Trials and allegations involving Silvio Berlusconi

Trials and allegations involving Silvio Berlusconi have been extensive and include abuse of office, bribery and corruption of police officers, judges and politicians, collusion, defamation, embezzlement, extortion, false accounting, mafia, money laundering, perjury, tax fraud, underage prostitution influence and witness tampering.

Allegations

Berlusconi has been tried in Italian courts in several cases. The outcome for six of those cases were politically altered to end with "no conviction", because of laws passed by Berlusconi's parliamentary majority shortening the time limit for prosecution of various offences and making false accounting illegal only if there is a specific damaged party reporting the fact to the authorities. Berlusconi claimed that "this is a manifest judicial persecution, against which I am proud to resist, and the fact that my resistance and sacrifice will give the Italians a more fair and efficient judicial system makes me even more proud", and added that "789 prosecutors and magistrates took an interest in the politician Berlusconi from 1994 to 2006 with the aim of subverting the votes of the Italian people" citing statistics that he said have constituted a "calvary including 577 visits by police, 2,500 court hearings and 174 million euros in lawyers' bills paid by me". Berlusconi has always been able to afford top lawyers and publicists, for example Nicolas Sarkozy was one of his French top defenders. Some of his former prosecutors later joined the parliamentary opposition. Some of his attorneys are also members of parliament.

Notes:

Completed trials

Propaganda Due (P2) trial: False testimony (1989)

In 1981, a scandal arose after the police discovery of Licio Gelli's secret quasi-Masonic (freemason) lodge Propaganda 2 (P2), which aimed to change the Italian political system to a more authoritarian regime. The list of people involved in P2 included members of the secret services and some prominent characters from political arena, business, military and media. Silvio Berlusconi, who was then just starting to gain popularity as the founder and owner of Canale 5 TV channel, was listed as a member of P2.Proceedings of the parliamentary inquiry commission headed by Tina Anselmi The P2 lodge was dissolved by the Italian Parliament in December 1981 and a law was passed declaring similar organisations illegal, but no specific crimes were alleged against individual members of the P2 lodge. While the Italian Constitution had forbidden secret associations since 1948,
Berlusconi later (in 1989) sued three journalists for libel for writing articles hinting at his involvement in financial crimes. In court, he declared that he had joined the P2 lodge "only for a very short time before the scandal broke" and "he had not even paid the entry fee". Such statements conflicted with the findings of the parliamentary inquiry commission appointed to investigate the lodge's activity, with material evidence, and even with previous testimony of Berlusconi, all of which proved that he had actually been a member of P2 since 1978 and had indeed paid 100,000 Italian liras (approximately equivalent to €300 today) as an entry fee. In 1990, the court of appeal of Venice found Berlusconi guilty of false testimony in front of the Court of Verona, however the court could not pass sentence as the offense had been pardoned by an amnesty passed in 1989.

Some political commentators claim that Berlusconi's electoral programme followed the P2 plan.

Bribery of lawyer David Mills (1999)

David Mills, lawyer husband of the former British cabinet minister Tessa Jowell, acted for Berlusconi in the early 1990s, and was later accused by Italian prosecutors of money laundering and of accepting a gift from Berlusconi in return for witness evidence favourable to Berlusconi given in court. Mills claimed that the money in question came not from Berlusconi but from another client. Tessa Jowell then announced her separation from Mills, which some of the UK media suggested was an attempt to distance herself from a potential scandal. She also denied having discussed the money with her husband; '' Private Eye'' magazine published a satirical front cover of Jowell with a speech bubble stating: "I have never met my husband". In December 2010, information obtained by the Wikileaks website revealed Mr Berlusconi had become very fond of Ms Jowell, referring to her in private company as 'piccolo puntaspilli' (the little pincushion).

On 17 February 2009, Mills was found guilty of accepting a bribe of about 400,000 pounds sterling, allegedly from Silvio Berlusconi, and was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in prison. On 25 February 2010, the Court of Cassation gave a verdict towards David Mills of not guilty because the statute of limitations expired. The appeals court ruled on 25 February 2012, in a separate case against Silvio Berlusconi, that the crime should be dated on the exact day when the bribery transfer took place in November 1999, and not at the time of the counter service delivered in 2000, as prosecutors had previously argued, and on that ground Berlusconi was also awarded a Statute of limitation acquittal.

