With the postponement of the match on the request for indictment of the club and its 12 former managers to May 10, the timing of the two proceedings differs
Divorce. It is the word that best illustrates the effect of yesterday in front of the Marco Picco judge on the complex of the Juve-capital gains case. With the postponement to 10 May of the match on the request for indictment of Juventus and its 12 former managers – including Andrea Agnelli, Pavel Nedved, Maurizio Arrivabene and Fabio Paratici – the paths of criminal justice and sports they drive away. Not that there was a formal link between the two roads, it must be clarified that the minus 15 of the penalty is not in the least the subject of the matter on which the Gup will have to pronounce. But it is clear that an indictment or criminal dismissal would have inevitably conditioned in one way or another the general atmosphere around the matter on which the judges of the guarantee panel at Coni will be called to express their opinion on 19 April. the degree of “legitimacy” of sports justice, its last stage before any appeals outside the system, before the administrative justice. So, everyone on his own. With diametrically different times. So sports justice will have to decide on its own, without indirect “assists”. It’s not the first time this has happened (in the Calciopoli affair the decisions concerning the championship were taken long before the verdicts of the criminal trial), but before yesterday one could have somehow imagined an at least parallel journey of the two tracks.
REFERRAL
—
Therefore, the path of the criminal proceeding is destined to lengthen. For now, the menu for the next episode on May 10 in front of the Gup provides for an answer to the possibility that small shareholders can appear as a civil party (and therefore ask for damages in the event of a conviction against Juve and the old auditing firm Ernst&Young). The hottest issue has not yet been touched upon: territorial jurisdiction. The issue on which the defense requests the move to Milan (headquarters of the Stock Exchange) or alternatively to Rome (headquarters of the Piazza Affari servers). Requests on which the prosecutor Mario Bendoni and the deputy prosecutor Marco Gianoglio will obviously battle, who insist on Turin as the site of the hypothetical crimes that fill the request for indictment (false corporate communications, obstacle to supervision, market manipulation and false invoices). Considering that the matter of territorial jurisdiction could reach the Court of Cassation, it is probable that any trial, unless it is decided to file, cannot start before the end of the summer.
FIRST HALF
—
Moral: dear sports justice, you will experience your spring of passion alone. First there will be the guarantee college, then the second half with the salary maneuver and suspicious partnerships. The two files contain several variables. The guarantee panel itself could reject the Juve appeal or cancel the sentence, but there is also the possibility that it will ask the federal Court of Appeal for a reformulation of the reasons and of the sanction itself. In any case, even in the face of this solution, it would be time for the end of the championship.
RECOVERY
—
The issue of salary maneuvers is more bumpy. Precisely in these hours the terms for the investigation of the prosecutor Giuseppe Chiné and his collaborators expire. Who had to ask for two extra periods (40 and 20 days) to analyze the new papers from the Turin public prosecutor’s office. At the gong, however, there will be a time to take stock and another for the defense of the potential accused who could present briefs or ask for a plea deal. Obviously this itinerary would fall apart if it came to archiving (at least unlikely scenario at the moment). In practice, before the possible referrals, the whole month of April could go away. Taking advantage of the shortened times envisaged by the FIGC sports justice code, May could concentrate both the first and second degree to reach here too before the finish line at the end of the championship (last day 4 June). Then, however, there would be the guarantee college which would cross borders near the end of the competitive season. In short, everything is more complicated. Changing a standings crystallized since the end of the championship would certainly be a problem. That’s why nothing can be ruled out, even an affliction moved to next season (but for now it’s still a remote hypothesis).
DECISIVE
—
Surely, given the “divorce” between the two justices, penal and sporting, and the skein of a timetable to unravel, the appointment of the Guarantee College on April 19 becomes even more important. It will be the fundamental crossroads of history.
March 28, 2023 (change March 28, 2023 | 14:05)
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED
