberal forces for the 1967 election: "The American liberals find themselves ideologically closer to Karl Marx rather than to the typically liberal 20th century Europe."

The T4 explosive in NATO bases

The Italian Judges assessed that the explosive used in the Piazza Fontana massacre, originated from a NATO base as confirmed to parliament by General Maletti and confirmed by Premier Cossiga.
In May, 1991, as a member of the Partito Democratico Socialista, the parliaments commission president and I held interrogations. In the 139 Gladio bases around the country, we found out that tons of explosives were being held there. "Gladio had been built in a solid way that was hidden and clandestine, whose members were Mafiosi, terrorists, P2 masons, Army Officers, intelligence, politicians, Ministry of Interior officials and industrialists." It was stressed that: "the powerful explosives used in every massacre in Italy were T4, of military origin. The massacres aimed at provoking anger amongst the people with the Nation's reaction being that political power would have to be used for a strong repression against people who provoke, maim and murder. The head of the Secret services Maletti was involved in this strategy, accused of aiding and abetting the authors of the massacres. He and General Santovito were both convicted of their crimes.
No answer was given to me by the government as Senator of the Italian Republic, implicitly conferming that Gladio was a subversive organization against democracy.

Judge Leonardo Grassi discovered Gladio in 1992/1993

Judge Grassi wrote: “the discovery of Gladio was of extreme importance in all the trials for the massacres committed in Italy. Several people provided us with a great deal of evidence regarding the connection between the massacres committed in Italy since 1969 by the terrorists and the leaders of the Italian Secret services, in order to fight the Communist party in Italy."
Grassi went on to say that: "the official theory of Gladio's only objective was to fight a possible invasion by the Soviet Union, was false." This theory was, "incorrect and disproven by evidence."
The technique utilized by Gladio after terrorist attacks was to "freeze" the investigation, via covert means, falsely accusing the innocent of being guilty.
The Justice Courts in Milan wrote, in August 2016, that the Brescia massacre had been committed by “the right-wing terrorists Ordine Nuovo" with support from Italian and U.S. military,” Also known as, Gladio / Stay Behind.

The Moro kidnapping - Steve Pieczenick U.S. adviser

On the basis of research as an investigating judge and historian, I here state that Italian premier Aldo Moro, was a Gladio victim. I discovered the truth, 30years after Moro's death, through Steve Pieczenik's confession and his extremely important 4 reports, which were hidden from Italian Judges by the Italian Minister of Interior.
Steve Pieczenik, a U.S. department agent and Henry Kissinger adviser, also became adviser to the Italian Minister of Interior as the crisis Committee member. Mr. Pieczenik hindered and stopped the Judges' investigation into the Aldo Moro kidnapping and murder.
Pieczenik stated, "I am confessing that it was me who prepared the strategic manipulation, which led to the death of Aldo Moro, with the aim of stabilizing the Italian situation.
The Red Brigade could have released Moro, and in a way that would have undoubtedly obtained great success and increased their legitimacy. Instead, my strategy of creating unanimous disgust of terrorist activity was even more successful. The price to pay was Moro's life. My strategy was that no individual is indispensable to the State. [...] The trap was that the Red Brigade had to kill Moro. I tricked them so well that they had no choice but to kill the prisoner.
The Italian Minister of Interior knew of the game we were playing. The decision to kill Moro was not taken lightly. We discussed it many times. But the Minister managed to keep to this strategy, and together we took a difficult decision."
In 2015, Pieczenik was formally accused of complicity in the Moro case, on the basis of undoubted legal evidence proving Pieczenick's participation in Moro's homicide. Pieczenik was the officer to Italy in charge of NATO. British and German Secret services were also involved from day 1 of the kidnapping, in trying to find out where Moro was being held. Gladio's final objective was to stabilize the Democrazia Cristiana's political power. Moro's murder was the beginning of the terrible social and economic crisis that Italy has suffered since then.
30 years after the Aldo Moro killing, President Cossiga told a journalist from Panorama that "special Gladio units had been employed in the hunt for Moro." "It's true, Gladio was involved. They were the famous division of the Italian intelligence service.” A secret report of the German BND on the role of Gladio in the hunt for Moro, was sent to the Italian Minister, who visited the famous Gladio base in Sardinia." President Obama would have opened an investigation into the Moro case, but I am still waiting for the result of that personal request.

