The position of Franco Norri has been eliminated and he will have an independent trial for perjury on 13 January 2027
Seven lawyers in the Assen defense team. In the preliminary objections, the defense contests the indeterminate nullity of the charge. Question of constitutionality on wiretapping
From San Marino information of 30 October (by Antonio Fabbri) – First hearing before the Law Commissioner Adriano Saldarelli for the trial on the Bulgarian affair and on the so-called “parallel plan”, the affair linked to the failure to sell the shares of Banca di San Marino by the Ente Cassa di Faetano to the Bulgarian investor Assen Christov. At the center of the day, the constitutions of the civil parties, the preliminary objections of the defenses and the judge’s decision on the dismissal of the accountant’s position Franco Norriwho bears the sole charge of perjury. There are nine defendants, seven individuals and two companies, called to respond, for various reasons, to charges which include private corruption, money laundering, offenses against public officials and attacks on the freedom of public authorities. The hearing was also characterized by defense objections on the wording of some charges, on the constitutional legitimacy of the wiretapping law and on the validity of investigative documents.
The parties in the courtroom
The main accused is present, Andrea Delvecchioassisted together with his wife Marina Manduchi and to his son Alessandro Delvecchioby lawyers Amos Capicchioni, Nicola Mazzacuva And Gianluca Brugioni.
Absent Assen Christovdefended by a panel made up of seven lawyers, five of whom were present in the courtroom: the lawyers Sabrina Lettoli, Matteo Montorsi, Ermanno Cappa also in place of the lawyer Luca d’Auria, Michela Passaro also as a replacement for your colleague Francesco ConsoloAnd Claudio Coratella.
Federico Cerbella is defended by Massimiliano RostiWhile Silvia Rometti by the lawyer Giuseppe Ragini. Franco Norri he is assisted by lawyers Michela Vecchi And Gianluca Mularoni.
In the first hearing, the Most Excellent Chamber and the State Congress asked to join as civil parties, assisted by the State Attorney’s Office with the lawyer Simona Ugolini; with the Ente Cassa di Faetano, which saw the legal representatives and the president present in the chamber Sergio Barducci and the member of the Board of Directors Roberta Mularoniassisted by lawyers Alessandro Cardelli And Moreno Maresi. Bank of San Marino, represented by lawyers Maria Selva And Lara Contisaw the president present in the chamber Raffaele Bruni. The lawyer Tania Ercolani instead it represents the Central Bank and the Financial Intelligence Agency (AIF).
All the civil parties have asked to be able to appear for the reimbursement of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages against all the defendants, each for the crime they are accused of, with the exception of Franco Norriwhose lawyer Michela Vecchi for this reason he asked for the position to be removed, in order to be able to carry out an independent trial more quickly.
Opposition to civil party constitutions
One of the first issues addressed concerned the admissibility of the civil action of the Central Bank and the AIF in relation to the fifth charge, relating to offenses against a public official. The lawyer Nicola Mazzacuva contested the existence of a direct offense against the entities, arguing that the public official who was the recipient of the alleged offenses was not identified with sufficient clarity in the documents. The defense also questioned the connection between the allegations and the damages claimed. Same objections raised by Christov’s lawyer, Claudio Coratella, who, joining his colleague, also spoke of the legitimate right of criticism, expressed not by his client but by a journalist, also contesting the legitimacy of the AIF and recalling precedents from the Court of Cassation.
The defense also contested the legitimacy of the State Congress to constitute itself autonomously, arguing that the representation of institutional interests would be the responsibility of the Most Excellent Chamber and that the presence of both bodies would risk determining a duplication of compensation requests.
Lawyer Sabrina Lettoli asked for the Government to be excluded from the proceedings, fearing the risk of duplicating the request for compensation. The same exception was shared by lawyers Amos Capicchioni, Massimiliano Rosti and Giuseppe Ragini. In certain cases, the defense also objects to the absence of a causal link between the conduct attributed to certain clients and the damages complained of by the Chamber and the Congress of State.
The response of the civil parties
Lawyer Simona Ugolini, for the Most Excellent Chamber and the State Congress, replied that the Government decided to constitute itself autonomously in consideration of the seriousness of the facts and conduct that would have directly involved it. He specified that, if the constitution of the State Congress had not been admitted, the Chamber would still have maintained the same compensation claims for both.
The establishment of the Ente Cassa di Faetano had also been contested by the defence. Lawyer Moreno Maresi asked for the exception to be rejected, arguing that the request for compensation concerns both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, including serious damage to the organisation’s reputation.
The lawyer recalled previous assessments already made in the preliminary investigation phase by three judges, reiterating that the legitimacy to take part in a lawsuit for the request for damages is clear, specifying that the quantification will be up to the judge in the merits phase.
Civil parties admitted
Despite the objections of the defense, Judge Saldarelli nevertheless considered the constitutions of all the civil parties admissible. In the order it observed that, for the purposes of legitimation, it is necessary to evaluate the statement contained in the documents of the civil party and the possible existence of the elements of the damage, without anticipating the judgment on the merits.
It recognized the AIF as having its own subjectivity as an autonomous center of interests, despite the absence of legal personality, and therefore the possibility of appearing in court as CBSM.
The legitimacy of the State Congress is also recognized.
According to the ordinance, the legitimacy of the Most Excellent Chamber does not exclude that of the body which according to the accusation was directly subject to the contested conduct.
The judge therefore admitted the establishment of the Ente Cassa di Faetano, together with those of the Bank of San Marino, the Central Bank, the AIF, the Most Excellent Chamber and the State Congress, within the limits of the respective charges. The definitive assessment of the actual existence of damages, their possible quantification and the connection with the disputed conduct, remains left to the merits of the trial.
The excerpt from the Norri position
The only accusation against the accountant Franco Norri is that of perjury. For this reason, his lawyer, Michela Vecchi, asked to remove his position in order to define it more quickly and in an independent process. The judge, given the non-opposition of the parties and the fiscal prosecutor’s office, represented in the courtroom by Manuela Albani. It ordered the removal of Norri’s position, with the formation of an independent file which will see the definition of the trial already set for 13 January 2027. Norri therefore withdraws from the main proceedings.
Preliminary exceptions and questions of constitutionality
During the preliminary objections, almost all the defenses contested the indeterminacy of the charge, which was not sufficiently clear what some of the contested conduct consisted of. Highlighted ambiguities in the dispute relating to the conduct of the disputed competition, an accusatory approach deemed imprecise, with possible repercussions on the exercise of the right of defence. A rather important technical point concerned the exceptions of nullity linked to the usability of the interceptions and the evidence collected, up to a certain stage, without the necessary guarantees for the accused, according to their defenders, some of whom received notification of the investigations against them only after the fact, without being able to participate in the operations. Lawyer Amos Capicchioni raised an exception of constitutional legitimacy relating to the regulation of wiretapping, contesting in particular regulatory gaps which would undermine the guarantees of the defence.
Upcoming hearings and proceedings calendar
Given the constitutionality exception, the judge gave the parties a period of 20 days for their counter-deductions, after which he will decide on the validity or otherwise of the exception and, if necessary, will send the matter to the Guarantor Board. At the same time, the parties will also be able to file briefs on the preliminary objections already formulated. The proceedings will continue with the examination of the preliminary questions and any requests for evidence on December 10th at 10 am. A calendar of hearings has already been set: January 14th 2027, January 28th, February 11th, February 25th and March 11th.
af
