WAITING FOR A NEW IMMIGRATION LAW

FECL 47 (October 1996)

For the fifth consecutive time, the Italian government has amended the Decree on Immigration, better known as the "Dini Decree", after former Italian Prime Minister Dini, who issued its first version in November 1995. The most remarkable new aspect of the most recent amendment is the introduction of benefits for immigrants who help authorities to dismantle criminal organisations exploiting immigrants (mainly in prostitution). But ten months after the first government decree, the parliament is still showing itself unable to pass a new Immigration Law.

Italian politics, it is true, have been very turbulent for the last ten months. In particular, the anticipated dissolution of the Parliament and the formation of the first centre-left government in Italian history kept most members of parliament busy. Nonetheless, the delay in getting to work on the new Immigration Law gives rise to serious concern, especially in view of the ambiguity of the regulations currently in force.

Decree a result of political blackmail

In order to understand the current debate on immigration policies, we need to recall the events of the last ten months.

The Dini government issued its immigration decree of November 1995 against a background of political squabbling on immigration. Before adopting a new immigration law, the Parliament wished to examine a number of propositions aiming at effectively preventing illegal immigration, whose steady increase the 1990 Immigration Law had failed to stop. In September 1995, the Lega Nord (the party of the autonomists in northern Italy which recently declared the secession of "Padania" (the North of Italy) threatened to vote down the national budget, if the government did not take urgent action - i.e. issue a decree - enabling the immediate expulsion of all immigrants without stay permits (the so-called clandestines) or breaching the law. Preceded by a massive and particularly ruthless press campaign, the blackmail worked as the Lega Nord wished: the government cut short the parliamentary debate on a new Immigration Law by promulgating its own decree.

This measure further strengthened two widespread public perceptions of immigration, which voluntary associations in support of immigrants have struggled with for a long time: that the phenomenon of immigration requires and justifies "state of emergency" measures, and that immigration is tantamount with criminality.

As regards its content, the Dini Decree is contradictory - a typical product of political haggling. On the one hand it meets some of the demands of the Lega Nord, on the other hand, it attempts to counterbalance them by introducing some more positive regulations.

Decree abolishes procedural guarantees

The real reason of the decree was clearly the popular objective of expelling migrants from the Southern hemisphere. The old Immigration Law of 1990 already established a long list of cases justifying expulsion. The new and particularly grave element added by the Dini Decree was the extended use of expulsion as a measure of prevention and sanction without due process - i.e. in blatant non-observance of procedural guarantees such as the presumption of innocence and the right of defence. Moreover, the Decree introduced a number of formal obstacles preventing appeals against expulsion - e.g. a reduction of the appointed time for filing an appeal. More generally, the Decree has contributed to inequality before the law between Italian citizens and foreigners with respect to personal liberty. "Accompaniment to the frontier" - i.e. automatic and immediate execution of expulsion orders - is the rule. The decree provides for only a few exceptions from this rule, e.g. for children under age 16, pregnant women, residents for at least five years, etc. This does, however not change anything in the discriminating substance of the norm. Persons subject to an expulsion measure are banned from re-entering Italy for seven years.

Political refugees denied entry

The regulations on entry are another negative feature of the Decree. Entry is already restricted by the visa requirement for nationals of most non-EU countries. In addition to this, entry may be denied to a foreigner condemned in Italy or in any other country for one of the offences justifying expulsion under the Decree. As far as offences in another country are concerned, the legal and political situation in the country where a foreigner has been condemned is not taken into account. Thus, asylum seekers sentenced at home on false grounds can be denied entry. Foreigners must also show a medical health certificate at the time of entry. While this regulation is unlikely to contribute to better public health protection, it has contributed to a public perception of immigrants as bearers of contagious diseases.

Amnesty regulation for clandestines has little effect

Among the more positive features of the Decree, one should mention the possibility for "irregular" immigrants to regularise their stay. However, the time set for applying for regularisation was extremely short. It expired on 31 March. Moreover, the Decree lacks an incentive for employers of irregular immigrants to facilitate their regularisation. Obviously, legal employment means higher labour costs for the employers. Finally, independent workers such as street vendors and craftsmen were not eligible for regularisation, although they represent an important part of Italy’s clandestine foreign population.

Seasonal workers, most of them working in agriculture, were included for the first time in the official annual immigration quota. Under the quota regulation, they are granted leave to stay for at least six months a year. Stay can be extended to two years for seasonal workers able to certify employment not limited in time.

Facilitated family reunion and better health care

Some improvements were also made regarding family reunion. However, family reunion is not a right, but subject to a certain level of income and the availability of accommodation. Furthermore, the Decree guaranteed medical assistance to all foreigners in Italy on the same conditions as for Italian citizens and regardless a foreigner’s legal status. Finally, more severe sanctions against employers of clandestine foreign workers and people facilitating illegal entry were introduced.

Decrees instead of Law

Immigrants’ rights associations immediately started to campaign for some of the repressive provisions of the Decree to be dropped. According to the Italian Constitution, government decrees must be confirmed by both houses of parliament within 60 days, failing which the decree becomes invalid. During this 60 day period, the parliament can modify the decree. Due to the heated political atmosphere at the time the Dini Decree was issued, the parliament failed to meet the time limit for confirmation. Determined to implement the measures introduced by the Dini Decree in spite of its annulation, the new government led by Prime Minister Prodi reacted by simply issuing a new decree without any substantial modifications. Only when the Decree was renewed for the fourth time in July 1996, did the government make an important modification by restricting expulsion to the cases provided for by the 1990 Immigration Law which, however, is still discriminatory. On the other hand, the fourth Decree reinforced immigration control measures in accordance with the requirements of the Schengen Convention. This implies automatic denial of stay to any foreigner having entered Italy without authorisation.

Stay for "repentant" illegal immigrants collaborating with the judiciary

Meanwhile, the government has dedicated itself to preparing a new Immigration Law. However, since the Bill will not be ready before the expiry date of the fourth Decree, the Government will once more have to resort to a renewed Decree. In September, the idea of a provision on pentitismo ("repentant" offenders’ collaboration with justice), similar to the instrument introduced earlier for repentants charged with terrorist, Mafia and corruption crimes, was launched. Any illegal immigrant who collaborates with the judiciary in identifying criminals exploiting immigrants shall be rewarded with a stay permit. The prime objective of the pentitismo scheme in immigration is to destroy the fast-spreading prostitution rackets involving mostly very young clandestine immigrant girls, but it can be extended to other forms of profiting from illegal immigrants.

Temporary patchwork measures affect democratic legitimacy

To sum up, in dealing with the immigration issue, the government is continuing to resort to temporary patchwork measures, based, not on laws approved by parliament, but on its own decrees dictated by the tactical-political needs of the day. Obviously, such a practice lacks democratic legitimacy. Moreover, while the government is continually muddling through with new patchwork measures, it is easy to forget that the plethora of old and new obstacles to legal entry to the country actually already amount to the de facto abolition of the right of asylum in Italy.

Luciano Ardesi (Rome)