Gladio massacres - Capaci (Judge Falcone) and Via d'Amelio (Judge Borsellino)

In May, 1992, anti-mafia Judge Giovanni Falcone, his wife Francesca Morvillo, who was also a magistrate and the only known woman murdered in Italy for her profession and three police bodyguards, were blown up by a ton of T4 explosive of NATO origin. 
In June 1989, Falcone had escaped another attempt on his life in Addaura, Sicily.
A student at Catania University, and Gladio member admitted in front of a Judge in Trapani that the "Gladio structure in Sicily had committed several crimes over the last 20 years: including the attempted murder of Falcone in Addaura in 1989, the assassination of Piersanti Mattarella and the assassination of Pio La Torre."  According to a credible Mafioso who had been detained in the United Kingdom in the very early 90s, Italian Secrect services together with their British and U.S. counterparts, went to the jail near London and obtained the name of an expert bomb maker, who was from the Ordine Nuovo.
Falcone's electronic diary was delivered to a journalist, in which it was quite clear that he was investigating Gladio's crimes. According to Falcone, all the above assassinations and attempted plus some not mentioned above, had Gladio's handprint all over them.
The tie between the Sicilian mafia and Gladio, was Vito Ciancimino, who was a Palermo mayor. Another informer told a Court in Palermo, that Paolo Borsellino had been killed by a member of Gladio. Another member of Gladio in an Italian embassy in Bulgary, told me that Falcone and Borsellino had been killed because of their dangerous investigations into political power.

The Strategy of Tension in Algeria

In January 2001, a former Algerian Army General , Habib Souaidia, admitted to be responsible, with other government officers, of several massacres in Algeria between 1980 and 1991. He told me that Islamic terrorists had been charged, even though innocent, by the Algerian Authority. He described the ferocious attacks carried out by the security services. Terrorism appeared to be both armed fundamentalist groups antagonizing the political system, as well as instruments used by the Deep State, not in defense of democracy, but to preserve its own private interests to reach positions of high power.
I added in January 2001, before the 9/11: "as Europe could sooner or later be crushed by these same explosive phenomenons, it is now our moral and political duty, to re-establish the transparent truth for everyone."


In my 2005 book “The Big Lie” I wrote that “The September 11th 2001 attacks, was an operation aimed to justify the March 2003 war against Iraq and Saddam Hussein, thought up and prepared well before 9/11. That war was sold to us, as part of the fight against Al Qaeda”. That theory was renounced by President Bush on the 2nd December 2008, in an ABC TV interview, where he admitted a "mistake" in going to war with Iraq, "caused by wrong information the intelligence services" about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair also told the truth on the 25 October, 2015, for the war in Iraq: “there are 'elements of truth' in the theory of a link between the invasion of Iraq and the rise of the Islamic State”, "I apologize for the planning and evaluation errors". The Iraqi war was the beginning of other wars that led to anarchy in northern Africa and the birth of ISIS.
The intervention in Iraq was justified by two prior "revelations" to 9/11:
A) Saddam had attempted to import raw uranium from Niger.
B) That it was needed for constructing an atomic device. On the 1st of December, 2000, nine months before 9/11, the British Joint Intelligence Committee wrote: "a report from unconfirmed sources saying that the Iraqis are showing interest in buying uranium."
Where was this plan first devised? It was amongst a group of Neo-Cons in America that had been inserted into the White House and the Pentagon led by Paul Wolfowitz. It was implemented in England and Italy and then spread by British intelligence soon after, with the blessing of the U S.
The Neo-Conservative Michael Ledeen would have supplied Karl Rove with documents about the weapons of mass destruction, with which Bush justified the invasion of Iraq on 2003.

The possible attack against Iran

For the planned war against Iran, a deep worldwide government pulls the strings of national governments, the economic and military power centers, and the mass media, feeding more terrorism for using it in favor of a new American-led world order. The media make the people incapable of understanding what is really happening around them.
Muhammad al-Barade'i, Director of the Atomic Energy Agency at the U.N. and Nobel Peace prize winner in 2006, warned that "there is information and misinformation." The war in Iraq was the first act of a long operation to create the conditions of a global conflict that will allow world domination by the United States of America. The end of Saddam was their first target with his 'comical trial' and not so comical execution in 2006. Mu'ammar Gheddafi was their second in 2011 which was also extremely successful, and a lot quicker than having to put Saddam on trial. They just took Gheddafi out of the picture.

