Bossi-Fini law changed consolidated act art. 40. This stated that non EU citizens holding regular documents can gain access to public lodgings the same way Italian citizens can as provided for by law. The new version of the quoted article states at paragraph 6 that: “Foreign citizens holding at least two years long residence papers and regularly both subordinated and self-employed working can gain access to public lodgings or to social services appointed by regions or local bureaus or to facilitated credit in order to restore, buy or rent a house (it must be the first one though).
In other words, the law seems only to little restrict the rights migrant citizens hold compared to Italians, but new law really worsens the situation.
The article refers to migrant citizens holding stable residence papers.
We shall now focus on stable residence papers in fact many police headquarters refuse to evaluate applications when the person giving the form in holds a valid permit of stay, they simply tell them to come back when this expires.
This is unlawful, stable residence papers guarantees more rights and benefits and can be applied to before permit of stay expiry date. In theory a person could also apply for it immediately after having the normal permit renewed. This is because holding this document is advantageous, it allows for instance to maternity allowances when permit to stay doesn’t.
What happens with lodgings? As already said the new article seriously restricts migrant citizens rights. Bossi-Fini law provides for that papers cannot last more than two years and they are released to open contracts holders. People holding determined in time contracts, collaborations can only have a one year lasting permit. Therefore people, who have probably been living in Italy for years, whose contract are continuously renewed and are considered precarious workers are not treated the same way Italian citizens are when talking about gaining access to public lodgings. Art. 40 provides for, in order to accede to public lodgings, that a stable residence permit at least two years long is required and the person applying to housing must be subordinated working. The interpretation of this law is of coarse less indulgent. We were signalled questionable interpretations.
For istance, someone considers that when applying for public lodgings a stable permit is compulsory and the permit must be newly renewed in order to have two years of validity.
This is an absurd interpretation of law. Nowhere this is stated.
Many police headquarters – since the rule is amigously written – consider that in case a not charged with crimes person holds a determined in time working contract and a stable income, residence papers CAN (not MUST) be released for two years. Therefore police headquarters keep acting in a discretional way, and it is not clear on which basis they release some two years long papers and some one year long or one years and a half ones.
Remeber that even if a permit lasts for 23 months instead of two exact years that housing bureaus at local council can deny the right to apply for public lodgings.
Treviglio (Bergamo) discriminatory choice
Aler (Azienda lombarda per l’edilizia residenziale) made this rather exotic choice which limits the chance of buying public lodgings to only Italian and EU citizens. This is considered discriminatory by many, it excludes non EU citizens, even the ones regularly working and having lived in Italy for at least five years and hold stable residence papers. A press agency few days ago wrote: “Unavoidable arguments are raising from unions, immigrants offices and associations which consider this ‘extremely serious and grave’ and announce initiatives to stop this behaviour. We are reaching a paradox – unions declare – even the free market principle is denied. The signal, emerging from Aler in Bergamo, is extremely worrying and is based on prejudice rather than on the bureau role as public office. In times when initiatives and efforts in order to increase integration among cultures are spreading out this behaviour is even more unacceptable. Local DS party secretariat consider Aler choice miserable and demagogic.”
The president of Aler – member of Alleanza Nazionale – explains that the choice of discriminating migrants citizens depends upon “the will of avoiding unpleasant situations such the one in Milan, where Aler sold lodgings to migrants, especially Chinese ones”. These are his words.
I do not mean to express a political opinion or to comment upon these shameful words, but from a juridical point of view this way of acting discriminates ALL migrant citizens – even the ones law entitles to equal rights and treatment also in case of actually buying a house – and it is unlawful and can be civilly appealed against discrimination. This civil action can be appeal at local courts, associations and unions, apart from interested people, can appeal to court as well.
I sincerely hope that unions having attacked this measure are already working in this sense. We hope that this juridical action – and its positive results – are soon to come since this is a very elementary discrimination case. Magistrateship could therefore declare that such behaviour is descriminatory and all other similar measures are removed.
The quoted case is an example showing that some offices and bureaus – despite law clearness – hold the ambition to create or imagine different from the ones stated by law rules. This is something many believe, authoritarian powers are considered more worthy than law.