logo

Documento a cura del
Progetto Melting Pot Europa
web site: http://www.meltingpot.org

redazione@meltingpot.org

Home » Sans-papiers » Domande frequenti (FAQ)

Questions on residence papers renewal

13 marzo 2003

1) A question by Raffaele Miraglia, lawyer in Bologna. The refusal of residence papers renewal and the subsequent expulsion order. Mr Miraglia refers of the case of a person legally living in Italy since 1998, whose papers were revoked because of the fact that he was sentenced as it was found by fingerprinting him. Something similar also happened in Verona. This is much worrying because the crime for which the person was sentenced is part of Testo Unico art.4 paragraph 3 which considers impediments to the entry in Italy of people being sentenced because of some crimes.

2) A migrant citizen, needing to renew residence papers, could risk expulsion on basis of Bossi-Fini law since in year 2000 he was sentenced by Bolzano court. What can be done?
This person was esntenced because he had helped to people entering Italy hosting them in his car through Brennero border, one of the two was carrying a counterfeited document

Answer: going through all legal proceedings is not necessary. What needs to be considered is the actual situation: two people sentenced. We should also suppose that these people hold a definite sentence and cannot anymore appeal to court.

The worry of losing residence papers and being order expulsion is legitimate. The important is not to generalize, not to consider this a rule. We need to consider the fact that law sometimes offers self defence spaces.
Testo Unico art. 4 paragraph 3 is the most worrying rule according to Bossi-Fini strict interpretations.
The article states: “Any foreign person who is not answering requisites or is to be considered a problem to public order here in Italy or in one of the states with which Italy has signed free movement agreements or was sentenced because of crimes connected to art. 380 paragrafh ½ - crimes connected to drugs, sex, clandestine immigration, prostitution –is not to be accepted in Italian territories”.

A migrant person being sentenced because of such crimes is not allowed to live in Italy
You need anyway to pay attention.
This rule doesn’t refer to the ones already regularly living in Italy but it refers to people having not entered Italy and asking for entry authorization in order to obtain residence papers.
The situation appears to be extremely different.
Art. 9 paragraph 3 on residence papers confirms what stated.

This article rules the release of residence papers and provides for that a migrant citizen, when sentenced because of crimes connected to criminal code art. 380 and 381, could see his/her papers revoked. A first interpretation of the law makes people believe that in case a citizen is condemned he/she loses papers and is expelled.

But it doesn’t work this way.

This same rule art. 9 paragraph 3 provides for that permits can be revoked but in case expulsion doesn’t need to be ordered residence papers are to be released.
This simply means that in case of such sentences connected to criminal code art. 380 and 381 a person already holding stable residence permit can lose this permit but this doesn’t mean not being allowed to live here. In case he/she is not ordered expulsion, he/she is entitled to residence papers and subsequently could run for residence permits within some years.

This article confirms that court sentences and expulsions do not go together. It also confirms that denials can easily come to people needing to enter Italy but they are not immediate to people already living here.
The same art. 13 paragraph 2 letter c considers the expulsions of subjects who, according to criminal court sentences, live on criminal activities and are therefore to be considered dangerous people. But even in such cases expulsion doesn’t always immediately come. The welknown 2002 “Farane” Supreme Court sentence states that in order to consider a person a dangerous to society person an evaluation of different elements needs to be done, these must show that the person lives on crimes.
An isolated fact is not enough to prove attitudes of single subjects. One sentence cannot imply immediate expulsion.
In case the opposite happened, art.15 allowing magistrates to order expulsion when a person can be considered extremely dangerous wuld hold no sense of being.

I think I can answer to the two questions saying that no automatism does exist. I personally do not exactly know the seriousness of committed crimes but an isolated case cannot imply expulsion and shouldn’t justify residence papers denial.

The man who was found sentenced under a false name, this is not such a crime that would imply residence papers denial nor expulsion. In addition to this 1998 regularization doesn’t provide for obstacles to people sentenced.
This person might face another sentence because of having given a false name in but if he has regularly lived and worked in Italy after regularization he shouldn’t have problems.