FICIESSE AL 117° PRESIDIUM MEETING DI EUROMIL. SOTTOSEGRETARIO ROSSI ASSENTE, IL GOVERNO ITALIANO E' IN IMBARAZZO - di Francesco Zavattolo
Pubblichiamo l'intervento del Segretario generale di FICIESSE, Francesco Zavattolo, al 117° Presidium meeting di Euromil, organizzazione che raccoglie 39 tra sindacati e associazioni professionali militari europei; più sotto la versione in italiano dell'intervento.
I wish to thank Euromil and the president Emmanuel Jacob for having invitied us to this event.
Mr. Rossi has not attended this important international meeting and this is prove of the embarrassment of the Italian Government.
I represent Ficiesse, a civic organization made up of citizens and Guardia di Finanza servicemen that wish to promote solidarity beetween them.
Italy is probably the only country in Europe that has a police force that deals with economics and financial duties under military regulations. Our opinion is that this important institutional function must be practised by a civil organization.
We believe that demilitarization is important for Guardia di Finanza servicemen, but even more for citizens.
If I were asked to give a name to this meeting, I would call it "Europe of Rights", in light of judgement issued a few days ago by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
The judges of the court have set a basic principle: one thing is to restrict the excercise of freedom of association by military personnel, another thing is to deny the existence of these rights.
This is the point. Military representarion in Italy has value within the armed forces only. It just suggests proposals or opinions but the protection of the interests of workers is up to the Military Administration itself. Here it is the first conflict of interests: how can one person represents, at the same time, two different kinds of interests that sometimes are conflicting? It is as if Mr. Marchionne, Ceo of Fiat, would hold the same position of Mr. Landini, secretary general of Fiom.
In order to understand how complex and delicate this time we are living is, one has to think of the 4 bills about the system of military representarion which have been laid down at our Parliament.
Two of these, laid down by SEL (left party) and Movimento 5 Stelle foresees the introduction of Trade Unions within our armed forces.
The third proposed by D'Arenzio (democratic party), introduces the right of association and foresees a change of the ongoing system..
The fourth, which is also the last for originality, vision and courage, laid down by Scanu, Calipari and other members of the democratic party, does not foresees any worthy modification.
The Law will be probably based upon the text presented by Scanu. If this will be the case, military representarion will not obtain anything again.
You may ask how is this possible.
Over the past 25 years the issue about democratization of armed forces and armed polices has not being discussed, neither in Parliament nor in civil society.
It took the presence of Europe to face seriously the matter.
For two particular reasons: the gradual extension of rights to military personnel, especially economically, obtained by the personnel of Polizia di Stao (service time and reorganization of careers) and the progressive extension of lobbying power within the military summit and the war industry, due to the professionalization of the armed forces and international missions.
Within this context of economic crisis, of a weak and absent politics and of an academic world that lack interest, one did not talk anymore about rights and democratization.
Analogous with what is happening in the rest of the business world, we are staring at the constant erosion of worker's rights especially in a sector such as the military one that already suffers limitations.
The Minister of Defence is working at a white book on a new model for defence. With reference to human resources, a white impenetrable wall is being traced between the military world and the rest of civil society. Military leaders, one year ago, would not have even thought about proposing this.
This division of the foundation, that I am not afraid of defining reactionary and of the nineteenth century, is absolutely to avoid. History teaches us that it is dangerous.
All the more so if it involves the Arma dei Carabinieri, that has mainly police duties and above all if it involves the Guardia di Finanza that deals almost exclusively with matters regarding economic and financial duties.
Separating these two military bodies from the rest of civil society, means to put at risk the democratic seal of the country.
Not to mention that today in order to protect one's interests, military personnel are sistematically forced to pursue administrative justice at their own expenses (very often it does not worth the effort and one desists). Furthermore hopes of winning are reduced since several councillors of state are from the military hierarchy. it is probably not a fortuitous event that 95% of appeals are rejected in the second degree of judgement.
