On the case of Alfredo Cospito, locked up in the «41 bis» since last May, the Attorney General of the Cassation takes sides with the defense and requests the annulment of the decision of the surveillance court which – in December – confirmed the “hard prison” for the anarchist detained since 2012 and on hunger strike for 115 days.
In the indictment filed in view of the hearing set for next February 24, the highest prosecution representation considers that decision to be reviewedand this represents a further novelty in contrast with the decision, taken just last Friday, by the Minister of Justice Charles Nordioto confirm the «41 bis».
Rejecting a new request by the lawyer Flavio Rossi Albertini, the Minister of Justice confirmed the need for “hard prison”, without adhering to thealternative hypothesis proposed by the national anti-mafia and anti-terrorism prosecutor to “declassify” the detention regime into that of “high security”; a choice – that of Nordio – made in the wake of the attacks and street protests which, according to the minister, Cospito himself solicited from prison with his fast in protest.
Now however, on the judicial front, it arrives the novelty of the public prosecution asking to review the situationconsidering the verdict with which the supervisory judges had rejected a previous request by Cospito’s defender to remove his client from the restricted prison regime (before the decision that concerned him) only to members of organized crime and three members of the Red Brigades as ill-motivated ‘last generation.
There are still more than ten days left before the Cassation hearingand Cospito’s health deteriorated to the point that yesterday the transfer to the hospital was decided.
The judges of legitimacy must decide on the basis of the indictment of the attorney general and the reasons for the defense illustrated in the appeal, and they have before them three possibilities:
– definitively cancel the ministerial decree which imposes the «41 bis» on Cospito; – cancel with referral to the supervisory court so that it can take a new decision or in any case motivate it in a different way;
– reject the appeal against the reasons presented by the defense and – at this point – also by the prosecution.
At any time, given the ever-changing situation, both at the judicial level and in terms of the prisoner’s health conditions, the minister can decide whether to intervene again or wait for further results.