The exercise of fundamental freedoms has been prevented: according to the Constitution, Italians would have the right to asylum
Our Constitutional Charter, in article 10, provides for the right of asylum for "the foreigner, who is prevented in his country from the effective exercise of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Italian Constitution". But what if the opposite happens? What if it were the current Italian state to hinder and in some cases make it impossible to enjoy those freedoms? If the Italian state prohibited demonstrations in the center of the most important cities, how did the Draghi-Lamorgese government do it? If he even heavily beaten the underage boys who are exercising their freedom to express the thought recognized by article 21, as happened in Milan in Piazza Missori, last January 28, and in Rome? If a very high number of fines and Daspo were imposed to drastically reduce the number of people protesting in the square, as has been happening for months now throughout the national territory? What if he denounced university students in Turin, Milan and Rome for "occupation of public land" and systematically used the weapon of threat and sanctions even in the case of peaceful demonstrations?
Isn't this a "preventing the effective exercise of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Italian Constitution"? Note that our fundamental law speaks of the "effective" exercise of freedoms; the Constitution does not have in mind the observance of the juridical norms strictly understood, but the substantial respect for the freedom and dignity of the person. To be clear, the Constituent Fathers had very well in mind that of substantial justice as a criterion, not that of formal legality. They had very well in mind the recent past of obstacles to democracy and the elimination of the rights of freedom that was implemented by fascism. And that was gradually implemented, with absolutely legal methods: through laws of Parliament and above all through changes to the fundamental law of the time, which was the Albertine Statute.
For this reason we must ask ourselves: why did they change the Constitution to article 9 and article 41? Why, for the first time in the history of the Italian Republic, has one of the articles within the fundamental principles, which have always been considered intangible, been modified? Why did this change pass surreptitiously, so much so that most of the population only became aware (partially) of it at the end of the whole procedure, which took months to adopt? And above all, why did Parliament approve this reform with a two-thirds majority? To prevent the constitutional referendum, which would have been possible only if the majority had been lower? Isn't this an “impediment to the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Italian Constitution”? Isn't this an impediment to the Italian people's right to vote? Isn't this treating Italian citizens simply as recipients of decisions taken from above, making sure that they cannot be expressed?
What if the amendment to the Constitution was in the wake of a systematic design to limit democratic freedoms? Why insert, in article 9, the term that the Republic “protects the environment, biodiversity and ecosystems, also in the interest of the younger generations”? Why introduce these concepts, which are extremely vague and open to different interpretations? Why add, in article 41, that “private economic initiative cannot be carried out in a way that damages health and the environment”? And that it must be addressed and coordinated for not only social but also environmental purposes? Isn't there already enough detailed and limiting legislation? What is this further specification for? To justify the next states of emergency based on forged data? To control and harass Italian small and medium-sized enterprises even more, making sure that they close? Would this be favoring private initiative? Would this help the economic recovery? Would this be free market?
Or would it not be to grant the Government the possibility to issue decree-laws in bursts and thus end up legislating in the place of Parliament? And what about a legislative body reduced to the task of validating government decisions? Why are the parliamentarians taking such massive sides of the executive? Why is there actually no longer any opposition to the Draghi government? Why do deputies and senators want to avoid the dissolution of the chambers and therefore the loss of their emolument until 2023, as they see their re-election unlikely due to the reduction in the number of parliamentarians?
The post Prevention of the exercise of fundamental freedoms: Italians would have the right to asylum under the Constitution appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL https://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/impedito-lesercizio-di-liberta-fondamentali-per-la-costituzione-gli-italiani-avrebbero-diritto-allasilo/ on Thu, 17 Feb 2022 03:52:00 +0000.