External relationship in mafia association

The Court of Palermo investigated Silvio Berlusconi and his associate Marcello Dell'Utri, on the charge of external partnership with Mafia associations and money laundering. Nine years later the trial ended with a sentence of 9 years imposed on Marcello Dell'Utri and the acquittal of Silvio Berlusconi.

Massacres of 1992–1993

The Court of Florence and Caltanissetta investigated Silvio Berlusconi's connection with the Sicilian Mafia. He was accused of connections with the people responsible for the massacres of 1992 (Capaci and via D'Amelio) where two prosecuting magistrates, involved in the Mafia trial known as "Maxi-processo" of the 1980s, Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino were brutally murdered. The case was archived due to insufficient amounts of evidence found at the expiry of the investigative deadline.

RAI-Fininvest advertising cartel

Berlusconi was through his status as upcoming Prime Minister accused of extortion towards RAI in September 1993, in the attempt of convincing them to sign a cartel agreement on the advertising shares between RAI and the Fininvest TV networks (45% each), for achievement of softer competition and higher prices. The prosecutors investigation was launched in August 1994. The proposed agreement was never signed, because of being rejected by RAI. Through interrogation of Claudio Dematte (former RAI president), Gianni Locatelli (former RAI general manager), and Paolo Murialdi (former RAI administration director), it became clear that Locatelli had received oral "threats" from Berlusconi in September 1993, that if RAI rejected the proposed deal, then it would automatically also remove political goodwill by Berlusconi's political party to ever support potential recurrence of any RAI saving decrees. The preliminary hearing judge ruled in April 1995 for the case to be archived, due to insufficient amounts of evidence to proof extortion or incitement to corruption.

All Iberian 1 (Illegal financing of a political party in 1997)

Conviction set aside because the statute of limitations expired before Berlusconi exhausted all appeals.

Bribery of the Guardia di Finanza (Arces process)

Silvio Berlusconi (owner of Fininvest) was accused of complicity in corruption. The crime was perpetrated by Fininvest's payment of 380 million lira in bribes to three officers of the Guardia di Finanza engaged in tax audits, in the attempt of convincing them to "turn a blind eye" against tax frauds committed by the four Fininvest owned companies (all with headquarters in Milan): Videotime (1989), Arnoldo Mondadori Editore (1991), Mediolanum (1992) and TELE+ (1994). The mix of interrogation by Paolo Berlusconi and Salvatore Sciascia (the former head of the tax office of Fininvest) made it clear, that the most important decisions were made by Silvio Berlusconi, who was aware of everything, and that sometimes the responsibility of managers were only a facade, because everything was decided by a very small group of people. Silvio Berlusconi was interrogated about his role in the case by the Milan prosecutor Antonio Di Pietro on 22 November 1994. An official indictment was launched against Silvio Berlusconi on 14 October 1995.

;Court rulings
* First-instance Court (July 1998): sentenced Silvio Berlusconi to 2 years and 9 months imprisonment, for all four bribes.
* Court of Appeals (May 2000): For Silvio Berlusconi, the statute of limitations expired for the first three cases, and an acquittal was given on the fourth case, because the court gave him the benefit of the doubt (not proven). According to Italian law, the "statute of limitations" does not imply innocence but acquits the accused from any further legal proceeding; it may in fact indicate guilt if the statute of limitations is applied after conceding benefits for previous good conduct, since such benefits can only be granted after guilt is ascertained, as per Corte di Cassazione, Sect. IV, Sentence no. 5069, 21 May 1996.
* Court of Cassation (October 2001): full acquittal for Silvio Berlusconi in all 4 cases. The other accused in the case were judged to:
** Paolo Berlusconi: full acquittal.
** Alfredo Zuccotti (former managing director of Fininvest): 1 year and 4 months imprisonment.
** Salvatore Sciascia (the former head of the tax office of Fininvest): 2 years and 6 months imprisonment.
** Massimo Maria Berruti (the legal advisor to the group Segrate): 10 months imprisonment.
** Vincenzo Tripodi (colonel of Guardia di Finanza): full acquittal.
** Giovanni Arces (officer of Guardia di Finanza): 2 years imprisonment.
** Angelo Capone (officer of Guardia di Finanza): 3 years imprisonment.
** Francesco Nanocchio (officer of Guardia di Finanza): 2 years and 2 months imprisonment.
In April 2010, the supreme court noted through the published motivations of its ruling in the ''Bribery of lawyer David Mills to commit perjury'' case, that his false testimony had resulted in an incorrect acquittal for the charges against Silvio Berlusconi in the ''Arces process''. But when considering the statute of limitations now apply for all four charges in the case, the judicial system did not find it appropriate to reopen the case.

