Berlusconi and … his shareholders

The Mediatrade-RTI investigation shows as suspects Silvio Berlusconi, the son Pier Silvio, Fedele Confalonieri, the American producer Frank Agrama and other defendants. They are accused of irregularities in the sale of rights in order to create over 34 million euro of slush funds.

According to investigators the criminal offenses would take place ‘within a system of fraud used by the end of the ’80s, under which the broadcasting rights were provided by Paramount, to a lesser extent by other international producers, rather than directly from suppliers, and were bought by Mediaset at inflated prices through dummy companies due to Farouk Agrama”.

A concealment of funds in full conflict of interest, which took place between Milan and Dublin from July 2002 to November  2005, a time in which Silvio Berlusconi was prime minister.
The fact that they are not mentioned for the two decades prior to 2002 is due to the prescription of offenses  …

According to Niccolo Ghedini, lawyer for the premier, the charges will affect a “time in which Silvio Berlusconi had not the slightest possibility of an impact on the company.”

A likely thing, if we could be sure that Silvio Berlusconi meets the standards on conflict of interest, which, consequently, would “ipso facto” involve the incrimination of his son, Pier Silvio Berlusconi, as it is not possible that top management were not involved in an expedient than ten years.

A “proceeding in which the injured party rather Mediaset is in fact backfires against the company and its top executives,” as claimed by the Berlusconi family’s television network?
Maybe. It would seem possible: it could be not the first nor the last time that executives and shareholders are incorrect in this way, scratching profits, which should be back in the budget for new investments or dividends.

However, the process goes as it will go if it will go, but certain facts are really happened.
What’s waiting for Consob (National Commission for Companies and the Stock Market), as RTi and Mediaset are of limited companies?

The investigations, in fact, are clear: someone (Berlusconi, his associates or others) “appropriates a substantial portion of amounts transferred (note: about 70 million euros) from the RTI and Mediatrade to Olympus Trading Company (note: due Frank Agrama) as payment for television rights”.

Considering that Medusa Film SpA (a Paramout competitor) is a subsidiary/associate company of RTI Spa, who protects shareholders and the free market?

Processo breve, processo ingiusto

L’Italia è un paese dove una causa fallimentare dura più di un decennio ed un recupero crediti, se va bene, qualche anno. Una banale lite od un contenzioso lavorativo si attestano su poco più di un quinquennio. Praticamente impossibile contestare  multe, balzelli e tributi errati od inesatti a causa delle lungaggini procedurali.

Cause civili e non penali, come quelle a cui si applicheranno le norme sul processo breve.

E’ evidente che quelle che il governo Berlusconi sta facendo approvare di tutta fretta non sono leggi utili agli italiani onesti e neanche a quelli moderatamente disonesti, ma “penalmente non rilevanti”.

Il processo breve serve solo ad evitare lo svolgimento dei processi per i politici, i funzionari e gli imprenditori coinvolti in fatti di corruzione e concussione, reati ambientali e societari, l’appropriazione indebita e le truffe, che, tra l’altro, sono fatti che si possono acclarare solo dopo un lungo monitoraggio.

Un totale di poche decine di migliaia di persone che, grazie al combinato prescrizione-processo breve, potranno restare al loro posto, continuando a compiere le nefandezze che intercettazioni e filmati comprovano, grazie ad un cavillo od una negligenza che hanno allungato i tempi del processo.

Quale governo e quale parlamento approverebbero mai una legge che  agevola chi dilapida il denaro pubblico, chi defrauda pensionati e sprovveduti o svena le aziende, chi avvelena l’ambiente od evade le tasse?