Is there a conflict between legality and entrepreneurship? Reasoning from the Ance meeting, Rome, 15 September 2019, (non) guilty assumption.

Is there a conflict between legality and entrepreneurship?
The question derives from the ratio of the recent normative, both in the field of public contacts and in criminal law, that is mainly focused on punishing, with different tools, suspicious behaviours and alleged irregularity, even if the suspicious or the irregularity are not actually proved and ascertained.
In this way enterprises lost the sense of justice and increased – instead – the frustration of not being able to enforce their own reasons being accused and mistrusted without having committed crimes.
In the time of presumption – concerning corruption, organized crime and bad faith – the relationship between the institution and the businesses is broken. In this context the State is not able to offer justice anymore. This conclusion is dangerously affecting the pillars of the rule of law, which should aim at protecting the associates who renounce to take justice in their own hands by trusting the rationality of the law, as kind and content of social life.
Instead, the implication of a regulation that, also out of the criminal law, assumes to regulate the social cohabitation by starting from the assumption that persons and enterprises should be monitored because, otherwise, could be able to act criminally, are critical for the most profound meaning of legislation and law.
It is necessary to remember that associates are not “social enemies”, nor subject that must be eliminated, but they are rather people who are part of the legal system, who give the law a meaning.
As the Regional Administrative Court’s ex-President Angelo De Zotti mentioned more than once during the meeting, there is a conflict between eels and salmons: the Italian Legislator of public contracts forces us to do as salmon do by difficulty swimming counter current, whereas the German one, makes his enterprises and administration agile eels.