The Court of Justice of Strasbourg has declared that the “Prodi law” infringes the rights of people to have, in a short time, a fair lawsuit to protect their property. 
With regard to this matter, lawyer Celona, an expert in international law, and lawyer Micolano, who defends a citizen who has turned to the Court of Strasbourg to demand justice, have been interviewed.

Is it possible that a law (the law n. 95 of 3 April 1979, which is better known as “Prodi law”), which was passed by our Parliament twenty years ago and was retired only a few months ago, can infringe the fundamental rights of citizens? 
"It may seem absurd, but the answer is yes. The confirmation of that comes from the European Court of Justice, which a few weeks ago upheld the claim of a former employee of a Bologna-based firm (the Fochi company), which was subsequently put under the administration of an external commissioner by the Ministry of Industry on the basis of the law that bears the name of the former Italian Premier and current president of the European Commission."

In order to examine this topic more exhaustively, two experts have been interviewed: lawyer Giuseppe Celona from Milan, who deals with competition law and community law, and lawyer Bruno Micolano from Bologna, the lawyer of the former employee.
“The regulation infringed is provided for by the Convention for the rights of men - explains lawyer Celona - which asserts the right to have a fair lawsuit.”

What does the law provide for in cases like this?
"The law on the special management of a firm provides for the enforcement of the regulations of the bankruptcy law. 
Regulations on compulsory winding-up are those reserved to economic public corporations and banking companies, while the bankruptcy law, in accordance with the decision of the court that declares a company's bankruptcy, in its final part appoints the official receiver and fixes the hearing for credit audit."

And what about compulsory winding-up?
"In this case, the procedure for acceptability of net deficiency audit is not provided for, but the official receiver or the commissioner registers the net deficiency (the list of creditors of the company) and the amount of relative credits. Only from that moment is it possible to raise opposition."

Let's ask lawyer Bruno Micolano from Bologna whether the Prodi law has been useful, given that an employee is not granted, after four years, a sacrosanct right like wage?
"The Prodi law was mainly used to safeguard large companies in trouble, helping them survive on the market. All that went to the detriment of employees, like in the case of my client, who up till now has received nothing at all, not even the retirement bonus, and cannot even benefit from guarantee funds."

From what one can see, it does not seem that the Prodi law has been too good. Why then has it lasted for twenty years?
"It cannot be said that this law has been completely useless, as it has replaced bankruptcy with a non-judicial administration. In reality, it has been useful for realizing at one's best the goods sold by the single company in order to distribute them to employees."

To come back to our matter, in his claim filed in December 1997, the former executive at Fochi reported the infringement of article 6 of the Convention, which establishes that “each person has to be granted the right that his case is fairly and publicly examined within a reasonable time by a court”, while the special management procedure requires a longer time.
As already said, the court has examined the claim from the viewpoint of the right of the employee to have recourse to a court and to protect his goods. 
In order to gain time, the Italian government claims that the petitioner must before submit his property claims to the official receiver and then he will be given the possibility of contesting the net deficiency before the civil court after its registration at the registrar's office. 
As one can see, this is another wrong notion of our Justice that clashes with article 3 of our Constitution, the one that claims the inalienable rights of citizens in the first place. 

What the law n. 95 
of 3 April 1979 prescribes

The article 1 of the Prodi law says that: 
“once the company failure, or rather non-payment of at least three monthly wages, has been judicially ascertained, in accordance with articles 5 and 195 of the bankruptcy law, by the court or on the initiative of the subjects indicated by article 6 of the above-mentioned law, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, in agreement with the Ministry of the Treasury, prescribes the special management procedure with a decree. This procedure is put into effect by one or three commissioners under the surveillance of the Ministry of Industry.”

Article 2 prescribes the powers and remuneration of the commissioner: “the decree that provides for the special management procedure can prescribe, also taking into account the interest of creditors, that the commissioner continues to run the company for a period not exceeding two years, which is liable to deferment only one time for no longer than one year subject to the analogous opinion of the Committee of ministers for the coordination of industrial policy (CIPI)...
The commissioner prepares a programme, whose carrying out must be authorized by the committee of inspection subject to the analogous opinion of CIPI. 
The programme should provide for, as far as possible and taking into account the interests of creditors, a reorganization plan that is consistent with the guidelines of industrial policy and that specifically indicates the installations to be reactivated and those to be completed, as well as the industrial installations or plants to be transferred and the eventual new entrepreneurial lay-outs.”