General Flynn and Michael Ledeen.

The war against Iran remains in the will of a presidential candidate indicated by a foreman chief of the CIA a “threat for America” ( Corsera 25 agosto 2016, V Mazza) Trump's adviser, General Flynn for foreign policy. General Michael Flynn's true foreign policy is that America's real enemy is Iran (Corsera August 25, 2016). Michael Ledeen and General Flynn wrote a book together, the field of Fight- During the presidential campaign, they presented on 25 h August, 2016. Flynn States that: "Iran is a sponsor of extremist terrorism. I do not recommend that the next U.S. president renews the September 2015 nuclear agreement." We have to think that prof Michael Ledeen share that strategy.
Italy could be involved in possible attack against Libia and IRAN ; there are some circumstantial evidences of NATO's will to wage war against Iran. Like the plan to make the tiny island of Santo Stefano, in Sardinia, into a NATO base. The island is already a NATO support base since 2008 and houses Atomic missiles there. In August 2016, the Italian Ministry of Defense decided to turn Santo Stefano into an operational base for possible missions in the Mediterranean. The Sardinia region opposed this, rejecting warships docking there. Sardinia also opposes the manufacture near its capital city of Cagliari, of the MK3 bombs that Italy supplied to Saudi Arabia until 2015, which were used against the Shiites.
The Neo-Cons could involve Italy in a war against Iran, as they managed to do with Iraq. At that aim , Italy's Premier and Italian Government want to amend Article 78 of the Italian Constitution, approved by illegal majority , according the Consulta (2014) , so that only the Chamber of Deputies, which could be over the Premier's control, in force of the new electoral law. According to the reform , coming by the Government and approved by an illegal majority , the Italian Senate should be excluded by a participation to the possible war declaration, as now instead it is established by the 1948 Italian Constitution .
That Constitutional reform is dangerous for the world peace because aims to make easier for Italian Government the war declaration , for example in Nord Africa, and to make war on some country, as happened for the war against the Iraq .
That Italian Constitutional change is in full agreement with the theory of preventive war pursued by some neocon, who are now in prominent position inside the Italian Government. President Obama seems have supported our Constitutional reform proposed by the Italian Government . But we do not know the authors of the draft .
Probably the President Barak Obama, we appreciate very much for his courage and farsightedness in approving the nuclear agreement of Vienna 2015, - signed by United States, China, Russia, Great Britain, French , Germany , European Union and Teheran , -was not aware of that part of the reform of the Italian Constitution regarding the article 78.
We are in favor of the approving of the ICC and of the Crime of aggression before the ICC, as it was approved by many countries , as Germany, Austria, Belgium , Finland , Germany. Spain , Switzerland , Slovakia, Poland , Luxembourg. On the contrary, Italy, US , Russia, Great Britain, China and other Countries have not still signed the amendment of the ICC Statute, which introduces the crime of aggression which
” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations”.
For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein."

