Rete 4 on satellite

V_day_Parma.jpg
V-day in Parma


Prodi and Gentiloni, Rutelli’s right hand man who plays tennis with Ermete, are not applying court decisions about information.
On 12 September the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice overturned the Gasparri law and recognised the rights of Europa 7. It’s the most recent in a serious of court decisions. The Constitutional Court and the Council of State some time ago gave verdicts against Rete 4 that has been in unauthorized occupation of the frequencies assigned to Europa 7. Francesco Di Stefano, the owner of Europa 7, has written to me and I am publishing his letter.
D’Alema reminds us: “At the beginning of the 1990s who won? Berlusconi who had the money and the media. And even today if the parties go pear-shaped, Beppe Grillo’s blog won’t be the winner.”
After these words I’m waiting for some actions to follow. Let the government set up Rete 4 on satellite tomorrow morning. It’s easier than D’Alema becoming president of Mondadori, his publisher.

Dear Beppe,
As usual you have been a good prophet when you said in your interview before going up on stage, talking to the numerous journalists who were present: “the next V-Day will be against yourselves because people are beginning to realize ever more that you write nothing that could seriously displease the “political caste” and their powerful friends.”
That has come true. In fact on 12 September following the conclusions of the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice regarding our case, that overthrew the Gasparri law and recognises the rights of Europa 7, there has been a “deafening silence” from the “BIG PRESS”, and in particular Il Corriere della Sera and La Repubblica, but also from RAI and Mediaset.
The latter is trapped in an anomaly and the Minister Gentiloni has literally disappeared.
It would have been very different if the verdict of the Advocate General had been in favour of the Gasparri law. Mediaset would have talked about it for a week on all the networks simultaneously. And RAI would have constantly shown the face and the “intelligent look” of the former Minister Gasparri. Thank God and the Advocate General that we have been saved from this.
Il Corriere della Sera (in 8 years it has never tackled the issue of Europa 7) would have put the news on the front page with much in-depth analysis.
The only ones who have had the courage to write about it are: Marco Mele (Il Sole 24 Ore) and Marco Travaglio (L’Unità). There’s also an Article 21 initiative with Beppe Giulietti fighting this deafening silence and asking “what is behind it”.
If the Prodi government, in the hearing at the Court of Justice, had fought against the Gasparri Law “as it was its duty to do”, instead of defending it, today it would have been able to take advantage of having temporarily defeated a “shameful law” and partially respected the pact with its voters, instead of hiding with the “BIG PRESS” and the “BIG TV NETWORKS”
Dear Beppe, luckily there’s the Internet, and your great commitment to the freedom of information.
Thanks and well done for V-Day.” Francesco Di Stefano - Europa 7

Interview with Di Stefano:

Francesco_DiStefano.jpg

Previous posts:
V as in information
The Fatwa
Europa 7: the TV station that disappeared

Posted by Beppe Grillo at 08:47 PM in | Comments (2) | Comments in Italian (translated) Post a comment | Sign up | Send to a friend | | GrilloNews | listen_it_it.gifListen | TrackBack (0) |
View blog opinions
| | Condividi

business education articles new education business opportunities finance education deposit money education making art loan education deposits make education your home good income education outcome issue medicine education drugs market education money trends self education roof repairing market education online secure education skin tools wedding education jewellery newspaper education for magazine geo education places business education design Car education and Jips production education business ladies education cosmetics sector sport education and fat burn vat education insurance price fitness education program furniture education at home which education insurance firms new education devoloping technology healthy education nutrition dress education up company education income insurance education and life dream education home create education new business individual education loan form cooking education ingredients which education firms is good choosing education most efficient business comment education on goods technology education business secret education of business company education redirects credits education in business guide education for business cheap education insurance tips selling education abroad protein education diets improve education your home security education importance


Comments

Hi,
I am a Italian and I live in England, last Month I decided to go to see the Formula 1 motor racing event in Monza 2007, so I came with a lot joy but because of short time of booking I could stay in a Hotel in Milan and I thing is not big problem because there are a lots train and buses.
Wrong!!!! The bus (Black line) between the Monza's railway station and the circuit F1 it doesn't take you to the circuit but it takes to the Park entrance, between the park entrance and circuit entrance we walked 1.2 Km, but because we needed collect the tickets we walked another 1.3 Km to the Autopisani centre.
So we walked for 2.5 Km and another 0.5 Km to enter in the stand where we sit.
It's not finished yet, when the qualify are done we try get a bus from Autopisani centre to the railway station in Monza so we save walk again 2.5 Km, well we waited for a entire hour (with all the other people) and crushed with 200 people in a bus we made it to the station: What the hell Monza council things that people going to the F1 event enjoy travel like animal?????
It cost me 1500 Euro to come to see this event.
Why don't have in place a bus every ten minutes like other country have ??????
Of course The Sunday race was more worse that Saturday because there were a lot more people and no buses to connect the race track to railway station in Monza.
It’s not because there were too many people and few buses this was the case of too many people and NO buses.
I feel strong to say that after so many years that this town stage this important event Il Comune di Monza doesn't give a shit at all to provide a decent bus service. That was Crap Crap Services.
Never again I will come to Monza.

