After having introduced 48 new crimes and a similar number of aggravating circumstances in little more than three years of government, the executive led by Giorgia Meloni launched yet another ‘security decree’ a few days ago. Having arrived at the fourth version of a law on public order is in itself indicative of failure and the difficulties to be overcome. But it is always right to reason and judge measures by what they produce, not by the intentions that accompany them.

In liberal culture, the more state laws, the more the state becomes corrupt. Here, the sovereignist right has so far approached the news as an opportunity for flag laws, useful more to reinforce political identities than to solve real problems. An overabundance of legislation conceived as a fetish against recurring enemies – immigrants, judiciary, Europe – or as a punitive tool to be waved to satisfy the public square, within a simplifying narrative that opposes a police that arrests to a judiciary that liberates.
A republican policy should not be divided on these issues and should only be concerned with re-establishing a widespread principle of legality and security, based on the effectiveness of rules and respect for rights.

A more balanced system, but not a solution

Within this framework, the mediation exercised by the Presidency of the Republic in the definition of the latest measure and the contents anticipated by the press outline a structure that, on the whole, seems to be moving in a more balanced direction. There are no illiberal or authoritarian drifts, nor the usual alarms for democracy denounced by the Left. The general inspiration of the decree is shareable, although in my opinion it would be desirable to supplement it with instruments of greater protection for all, such as the full recognisability of police officers and the use of recording devices while on duty, in the interests of both citizens and operators.

An inescapable question remains open: where will we put all these new convicts, in a prison system that is already collapsing with overcrowding unworthy of a civilised country? Recovering the constitutional spirit that assigns to punishment a re-educative purpose is not an ideological yielding, but a condition of rationality of the rule of law. The issue is even more serious if we look at juvenile detention, where there remains a worrying gap in the construction of paths of recovery, human training and civil responsibility.

Then there is a major absentee on the government’s agenda. There is as much severity in clamping down on crime as there is little in combating its causes. The populist right continues to treat the symptoms, ignoring the disease. Nothing is planned to prevent hardship, marginality, material poverty and educational impoverishment. Nothing structural is envisaged to support schools and families in their formative role, which remains the first safeguard of a free society.

Security, prevention and credible institutions

Lastly, there is another chapter on immigration, where we seem to have gone back to the call of the wild, perhaps in anticipation of the remigration sirens of Vannaccian extremism, with ramblings about naval blockades and centres in Albania. It is good that everything has been scrapped and referred to an autonomous bill entrusted to parliamentary debate.

Security is not built by piling up crime, but by credible institutions, enforceable rules and a society stronger than its fears. This is the line of a genuinely liberal right in which I believe.