"Don't stop Milan over suspicion." Antonio Di Pietro speaks out.

"You can't throw the baby out with the bathwater," says Antonio Di Pietro, his voice slightly lowered. "Because in this case the baby could even be real crimes, if there are any. But the dirty water risks becoming Milan's development, its urban planning, its administrative efficiency, its economic attractiveness . And by criminalizing everything, you're doing double damage ." His tone is serious, but not apocalyptic. Realistic, if anything. "I also find this media and journalistic hype frightening, which is building up on TV and in newspaper columns about culprits who don't even exist yet ." The former prosecutor and former Minister of Infrastructure is talking about the investigation involving the municipality of Milan, which some compare to Tangentopoli. " It has nothing to do with Tangentopoli ," he says. He's keen to clarify one point: "I respect the magistrates. Also because I don't know the details of the investigation and I have no reason to say it's unfounded. Someone may have even taken advantage of Milan's urban planning schemes. It's possible. What I'm trying to say is that the method leaves me perplexed . It seems like yet another investigation based on the trawling method . It's not investigating a crime, but an entire phenomenon." And what's the difference with Mani Pulite? "Back then, we were looking for who took the money, who cashed in on tangible benefits. The bribe, the foreign bank account, the Swiss transfer. Today, in these new investigations, everything is more 'sophisticated.' The bribes have been engineered, so to speak. The benefits pass through consultancy, assignments, professional relationships. Everything becomes more opaque, more difficult to prove, easier to suspect. But also riskier to interpret." What does that mean? " Maybe the magistrates think that consulting someone is actually a corrupt exchange, but perhaps, more simply, that consulting is actually a real necessity . Because to build Milan's skyscrapers, you can't rely on a surveyor from Canicattì. You can rely on someone who knows how to do the job, because they've already done it and do it continuously."

So, "trawling," says Antonio Di Pietro. The maritime metaphor, used for many years now, serves to convey the idea of an investigation that doesn't delve deeply. That isn't based on evidence. "You receive a complaint, perhaps vague, perhaps from someone complaining about someone planting a flowerpot under their house. And from there, a sweeping, massive investigation begins, covering everything and everyone: public works, construction sites, builders, contracts, consultancies..." The risk is mayonnaise. "It gets mixed up with the newspapers, with the public opinion kept at bay, with television broadcasts constructed along the same lines as the Biscardi trial."

Then, as often happens in his speeches, Di Pietro follows the gravity with a hint of sarcasm. An ironic crack in his reasoning. “I think new investigators are very fashionable these days,” he says. “ Everyone wants to investigate, everyone comments in real time, everyone decides who is guilty and who is not. Not based on evidence, but on their fans .” And at this point, the veteran prosecutor's gaze quickly widens beyond Milan. So he makes two weighty comparisons, Di Pietro, evoking Genoa and Garlasco as extreme cases of judicial and media degeneration : “In Genoa, we saw something similar to what happened in Milan. An investigation that led to the resignation of regional president Giovanni Toti and the fall of the council, before it even got to trial. And Garlasco is the most disturbing model, if you like. The media trial that takes precedence over the criminal one. Parallel paths are created, guilty parties are fabricated. And in the end, nothing is understood anymore.” The night all the cows were black? And here Di Pietro says a resounding phrase: " Opinion, in the long run, supersedes evidence ."

Mayor Beppe Sala is also under investigation. "Look, I'm waiting to see what evidence they have," he says. "They're accusing him of improper inducement to give or promise benefits. But we have to ask ourselves: was this benefit for him? Or was it for the city? Because if a mayor does something to achieve a public goal, I don't see where the crime lies. If then hiring a consultant who has already worked with the municipality becomes a crime, then, I repeat, who should be called? The surveyor from Canicattì to build the skyscrapers?"

And this very paradox leads him to a broader discussion: “ Beware of the culture of 'no regardless.' The criminalization of business and development . It's the same phenomenon that wants to block the TAV, that hindered the TAP, that said no to the high-speed rail line in Florence. That's not honesty, it's regression. Luckily, we have the high-speed rail line today, and even the gas pipeline from Puglia. But in the meantime, how much damage have we done? I understand that we need to be vigilant. It's right. But we also need to know that a city can't live in terror of suspicion. Hold trials, but don't block Milan. Milan is the only Italian city that truly competes with European capitals. It's Italy's westernmost metropolis. Stopping it would be national suicide .” And inevitably, the comparison with Mani Pulite returns. But not to mythologize it. To underline its distance. "I won't go into the merits of the management of the Milan Prosecutor's Office, out of respect for the institutions. However, I know that Prosecutor Marcello Viola is a respected and estimable person . I've read his resume, and it seems solid. The issue isn't the individual magistrate. The issue is the investigative system as a whole." And with a hint of irony, Di Pietro lets the last sentence slide, as if it weren't an epilogue, but a prophecy: "They can even decide to repeat a small Mani Pulite investigation every five years, if they like. Just as long as in the meantime we don't find ourselves living in a country where not even a single sidewalk is being built anymore."

More on these topics: