Italy – Court of Appeal finds disparaging comments against refugee-assisting entities may constitute harassment and discriminatory behaviour

Date: 
Friday, January 18, 2019

On 18 January, the Court of Appeal of Brescia ruled in a case concerning public comments made by a citizen against three organisations with regard to their funding and their activities in support of migrants and refugees.

The comments, which were published on Facebook, attributed profit-making purposes to the three organisations and included references to the irregular status of their beneficiaries. The three organisations brought an action before the Tribunal of Brescia against what they claimed to be harassment and discrimination, as the comments were related to the race and ethnicity of the people who were supported by these organisations. The Tribunal agreed with the plaintiffs that the comments constituted discriminatory behaviour and awarded compensation for all three organisations.

The defendant appealed against the decision before the Brescia Court of Appeal claiming that the contested decision was not based on sound reasoning and that there had been an unreasonable assessment of the factual circumstances. The appellate court, however, dismissed the appellant’s argument that the lower tribunal had wrongly interpreted the person’s comments on profit-making and noted that the extended visibility the comments had gathered in social networks could not be ignored. According to the Court, such visibility could create a climate of intimidation and hostility towards associations active in that field and possibly have direct repercussions on services offered to asylum applicants and refugees.

With regard to the use of the term “illegal” when referring to asylum applicants, the appellant argued that this adjective was used in its objective meaning and could not be considered harmful or discriminatory. The Court did not accept that the comment was merely describing a factual situation of undocumented or irregular stay, emphasising that Article 10 of the Italian Constitution confers the right to enter the territory and apply for international protection. Therefore, any suggestion that asylum seekers are illegal is wrongful and in violation of their dignity.

Lastly, the Court affirmed the lower court’s finding that the contested acts also fell under the domestic law’s notion of “retaliation” in the form of a prejudicial conduct against any person as a reaction to any activity aimed at achieving equality of treatment. The appeal was dismissed and the appellant was ordered to pay the legal costs, as well as compensation.

Based on an unofficial translation by the ELENA Weekly Legal Update. Many thanks to ASGI (Associazione per gli Studi Giuridici sull'Immigrazione) for making this judgment available and to Sofia Bonatti, Senior Legal Officer at ECRE, for helping us with the translation.



This item was reproduced with the permission of ECRE from the weekly ELENA legal update. The purpose of these updates is to inform asylum lawyers and legal organizations supporting asylum seekers and refugees of recent developments in the field of asylum law. Please note that the information provided is taken from publicly available information on the internet. Every reasonable effort is made to make the content accurate and up to date at the time each item is published but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by ECRE.                                                       

 

Keywords: 
Discrimination