On July 13th, the Free Trieste Movement presented the Commissioner of the Italian Government in the Free Territory of Trieste with a new request. The request calls on the Commissioner to declare the inefficacy of certain political judgments that deny the Free Territory. Also, the document raises, for the fist time, the question of the liability of the judicial, administrative, and civil officers who deny Trieste’s legal status and the rights of the citizens who appeal to the laws in force in their State, temporarily entrusted to the Italian Government’s administration.
The first measure addressed is lawyer Nicola Sponza’s lawsuit against me. Sponza is the political secretary of movement Territorio Libero / TL3, established last year by people who left Free Trieste.
This is the same gang that wants to join the simulation of Italian sovereignty over Trieste side by side with the local nationalistic “camorra” running in the 2016 elections.
Free Trieste has already distanced itself from such a foolish political decision, which equals to gifting Trieste and its international Free Port to Italy, on a silver plate. A convenient and practical solution for Italy; a devastating outcome for the Free Territory of Trieste and for its citizens.
As for those who, like Free Trieste, oppose the simulation of Italian sovereignty, they undergo judicial persecution and public derision. They attack you, they libel you, they denounce you. All of this under the protective wing of local Italian authorities, those who gain the most from dispersing the citizens of Trieste who stand for their legitimate rights.
This is how a starts the rather abnormal trial. My former comrades, who converted on the road to Rome, are now suing me.
It is the same people who, through “Triest” (technically an apolitical NGO, factually another tool to support the 2016 Italian elections) go to UN Geneva complaining about judicial actions against the citizens of the Free Territory who deny Italian sovereignty.
Some very foul play indeed, but also a tool to confuse people: the good guys become the villains, and the villains are the new good guys.
Yet, as the criminal action starts, it happens that I, the accused person (the actual person the local judiciary would like to get rid of, because if there is one questioning them it’s me, not “Triest“) exercise my rights. I do it early on, starting with preliminary investigations. Obviously, I won’t recognize the judiciary’s authority if it acts on Italy’s behalf.
Furthermore, as my plea is denied, I turn from accused person to accuser. I seek the suspension of the illegitimate trial, and ask the judiciary’s documentation be declared nullity and void.
I do all of this addressing the Italian Government, but in its role of Trieste’s provisional Government. This is why I address the Commissioner of Government. Finally, I denounce those who, in the proceeding, denied the laws in force in Trieste. With their actions, they are violating the rights of all the the people of the Free Territory.
The Commissioner of the Government has 15 days to declare if the Italian Government’s special trusteeship mandate is still in force. And to act against the public officers who believe they can trample on the law.
Translated from blog “Ambiente e Legalità” – “Environment and Legality” by Roberto Giurastante
***
Those who, in breach of international laws, and of Italian laws and Constitution (1947 Treaty of Peace, 1954 Memorandum of Understanding, Law No. 811 of 2 August 1947, Legislative Decree of the Provisional Head of State No. 3054/1947, Decree of the President of the Republic of 27 October 1954; Constitution of the Republic of Italy, arts. 10, sub-paragraph 1 and 117, sub-paragraph 1, Constitutional Law No. 1/1963 art, 70, Law No. 73/1977; Law No. 190/2014, sub-paragraph 618, art. 40, sub-paragraph 2 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure) as for proceeding No. 1456/14 before the Justice of the Peace in Trieste:
1 – Officer of the Judicial Police Superintendent Gianluca Vitiello – Section Judicial Italian Police at the Court of Trieste – for not suspending the custodial interrogation, despite the investigated person having exercised his rights as citizens of the Free Territory of Trieste, denying the very authority of the proceeding Judicial Police. Also for drafting the commitment for trial.
(See: verbale di elezione domicilio dell’indagato – Minute for the election of domicile, which includes a formula denying Italian jurisdiction and sovereignty over the Free Territory of Trieste);
2 – Deputy Prosecutor Dr. Federico Frezza for committing the accused person for trial issuing the pertinent decree. He did it despite the accused person exercising his rights of citizens of the Free Territory as early as during preliminary investigations. It is rights established with the 1947 Treaty of Peace of Paris in force.
(See: decreto rinvio a giudizio / decree of commitment for trial);
3 – Justice of the Peace / lawyer Carla Milocco for opening the trial on June 11th, 2015. Her actions does against the law, because she ignored the accused person’s request to suspend the proceeding.
The request was grounded on a previous request addressed to the Commissioner of the Government.
Furthermore, the judge/lawyer has rejected with a deceptive ordinance the accused person’s exception of the absolute lack of jurisdiction. The Court’s decision denies the legal force of the 1947 Treaty of Peace of 1947. The act constitutes an illegal claim of Italian sovereignty over the Free Territory of Trieste;
4 – Public Prosecutor Dr. Martina, for demanding the rejection of the accused person’s exception of jurisdiction. In particular, for labeling it as lacking legal foundation, yet, failing to prove it and to demonstrate the alleged Italian sovereignty over the Free Territory of Trieste. This is a decisive point because it equals to failing to identify the sources of his own powers. It also equals to denying the legal force of the 1947 Treaty of Peace, and of the aforementioned Italian laws which enforce it under Constitutional Constrains;
5 – Lawyer Gigliola Bridda, (the civil plaintiff’s lawyer), for seeking the rejection of the accused person’s exception regarding jurisdiction. By doing so, she is associating herself to the investigating bodies’s violation of the laws in force within the Free Territory of Trieste;
6 – Lawyer Nicola Sponza, (complainant), for supporting the rejection of the accused person’s exception regarding jurisdiction. This is especially concerning because Sponza himself is aware that the exception has legal foundations. Furthermore, in his role as lawyer, he himself presented and supported the same exception.
The English translation of the June 11th, 2015 minutes of proceeding No. 1456/14 and the ordinance denying the existence of the Free Territory of Trieste is HERE.