Posted by: Joe Toledo | September 16, 2007 08:33 PM


So what’s new?

The EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

and Attorney Generals have ruled several times over the past 20 odd years on the issue of the Italian Republic’s discrimination against mother tongue foreign language lecturers in Italian State Universities (See below) . No fine has been imposed and on 1st August 2007 GIUSEPPE ANGELI (AN) presented this Question requiring a written reply 4-04602 to the Italian Chamber of deputies: Chamber
“ for the Minister of University Education and Research, the Foreign Affairs Minister and the Minister in charge of Reform and Innovations in the Public Administration

In my opinion, the Republic of Italy continues to discriminate against the so-called category of “mother tongue university lecturers (lettori) who, with excellent professional standing, teach foreign languages in many Italian universities:

It is absolutely abnormal that this category of workers is employed under the National Contract for University Technical and Administrative Staff . This law has led to loss of their juridical and financial status, blatant denial of their acquired rights and a 75% reduction in salary.

Given this premise I would like to know whether this Government believes it should recognise the specific professional role of these so called mother-tongue lecturers (lettori) and create an autonomous section in the contract for them so as to guarantee their juridical and financial status.

.(4-04602)
Has anyone seen anything about this scandal in the papers or on TV?

European Cases and Rulings

1) Case 33/88
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 30 May 1989. Pilar Allué and Carmel Mary Coonan v Università degli studi di Venezia. Reference for a preliminary ruling: Pretura unificata di Venezia - Italy. Free movement of workers - Foreign-language assistants.
THE COURT ( Fifth Chamber ), in answer to the questions referred to it by the Pretura unificata di Venezia, by order of 21 December 1987, hereby rules :
( 1 ) Employment as a foreign-language assistant at a university is not employment in the public service within the meaning of Article 48(4 ) of the EEC Treaty .
( 2 ) Article 48(2 ) of the EEC Treaty precludes the application of a provision of national law imposing a limit on the duration of the employment relationship between universities and foreign language assistants where there is, in principle, no such limit with regard to other workers .
( 3 ) Article 3 of Regulation No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community prohibits stipulations in contracts for the employment of foreign-language assistants by a university of a Member State whereby the person concerned is deprived of the social security cover available to other workers .

2) Joined cases C-259/91, C-331/91 and C-332/91.
Judgment of the Court of 2 August 1993. Pilar Allué and Carmel Mary Coonan and others v Università degli studi di Venezia and Università degli studi di Parma. References for a preliminary ruling: Pretura di Venezia and Pretura di Parma - Italy. Free movement of workers - Foreign-language assistants.
THE COURT, in answer to the questions referred to it by the Pretore di Venezia and the Pretore di Parma by orders of 4 October 1991 and 14 November 1991 respectively, hereby rules:
It is contrary to Article 48(2) of the EEC Treaty for the legislation of a Member State to limit the duration of employment contracts of foreign-language assistants in any event to one year, with the possibility of renewal, where in principle no such limit exists with regard to other teachers

3) CausaC-90/96-OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL N. Fennelly,
On those grounds THE COURT
(Fifth Chamber),
hereby rules:
Articles 5 and 48(2) of the EC Treaty do not preclude a national rule which reserves eligibility for appointment to fill temporary teaching vacancies in universities to tenured teachers and established researchers and excludes foreign-language assistants, unless such appointment is open to other categories of staff appointed to university teaching otherwise than by way of open competition, whose teaching and academic skills are not subject to evaluation in the same way as those of researchers, whilst foreign-language assistants who, under national law, have the same status and perform equivalent duties are excluded.

4) Case C-212/99 OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL GEELHOED 20 March 2001 (1)
Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty - Freedom of movement for workers - Former university foreign-language assistants - Recognition of acquired rights
Conclusion In the light of the above facts and circumstances, I propose that the Court:
(a) declare that, in connection with the administrative and contractual practice applied by certain public universities when re-engaging former foreign-language assistants as linguistic associates, whereby the rights which the latter have acquired individually by virtue of their previous employment are not or not sufficiently recognised, whereas in general such recognition is guaranteed for other national workers, the Italian Government has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC); (b) pursuant to Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, order the Italian Government to pay the costs