Conclusion 10th September 2016

My modest conclusion is that there is a worldwide Deep State. It exists and uses terrorism, mind control and general chaos for preventive wars. There are several cases all over the world demonstrating that terrorist attacks have been protected or encouraged before they happened, that those who are responsible of State terrorism have not been punished. Terrorism must be fought without a doubt, but we have to respect human rights, as we did in Italy whilst fighting the Red Brigade.
History is full of crimes committed in the name of democracy, peace and freedom. Terrorism must be fought, but also by unmasking those who use terrorism as an excuse to make the preventive wars.
In January 2001, I wrote that Europe and the United States must not delude themselves. Pretending to not see or understand, will, in the end, only lead to them having to pay a very high price.
The planet's public opinion is never available to discuss, under the pretext of the fight against terrorism, new wars and the massacres of civilians and children as in Falluja or the civilian hospitals in Iraq and Syria. It is wrong to believe that nuclear war against Iran and Russia can be won by the U.S. and its European allies. If it comes to war, it will be the Europeans and mainly Italians that will pay the ultimate price for the treason of European leaders, as Europe will cease to exist. War with Russia and Iran is way beyond U.S. capability.
We reject Machiavelli's theory as the spiritual leader of world politics. He has been the source of so many past and present evils in Italy and around the world. No State should be allowed to gain and hold on to power with "licenses to kill" and carry out massacres, widely used by some rulers of the past and present, as a tool for political struggle. I am convinced that unpunished acts such as massacres, assassinations and bombings, are not compatible with noble purposes such as the defense of peace , freedom and democracy. These bloodthirsty means only lead to having rulers who govern thanks to their crimes, lies and to the people's ignorance.
Democracy will only be possible with transparency and truth, by discovering which occult powers are really behind the massacres and with the revival of a great moral tension and the awareness that politics is a dead science if morality does not go hand in hand to govern a nation.
I agree with JFK << The "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open democracy , historically opposed to secret societies and to secret meetings . Today we are opposed around the world by an invisible world State , a ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence-on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice>>.
I think that US, which generously fought against Nazism and fascism in defense of European freedom , suffering the loss of many human being , come back to defend the peace and help our fragile democracies in Europe and all over the world . We opposite the invisible world state , which want the preventive war that is a tragedy, the end of human being. This system utilize , trough the corruption, vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.
We believe that Democracy is transparency and control. We believe that the state need of Justice more than the welfare A state could exist without welfare but not without Law and Justice. We and the victim of the 9/11 are waiting Justice and law, in the respect of human rights and due process of law. We are for the respect of all the people , even those who have committed crimes against humanity.
Grazie - Thank you

sabato 24 ottobre 2015

Grande processo alle Nazioni Unite

Cari amici, quest'anno è il 70 anniversario delle Nazioni Unite nate nel 1945 per scongiurare altre guerre dopo i due conflitti che portarono a oltre 50 milioni di morti. Il festival della diplomazia ha organizzato questo evento. Alcuni grandi giornalisti , giuristi e docenti parlano dell' ONU , a favore e contro. Compiti primari delle NU sono secondo lo Statuto, garantire la pace, non con interventi unilaterali di singoli Stati (guerre preventive) ma con misure collettive decise dall'ONU (art.1) per prevenire minacce, reprimere atti di aggressione, risolvere, secondo il diritto internazionale, le controversie tra Stati; sviluppare tra le nazioni relazioni amichevoli fondate sul rispetto e sul principio di eguaglianza dei diritti e dell'autodecisione dei popoli; risolvere i problemi economici, sociali, culturali e umanitari promuovendo l'eguaglianza dei diritti degli uomini e delle donne e delle nazioni grandi e piccole. Purtroppo gli obiettivi di pace eguaglianza e sviluppo economico e sociale dei popoli sono inadempiuti; sono aumentati i conflitti in varie parti del mondo e sono cresciute le diseguaglianze sicché milioni di persone vivono in condizioni di povertà e senza dignità. Da ciò le grandi migrazioni. Tuttavia l'ONU resta una istituzione necessaria contro le guerre preventive delle superpotenze che minacciano la pace nel mondo. Bisogna cambiare dando maggiore peso ai cittadini e all'assemblea generale. Il 25 ottobre pv si celebra un processo simbolico per accertare se l'ONU ha adempito agli obblighi dello Statuto e cosa fare per migliorarne il funzionamento in difesa della pace, della eguaglianza e dello sviluppo dei popoli. E ci saranno prestigiosi testi dell'accusa e della difesa. Il processo si deciderà con il giudizio dei cittadini in sala.
I nostri padri costituenti volevano l'ONU. E scrissero l'art.11 della Costituzione , rivoluzionario in senso vero <<l'Italia ripudia la guerra come strumento di offesa alla libertà degli altri popoli e come mezzo di risoluzione delle controversie internazionali; consente, in condizioni di parità con gli altri Stati, alle limitazioni di sovranità necessarie ad un ordinamento che assicuri la pace e la giustizia tra le nazioni; e promuove e favorisce le organizzazioni internazionali rivolte a tale scopo>>.

Domenica 25 Ottobre 2015 ore 11.00
Teatro di Dioscuri
Via Piacenza, 1

giovedì 9 luglio 2015

Signor Presidente della Repubblica prof Sergio Mattarella

Roma 9 luglio 2015

illustre signor Presidente della Repubblica
so bene che le possibilità che lei non firmi  la legge sulla buona scuola  sono poche. E tuttavia, in un momento grave per le sorti della democrazia e della libertà,  sento il dovere di rivolgermi a Lei, quale massimo garante della Costituzione, per dare un contributo di conoscenza sul problema complesso e per  richiamare la Sua  vigile attenzione sulla opportunità , prima di  promulgare la legge ,  di  chiedere,  in base all'art 74 della Costituzione, con messaggio motivato alle Camere, una nuova deliberazione che sia conforme alla lettera e allo spirito della Costituzione repubblicana.

