The eighth edition of I will see, the annual event organized by the transversal think-net of the same name founded, among others, by Enrico Letta, Giulia Bongiorno, Angelino Alfano, Henry Bertolino, Gianluca Rana e Luisa Todini, chaired by Blessed Rizzo. Instead, the work of the 21 begins this afternoon working groups scheduled. Franco Spicciariello, founding member of Open Gate Italia (Media Partner of this edition of veDrò) and coordinator of Masters in Public Affairs of the LUMSA in Rome, will participate in the one dedicated to the theme of corruption, "chronicles from a country that (yet) is unable to amend itself". Here is his point of view
Lobbying and anti-corruption bill: when the law risks making the problem worse
In the context of the 1999 Strasbourg Convention, which contains measures to combat corruption and which Italy ratified after 13 years last June, there is the rule on the traffic of influence. That is, anyone who pays a third party to try to influence the public decision-maker, and derives an advantage from this, commits illicit trade in influence which (text of the new 346bis), in the recent Anti-corruption bill approved in first reading by the Chamber of Deputies, it was introduced as a crime in our legal system.
Beyond the demagoguery that surrounds discussions on lobbying, it must be assessed how a crime can be introduced which establishes in an incompletely defined way what is illegal without having said what is instead lawful. All the more if a rule is introduced which has the effect of making discretionary power even more uncontrollable – having regard to the obligation established by the Constitution – of prosecution by the judiciary. In a state of law it is in fact essential to determine in a clear and defined way the boundaries of what is a crime.
Italy, on the other hand, as evident from the approved text, is going in the opposite direction. In fact, what does it mean to be “unduly” given or promised money or other financial advantage by exploiting one's relationships with public decision-makers? Can the legitimate lobbying activity of company representatives or even trade unionists (who, when they are not involved in concertation, do nothing but lobbying) be a crime? The answer can be positive or negative, but the problem is that the vagueness of the definitions and the absence of a regulation of the activity leave a discretion that is at least dangerous. A danger that also appears evident to politicians, given the Agenda approved by the Chamber which commits the Government (and the Minister of Justice himself Paula Severino publicly committed in this regard) to adopt regulatory measures to introduce a broad and organic regulation of lobbying and interest representation.
Unfortunately, however, two aspects relating to the standard in question do not seem to have been taken into consideration. The first is that "Countries that have ratified the 1999 Convention – as he wrote the professor Pier luigi petrillo, constitutionalist at LUISS - cLike the United Kingdom, Holland, France and others without forgetting Sweden, which are certainly not uncivilized countries, have done so by placing a reservation on the rule of the illicit trafficking of influence. If included in the penal system, and thus they justified their decision, it would undermine the exercise of a constitutionally guaranteed right», also recognized in our country by some sentences of the Constitutional Court.
The other aspect is that most European countries are moving towards a system intended to regulate lobbying activity. As of August 2012, the list of countries with lobbying legislation includes, among others, Australia, Austria, Canada, France, Germany, Poland and the USA, as well as the Commission and the EU Parliament. And soon it will also touch in Great Britain and Ireland. The impetus for transparency also comes from international institutions: from the UN to the OECD (which has established shared guidelines and incorporated into the standards approved in particular in the former communist countries), even passing through the International Monetary Fund. The IMF in May 2009 indeed published a working paper, "A Fistful of Dollars: Lobbying and the Financial Crisis”, underlining the role played by the lobbying activity for a lighter regulation carried out by the companies of the financial world. Activity that would have led directly to the 2008 crisis. The conclusions of the study were very clear: “Our analysis suggests that political influence by the financial industry can be a source of systemic risk. Avoiding future crises may require a weakening of the financial world's political influence or closer monitoring of lobbying activities”. A monitoring that does not exist in Italy to date, despite over 40 legislative proposals of parliamentary initiative and a government one (the so-called Santagata bill at the time of the second Prodi government), and that indeed the decisions taken up to now by the Government and Parliament risk always pushing more in a shadow of which in Italy there is no further need.
He has worked a lot on this issue in recent months I will see with working groups on composite lobbying (lobbyists, state councilors, representatives of associations, etc.) - animated by Professor Petrillo, also head of the Transparency Unit of MIPAAF, first Ministry to establish a register of lobbyists – aimed at building a shared regulatory proposal. The fruit of a year's work will be presented during a plenary session of veDrò scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday 28 August.
