Agamben’s Vaccine Pass Manifesto
Translator’s preamble:
Below is a translation of a petition to the President of Italy, presented for public signing on August 12, 2021 at Avaaz.org
In 2004, Antonio Negri wrote of his old friend, Giorgio Agamben:
“Unlike myself, he was never involved in political struggles, for which he has an incredibly voracious curiosity, as they constitute a great lack in his life — and he very much regrets not having had such experiences. He is quite limited when it comes to understanding politics — and in his work this limitation takes the form of a radical Heideggerism.”
(Negri, A, and Casarino, C., In Praise of the Common: A Conversation on Philosophy and Politics, University of Minnesota Press, 2008, p152.)
It might seem that at last Giorgio Agamben has found himself on the streets, participating in the struggle against the erosion of freedom represented by the Italian coronavirus vaccine pass (the Green Pass). I present this translation not because I agree with any of it, I don’t, but because anglophone readers of Agamben might like to know what he is up to. We live in a mixed-up crazy world.
GREEN PASS: THE REASONS FOR NO
(A petition)
(First signatory: Giorgio Agamben)
Spontaneous Committee for the Defence of Fundamental Human Rights
https://umanesimo-e-scienza.blogspot.com/
12th August, 2021
You can sign the manifesto at this link:
Agamben, Sceusa, Mattei… Humanists and scientists against the Green Pass
[Translators note: instead of searching for the manifesto to sign, read a brief piece on how the far-right is consolidating itself in Italy.]
Carlo C. has launched this petition, it is to be sent to Sergio Mattarella, President of the Italian Republic.
For more than a year and a half the Italian people have been subjected to radical limitations to rights and freedoms considered fundamental by the Constitution, the ECHR and the Declaration of Fundamental Human Rights.
The government has approved a measure — the Green Pass — which, in principle, means the denial of access to activities, services and public places (theaters, cinemas, sports activities, public places, fairs, events, conferences, etc.), to a specific category of people: namely those who have not been vaccinated or have not booked the vaccination (with the exception of those who have recovered from the disease and or who are able to pay for a test which must be repeated in the 48 hours prior to the enjoyment of those freedoms or rights).
Decree Law №111, of August 6, 2021, even made students’ ability to attend college and take classroom courses contingent upon possession of a Green Pass, also requiring school personnel in the public system to possess the certification.
Alongside these measures, however, there remains, by law, the freedom not to undergo a vaccination. This freedom is guaranteed by Article 32 paragraph 2 of the Constitution, which, while providing for the possibility that there may be exceptions introduced by a formal law, warns that in no case can there be any violation of the limits imposed on the law which may contravene respect for human dignity.
Therefore, the restrictions of access to sports, social, cultural, training, work and educational activities established with the Green Pass are affecting a category of people who are exercising a constitutionally guaranteed freedom — they are being penalized for the exercising this right.
The Green Pass is, therefore, in contradiction with the founding principles of our legal system, both constitutional and international:
1) Article 1 of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination (New York, 1965 — opened for signatures in 1966 — ratified in 1976), specifies that discrimination is defined as any conduct which directly or indirectly “involves distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference on grounds of race, color, descent or ethnic origin and which has the purpose and effect of destroying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in political, economic, social and cultural fields and in any other area of public life.” The restrictions contained in the Green Pass are literally the very ‘exclusions’ that determine the effects indicated as discriminatory in the definition of the Convention. Discrimination, in fact, means the violation of the principle of equal dignity being accorded to differing opinions or circumstances.
2) In jurisprudential practice, discrimination constitutes any treatment, consideration and/or distinction enacted towards an individual or a class of individuals on the basis of belonging to a particular group, class or social category. Discrimination aims at triggering the social exclusion of those subjects who are the targets of the discriminatory perspective, which is always based on a differentiationist [differenzialista] worldview. The violation of the prohibition of discrimination is, therefore, correlated to distinctions and restrictions based on ‘personal situations,’ on personal conditions, on ‘perpetrators.’