5) Causa C-212/99 SENTENZA DELLA CORTE (Sesta Sezione) 26 giugno 2001
THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)
hereby:
1. Declares that, by not guaranteeing recognition of the rights acquired by former foreign-language assistants who have become associates and mother-tongue linguistic experts, even though such recognition is guaranteed to all national workers, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 48 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 39 EC);
2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs;

6) Case C-119/04Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 18 July 2006
— Commission of the European Communities v Italian
Republic

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Judgment
of the Court establishing failure — Non-compliance —
Article 228 EC — Financial penalties — Recognition of
acquired rights of former foreign-language assistants)
(2006/C 224/04)
Language of the case: Italian
— Application for the imposition of a penalty payment
Operative part of the judgment
1. The Court declares that by not ensuring, at the date of expiry of
the period prescribed in the reasoned opinion, recognition of the
rights acquired by former assistants who have become associates
and linguistic experts, even though such recognition is guaranteed
to all national workers, the Italian Republic has failed to take all
the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of 26 June
2001 in Case C-212/99 Commission v Italy and has therefore
failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 228 EC.
2. Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 106, 30.4.2004.

7) JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber) 18 July 2006 (*)
(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Judgment of the Court establishing failure – Non-compliance –Article 228 EC– Financial penalties – Recognition of acquired rights of former foreign-language assistants)
In Case C-119/04,
Judgment
1 By its application, the Commission of the European Communities asks the Court to:
– declare that, by not taking all the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of 26 June 2001 in Case C 212/99 Commission v Italy [2001] (ECR I 4923), the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 228 EC;
– order the Italian Republic to pay into the Commission’s ‘European Community own resources’ account, a penalty payment of EUR 309 750 for each day of delay in taking the measures necessary to comply with the judgment in Case C-212/99 Commission v Italy, from the day on which judgment in the present case is delivered until the judgment in that case is complied with;
– order the Italian Republic to pay the costs

8) Case C-119/04 - OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL

Poiares Maduro delivered on 26 January 2006 (1) Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Judgment of the Court establishing such failure – Non-compliance – Article 228 EC – Financial penalties – Recognition of acquired rights of former foreign language assistants)

Conclusion
In the light of the foregoing considerations, I suggest that the Court should:
– declare that, by not guaranteeing recognition of the rights acquired by former foreign language assistants who have become linguistic associates and mother-tongue linguistic experts, even though such recognition is guaranteed to all national workers, the Italian Republic has not implemented all the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of 26 June 2001 in Case C-212/99 Commission v Italy and has accordingly failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 228 EC;
– order the Italian Republic to pay to the Commission of the European Communities, into the account ‘EC own resources’, a penalty payment of EUR 265 500 for each day of delay in implementing the measures necessary to comply with the judgment in Case C-212/99, from delivery of the present judgment until the judgment in Case C-212/99 has been complied with;
order the Italian Republic to pay the costs



PRESS RELEASE No 64/06
18 July 2006
Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-119/04
Commission of the European Communities v Italy
FOR THE SECOND TIME THE COURT FINDS AGAINST ITALY FOR FAILING TO RECOGNISE THE ACQUIRED RIGHTS OF FORMER FOREIGN-LANGUAGE ASSISTANTS
In view of the fact that the breach of obligations no longer persisted on the date of examination of the facts, the Court did not impose a penalty payment on Italy
The employment conditions of foreign language assistants have been the subject of many cases before the Court of Justice. In 1995 Italy adopted a law to reform foreign language teaching. The post of “foreign-language assistant” was abolished and replaced by that of ‘linguistic associate”. Following that law’s entry into force, the Commission received several complaints from former foreign-language assistants that, in the conversion to linguistic associate, their length of service as assistants had not been taken into account for the purposes of pay and social security. The Commission therefore instigated legal proceedings against Italy.
On 26 June 2001, in Case C-212/99 Commission v Italy, the Court found that Italy had failed to fulfil its obligations under the provisions of the EC Treaty guaranteeing freedom of movement for workers, by not guaranteeing recognition of the acquired rights of former foreign language assistants in six Italian universities (La Basilicata, Milan, Palermo, Pisa, La Sapienza in Rome and the Eastern University Institute in Naples), even though such recognition was guaranteed to Italian nationals.
Believing that Italy had still not complied with that judgment, on 4 March 2004, the Commission commenced the present action against Italy requesting that the Court find Italy in breach of the judgment of June 2001 and impose a penalty payment of EUR 309 750 per day from the date of judgment in the present case until Italy had complied.
The Court declares that, by not ensuring, at the date of expiry of the period prescribed in the reasoned opinion, recognition of the rights acquired by former assistants who have become associates and linguistic experts, even though such recognition is guaranteed to all national workers, the Italian Republic has failed to take all the measures necessary to comply with the judgment of 26 June 2001 in Case C-212/99 Commission v Italy and has therefore failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty.
However, in view of the fact that the breach of obligations no longer persisted on the date of the Court’s examination of the facts, the Court rejects the Commission’s application for the imposition of a penalty payment.


