The prevailing feeling seems to be that a pragmatic approach to the migration issue has always seemed to be lacking in Italy. Likewise, it would seem to be lacking, and the conditional is always obligatory, the necessary promptness, in terms of the communion of intent between the different political forces of the majority and of the opposition, in managing to find a programmatic guideline, useful for allowing a management , rational and rationalized, of a phenomenon that shows no signs of abating, at least in the near and future future as it is probably destined to grow by virtue of its physiological natural dynamics.
Even more so when the emergency measures by decree, of any nature and consistency, far from being even vaguely conclusive, would rather appear to be seen as lukewarm palliatives generating lively protests inevitably intended to catalyze general attention away from its solution. the basic question. Lastly, the decree published in the Official Gazette appears to concern the "Indication of the amount and methods of provision of the financial guarantee payable by the foreigner during the procedure for ascertaining the right to access the territory of the State".
The "financial guarantee" referred to in article 1 is defined as "suitable when the fixed amount (would be) capable of guaranteeing the foreigner, for the maximum period of detention, equal to four weeks (twenty-eight days), the availability: a ) of adequate accommodation, on the national territory; b) of the sum needed for repatriation; c) of the minimum necessary means of subsistence, per person".
Well. Even if we want to ignore the fact that the European Court of Justice, already in 2020, seems to have sanctioned a similar measure introduced at the time by Hungary, and also if we want to ignore, even if we don't see how, the sole opportunity of a measure that would seem largely questionable in terms of the differences that would appear to be suitable to underline on an exquisitely human level, however, the acceptance of the "migrant" and/or potential "refugee" on the national territory does not seem to be able to be left to depend on the possibility of each individual to guarantee the provision of a financial "guarantee" that is both unjustified and, indeed, unnecessarily discriminatory as it is anchored to the subjective conditions of foreign guests.