3) The introduction a Green Pass to access certain activities, places and services, thereby excluding from the same activities a category of people, including minors and young adults, identified only on the basis of their [lack of Green Card] status (this status being having made a choice guaranteed by the Constitution and not limited by law, therefore, not an illegal act explicitly reproved by constructive law) is, moreover, in clear contrast with Article 2 of the Constitution, under which the Republic recognizes and guarantees the inviolable rights of man, both as an individual and in the social formations where his personality unfolds, as well as with Article 3 of the Constitution which enshrines the equal social dignity of citizens and their equality before the law, without distinction of sex, race, language, religion, political opinions, personal and social conditions. So is given to the Republic the task of removing any obstacles of economic and social order that effectively limit the freedom and the equality of the citizens, preventing the full development of the human person and the effective participation of all workers in the political, economic, and social organization of the Country.
4) The Green Pass also violates Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, titled “Non-discrimination,” which states: “1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, color, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited. Within the scope of application of the treaties and without prejudice to any specific provisions contained therein, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited,” as well as Article 23, which states that “Equality between men and women shall be ensured in all areas, including employment, work and pay.”
5) The Green Pass violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states in Article 2: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. No distinction shall also be established on the basis of the political, legal or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether independent, or under trusteeship or non-self-governing, or subject to any limitation of sovereignty,” and Article 7 states, “All are equal before the law and are entitled, without any discrimination, to equal protection by the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration as against any incitement to such discrimination.”
6) The Green Pass also violates the European Convention on Human Rights, specifically Article 14, which states, “The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, color, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, membership of a national minority, property, birth or other status.”
7) The Green Pass violates the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which makes clear in Article 10: “In defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall aim to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.”
8) The green pass is also contrary to Resolution 2361 of the Council of Europe approved on 27/01/2021 which, in point 7.3, prohibits any form of discrimination for those who choose not to vaccinate and calls on States to ensure that citizens are informed in a clear way on the NON compulsoriness of the vaccine.
9) Finally, although Decree Law 105/2021, which made the Green Pass mandatory, highlights the need to comply with EU Regulations 953/2021 and 954/2021, it blatantly contradicts their contents, Consideration 36 states: “It is necessary to avoid direct or indirect discrimination of persons who are not vaccinated, for example for medical reasons, because they do not fall within the target group for which the anti-covid vaccine is currently administered or allowed, such as children or those who have chosen not to be vaccinated. Therefore, possession of a certificate of vaccination, or a certificate of vaccination attesting to the use of a specific COVID-19 vaccine, should not be a prerequisite for the exercise of the right of free movement or the use of cross-border passenger transportation services such as airlines, trains, buses, ferries, or any other means of transportation. Moreover, this Regulation cannot be interpreted as establishing a right or an obligation to be vaccinated.” Therefore, the Green Pass does not comply with EU regulations, and violates the freedom of movement guaranteed to citizens.
As we can see from the above, the introduction of the Green Pass is in open contravention of the principles and founding rules of our legal system, and it results in the infringement of the duty of loyalty to the Republic and compliance with the Constitution and laws, which are imposed on all citizens and, prior to that, the Institutions, by Article 54.
To restate, this text is a denunciation of a grievous modus operandi that puts democratic principles in contradiction with the rule of law: the reason of emergency cannot be used as a shield to suspend and cancel rights considered inviolable by the Fathers of the Constitution and the International Community.
With the benefits and limitations of democracy, the nation has faced numerous serious crises. In the same way we can and must face this one, and future ones, without deviating one step from the path of the civilizing of law.
If we accept that the fundamental principles of the State can be suspended today in the name of pandemic management, we must understand that we are setting up a future in which the taking of paths other than democratic ones, in the name of any other threat that may arise, whether of human or natural origin, is a possibility.
Initiators of the petition:
Olga Milanese (Avvocato)
Carlo Cuppini (Operatore culturale)
First Signatories:
Giorgio Agamben (Filosofo e Accademico)
Giovanni Agnoloni (Scrittore e traduttore)
Carmelo Albanese (Filosofo e Urbanista)
Miriam Alborghetti (Giornalista)
[etcetera, etcetera…]
Pubblicata 12 agosto 2021
Translated by Mickey Moosenhauer, 16 August 2021.
