‘The Mattei Case’. Ossigeno defends the author of the book accused of defamation 

Questo articolo è disponibile anche in:

Journalist Sabrina Pisu is alleged to have misrepresented the author of an article on the disappearance of Mauro De Mauro – News and historical account

OSSIGENO 29 April 2026 – The Legal Helpdesk of Ossigeno per l’Informazione, operating with the support of Media Defence, has decided to support the legal defence of journalist Sabrina Pisu, who is being sued for defamation before the Court of Rome with a claim for damages of €60,000 over certain passages in the book *The Mattei Case*. The Evidence of the Murder of the Eni President After Lies, Misdirection and Manipulation of the Truth, written by her together with former magistrate Vincenzo Calia, published by Chiarelettere in 2017. The case presents specific elements that merit attention, as they affect the way in which journalism and historical reconstruction can be practised. The legal case stems from a civil action for defamation in which the plaintiff challenges certain accounts of events dating back half a century. 

WHAT IS BEING CONTESTED – Specifically, the way in which the book describes the role of a journalist who, in 1970, published news articles on the disappearance in Palermo of Mauro De Mauro, a journalist for the daily newspaper L’Ora. According to the writ of summons, the author of those articles is portrayed in the book as having been involved – knowingly or in any case playing a part – in efforts to mislead the investigation into the journalist’s disappearance.

The claimant argues that this description is based on a distorted reading of a news article from that period, and accuses the author of the book of having taken individual phrases out of their original context, attributing to the author of the article positions or intentions which, in fact, reflected statements by third parties or mere investigative hypotheses circulating in the days immediately following Mauro De Mauro’s disappearance.

It is also contested that the book presents, as historically established facts, reconstructions that were previously the subject of a civil judgment which concluded that they were defamatory, without acknowledging this judicial precedent.

A further ground of complaint concerns the attribution to the author of that article, or to persons connected to him, of relationships or links with institutional or industrial circles, deemed to support the hypothesis of involvement in the alleged misdirection of the investigation.  According to the writ of summons, these links are either non-existent or, at the very least, misrepresented, and are presented in the book as established facts rather than as hypotheses requiring verification.

Finally, Sabrina Pisu is accused of failing to contact the journalist who wrote that article prior to the book’s publication in order to hear his version of events and verify with him the validity of the criticisms.

CRITICISM AND HISTORICAL RECONSTRUCTION – Beyond the merits of the individual allegations, Ossigeno believes that the crux of the matter concerns the boundary between the right to criticise and historical reconstruction, on the one hand, and liability for defamation when dealing with complex events that have accumulated over time. In such cases, the author has a duty to undertake a historical reinterpretation and interpretation of the various aspects, filling in the less clear and objective parts of the story with an account that brings the various facts together into a logical and coherent whole, in order to propose a convincing overall reinterpretation, without thereby claiming to assign blame or responsibility.

Sabrina Pisu’s BOOK, written in collaboration with magistrate Vincenzo Calia and published in 2017, falls squarely within the tradition of journalistic investigation into historical events and economic and power interests which, half a century on, still raise significant questions about the role of the individuals involved.

Drawing on court records and documents, this work offers a new interpretation of Enrico Mattei’s death as a non-accidental event, placing it within a broader context of political and economic interests and linking it to the disappearance of the journalist Mauro De Mauro.

The topics covered, by their very nature, involve the critical analysis of sources, testimonies and narratives that are often divergent, requiring journalists and historians to strike a delicate balance between freedom of investigation and responsibility in the presentation of the facts.

Particularly significant is the fact that the legal action has been brought years after the book’s publication and following its wide circulation, a factor that may affect the overall outcome of the dispute, including in terms of its impact on public debate.

OSSIGENO also notes that the claim is not limited to a request for damages, but also aims to influence the content of the work, proposing amendments or the removal of parts of the text. Such an approach risks having a chilling effect on journalistic activity, discouraging the publication of investigations into sensitive or controversial issues. The case therefore falls within the broader phenomenon of legal actions that may have a limiting effect on participation in public debate, known as SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation): initiatives which, whilst formally legitimate, may exert economic and psychological pressure on journalists. Support for Sabrina Pisu, who does not have the publisher’s indemnity, is part of Ossigeno per l’Informazione’s mission to defend the freedom to disseminate critical information and the right of citizens to be informed on matters of general importance.

BEYOND THE WITHDRAWAL – The case concerns how to reflect on one of the darkest chapters in Italian history, on events which, decades later, continue to challenge public opinion and require free and independent journalism and public commentary, the freedom to investigate and present analyses, assessments and thoughts that go beyond the mere recounting of known facts.

THEY CALLED IT AN ACCIDENT BUT IT WAS AN ASSASSINATION – The co-author of the book uses investigative journalism to reconstruct an event that, in 1962 and in the decades that followed, constituted one of the most complex and unsolved mysteries of post-war Italian history and the country’s economic life: the death of ENI president Enrico Mattei, who died when the private plane on which he was travelling crashed near Milan on his return from a lightning visit to Sicily. For decades, it was attributed to bad weather. These were the conclusions of the initial judicial inquiry and the technical commissions of inquiry that were set up. The political and economic context surrounding it. This version was subsequently overturned by another judicial inquiry conducted by Magistrate Calia – co-author of the book – who established, based on factual evidence, that the plane crashed due to the in-flight explosion of a bomb placed, by persons unknown, in the cockpit. Thus, due to an attack which, according to hypotheses unsupported by evidence, was probably carried out by the Sicilian Mafia on commission to put an end to Mattei’s oil policy; by forging collaborative relationships with oil-producing countries, he was undermining the colossal profits of the major oil companies, the ‘Seven Sisters’. Intertwined with that mystery is the tragic disappearance of the journalist Mauro De Mauro, who was abducted and vanished without trace in Palermo in 1970 whilst investigating the final days of Enrico Mattei in Sicily, on behalf of the director Franco Rosi, who was preparing a film about the death of the ENI president, released two years later. ASP