Urban planning investigation Milan, no evidence of corrupt act

"It is not clear on the basis of what evidence the gip considered 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 have been reached if the corrupt pact had been proven, but as mentioned, this did not happen'. These are the conclusions with which the Court of Re-examination of Milan justifies the sentence with which, on 12 August last, it annulled the house arrest for the architect and former member of the Landscape Commission of the Municipality of Milan, Alessandro Scandurra involved in the investigation on town planning. "Ultimately, a confused factual picture emerges that does not allow us to appreciate whether Scandurra had concretely polarised around him a circle of entrepreneurs determined to pay him to obtain favourable opinions from the Landscape Commission". For the re-examination 'the argumentative simplification is debasing'. Today, the motivations of builder Andrea Bezziccheri, who was also released from prison on 12 August, were also announced.

Judges Pendino-Ghezzi-Papagno found that there was no serious, precise and concordant evidence of Scandurra's guilt in the contested bribery case. And that there is no proof, in practice, that the assignments he received as an architect from companies, including Manfredi Catella's Coima, were linked (the so-called 'sinallagmatic relationship' is missing) to his role as a member of the Landscape Commission and to the favourable opinions on the real estate projects at the centre of the investigation. "It cannot be inferred from any of the investigative evidence that Scandurra was aware of a duty of abstention of wider scope than that provided for in the Building Regulations," wrote the Riesame, which revoked the house arrest of Scandurra, defended by lawyers Giacomo Lunghini and Luciano Paris. "Nor can any conscious breach of the duty of abstention on the part of Scandurra be inferred," it goes on to say, "from the rather unadorned content of the conversations he had with other members of the BoD or with contractors. In 'none of the messages found and transcribed exchanged between the suspect and the other persons involved is there any reference to this circumstance, nor is there any solicitation on the part of the private individuals to ensure that Scandurra took positive steps to adequately cultivate their interests'.

The gip Mattia Fiorentini 'in his evaluations, referring to the prosecutor's request for precautionary measures, omits to consider the evidence in its dynamic dimension, uncritically proposing it again and characterising it with self-evidence, as shown by the final remarks, common to all the suspects and to the respective charges'. The gip, according to the re-examination, also speaks of 'remuneration received by Scandurra that is assumed to be undue without, however, clarifying the reasons for it except through recourse to conjecture'. The gip, it goes on to say, 'fails to consider that Scandurra is a high-level professional, recipient of international recognition. He carried out his assignments for which he received just compensation,' the order reads. There is no trace of over-invoicing or false invoices'. The fees "certainly cannot be described as 'lucrative'". And the 'confused factual picture' does not 'allow us to appreciate whether Scandurra had concretely polarised around him a circle of entrepreneurs determined to pay him to obtain favourable opinions from the Landscape Commission'.