Ministry of interior informed offices that all regularization proceedings must come to an end, of coarse no time limit was given so that all forms awaiting to be evaluated are answered to. This s’t be allowed because each single application form should be answered to, this clearly means that ech form should be evaluated and referred to either or its rejection or not.
We well know that Prefectures are reaching the end of all evaluation proceedings regularization required for and everywhere all papers showing non acceptability istances (such as expulsions, sentences, etc) are being verified. Unfortunately procedures Prefectures follow are not always correct both when verifying impedimental to regularization matters and when rejecting application forms.
Many signal us that foreigners are being expelled and taken to Italian borders without having before received communication of the denial of regularization application forms. We were informed that in some cases not even employers were informed of the occurring expulsion. It has often happened that some migrant citizens kept on working when they received the welknown Prefecture hearing note (many thought that residence papers were to be released). When the hearing came, workers went to the prefecture and they simply disappeared. Some days later it was understood that these people were either repatriated or detained inside detention centres while awaiting for expulsion to come. In the meanwhile the rejection of regularization application was NOT communicated NOR employers were referred of the fact.
This is clearly unlawful. In fact interested people hold the right to know the reasons why their regularization proceedings were rejected and they also hold the right to know where and to whom appeal against such decision. But this does not often happen.
Many prefectures believe and state that only employers, not employees, have the right to know why regularization forms were rejected … this is absurd! Jurisprudence has costantly emphasized that regularization proceedings regard both employers and employees therefore both employers and employees have the same right to know why regularization was denied, reasons must be written.
Prefectures behaviour is evidently contradictory and unlawful. In addition to this, we need to keep in mind that such behaviour also occurs in cases that are doubtful.
In fact, we too often find out that prefectures in order to quickly bring proceedings to an end deny regularization on basis of impedimental facts that in the meanwhile have been put into archives and do not anymore exist.
Many lawyers refer of similar to the quoted cases: it often happens that prefectures deny regularization and it is later on understood that supposed impedimental to residence papers facts do not in reality anymore exist. We are talking of innocent people who were charged of non existing crimes and then discharged, unfortunately noone checked facts and these people were denied regularization.
This is clearly unjust. I personally had to face such problems myself. A police headquarters officer told me that there are two ways: the quick one and the “good” one. He said “we have to make it quick”, he simply confirmed the fact that they didn’t check how reports turned out to be, they simply verified their existance.
What happens is evidently worrying because “making it quick” is ridicolous since we are talking about people who have waited for regularization to come for more than a year… and this beahavior is ridicolous because a year “would allow to have things done well”…
We must also say that many police headquarters have been properly working, but it is anyway worrying that many offices chose to work in a different from what law provides for way.
Problems connected to legal assistance
When rejections occur, problems connected to legal assistance often raise. Many citizens address to lawyers who ask for 2.000 euros (or even more) parcels.
We shall refer of a case which we got informed of via e-mail:
“I was informed of a case that took place in Rome. We are talking about the story of a Moldavian girl. Her hearing at prefecture was fixed, she had to show up at the immigration desk past Thursday. She had to wait for some hours and her fingerprints were taken. She went to the hearing together with a trade unions activist (I don’t remember whether it was Cisl or Cigl), this person hod nothing to say on what was actually going on. This girl was then told that she was only passing through formal proceedings and that she should return to prefecture the next day (Friday) at 6:00 p.m. The following day she came back to the desk and she was immediately taken both her passport and her mobile phone. Her husband was waiting for her just outside the door and noone told hime what was going on. At 9:00 p.m. the man was told that she was taken to Ponte Galeria detention centre (near Rome). The next day the Moldavian girl was given back her mobile phone. Noone told her what was going on, what she was being charged of (police kept saying that she had stolen a car, but this girl doesn’t even know how to drive: she doesn’t have a drivers’ licence). She supposed that a person she used to live with was stopped while stealing a car and gave her name. There was no interpreter helping her in understanding what was happening. The next day an interrogation took place but the girl didn’t understand whom she was being questioned by (a judge, a policeman?). In the meanwhile her husband addressed a trade unions lawyer. This lawyer was contacted by the lady employer who was told that there were few chances to change the situation, and he asks for 2.000 euros. The girl remains inside the detention centre for a few days, noone tells her what’s happening. Inside the centre she meets other women who were stopped by police while they were going shopping. The girl and her husband choose that thay cannot afford appeal against expulsion expenses.
I received many calls referring of similar to this cases… (in fact free legal aid is hardly obtained). After ten days the girl was repatriated together with other Moldavian citizens. Her husband, who was recently regularized, returned home: they were only waiting for their documents to come in order to take their child to Italy as well…
There are too many similar to this cases, people do not understand what’s going on, lawyers are too expensive and police officers do not explain what’s happening.
Citizens go to police headquarters, they lose everything they have and they return home without anything with them.”
When I hear such stories, I of coarse am not proud of being a lawyer, anyway each working category employs “good and bad” workers… some respect rules, some others don’t: they take advantage of people’s ignorance and unawareness and they ask for increased parcels, which migrant citizens cannot afford. This is obviously a problem.
Free legal aid
Law says that people who cannot themselves pay for legal assistance are allowed to legal aid which is pay by the state. This law, you can read it on our web page, provides for that the ones, whose income is law and who cannot afford to pay for a lawyer, are to be granted legal aid, the lawyer is to be appointed and paid for by the state.
One of the greatest problem migrant citizens have to face is the fact that they hardly manage to have the needed certification released by consular authorities. In fact in order to be freely legally assisted people have to prove that they cannot pay for legal aid. Consular authorities must release a document stating that the interested person holds no means to pay for legal aid in his/her country of origin. Such certification doesn’t immediately come, in fact consulates or embassies are not organized in order to have quick evaluation done in the country of origin. Quickness is extremely important in such cases, times are not long when needing to stop expulsions or regularization denials. It too often happens that people are not guaranteed legal aid.
The greatest majority of migrant citizens doesn’t obtain legal aid and the sole alternative to expulsion or regularization rejection is to pay themselves for a lawyer. But even official tariff often is way too expensive.
On the other hand, as we have often tried to explain, everyone – associations, trade unions, groups etc. – are well aware of these problems and they should at least work in preventing such circumstancies. They should ask prefectures to elaborate common clear criteria and allow both employers and employees to study and verify all rejections cases.
Remember that these people have been awaiting for regularization to come for a year and there’s no reason to expell them without allowing the evaluation the effectiveness of expulsion orders and of proceedings police followed.