During coming weeks, depending on the bill that will be the basic text of the Law, we will understand if Italy is on the track following article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights or not.
Our parlamentarians will have to choose between the sacred rights of military personnel or freezing, with some little update (that will be most received by the delegates rather than by represented personnel) of the current situation in Scanu bosom.
In between the project of D'Arenzio, that at least is open to the right of association.
My thoughts, and the thoughts of the association that I represent, is that Parliament should abandon reargard proposals. It should try hard to equip military personnel with a new instrument of protection that guarantees the fundamental rights and the opportunity to defend one's own interest, without underminig the internal cohesion and operative capacity.
It is a paradox that a soldier can join a political party and do active politics and cannot join or form any professioanl association. The Italian Constitution does not prohibit it. European legislation dictates it.
=================
Anzitutto il mio ringraziamento personale ad Euromil e al Presidente Emmanuel Jacob per averci invitato all'evento.
L'onorevole Rossi ha rinunciato ad essere presente in questo importate consesso internazionale, segno, questo, che il Governo, alla luce della sentenza di pochi giorni fa della Corte dei diritti dell'uomo di Strasburgo sull' affare “Matelly vs Francia” è in grave imbarazzo.
Se potessi dare un nome a questo Presidium meeting lo chiamerei “l'Europa dei diritti”. I giudici di Strasburgo, infatti, nella sentenza pubblicata il 2 ottobre scorso, hanno fissato un principio fondamentale: un conto è limitare l'esercizio dei diritti di associazione al personale militare, cosa ben diversa è negare l'esistenza di tali diritti. Proprio sui diritti negati, giusto un anno fa, 400 militari della Guardia di Finanza, corpo di polizia economico-finanziario, hanno presentato ricorso a Strasburgo perché non ammessi, da un giudice ordinario, a costituirsi parte civile in un processo nato a seguito degli scontri sulla TAV.
Stando ai rumors che arrivano dal Parlamento probabilmente sarà proprio il testo Scanu a diventare testo base sul quale avviare il lavori parlamentari e su cui stilare la nuova legge sulla rappresentanza militare. Se così dovesse essere, la Rappresentanza militare di nuovo non avrà proprio nulla!
Come è possibile, vi chiederete?
Allo stesso tempo non possiamo dimenticare che oggi per tutelare i propri interessi, il personale militare è costretto sistematicamente ad adire la giustizia amministrativa, con spese a proprio carico (tanto che molto spesso il gioco non vale la candela e si desiste) e con speranze di vittoria molto ridotte, in quanto diversi Consiglieri del Consiglio di Stato provengono dalle alte gerarchiae militari (sarà un caso ma il 95% dei ricorsi vengono bocciati in secondo grado di giudizio).
Nelle prossime settimane, a seconda del disegno di legge che verrà posto come testo base della riforma, capiremo se l'Italia è sulla retta tracciata dall'art.11 della Convenzione Europea dei diritti dell'Uomo oppure no. I nostri parlamentari dovranno scegliere tra i sacrosanti diritti dei militari o il congelamento, con qualche piccolo aggiornamento della situazione attuale che sta in seno al progetto Scanu. In mezzo c'è il disegno D'Arienzo che quanto meno apre da subito al diritto di associazione professionale.
Il mio pensiero, e quello dell'Associazione che rappresento, è che il Parlamento, alla luce della recente giurisprudenza europea, deve abbandonare proposte di retroguardia e deve adoperarsi per dotare il personale militare di uno strumento di tutela che, pur non minando la coesione interna e la capacità operativa, garantisca, quanto meno, i diritti fondamentali e l’opportunità di difendere i propri interessi. E’ paradossale che un militare possa iscriversi ad un partito e fare politica attiva e non possa iscriversi o costituire un’associazione professionale. La Costituzione italiana non lo vieta e la normativa europea lo impone.
