Pillon will have to compensate the Lgbti association accused of proselytising

The accusation levelled by Simone Pillon against the Lgbti Omphalos association and its members of making 'one-way propaganda and celebrating homosexuality, with the intention of involving minors in exhibitionist/erotic activities carried out at the association' has remained without any proof. The Court of Cassation (judgement 12134) deposited the reasons with which, while affirming the extinction of the crime of defamation due to the statute of limitations, it confirmed the sentence of compensation against Omphalos and the then head of the youth sector and meetings 'against homophobic bullying', Michele Mommi, civil party in the proceedings against the former senator of the League. Pillon, who, in 2014 at the time of the events, did not sit in Palazzo Madama, but acted in his capacity as national councillor of the Forum of Family Associations, had been sentenced at first instance in Perugia to a €1,500 fine. In the investigators' sights had ended up the sentences he had uttered during some meetings with students in Umbria and San Marino.

In particular, the accusation was that he had 'spread news that did not correspond to the truth about the association's activities of information and prevention of venereal diseases'. According to the first instance judgement, Pillon had also pointed to the association, engaged in educational meetings in schools against homophobic bullying, as 'instigating homosexuality' or as 'distributing pornographic material'.

However, Pillon had been acquitted in second instance, also in Perugia. The Court of Appeal had initially recognised the former senator's right to criticism in a ruling that was annulled by the Court of Cassation, also taking into account the fact that the statements at issue had been made during the debates for the approval of the law on civil unions. A verdict that the territorial Court had been invited to review, considering that a prerequisite for exercising the right to criticism is, in addition to the continence of expression, the truth of the news and facts narrated. In the 'second' appeal it had been declared that there was no need to proceed due to the statute of limitations of the crime. This sentence has now been confirmed by the Supreme Court, which rejected the former MP's appeal, considering his accusations against the association unfounded. Nor - the Supreme Court states - can the dissemination of information leaflets on the risks of disease transmission for sexual contracts or on the activities of the association be considered proselytising. Simone Pillon, for his part, announced an appeal to theEuropean Court of Human Rights, to continue a battle that is not personal, but 'for the thousands of mothers and fathers who want,' said the former deputy, 'for their children a school and an education free from the ideological Lgbt follies'.