Illegal financing of a political party on All Iberian 1: statute of limitations

Court of First Instance: sentenced to jail (2 years and 4 months) for paying 21 billion lire (about 10 million euro) to Bettino Craxi via an offshore bank account codenamed "All Iberian".

Court of Appeal: the statute of limitations
According to Italian law, the "statute of limitations" does not imply innocence but acquits the accused from any further legal proceeding; it may in fact indicate guilt if the statute of limitations is applied after conceding benefits for previous good conduct, since such benefits can only be granted after guilt is ascertained, as per: Corte di Cassazione, Sect. IV, Sentence no. 5069, 21 May 1996 expired before the appeal was completed so Silvio Berlusconi was acquitted.

Medusa Film company purchase

In October 1995, Berlusconi received a "notice of investigation" from the prosecutor Margherita Taddei, on charges of false accounting and embezzlement connected to the purchase by Reteitalia (a subsidiary of Fininvest and the holding company of Canale 5) of the company Medusa Film, back in 1988. According to the financial statements of Reteitalia the purchase had cost 28bn lira, but according to the owners of Medusa Film they only received 18bn lira for the sale. The difference on 10bn lira (equal to €5.2 million) had been silently transferred by Reteitalia in monthly tranches of 100 or 200 million lira at a time into five private bank accounts owned by Silvio Berlusconi. The initial response of Berlusconi, which came during a TV broadcast on 5 October 1995, was to say: "It' s absurd accusing me of embezzlement, since I own one hundred percent of Reteitalia". The prosecutor replied, that in Italy it is a crime to make hidden (not accounted for) payments to shareholders. Subsequently, Berlusconi declined to show up for interrogations with the prosecutor, referring to that he knew nothing about the money transfers to his five private bank accounts, and claimed it was so small amounts that he never himself had noticed/questioned why these extra amounts had been transferred. The prosecutor then instead interrogated four other business people from Reteitalia, and in November 1995 filed an indictment request for all five persons (including Silvio Berlusconi) for having committed false accounting and embezzlement. If the embezzlement charges would be proven by the court, this part of guilt would, however, be granted impunity due to a 1988 amnesty for the crime.

;Court rulings
* First-instance court: 1 year and 4 months imprisonment for Silvio Berlusconi.
* Court of Appeals (February 2000): Full acquittal, since he was considered being too rich to be aware of such small amounts.^a The four other Reteitalia managers charged in the case received: Adriano Galliani (acquittal), Livio Gironi (acquittal), Giancarlo Foscale (acquittal), and Carlo Bernasconi (conviction confirmed).
* Court of Cassation (October 2001): Full acquittal, since he was considered being too rich to be aware of such small amounts.^a To be exact, the court ruled the previous Court of Appeals ruling to be upheld because: "re-examination of the same facts is not admissible to the Supreme Court".

