Meloni squashed the controversy Privacy Guarantee after the episode Report aired on Sunday night. “This guarantor was elected during the yellow-red government, part of the Pd and 5s and had a president part of the Pd, saying that he was pressured by the center-right government seems ridiculous to me“, emphasized the Prime Minister in answering journalists’ questions. Meloni answered on arrival at Fiumicino airport, from where he then boarded a flight that took him to Bari, where he arrived to participate in the final sprint Luigi Lobuonogubernatorial candidate from the center-right coalition. “Authority elected by Parliament, we don’t have the expertise about the possibility of resetting it“. This, he added, “that is a decision that however rests in the hands of the College“.
But what Meloni wants to reiterate to journalists and opposition colleagues is that this Guarantor has been in office since before his government took office, in 2022. In fact, the current College is operating since July 2020elected by the government at that time in office, namely a the majority of M5 and Pd. Since the mandate is valid for seven years, the Guarantor still has two years of activity ahead of him, unless the Board proceeds otherwise. “Not the Democratic Party and Party 5 they believe whoever they put in the Privacy Authority probably couldn’t blame me they could have chosen better“, added Meloni. Today, continued the Prime Minister, responding to those who asked whether the quota system should be changed, “we can discuss the law, if we want we can revise the law but I didn’t make it either, maybe there too you have to blame someone else“.
Just today the president of the Democratic Party senators, Francesco Bocciaspoke with reporters at Palazzo Madama, announcing that as the Democratic Party they were preparing “an urgent question about the Privacy Guarantor affair because what has emerged in the last few hours, also thanks to the Report’s investigation, is of unprecedented gravity. There is a college that, instead of guaranteeing impartiality, colludes with the majority party, with some groups, with some companies, with law firms.“. Speaking on Sheep Day, Siegfried Ranucci commented on the Prime Minister’s words by stating that in Higher Education “there is also one from the League and another from the Fratelli d’Italia, in fact the Fdi staff is only Ghiglia himself in my opinion“. Agostino Ghigliawas quoted by Ranucci, in a preview of the interview given to “L’Aria che tira” broadcast on La7, stating a possible step back that “there is no reason to do this, because the politics that requests it must reach an agreement with itself: either it is an independent guarantor, and therefore does not depend on politics, or it is a dependent guarantor, and therefore depends on politics. You can’t go every day: politics is there or not. Because we are independent, we do not consider political suggestions“.
Giovanni Donzellichairman of the Fdi organization, stated that “Pd and M5 called him dissolution of the Privacy Authorityappointed by Parliament during the Conte II Government, claiming that they would align politically with the Italian Brotherhood. It is a shame that, at the time of the appointment, the Fratelli d’Italia was barely representative 4% of MPs and the choice is completely in the hands of Pd and M5“. Donzelli highlights that”either the Pd and M5 leaders were so naive that they appointed an Authority that they now define as close to the FdI, or they were so confused that they abandoned themselves. dictate lines from the Report and by its host, Ranucci. In any case, the coherence of Fratelli d’Italia remains the same as always: Goodwith great enthusiasm and excitement, to the dissolution of any body or authority nominated by the left“. The honorable member then added that “in a democratic system this is true dissolution of independent authority this is not a political responsibility, certainly not the Italian Brothers who will defend the Authority labeled Pd-M5s. But the real question is another: are there any other privacy crimes to be atoned for, besides the audacity to sanction the inviolability of the Report?“.
The message, he concluded, was clear: “anyone who touches the Report will suffer from the “Report Method”, which consists of stalking, obsessive checking, and sludge machines. This warning is addressed not only to independent authorities, but also to judges, institutions and the press“.
