Ddl 1660: an authoritarian turn against social dissent

Insight by Youssef Siher, researcher

The new “Security” bill (Ddl 1660), approved last September 18 by the Chamber of Deputies and now under consideration by the Senate committees in anticipation of a vote on it in mid-December, represents a quantum leap in the direction of building a true police state in Italy. In fact, this bill - under the first signature of ministers Matteo Piantedosi, Carlo Nordio and Guido Crosetto - is but the latest in a long series of bipartisan security decrees aimed at restricting freedoms and repressing dissent, with a purely ideological focus on migrants and racialized minorities. A path that sees a pivotal moment in 2017, with the entry into force of the so-called Minniti decrees.

The “Security” decrees in the late 2010s and early 2020s

The Minniti decrees (one “Security” and one “Migrants”) represent the prelude to the current political season geared toward the social and political pacification of the country. These measures are primarily aimed at narrowing the spaces for social struggle, attributing the responsibility for economic, political and social crises, and even gender violence, to a minority deemed dangerous simply for existing within the borders of the state. This narrative fuels a climate of fear and terror, functional to the political demand to further restrict personal freedoms in the name of supposedly greater “security”. The basic tool is the same as in the 20-year fascist era: institutional racism. Then the “problem” was Jews and communists; today it is the marginalized classes and foreigners in a broad sense (and Arabs and Muslims in a narrow sense). Then it was anti-Semitism, today Islamophobia, that fueled the ideology behind these kinds of liberticidal and authoritarian policies.

The main measures adopted under the laws bearing the name of the former Minister of the Interior in the Gentiloni government were the introduction of the urban DASPO (effectively a ban directed at a person in certain areas of a given municipality by order of the Police commissioner), the abolition of the second instance for migrants who appeal against the rejection of their asylum application, the reopening and increase in the number of Migrant Identification and Expulsion Centers (CIEs, which in 2017 changed their name to Centers for Stay for Repatriation, CPRs), and the doubling of expulsions of irregular migrants (more than 17. 000 in 2016 alone). The two decrees thus go hand in hand, a strategy that all governments since then have used to link security and immigration issues.

From 2018 and 2019, however, are the two yellow-green “Security” decrees, strongly desired by then Interior Minister Matteo Salvini, now Deputy Prime Minister, with the explicit intention of dismantling the reception system for asylum seekers, penalizing the work of NGOs that save lives at sea. The 2018 Salvini Decree limits discretion in granting humanitarian protection and introduces detentions to identify asylum seekers apprehended at the border, expands the crimes that result in denial of protection, and extends detention in CPRs to 180 days (from 90 in the Minniti Decree). The decree extends the urban DASPO to terrorism suspects, authorizes the experimental use of tasers for municipal police, toughens penalties for illegal occupations of property, and introduces the use of wiretaps against promoters and organizers of such occupations.

The so-called “Security bis” decree, which came into effect in 2019, strengthens regulations for public demonstrations, increasing police protection. It toughens penalties for the use of helmets or means that hinder identification and introduces imprisonment from 1 to 4 years for those who throw flares or blunt objects. It then provides for aggravating factors for crimes such as violence, resisting a public official, devastation, looting, damage and disruption of public services.

Ddl 1660, therefore, merely continues on the path that for years has wanted to limit the spaces for dissent and social and political antagonism in Italy, and it does so by hitting the weakest and most subordinate segments of society. The new bill, not surprisingly, has been described as “the greatest and most dangerous attack on the freedom to protest in republican history” by Patrizio Gonnella, president of the Antigone association.

Ddl 1660: toward a fascist-style police system

Antigone and ASGI (Association for Legal Studies on Immigration), in a document presented at the hearing in the Chamber of Deputies, explained that “the regulations of the government bill are inspired by an authoritarian, non-liberal model of criminal law that responds to a very clear cultural and political matrix of dubious democratic consistency”. First, the bill provides for restrictive measures on public demonstrations and dissent, giving broad powers to local authorities and police forces. The bill then also allows for the suspension of rights in emergency situations, as well as granting powers to intervene on individuals and groups considered dangerous, all of which are reminiscent of the practices of authoritarian emergencyism and marginalization of opponents typical of the regime.

Among the text’s most critical provisions, however, which erode fundamental principles of the rule of law, the introduction of the new crime of “prison riot” stands out. This provision marks a profound departure from the republican and constitutional prison model, harking back to the strict provisions of the 1931 Fascist regulations. In Ddl 1660, the crime of prison revolt is configured as an instrument of constant intimidation toward the entire inmate population, with the ultimate goal of transforming inmates into docile and obedient bodies. Applicable even to migrants imprisoned in CPRs and Reception Centers (CASs), the norm re-proposes oppressive logics similar to those of fascism, which required detainees to walk in order, speak softly and refrain from chanting, shouting or collective complaints. This tight control revealed a desire to annihilate all forms of autonomy and freedom of expression.

Fascism=colonialism

The text of the law currently being passed thus represents a profound transformation of the Italian state, pushing it toward a dimension increasingly resembling that of a police state. This shift in perspective, which can be likened to a colonial-type structure, is manifested not only by the expansion of punitive measures, but by transforming into a political management strategy aimed at ensuring social stability. The new measures seem to be particularly directed against the most vulnerable and marginalized sections of society, shaping themselves as an instrument of social control.

The same repressive tools that the Meloni government wants to adopt here in Italy, with the silence of the major opposition parties, are nothing but the other side of the coin of the same system that oppresses the oppressed peoples of the Global South. In his essay Discourse on Colonialism, the martiniquais scholar Aimé Césaire explained, in fact, clearly that fascism and Nazism are nothing but the application of colonial violence within the borders of the West. This assertion finds a striking example today in Zionist colonial repression in Palestine. Israel, throughout its history, has developed a complex securitarian and repressive apparatus against the Palestinian population, justifying it in the name of national security and the fight against terrorism. These tools, tested in the colonial context, are subsequently adopted and adapted in other contexts internationally.

For example, the mass surveillance system used to monitor Palestinians, based on advanced technologies such as drones, facial recognition software and biometric checks, has been deployed extensively in the occupied territories. This system not only aims to prevent Palestinian riots and resistance, but also serves as a laboratory for the Israeli security industry, which exports these technologies and methodologies worldwide. Many of the techniques used to control the Palestinian population, such as building walls, militarized checkpoints, and aggressive policing, are transferred and adapted in Western contexts to manage migration, control urban suburbs, and suppress social protests. A case in point is the use of “crowd control” techniques and nonlethal weapons, such as tear gas and rubber bullets, tested on Palestinian protesters in Gaza and the West Bank, which were then adopted by police forces in Europe and the United States to manage demonstrations. The brutality with which Palestinians are treated is thus not limited to their specific context, but is part of a broader dynamic of “exporting” repressive practices that strengthen securitarian apparatuses globally. This “boomerang effect” is thus also evident in the domestic militarization strategies adopted by many Western states, which imitate the models developed in Palestine by the Zionist entity. The drones used to surveil poor neighborhoods, the barriers erected against migrants and the tactics of repression of protest movements show a clear influence of Zionist practices. In this way, the colonization of Palestine becomes not only a symbol of oppression, but also a living laboratory for the ideation and normalization of a global system of authoritarian control.

This dynamic highlights how repression, originally conceived as an extraordinary tool in colonial contexts, has become an integral part of the system of social and political control within the metropolises of Western empire. In a world marked by growing inequalities and social tensions, the adoption of colonial repressive practices in Western contexts only exacerbates systemic discrimination, making repression an ordinary measure deeply embedded in the dynamics of governance.