''^a Among the reasons for full acquittal were: (1) The 10bn transfers to Silvio's bank accounts were made by his father before he died, (2) As Reteitalia is managed independently from Fininvest managers, "one must also exclude a knowledge of the ex-post' enrichment and its causal" by Berlusconi, because it "would require the visibility of the 'increase of more than 10bn even after some months of using the bank accounts.", (3) But this visibility "is contradicted by reality," since "the multiplicity of bank accounts belonging to the family Berlusconi, the pulverization of the sum into five bank accounts and other large well-known heritage of Silvio Berlusconi in which the sums were widely divided to flow, postulate the impossibility of knowledge of both the extra saldo increases and especially the origin of the same.", (4) Without "knowledge and acceptance of the causal", there can be no "involvement of the defendant for the act of preparation false corporate communications.".''

Bribing a judge on Lodo Mondadori: statute of limitations

First Court: A '' Prima facie'' case was issued, but the magistrate decided to drop the charges. The state attorney refused to file the case and appealed against the ruling.

Appeal Court: statute of limitations expired before the appeal was completed so Silvio Berlusconi was acquitted.

False accounting on All Iberian 2: not guilty (law changed)

First Court: On 26 September 2005, Berlusconi was acquitted because the new law on false accounting makes false accounting illegal only if there is a specific damaged party reporting the fact to the authorities. This new law was passed by Berlusconi's parliamentary majority after the beginning of the trial, and was claimed by the opposition to be an ''ad personam'' law, i.e. aimed at acquitting Berlusconi.

False accounting on Fininvest Media Group Consolidated: statute of limitations

Allegation: 750 million euro of illegal (black market) funds stored by Fininvest in 64 offshore companies. The statute of limitations expired due to the new laws on false accounting approved by Berlusconi's government, therefore an acquittal was given because no specific damaged party reported it to the government.

Embezzlement, tax fraud and false accounting on Macherio estates: 3 acquittals and 1 amnesty extinct crime

First Court: acquitted for embezzlement and tax fraud, the statute of limitations expired before a verdict was reached on the two cases of false accounting.

Appeal Court: acquitted for embezzlement, tax fraud and false accounting for the ''Idra'' company; while being guilty on false accounting for the ''Buonaparte'' company – a crime he however received amnesty for due to the 1992 fiscal remission law.

False accounting on Lentini affair: not guilty (law changed)

Allegation: 5 million euros paid secretly to Torino football club for buying the player Gianluigi Lentini bringing him to AC Milan.

First court: The statute of limitations expired due to the new laws on false accounting approved by Berlusconi's government, therefore the case was closed with an acquittal on 4 July 2002.

False accounting, embezzlement and tax fraud on Mediaset television and cinema rights: not proven

Silvio Berlusconi was on trial in relation to transactions carried out by the Berlusconi family's media company Mediaset in the 1990s. Prosecutors suspected two offshore firms controlled by a Berlusconi family holding, Fininvest, bought television and cinema rights from a US firm. The companies, it was alleged, then sold the rights on at inflated prices to Mediaset, also controlled by Fininvest, to avoid Italian taxes and create a slush fund. The trial started on 21 November 2006. The court acquitted Berlusconi, giving him the benefit of the doubt (not proven).

Violation of antitrust law, money laundering, and tax fraud, through transactions by the Telecinco TV-channel (Spanish case): not proven

In Spain, Silvio Berlusconi, along with other Fininvest managers, was charged with violation of antitrust law, money laundering, and tax fraud for 100bn lira, for the TV-channel Telecinco he founded. The trial was suspended from 1999 to 2006 due to the immunity enjoyed by Berlusconi from being a leader of a foreign government. In April 2006, when Romano Prodi replaced Berlusconi as Italian prime minister, the Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón reopened the court procedure against him. In 2008, the lawyer Niccolo Ghedini announced the Spanish supreme court had ruled a complete acquittal towards Berlusconi and all other previously accused in the case.

Corrupting a judge and false accounting on SME-Ariosto: not guilty

At its outset, the trial SME-Ariosto involved both Cesare Previti and Silvio Berlusconi. Subsequently, a bill was approved by the Italian parliament, the so-called "Lodo Maccanico" act (also known as "Lodo Schifani", after the name of Renato Schifani

HOME


Content is Copyleft
Website design, code, and AI is Copyrighted (c) 2014-2017 by Stephen Payne


Consider donating to Wikimedia



As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases