The controversy over the "Green Pass" does not seem to subside, the fake news on the pandemic continue to rage freely on "social networks", and the protests, when against vaccines, when against the so-called "green certification", as conducted in a deliberately confusional and guilty specious manner, most of the time translate into as many violent and aggressive utterances to the detriment of those who spend themselves in spreading the scientific data with wise knowledge of the cause. This is the state of the art in Italy, a Democratic country par excellence (at least we would like to believe it), where it is likely that there are only countless states of "exception" and / or "ideological conditions" of a "right-handed" political matrix apparently prevalent since distorting the truth and manipulative with respect to the conditioning dynamics of the so-called feeble "popular credulity".

Lastly, and in a ridiculous way (let me say it), the collection of signatures has also begun for the repeal of the rules that, from next October 15, will make the "green certification" mandatory also for access to the workplace. As usual, it is easy to talk about "rights" (admitted and not granted that the "right to self-referentiality" and "personal interest" exists and, as such, subject to protection), of "the fight against inequalities "And" discrimination ", but no one seems to make the slightest hint of the existence of corresponding" duties ": which also exist and represent the legitimizing prerequisite, not to mean the necessary precondition, for the recognition of any" right "Within a civil community that realistically aims to define itself as such.

What narrative can ever justify, then and again, despite the extension of the mandatory "green certification", this social "disorder" if not exactly "authorized", however inexplicably "tolerated", which risks compromising the optimal success of the campaign vaccination and the related mass immunization process? We want to understand once and for all that in this, as in many other cases, the complained and feared "lack of rights" (admitted and not granted that it is a plausible dispute), is caused by how many, "no-vax" and "no -pass ”included, do they instrumentally and maliciously fail to fulfill their duty towards the community that welcomes them? Is it really so difficult to understand that the first right nowadays is that of "life" and, correspondingly, the only prohibition is that, if anything, of "dying"? What social hardship can “green certification” ever cause? Well. Given that the tenor of the proposed questions offers in itself the consequent answers, it may not be superfluous, with all due respect to potential serial protesters, to clarify certain profiles of constitutionality too often sacrificed and bent to a narrative of convenience, covertly endorsed by a certain majority. government in search of re-affirmation, which has ended up conditioning some masses by making their fleeting "beliefs" flow into a pseudo-cognitive basin of dubious and exaggerated ideological consistency which has contributed to exacerbate their already fragile convictions.

To begin with, then, let it be clear to everyone that the "Green Pass", even in its extended formulation, does not discriminate between so-called "serious A" vaccinated citizens and so-called "series B" unvaccinated citizens, since full respect of the principle of equality, unlike what many artfully show they want to believe, has always resulted in guaranteeing equal treatment to those who are in similar conditions and, conversely, also translates, and correspondingly, into guaranteeing differentiated treatment however uniform and finalistically egalitarian, to those who are “different” (but not inferior to them) compared to the former on the basis of the interpretative paradigm that conceives “equality”, first of all, as respect for “diversity”. Differently and more simply by arguing: 1) .- if it is true, as it seems to be true, that even a vaccinated subject is susceptible to "positivizing" and being a "vehicle of potential contagion", however it appears equally true that in those cases, not only the viral load is extremely low, but the pathological event produces less harmful consequences on the general health conditions of the affected individual; 2) .- the "vaccinated", however, and for that very reason, represent a living protection for the so-called refractory to the vaccine and / or for those who cannot get vaccinated even if they want to, both because the risk of crossing the virus is naturally lower, and because they would in any case be not very contagious in the event of a pathology and would require less invasive treatments that would not overwhelm the hospital sector. It should also be clear, and once and for all, that the "green certification" not only does not appear to be harmful to the provisions of Article 32, second paragraph, of the Constitution, since the certification itself is not a mandatory health treatment, but it is also not in contrast, unlike what some argued, with the provisions of EU Regulation 2021/953 which, in prohibiting any discrimination with respect to unvaccinated subjects, does not seem to collide, given the different scope of operations, with the provisions of Law Decree no. 52/2021 (converted into Law no. 87/2021) which, unlike the first, concerns only the conditions of "internal circulation" (of exclusive national competence) and "access to services".

idle to have to continually reiterate it, all the more when it would be more useful, for not wanting to say opportune, to focus the debate on real issues, on contingent problems, which and which, inevitably, are constantly relegated and relegated to a secondary position painfully mistreated even by government majority more responsible and sensitive to the specific and primary needs of the civilian population. Today as today, there is a great confusion, I recognize it: the institutions seem to have definitively lost their role, functions and authority as overwhelmed by the vortex of growing "bigoted ignorance" (in the secular sense of the term) engendered and fed by a Right (no longer Right ) subversive and sly that appeals to a Constitution freely interpreted and lived in total prejudice of an unrecognizable Left (no longer Left) that only manages to passively reflect the Government's action and to let itself go to the sterile contestation of the circumstance. The "Green Pass", however, and above all, despite the criticalities that accompany the context of its insertion, must be correctly interpreted for what it really is: that is, the "right compromise" between the guarantee of fundamental freedoms and the duty of economic and social solidarity as aimed at averting the lethal event. Do we really need to add more?

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

(Lawyer - Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata