Milan, re-examination of urban planning investigation: 'Catella's chats do not show evidence of corruption'

The chat conversations acquired by the Milanese prosecutors, including those with the former city councillor for urban planning Giancarlo Tancredi and the general director of Palazzo Marino Christian Malangone (both under investigation) "do not reveal any symptomatic elements of the existence of underlying corrupt agreements, highlighting at most improper contacts, due to the excessive confidence between the interlocutors that resulted in exchanges of information and technical evaluations on projects, and of solutions to overcome critical issues, with the prospect in some cases of negative consequences both from a technical and legal point of view, but which never materialised into signs of the existence of a pactum sceleris between the parties'.

Finally, the judges define Scandurra as a high-level professional, 'the recipient of international recognition who actually carried out the aforementioned assignments and received the relevant remuneration', this is the part that reinforces the opinion already expressed by the panel of judges Pendino-Ghezzi-Papagno. In the investigation documents, they point out, 'there is no trace of over-invoicing or false invoices. There is no concrete and pregnant evidence on the basis of which to believe that the design assignments were given to Scandurra because of his public function and not because of his activity as a freelancer. Different conclusions could be reached,' the judges of the re-examination point out, 'if the corrupt pact had been demonstrated, but as mentioned, this did not happen.

Moreover, on another front, 'it does not appear that Catella had knowledge' and neither 'could/should have had knowledge' of the 'articulated legislation' that 'regulates and governs cases of conflict of interest for public officials'.

A hard blow for the investigations of the prosecutors, who can nevertheless say that they have found confirmation with three other suspects, former councillor Tancredi, entrepreneur Federico Pella and former chairman of the Landscape Commission Giuseppe Marinoni, all released from custody but given different reasons. The most delicate position, judging by the re-examination judgement, is therefore that of Tancredi, on whom hangs the strong judgement of having 'a high criminal attitude'. He and Marinoni, according to the judges, would have 'distorted the public function', speaking of a real 'commodity'; Tancredi would have had in this system of illegality 'return benefits' given by his role and visibility.

If we were to limit ourselves at this time to the grounds of the re-examination, the investigation would have to be partly rewritten, because at this point it is no longer clear who the corrupt and who the corrupters are. In the meantime, the public prosecutor appealed to the Court of Cassation against Scandurra's release from house arrest.