Here we are! Once again we are talking about italian justice and it clearly splits the mind. We still feel mocked by those who are called the difenders of justice and the helpers of weak and just. It is not old enough the news that a supergrass who helped judges could have taken advantage of five hundred millions, a flat, a monthly salary, and protection. Moreover they are now thinking of mitigating the imprisonment. After suffering from an "unjust" trial and an "unfair" sentence, these "poor" men could have the possibility of meeting their under twelve children, without the dividing glass, of doing sixty minutes of physical excercise and of enjoying their exercise together with other two of their "fellow sufferers". Clerarly this is favourable for new criminal actions but not for honest people who work to support them economically.
Don’t deceive ourserlves with the idea that it is their right to have a house or to receive a sum of money as human beings, only because they help justice. They become worthy of a sum that honest worker will be never able to save if he ought to pay a rent or satisfy by himself everyday need. How could they have the right of quiet life, walks, readings, healthy sport if they have the painful burden of their criminal actions on their shoulders? I think, and so do others, that their redemption must occur helping those who suffer for their faults. In modern justice they don’t help who lost a relative or money. It is exactly the contrary! Usually the families of carabinieri and policemen killed in mafia war receive a simple medal for gallantry and a poor pension as a mere sop. The question springs to the mind: who does really manage law and justice? Honest or dishonest people? Everyone would like to know who is so audacious to put forward such proposals and first of all to offend us who are always stressed to earn our lives and go on.
It speaks volumes of the whole absurdity when we know that prisoners have the possibility to take advantage of medical favouritisms which common people cannot have. They can see every kind of specialists immediately, without queues, without any kind of financial burden. They go on mocking and tricking commonpeople and society. I think that we should expect the failure of trust in justice. The first result is the idea of personal justice, a do-it-yourself law, or extreme punishments as the capital one. It was so sad watching TV last month! It broadcasted the exultation of american people at the news of the death of the woman executed in Texas. We could understand it as a symptom of tireness, of a deep need of justice, of seeing really annihilated those who make evil in the society, without fearing they could do it again.
We would like to see their real redemption making use of a system without favouritisms. A person who made willingly wrong cannot enjoy life more than we do! The lack of freedom means nothing. We are unsatisfied, because they actually can lead an almost easy life. Why government people do not understand that we need a real and efficient system o f justice. We really want that everyone be equal in the eyes of the law? And first of all we want that scales be impartial judging the different responsibilities.
Why do we have to be subject to these subtle games? Why do we have to be taxable supporting people who hurted us and go on doing it? Why don’t we adopt a more coherent system with right punishments?
Beatrice Di Venosa
