Fondi Holy See, Becciu questioned on March 17: "Finally I will be able to speak, it's time for truth"
Marogna appeals to the "NATO secret", the President of the Court: "The Alliance seems to me involved in other matters"
The process on the management of the funds of the Secretariat of State continues: the Vatican Court today rejected all the defensive objections.
The next audience has been set for March 17, the day on which Cardinal Angelo Becciu will also be questioned: he will have to answer for the accusation of the funds that would have been sent to Sardinia to the diocese of Ozieri and to the Spes Cooperative.
"Finally the time has come to tell the truth. Good. The trial begins and so ... I have been waiting for seven months. And now I can speak, I'm happy", commented Becciu.
MAROGNA AND THE "NATO SECRET" - At the end of today's hearing, the ninth, after having rejected all the defensive objections of "nullity" of the citation and judgment with an order, the president of the Court, Giuseppe Pignatone, asked the defense which defendants gave their willingness to be questioned during the next hearings.
Cecilia Marogna's defender, Fiorino Ruggio, opposed an alleged "NATO secret". "My client - the lawyer reported - wrote to the Vatican Secretariat of State, the Italian State and NATO, relieving her obligation to secrecy". "I can possibly write to the Secretariat of State to ask for clarification, but certainly I cannot write to NATO, due to my competences", the reply from Pignatone who, thinking about the war in progress in Ukraine, added: "I now consider it in other busy chores ".
"If the obligation of secrecy is not dissolved by NATO, the problem remains. Also because my client fears for her own safety", continued Ruggio.
On July 29, however, the Presidency of the Council of Ministers intervened on the matter with a note, reporting that "with regard to the criminal proceedings underway at the Vatican justice bodies that sees Mrs. Cecilia Marogna concerned, it is specified that there is no obligation of secrecy that limits the exercise of your procedural rights ".
(Unioneonline / D)