An act of brute force: the Super Green Pass wreaks havoc on law and freedom
In Italy "the broadest obligation among the major Western countries". Here are all the lies and mystifications on which the Green Pass is based …
"Italy is making Covid-19 health passes mandatory for all workers in the private and public sectors, in one of the toughest vaccine-promoting measures adopted by any major Western country" . So the Wall Street Journal yesterday gave the news of the approval – unanimously – of the so-called Super Green Pass in the Council of Ministers. We are the first European country, and probably in the world, to make the vaccine compulsory to work. Without it, you stay at home without a salary (and it is not certain that it cannot be just cause for dismissal, despite the fact that Minister Orlando has sworn otherwise).
It seems that in this pandemic Italy is able to record record after record – even if negative. We had the sad record of the highest number of Covid victims per million inhabitants. We have led the way in lockdowns in the Western world, a measure that today everyone recognizes is not decisive but on which the two governments that followed during the pandemic have put almost all their cards on, neglecting other policies, from health protocols to the strengthening of transport. A dramatic squeeze of individual freedoms that was to remain a "resource" of last resort against the virus, but has become the only option.
So today, we lead the way not of vaccines, but of an extensive, distorted and reckless use of the Green Pass , overwhelming every other right recognized by the Constitution and even the freedom to dispose of one's body – in other areas claimed as absolute. Two very different things, vaccine and Green Pass , as we will see. And this too, like the lockdown , risks turning out to be a non-decisive measure, but on which the Draghi government has bet all its cards, also neglecting crucial issues and other viable policies. And on the other hand, it is not too surprising, being the minister of health the same as the Conte government.
The premier did not even deign to come to the press conference to justify the need for such a "heavy" decree, we would say extreme. Considering his blunders in previous press conferences, he may have appealed to the right not to answer. Not that we expected questions worthy of the gravity of the moment, given the government conformism of the media, now with unified networks and pages.
A first problem is that, as is well known, the fundamental requirements of a decree-law are “necessity and urgency”. Well, these requirements are evidently absent by definition, given that the decree will be effective starting from October 15, that is, in a month. There is no urgency. Moreover, Minister Brunetta at the press conference pathetically justified the incongruity with the need to exploit the "announcement effect". But that the government seeks an "announcement effect" does not negate the constitutional requirements that a law decree must always satisfy.
There is not even a need. There is no emergency, to date, in the numbers of the infected, hospitalized and deaths, being numbers not only manageable by the health system, but also lower than many of the pathologies to date among the main causes of death and, these yes , health emergencies that have now gone into the background.
Can Covid curves wheel up very quickly? True, but it is also true that we have vaccine protection (74 percent of those over 12 completed their cycle), which we did not have last year, and that in any case from a legal point of view proclaim, indeed reiterate a state future and eventual emergency is a forcing.
At this point, there is practically no human activity in Italy for which the Green Pass is not mandatory. For the moment, access to supermarkets and shops is excluded, but Minister Speranza has hypothesized a further extension to other sectors.
And all this, as has already happened with seriously restrictive measures of individual rights and freedoms such as lockdowns and curfews, without a technical analysis ever being disclosed by the government, which supports with studies and data the need to extend to almost everything and almost everything. all the obligation of Green Pass (originally conceived, let us remember, for trips abroad and major events). We are not even given to know an objective reached which, a condition satisfied which, the obligation can be removed.
This goes against the principle of reasonableness and proportionality of the rules, in particular those which affect fundamental rights and freedoms.
Even if the obligation of the Green Pass is justifiable with the protection of public health (which, as we will see, cannot be taken for granted), it is absolutely not certain that the right to health must override all the other rights and freedoms recognized by the Constitution, such as the right to work or education and the freedom of movement. The imbalance that is being introduced in the protections of rights and freedoms all of constitutional significance is sensational, undeniable.
No, the extension of the Green Pass obligation to public and private work is an unjustified and disproportionate measure from all points of view.
We immediately denounced in Atlantico Quotidiano the blackmailing nature of the Green Pass obligation, a surreptitious vaccination obligation. Indeed, with yesterday's decree, which effectively threatens the seizure of salary if we do not vaccinate ourselves, we enter the field of extortion. The umpteenth demonstration is in conjunction with the two reasons stated by the ministers during yesterday's press conference: the Green Pass serves to protect the workplace and to encourage people to get vaccinated. And the premier himself confirms this when to the unions that ask him to make the swabs free, he replies by reiterating that the free test would contradict the very essence of the green certificate, which precisely is to force people to vaccinate even in their absence. of a legal obligation. The forcing is evident.
In the mainstream narrative it is instrumentally confused between vaccines and Green Pass , attributing to the latter the benefits of the former: but it is the vaccines that protect against Covid , with the limits that we will see, while behind the Green Pass there is an unnecessary vaccination obligation or appropriate. And consistently, those who are against the obligation and for the freedom of choice are branded as no-vax . But you can be in favor of vaccines and against the Green Pass and the obligation. As Daniele Capezzone recalled, this is exactly the position of the most authoritative conservative newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal and the Telegraph .
The necessity of the Green Pass obligation is therefore based on a first colossal lie: that the unvaccinated are a danger for the vaccinated and, consequently, that the holders of a Green Pass are not a danger to themselves or to others. . A hoax propagated by the Prime Minister himself, when at a press conference last August he explained that "the Green Pass gives the guarantee of being among non-contagious people". False . The unvaccinated are not a danger per se, the positives – vaccinated and unvaccinated – represent a danger.
