"The solution to the case in question, when referring to the specific nature of the case, has a mandatory path: it must focus on a member of the anti-mafia pool, it must focus on the structure that heads this pool. The pool of magistrates of the Palermo investigation office was able to equip itself (first and foremost culturally), thus creating a new, close-knit structure that spread professionalism. It should not be forgotten that this was an open structure, in the sense that it professionally trained magistrates who, before joining the pool, had never dealt with these issues and who, thanks to the pool, achieved a very high level of competence. Ultimately, by operating in this way, the pool of investigating judges at the Court of Palermo achieved significant results, based on identifying the characteristics of the new mafia. These were the first results after years, decades and decades of substantial impunity. In some speeches, there was talk of rewards, in particular rewards for protagonism, as a criterion not to be followed, and the history of protagonism is a bit like the history of when women wore veils. At that time, all women were beautiful, but when the veil fell, differences began to be noticed. Something similar happened with the judiciary. When judges did not cause any ‘trouble’, when they were not inconvenient, they were all good and beautiful. But when they began to take on a specific role, to show signs of vitality, to demand to exercise control over legality even towards previously unthinkable objectives, that is when the accusation of protagonism began. Meanwhile, those judges who back down (as happened both in Turin during the trial of the historic leaders of the Red Brigades and in Palermo during the recently concluded trial of the Mafia) risk nothing at all, and no one protests or criticizes them. Other speakers have referred to rewards in the sense of a career that would run along “privileged” paths for those judges who have had certain professional experiences. But it is inconceivable, even somewhat scandalous, to speak of privilege in reference to the judges in Palermo, who live in conditions that are well known to all and which, if anything, represent a heavy penalty. In the case of the fight against the Mafia, these interests are the interests of democracy, which makes this second (non-sectoral) view entirely justified. For these reasons, I am opposed to the committee's proposal."