It is news of these days that the investigative pool of the Rome prosecutors, directed by Giuseppe Pignatone and the substitute Sergio Colaiocco, is in Cambridge, in the United Kingdom, to proceed, finally, to the formal interrogation of Professor Maha Mahfouz Abdel Rahman, the tutor English by Giulio Regeni, and to acquire his telephone, mobile and fixed printouts, used between January 2015 and 28 February 2016, to rebuild his network of relationships.
The survey theme
Among the aspects to be clarified, the Italian investigators want to understand who has chosen the specific topic of the research of the Italian scholar killed and the tutor who would follow him in Egypt, who has and with which study mode the "participated research", who has defined the questions to ask the itinerants interviewed by the researcher and if Regeni gave the teacher the result of her research during a meeting that would take place in Cairo in January of the 2016.
In fact, in addition to the audition of the university lecturer in Cambridge, the Rome prosecutors would have also asked to identify and listen to the presence of Italian investigators, all the students that the university, under the control of the teacher, had to send to Cairo between the 2012 and the 2015.
The procedural tool
What is commonly called by the "rogatory" press organs is actually, in a more technical way, a "European investigation order" (european investigation order) which, in implementation of the Council and European Parliament 41 / 2014, with effect from the 27 July of last year, through the rules of transposition in our system provided for by the 108 legislative decree of 21 June 2017, has replaced the previous investigation tool (that of international letters rogatory, in fact), with related limitations that distinguished it (among all, a legal framework for the acquisition of evidence still too fragmented).
These last ones remain in force in the relations between Italy and the States of the Union that have not adhered to the directive (ie Denmark and Ireland) and with those, however, that do not belong to the latter (Iceland and Norway) ).
The aim, with a view to horizontal cooperation, is to facilitate the collaboration and coordination of the investigative bodies to combat transnational crime, faced, unfortunately, with the persistent absence of organs with supranational investigative powers (the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office is still undergoing gestation).
How it works
The order of European investigation was introduced on the basis of art. 82 1 paragraph of the Lisbon Treaty, according to which judicial cooperation in criminal matters between the countries of the European Union must be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions.
As for Italy, it can be promoted by the public prosecutor or by the judge who proceeds, within the scope of their respective powers, in a criminal proceeding or in a proceeding for the application of a measure of asset prevention, towards all the countries of the Union that have adopted the directive (hence they must be excluded from Ireland and Denmark).
As for the United Kingdom, which is the most interesting in the case in question, it, although it has adopted a relevant national legislative framework, is certainly included in the related operational scope, at least until new ones have been defined. and several agreements related to the so-called Brexit.
Through a European criminal investigation order, all the investigative and research evidence of the test indicated in the directive n. 41. In particular, the European investigation order may be issued for: the temporary transfer to the issuing State of the detainees, the temporary transfer in Italy of persons detained in the issuing State, the hearing by videoconference or other audiovisual transmission or, again, by teleconference; the acquisition of information and documents at banks and financial institutions; undercover operations; the delayed arrest or seizure; the interception of telecommunications (including telematics) and the provisions of evidential seizure.
Some further points may serve as a starting point for personal reflections that each reader will be able to express, having regard to the story we are dealing with and considering the halos of mystery and the hypotheses that, around it, have concentrated (primarily , the involvement of the British secret services).
Member States, which receive the request, have up to thirty days to decide whether to accept it or not. If so, then they have ninety days to carry out the requested investigation act (any delays must be reported to the country that issued the European Investigation Order).
If not, that is, refusal to execute the investigation order, the receiving State will have to provide appropriate justification in this regard which, however, is in fact limited to a few reasons, including the possible opposition of the aforementioned request with the fundamental principles of the law of the executing State or, mind you, of injury to national security interests.
In the Regeni case, the European investigation order was sent by the Roman Public Prosecutor's Office on October 9 last year. Making a quick calculation, if it is true that the interrogation of the University professor of Cambridge will take place in recent days, it is equally true that the same, according to at least journalistic reports, already on two previous occasions had refused, or at least stolen, to such Act, precisely following as many international letters rogatory.
The fact deserves careful consideration: the United Kingdom could have refused this once again, but, in the absence of a conflict with its internal rules of law, the only other, valid reason could have been only that of a potential violation of the national interests. Which, perhaps, would have meant admitting the existence of unclear scenarios, including that of a direct involvement of external security apparatuses in the death of the Italian researcher.
Who knows that in this long time we have not had a better way to adjust, in the mind of those who will be called to provide their own version, the dynamics of the facts.
We wish, with all our heart, to our magistrates, to do a good job. For the dignity of a country (ours), and for that of a family, however devastated by the loss of a child, which occurred in circumstances that are currently very obscure.