But why this forcing? The Green Pass is a gimmick of the government to circumvent the constitutional limits of the vaccination obligation, which in the current situation would be highly questionable, bearing in mind that:
1) unlike other vaccines for which the obligation is already foreseen, anti- Covid vaccines do not guarantee immunity close to 100 percent, but between 68 and 78 percent. Therefore, although on TV and in the newspapers they continue to define them as “immunized”, the vaccinated can become infected and infect, with less probability than the unvaccinated but always to a significant extent. People who get vaccinated are about 95 percent protected from the severe form of the disease, but they are not immune;
2) the effectiveness of vaccines, already far from 100 per cent in protecting against infection, is drastically reduced 5-6 months after the second dose. To the point that Israel has long since started administering a third dose and there is talk of a fourth. Today, in mid-September, a person vaccinated in March from the point of view of vaccination coverage could be equivalent to an unvaccinated person, yet he will have the Green Pass until next March;
3) for a large slice of the population, even of working age, the risk-benefit ratio does not lean in favor of the latter. According to a study cited by the Telegraph , the risk of heart problems, myocarditis and pericarditis from the vaccine for adolescent boys is six times higher than the risk of being hospitalized for Covid-19 .
If anti- Covid vaccines made people immune, as initially hoped, before the spread of the Delta variant, 70-80 percent vaccinated people would be enough to achieve herd immunity. We would already be there. And in fact those were the figures that were indicated at the beginning of the vaccination campaign.
But as Fabio Ciciliano, a member of the CTS admitted, “talking about herd immunity with 80 percent vaccinated is no longer possible”. “There is no target percentage of the vaccinated population capable of turning off the viral circulation switch. In other words, herd immunity is a chimera ”, explained Cartabellotta, certainly not a no-vax . 90 percent may not be enough to avoid closures, warned Speranza.
Warning: the fact that you cannot achieve herd immunity does not mean that getting vaccinated is useless. However, it means that providing for a vaccination obligation pursuant to Article 32 of the Constitution, or worse, a surreptitious obligation to circumvent the stakes set by the jurisprudence of the Council, denying constitutional rights and freedoms to the unvaccinated, is a disproportionate and unreasonable measure.
In the sentence 5/2018, in addition to recalling the "correct balance between the protection of the health of the individual and the concurrent protection of collective health, both constitutionally guaranteed", the judges also stated that the vaccination obligation is not incompatible with the article 32 if : a) "the treatment is aimed not only at improving or preserving the state of health of those subjected to it, but also at preserving the state of health of others, since it is precisely this further purpose, relating to health as an interest of the collectivity, to justify the compression of that self-determination of man inherent in everyone's right to health as a fundamental right " ; b) if there is "the provision that it does not negatively affect the state of health of the person subjected to it, except for those consequences only, which, due to their temporary nature and insignificance, appear normal for any health intervention and, therefore , tolerable " ; c) "in the event of further damage to the health of the subject subjected to compulsory treatment – including the disease contracted for contagion caused by prophylactic vaccination – the payment of a 'fair compensation' in favor of the injured party is in any case provided (…). And this regardless of the parallel compensation protection (…) " .
As for the first condition, not only are we not certain of the non-transmissibility of the virus by vaccinated people, we are certain of the contrary, that is, that they can become infected and contagious. As for the second, for a large portion of the population we have evidence of long-lasting and non-negligible adverse effects, well beyond the fever of the day after. As for the third, we are witnessing a total discharge of responsibility on the part of the government and health authorities.
It is no coincidence that if on the one hand the anti- Covid vaccines have been authorized by national and international health authorities, no Western country has so far taken the path of obligation and the Council of Europe, in resolution 2361, has expressly excluded the 'obligation and discrimination of those who refuse to be vaccinated.
This is why the Draghi government has decided to take the devious path of a surreptitious obligation, which, however, is much more slippery from a legal point of view.
Yet, we are among the European countries, indeed in the world, with the highest percentages of vaccinated. Superior comparable to the UK and Denmark, countries that have completely opened and where the most light to pass health predictions have also been withdrawn.
But here we are repeated ad nauseam – the second colossal lie – that the Green Pass is an "instrument of freedom", because the only alternative to it would be closures and the fallout of the economy. But countries with the same percentages of vaccinated as ours have reopened everything even without a pass .
Of course, there is no shortage of countries that follow the Italian model, although none with the same toughness. President Biden is trying in threatening tones ("our patience is running out") to impose a weekly vaccination or tampon obligation in companies with more than 100 employees. But in the United States the opposition promises to be very tough – as opposed to in Italy. The Wall Street Journal , recalling that it is in favor of vaccines, spoke of "brute political force" and "useless fury".
What is surprising in our country is not only the ease with which the anti- Covid legislation has overwhelmed, since the beginning of the pandemic, constitutional rights and freedoms, finding no embankment in the constitutional bodies – neither Parliament nor the Council – but also the climate of consent, or silence / assent that accompanies increasingly repressive measures. As Enzo Reale observed, there is no limit to this drift, no one wants to know if, when and how it will end. We were looking for herd immunity, while we found conformity of the flock.
Furthermore, the hunt for dissidents, reporting, character assassination has begun . Anyone who dares to doubt and ask questions is hailed as a dangerous no-vax . An instrumentally emphasized danger. As we have already observed , in fact, the number of true no-vaxes is small, negligible for the success of the vaccination campaign.
Vaccination, observed Luca Ricolfi, has become “a kind of patriotic duty, and disqualifies any objection or doubt as a sort of desertion. There has never been such a climate in Italy after the end of the Second World War ”. To the good connoisseur …
The post An act of brute force: the Super Green Pass is a massacre of law and freedom appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL http://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/un-atto-di-forza-bruta-il-super-green-pass-fa-strage-di-diritto-e-liberta/ on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 03:52:00 +0000.