1. La democrazia è un sistema di regole stabilite inderogabilmente, dalla Costituzione , ex art 1, e vincolanti per  Parlamento e  Governo. Ebbene queste regole non sembrano essere  state osservate al Senato con il voto di fiducia sulla legge. Infatti la  fissazione di “linee guida per valutare il premio dei docenti” , che poi avrà incidenza sulla carriera dei docenti, premiati e non, è prevista, nella legge  approvata al Senato con la fiducia,  entro il 2018, con una delega generica al Governo su una materia fondamentale. Ciò  va contro l'articolo  76 della Costituzione, per il quale “l'esercizio della funzione legislativa non può essere delegato al Governo se non con determinazione di principi e criteri direttivi, e soltanto per tempo limitato e per oggetti definiti”, principi e oggetti  che  mancano del tutto nella legge de quo agitur. Inoltre l'art 72 della Cost prevede che “la procedura normale di esame  e di approvazione diretta da parte della Camera è sempre adottata per disegni di legge  in materia costituzionale ed elettorale e per quelli di delegazione legislativa”.

2. Dopo oltre 15 anni di assenza di regole su reclutamento e utilizzo del precariato istituzionalizzato con la l. 143/2004 e  con la l. 128/2013, la Corte di Giustizia Europea con sentenza  26 novembre 2014, ha  condannato l’Italia per violazione della Direttiva 1999/70/CE, avendo costretto al precariato 400 mila  docenti benemeriti privati del diritto al lavoro e alla dignità. Situazione non eliminata dalla legge sulla scuola. La precarietà  e gli stipendi inadeguati di docenti precari e di ruolo violano l'art 36 della Costituzione secondo cui “il lavoratore – tra cui l' insegnante- ha diritto a una retribuzione proporzionata alla quantità e alla qualità del lavoro svolto e comunque tale da garantire una vita libera e dignitosa”. E 600 euro al mese per i precari e 1800 euro per i docenti di ruolo  dopo 30 anni non sono tali da garantire  una vita libera e  dignitosa.
Il mancato rispetto della sentenza della corte di Giustizia da parte del Governo  viola: 1) l'art  10 della Costituzione secondo cui “l'ordinamento  giuridico italiano si conforma  alle norme del diritto internazionale generalmente riconosciute”,  tra le quali rientra la direttiva 1999/70/CE , nonché  2) l'art 117 della Costituzione secondo cui “la potestà legislativa è esercitata dallo Stato e dalle Regioni nel rispetto della Costituzione  nonché dei vincoli derivanti  dall'ordinamento comunitario e  dagli obblighi internazionali”, tali essendo anche quelli derivanti dalla Sentenza della Corte di Giustizia europea  relativa alla stabilizzazione dei precari.

3.  Nella legge  i poteri di gestione  della scuola,  prima affidati  al solo dirigente scolastico , sono stati poi affidati a un organo collegiale. A scegliere gli insegnanti più meritevoli,  sarà un  “Comitato di sette membri, tra cui  il preside , tre docenti insediati dal Consiglio di Istituto e per metà dal collegio dei docenti , un membro esterno, un genitore e uno studente , che individueranno  i migliori  e più impegnati tra i docenti  da valutare” .  Tutto ciò con conseguenze inaccettabili sulla armonia  tra i docenti e sulla imparzialità nella gestione della scuola.  Questa norma si pone in contrasto con la Costituzione . Infatti i criteri di valutazione del merito dei docenti vanno  stabiliti per legge  e non attribuiti a scelte discrezionali di presidi, dirigenti scolastici o comitati di cui fanno parte  membri esterni, genitori e studenti, che non sono né ben informati sul rendimento né imparziali . Infatti l'art 97 stabilisce che “i pubblici uffici sono organizzati  secondo disposizioni di legge in modo che siano assicurati il buon andamento e l'imparzialità  dell'amministrazione”. Ma viene violato anche l'art 33 della Costituzione sulla libertà di insegnamento: un  docente che dovrà essere giudicato  da un comitato di cui faranno  parte  anche i genitori degli studenti,  un rappresentante degli stessi studenti e un membro esterno,  non sarà più libero,  ma sarà condizionato da interferenza di soggetti non imparziali.

