Vaccination mandates

The latest Decree-Law of the Draghi government introduced a strengthened version of the Nazi laissez-passer already introduced in the previous months, a vaccination mandate for all Italian public employees and a mandatory vaccination for all over-50s residing in the Italian territory, under penalty of a 100 euros fine, “one-off”.

It leaves speechless the arrogance of Mario Draghi, this prime minister not elected by anyone but who rules by Decree-Laws that the Italian parliament, continually self-humiliating itself without shame, always ends up approving. Although the most infamous ideas originated in the ministers coming from the so-called “Italian progressive Left” (sic) and from the minister Renato Brunetta, belonging to the Silvio Berlusconi's pseudo-right, it is Mario Draghi who is… the bossman. And you are not the bossman (or the prime minister) only on salary day or when pimps and prostitutes show off a homage as false as interested, but you are the bossman (or the prime ministers) always, every day. So, it is Mario Draghi who is responsible for the crisis in which we all find ourselves and which he inherited only partially from the previous government.

I asked Augusto Sinagra to express himself once more on this situation and with his concise but precise answers, Sinagra, already interviewed previously because he is a good insider of the gears of Italian power, provides us with a precise picture of what is around us and a clue on how to resist and react.

1) In your opinion, does the latest government decree violate our constitution? If so, in which articles?

A) When asked which articles of the Constitution the latest government decree violates, I would first respond by saying which articles it does not violate. Of course, the whole first part relating to the fundamental principles of the Republic and then, specifically, article 32 relating to the protection of health, as well as article 24 on the untouchable rights of defense as well as the International Convention of Rome of 4 November 1950 on the Safeguarding of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, which the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights deals with.

2) Yet there appear to be “distinguished” constitutionalists who absolutely affirm the opposite ...

A) The “distinguished” constitutionalists who believe that the government decrees from March 2020 to today are in conformity with the Constitution, are the “distinguished” constitutionalists who struggle to become “distinguished” constitutional judges appointed by the President of Republic or by the parliament.

3) Now there is a law that imposes the obligation of vaccination AND still demands the signature of informed consent. Isn't that a contradiction?

A) As for the vaccination mandate and the mandate to sign the “informed consent”, jurists would say that it is an “intrinsic contradiction” while in reality it is a colossal bullshit that is proof of the incompetence and bad faith of the government of the banker Mario Draghi.

4) Does the Italian law and constitution provide for indirect obligations such as those introduced by the government?

A) Never did the law and never di the Constitution foresee “indirect obligations” (actually extortion) such as those introduced by the Conte government before and by the Draghi government now.

5) You too fall under the mandate of vaccination. May I ask you what do you think you are doing?

A) I would be subject to the vaccination mandate too, but the only thing I can say is “I don't care”.

6) Isn't setting a fine against the unvaccinated the first step towards a social credit system and therefore to a political control over the population?

A) Surely the fine of one hundred euros imposed by the Revenue Agency (unduly in possession of personal data of non “vaccinated” people), is something in itself irrelevant but which opens up the possibility of that Chinese-style social credit system. Today they are one hundred euros but if the legitimacy of this illegal measure passes, tomorrow it could be one thousand euros and then maybe the mortgage on your home and finally the confiscation of your home.

7) Doesn't it seem to you that the government is trying to bring home everything possible because it fears that the next President of the Republic will not be like the outgoing one?

A) This question is difficult to answer because it is difficult to guess what aims the government pursues in an almost infinite succession of unconstitutional measures. I hope that the new President of the Republic is a true guarantor of the Italian Constitution since that that is fortunately to go away, everything has been less than the guarantor of the Constitution.