Brussels, 27 June 2007
Commission closes Lettori case following firm assurances from Italy
The European Commission has received firm assurances from the Italian authorities that national legislation governing employment conditions for former foreign language assistants ("Lettori") in Italian universities is effectively applied. The legislation concerned had been judged compatible with Community law by the European Court of Justice in July 2006. As a result, the Commission has decided to close the infringement procedure against Italy, which had remained open while the Commission sought assurances.
"In response to requests from the Commission, the Italian authorities have given strong assurances that each university covered by the European Court's judgement is indeed correctly applying the new legislation. They have also undertaken to ensure that it continues to be fully and properly applied," said Vladimír Špidla, Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities.
The case had been brought by the Commission following a complaint by former foreign language assistants from six Italian universities. They argued that a 1995 reform of foreign language teaching in Italy meant their length of service as assistants was not taken into account for the purposes of pay and social security under the new status of ‘linguistic associate'.
On that basis, the Commission took Italy to the European Court of Justice. In June 2001, the Court found that Italy had discriminated against former foreign language assistants by not guaranteeing the recognition of their acquired rights, even though such recognition was guaranteed to Italian nationals.
Considering the Italian authorities' response to the judgement insufficient, the Commission then brought a second case before the Court requesting financial penalties. The Commission took the position, in particular on the basis of information provided by Lettori, that the criteria set out in the new Italian rules adopted in January 2004 were still discriminatory and did not seem adequate to guarantee equal treatment.
In its judgement of 18 July 2006, the Court decided that Italy failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty by adapting its legislation at a very late stage of the procedure, but that the law itself was nevertheless an appropriate solution for re-establishing the careers of the Lettori. This position had been contrary to the Opinion of the Advocate General and to the Commission's request. The Court also considered that a significant start had been made in applying the Italian legislation, as attested through declarations from the universities and commitments by the Italian authorities. Finally, it considered these sufficient to conclude that the breach of obligations no longer persisted on the date of the Court’s examination of the facts. Should any persisting problems occur in the application of the Italian legislation, this is now a matter for the national level, where they will be dealt with by the relevant Italian administrative or judicial authorities.
For more information:
Court judgement of 18 July 2006 (Case C-119/04) - press release:
http://curia.europa.eu/en/actu/communiques/cp06/aff/cp060064en.pdf
Court judgement of 26 June 2001 (Case C-212/99):
http://curia.europa.eu/en/actu/activites/act01/0118en.htm#ToC3



Posted by: geraldine boyd | September 15, 2007 11:33 PM


Post a comment


Beppe Grillo's Blog is an open space for you to use so that we can come face to face directly. As your comment is published immediately, there's no time for filters to check it out. Thus the Blog's usefulness depends on your cooperation and it makes you the only ones responsible for the content and the resulting outcomes.

Information to be read before using Beppe Grillo's Blog

The following are not allowed:
1. messages without the email address of the sender
2. anonymous messages
3. advertising messages
4. messages containing offensive language
5. messages containing obscene language
6. messages with racist or sexist content
7. messages with content that constitutes a violation of Italian Law (incitement to commit a crime, to violence, libel etc.)

However, the owner of the Blog can delete messages at any moment and for any reason.
The owner of the Blog cannot be held responsible for any messages that may damage the rights of third parties Maximum comment length is 2,000 characters.
If you have any doubts read "How to use the blog".

Post a comment (English please!)


First name and Surname*:

Email Address*:
We remind you that anonymous messages (without real first name and surname) will be cancelled.
URL:


* Compulsory fields



Send to a friend

Send this message to *


Your Email Address *


Message (optional)


* Compulsory fields


Beppe Grillo Meetups

meetup.jpg
Groups 372 Members 76.596
Cities 281 Countries 10

Books and DVDs

grillorama

Check out the books and DVDs of Beppe Grillo (service in Italian)

Initiatives


Terra Reloaded DVD

Clean Up Parliament

Map of Power


Awards

Webby award
14th Annual Webby Awards Official Honoree Selections

Interviews


Tegenlicht - Beppe Grillo's Interview

"De toekomst van Europa volgens Beppe Grillo"

(Tegenlicht TV)

International Press Review

The New Yorker
"Beppe's Inferno"

Times
"The Comic Who Shook Italy"
(The video | Related post)

Forbes
"The Web Celeb 25"
(Related post)

BBC
"Meeting Italy's silenced satirist"

AlJazeera
People and power: "Beppe's Blog"

TIME magazine
TIME.com's First Annual Blog Index
(related post)