4. Un aspetto centrale del ddl  sulla “Buona Scuola” riguarda  il corretto finanziamento delle scuole private, cd paritarie , e statali. Primo punto  La riforma prevede (art 17) per i contribuenti italiani la possibilità di donare  il 5 per mille  dell'imposta sul reddito delle persone fisiche  alle scuole statali o alle scuole private. Il punto in questione  ha portato  plurime  novità  negative. E ciò per l'aumento dei beneficiari privati  idonei ad ottenere le donazioni.  Passati da 50.000 a quasi 96.000 . Questo metodo di distribuzione  di risorse pubbliche premia le scuole pubbliche o private  che hanno non solo più sostenitori, ma anche sostenitori più abbienti   rispetto a scuole dislocate in zone povere  , andando così ad accentuare  diseguaglianze già esistenti tra le scuole. Ad  esempio,  riceverà un maggior finanziamento la scuola che si trova ai Parioli  a Roma, rispetto alle scuole che si trovano   a Centocelle ,  al Tiburtino e al Prenestino, per non parlare degli istituti scolastici di  paesini poveri  le cui scuole avrebbero un beneficio ancora minore.

5. Appare evidente che con l'art 17 della legge   si  viola 1) l'art 3  1 c della Costituzione che afferma  eguaglianza sociale dei cittadini: ci sarebbero cittadini e studenti di zone benestanti,  avvantaggiati dal  5 per mille,  rispetto a genitori  e studenti, che frequentano scuole di zone con cittadini  con redditi minimi o privi di reddito, che del 5 per mille non fruiranno;  2) l'art 3  2 comma della Cost, perché la Repubblica , sottraendo una parte delle imposte alla scuola pubblica , viene meno, per mancanza di risorse,  al  dovere di  “rimuovere gli ostacoli di ordine economico e sociale , che limitando di fatto la libertà e l'eguaglianza, impediscono  il pieno sviluppo della persona  umana” , specie dei più poveri. Questi infatti  non fruirebbero della donazione del 5 per mille  a differenza dei  più  abbienti, e del diritto dovere  dello Stato di istituire  scuole statali per tutti gli ordini e gradi  ex art 33  3) l'art  34 della Costituzione sulla gratuità della scuola pubblica dell'obbligo.

6. Articolo 18  Il cosiddetto School bonus prevede  benefici fiscali per chi versa denaro alle scuole. La  norma contrasta con almeno tre articoli della Costituzione. Anzitutto con l'art 53 perché i più ricchi  godranno di benefici fiscali previsti a favore di coloro che in cambio di “erogazioni liberali in favore di istituzioni scolastiche” anche private. Invero  l'art 53 della Costituzione,  prevede che  “tutti sono tenuti a concorrere  alle spese pubbliche – tra cui quelle per la scuola pubblica- in ragione della loro capacità contributiva”; i più abbienti fruiscono di benefici fiscali a scapito della scuola pubblica. Se tali fruitori   pagassero   le somme dovute a titolo di imposta, lo Stato potrebbe dare attuazione all'articolo 33 della Costituzione, secondo cui  “la Repubblica  istituisce scuole statali per tutti gli ordini e gradi”. La norma viola anche  il principio di eguaglianza dei cittadini di fronte alla legge ex art 3, esistendo lavoratori che vivono in zone  o paesi ove queste erogazioni liberali – che tali non sono- non si verificano. Con l'ulteriore paradosso che se i cittadini  benestanti   pagano al fisco interamente  le somme  dovute , le scuole pubbliche non fruiscono di “strutture , manutenzione e potenziamento “, di cui godono  i paesi e le zone in cui vivono evasori fiscali.

7. Articolo 19 (Detraibilità delle spese sostenute per la frequenza scolastica)
Ultima modifica in materia di agevolazioni fiscali  consiste nelle detrazioni IRPEF, in favore delle famiglie che iscrivono i propri figli in scuole appartenenti al sistema nazionale di istruzione, per le spese sostenute per la frequenza delle scuole sopra indicate. La disposizione de quo riguarda di fatto  solo le spese sostenute per la frequenza di scuole private e prevede una detrazione dall’IRPEF pari al 19% delle spese sostenute per la frequenza delle scuole sopra indicate. In tal caso vi è il finanziamento delle scuole private  grazie alle somme versate dai contribuenti soggetti all'IRPEF, con una evidente violazione dell'art 33  terzo comma della Costituzione secondo cui “ enti e privati hanno i diritto di istituire  scuole e istituiti di educazione senza oneri per lo Stato”, mentre in questo caso gli oneri per lo Stato sono rappresentati dalle detrazioni IRPEF che  vanno a favore della scuola privata per le quali non si applica l'art 34 della Costituzione, essendo esse scuole non gratuite. E sarebbe violato anche l'art 53 della Costituzione  sul principio che tutti sono tenuti a concorrere alle spese pubbliche in proporzione della loto capacità contributiva.

8. Per contro , nessun beneficio va alle scuole pubbliche e alle famiglie non abbienti dall'art 19. In realtà  i senza reddito o quelli con reddito minimo  hanno comunque  il dirittodovere  di inviare  i figli a scuola pubblica che è  gratuita , in base all'art  34 della Costituzione che stabilisce “l'istruzione inferiore, impartita per almeno otto anni, è obbligatoria e gratuita”.  Le sole scuole che fruiranno del finanziamento sono le scuole private. Che non sono gratuite. La norma (art 19) comporta come conseguenza  che   ingenti risorse pubbliche  sono sottratte alla scuola pubblica, sicché la Repubblica, ancora una volta , non adempie, per mancanza di fondi,  al dovere di  “rimuovere gli ostacoli di ordine economico e privato che limitando di fatto la libertà e l'eguaglianza , impediscono  il pieno sviluppo della persona umana e la effettiva partecipazione di tutti  i lavoratori alla  organizzazione politica  economica e sociale del Paese”.

9. Individuate le principali novità introdotte in materia di agevolazioni fiscali dalla  legge non ci resta che analizzare la scelta politica portata avanti dal governo :  le presunte agevolazioni mostrano  la volontà di riformare sensibilmente il modello di scuola italiano, non solo da un punto di vista strutturale, ma soprattutto da un punto di vista culturale, sociale ed economico. E' evidente la spinta sempre più netta verso un sistema di finanziamento pubblico della scuola privata e un finanziamento  privato della scuola pubblica, in netta contrapposizione con l’idea di istruzione pubblica, di qualità e accessibile a tutti così come previsto dalla Costituzione agli articoli 3 , 9, 33 e 34.  Nel nostro caso sarebbe violato  l'art 9 della Costituzione, secondo cui  la Repubblica promuove lo sviluppo della cultura e la ricerca scientifica e tecnica, poiché la  destinazione delle risorse alla scuola priva non lo consentono.

10. Il nostro appello ad agire ai sindacati confederali è caduto nel vuoto: una sterile e inutile critica  è l'ultimo atto di una sostanziale inerzia di fronte alla legge.  Si può pensare di difendere la  scuola pubblica con discorsi moralistici come “la legge non risolve il problema del precariato, mortifica la partecipazione e la collegialità, non rispetta la libertà di insegnamento, propone una idea distorta di valutazione e di merito” ? Mentre  nessuna iniziativa decisiva  contro la legge  vi è stata da parte dei sindacati? Le parole sono e restano vacui suoni, e la strada per la perdizione  è stata sempre accompagnata a finte proclamazioni  di devozione a un ideale: la libertà e l'eguaglianza dei diritti sociali  non si attuano con quello che si dice , ma con l'applicazione e l'azione, mancate nel momento più grave  dell'attacco alla Costituzione, il cui nome e le cui violazioni  non compaiono  nel manifesto dei sindacati.

Queste osservazioni  affido alla Sua attenzione, signor Presidente, segnalando  i molteplici profili di incostituzionalità della legge  nella speranza che Ella,  in base agli artt 54 e 74 della Costituzione, possa chiedere alle Camere una nuova deliberazione sul disegno di legge sulla Buona Scuola.

Con i sensi della più alta considerazione

Ferdinando Imposimato

9 luglio 2015

Difesa collettiva della Costituzione contro i demagoghi