The Hearing

Mps-Mediobanca, Prosecutor Viola at the Banking Commission: 'unity of intent' Delfin-Caltagirone to get Generali

Viola reconstructed an alleged concert between Delfin and Caltagirone that had been operating 'since 2019', through 'absolutely parallel conducts' maintained over time

26 February 2026

SEDE ESTERNO MEDIOBANCA PIAZZETTA CUCCIA MPS INCORPORA MEDIOBANCA - FOTO ARCHIVIO

2' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

Key points

"Concert operating from 2019": purchasing, voting and appointments in parallel
Between 2024 and 2025 the 'different strategy': the axis with Mps
The Lovaglio node

2' min read

Translated by AI

Versione italiana

The takeover bid launched by Monte dei Paschi di Siena (Mps) on Mediobanca was, according to the Milan Public Prosecutor's Office, a key step in a broader strategy: to allow Delfin and the Caltagirone group to achieve 'control, in the form of dominant influence, of Mediobanca' and, through the merchant bank, 'control of Generali'.

This was stated by Milan Prosecutor Marcello Viola, speaking at a hearing before the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry into the banking, financial and insurance system.

"Concert operative from 2019": parallel purchases, votes and appointments

Viola reconstructed an alleged concert between Delfin and Caltagirone that would have been operational 'since 2019', through 'absolutely parallel conducts' maintained over time: from the acquisition of shares - both in Generali and Mediobanca - to the exercise of votes in shareholders' meetings and the 'contextual recruitment and divestment of corporate offices'.

According to the Public Prosecutor's Office, the central point would also be an issue of transparency towards the market: the operation would have had the effect of concealing the existence of shareholders' agreements between significant shareholders of Mediobanca, with potentially significant consequences for the balance of governance.

Between 2024 and 2025 the 'different strategy': the axis with Mps

Still at the hearing, Viola added that the 'failure of the intention' would have prompted the suspects - this is the Prosecutor's assumption - to adopt a different strategy: to aim for control of Mediobanca functionally to the objective on Generali by involving Mps.

For the Prosecutor, what would have happened 'between 2024 and 2025' should be read as the 'welding of long-standing interests with the more recent interests of Mps with regard to Mediobanca', without this convergence, 'in our opinion existing,' said Viola, being made transparent to the market, not least because of the effects that this could have determined.

The Lovaglio knot

During the same hearing, magistrate Roberto Pellicano of the Milan Public Prosecutor's Office also spoke, addressing the position of Luigi Lovaglio, CEO of Mps. Pellicano explained that Lovaglio would have 'given fundamental material support to the concert' between Delfin and Caltagirone in the Mps-Mediobanca game.

The Public Prosecutor's Office, in the reconstruction illustrated in the Commission, distinguishes the manager's role from that of a shareholder: Lovaglio 'is not a shareholder of Mediobanca, he is not a shareholder of Mps',' Pellicano observed, 'and therefore his position would be that of an 'external competitor', i.e. a person who would have made a decisive contribution without being part of the alleged pact aimed at control.

Lovaglio's lawyer Giuseppe Iannaccone intervened in a note. He specified that 'having learned of the statements made by the public prosecutor Roberto Pellicano to the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on the banking system, I wish to express with absolute clarity my firm conviction about the full correctness of the conduct of Dr Luigi Lovaglio. The acts and documents I have examined unequivocally confirm, in my opinion, that he acted in strict compliance with the law and in the constant pursuit of the Bank's interests. I have no doubt that Luigi Lovaglio's total extraneousness to any crime hypothesis will emerge, with absolute clarity, as soon as possible'.