At the preliminary hearing held at the Genoa Court on Dec. 7, both defendants were remanded for trial in relation to the crimes charged against them, excluding the aggravating circumstance charged under Art. 270 bis 1 c. p.
The trial will therefore begin with the filter hearing on March 7, and under the ordinary procedure remands both on charges of possession and carrying explosive material, attempted manufacture of explosive/explosive devices. Technically resuming the legal motivation, with regard to the disqualification of the purpose of terrorism, reference is made to the most recent case law on the matter, particularly Supreme Court ruling no. 36816/2020, according to which “it is not sufficient to carry out any violent political action, as it is necessary that the conduct is potentially capable of creating panic, terror and widespread sense of insecurity in the community and is aimed at organs of institutional leadership or constitutional importance, as a function of the attempt to overthrow the constitutional order or overthrow the democratic system.”
In the present case, the judiciary ruled, in line with the preliminary investigation judge’s previous assessment, that there could be no connection between the seized material and the violent actions induced by the prosecution, so the defendants are remanded for trial on the charges outlined above, subject to appeal by the prosecutor.
In addition to this small technical account of the hearing, below are some reflections on repression as a general and continuous activity of the state against the exploited.
Behind every legal choice, college or individual judge, there is a political choice that characterizes sentencing. Repressive activity is not always related in a directly proportional and linear way to the intensity of conflict that social and militant classes pose. The activity of preventing the conflict hypothesis and that of annihilating the internal enemy is continuous on the part of the state, and is aimed at maintaining order and class privilege. There are no happy islands or terms of action and thought within which the repressive response can be avoided, although the absence of radicality in the struggle, by taking away strength from the revolutionary possibility, determines in the social sphere and in the power relations only points in favor of the other side.
These days, with reference to comrade Alfredo Cospito’s struggle, it is pointed out that it is always ready for the annihilation of revolutionaries, through the instrument of torture, which practiced directly, more or less systematically in different historical periods, tends to control and repress every revolutionary expression and struggle, placing the monopoly of violence that characterizes its power at the center, and lashing out against anyone who dares to question this.
The vindictive tendency of the state is aimed at the annihilation of revolutionary identities and serves as a warning to the social partners struggling against the vicious conditions that capitalist exploitation imposes.
Included in this open struggle is the application of the special prison regimes to which comrades are subjected, such as the example of the application of Article 90 on irreducible prisoners.
The demand for collaboration and the explicit demand for political abjuration, i.e., the blackmail imposed by special prison regimes such as 41 bis go to consolidate the power relations in the struggle between the sides, where the precise threshold of membership is delineated. Through the proposal of collaboration used as leverage for the end of torture against the prisoner himself, the state more generally achieves a useful result in embodying the weakening of the struggle through differentiation and through the friend/enemy, the good guys and the bad guys dichotomy, which is placed at the basis of the logic of the laws on repentants and dissociation.
The moment one decides to struggle, one must be clear that any of our efforts, or lack of efforts, fit into this context. In Italy, the repressive furore in recent times has had its epilogue with high sentences against anarchist prisoners for the crimes charged against them, used as a warning toward movements of struggle and revenge against the prisoners themselves and the hypothesis of radical struggle. Imperialist rule fuels its war on the exploited internationally with increased punishments domestically and coordination of police internationally resulting in the deportation of political prisoners. This seals war and economic agreements, where beyond the regulations of the legal systems, people are used as bargaining chips in pacts, in the consolidation of common interests of states and class. Over the rhetoric of human rights wins the practice of economic and power interests.
Today our thoughts and solidarity go out to Alfredo Cospito and his battle against 41 bis, to Anna, Juan and Ivan who with their hunger strikes have contributed to the struggle by putting their lives already deprived of personal freedom on the line, to all the revolutionary prisoners around the world who have joined and solidarized with Alfredo’s struggle.
To Nadia Lioce, Marco Mezzasalma and Roberto Morandi who have resisted the 41 bis regime for 17 years.
Aware that the only liberation lies in the struggle itself.
One of the defendants
Note from La Nemesi: The preliminary hearing held on December 7 in Genoa stemmed from the Diamante investigation, which on March 16 resulted in the arrest of the anarchists Gianluca and Evelin, who were subsequently transferred, at the end of the month, to house arrest with all the restrictions, from which the comrade was released on April 8 and in which the comrade remains, whose restrictions remain unchanged to this day. For more thoughts regarding this proceeding, it is possible to read the text “You will find us in our place, that in yours we do not know how to be. About the Diamante Investigation.“
Source: La Nemesi