Living in a small community like ours, in an economic reality such as the province of Brescia — still today one of the wealthiest areas of Italy — might make one think we are "immune" to the "critical" situations that often occur in large metropolitan areas or in less developed parts of the country.
Unfortunately, in recent years cases of "vigilante justice" have been increasing in our area too, and I have had to witness some of them first-hand. The outcomes have often (fortunately) been comical, but in some cases unpleasant situations had to be remedied.
Let me explain. There have been many cases in which a landlord (the property owner) has asked me — though often the damage had already been done — whether it was possible to change the lock on the home of their defaulting tenant, effectively evicting them from the rented dwelling. In other cases, I have represented clients who disconnected the utilities of a tenant who was not paying rent, or who decided to remove the window frames from the property! Others have "confiscated" the tenant's cat to force payment of rent, or have banned the use of outbuildings (garage, garden, cellar, courtyard…) until the rent due was paid, or have threatened the tenant while brandishing a stick and "inviting" them to leave the house quickly, or have simply sent the tenant a threatening letter foreshadowing a grim future for them and their family: (I quote) "if you don't get out of my house by…"
The range of cases is endless, and it is made worse by the slowness of the justice system, by the economic hardship the country is going through, and by the crisis of values and morality.
The fundamental concept that must be grasped, however, is a single one, and it seems to have been forgotten by most of us: protecting one's own interests is one thing, protecting rights is another.
The two often clash. It is right to protect the homeowner who is not receiving rent, but it is necessary to understand that in a civilised society, a so-called "rule of law" state, it is essential to recognise the right of someone in economic difficulty to a roof over their head, or at least to be helped through what is very often a moment of desperation. Even more so when minors are involved.
Who is responsible for intervening in these situations? Society itself — the "institutions" — which these days, much to their own regret, can no longer act, both for lack of the necessary financial resources and because of the chronic shortage of facilities suitable for taking in people in hardship.
I do not intend here to engage in political, sociological or philosophical discussion, still less to deliver a sermon, but I believe it important that this fundamental concept for living together be absorbed; the risk is drifting toward a society that takes the law into its own hands, with potentially dramatic consequences.
In any case, I would point out that the offence of "unlawful self-help" (esercizio arbitrario delle proprie ragioni) under Art. 392 of the Italian Criminal Code is committed by:
"Anyone who, in order to exercise a claimed right, being able to apply to a judge, arbitrarily takes justice into their own hands by means of violence against things, is punished, on complaint by the injured party, with a fine of up to five hundred and sixteen euros. For the purposes of criminal law, violence against things occurs when a thing is damaged or altered, or its intended use is changed."
So, even if the tenant is not paying rent or utility bills, the landlord cannot cancel the electricity supply contract — even if it is in their own name — or, worse, replace the lock, evicting the tenant from the property. Instead, they must proceed with an eviction action for non-payment: although the process is extremely slow, and at times the need to regain immediate possession of the property may outweigh the value of the unpaid rent itself, the law is very strict with those who take justice into their own hands.
Furthermore, the much more serious offence of "private violence" under Art. 610 of the Criminal Code is committed by:
"Whoever, by violence or threat, compels another to do, tolerate or omit something is punished with imprisonment of up to four years. The penalty is increased if the circumstances set out in Article 339 of the Criminal Code apply." That is, penalties are increased "if the violence or threat is committed with weapons, or by a disguised person, or by several persons acting together, or with an anonymous document, or in a symbolic manner, or by exploiting the intimidating force deriving from secret associations, whether existing or merely supposed. If the violence or threat is committed by more than five persons acting together, through the use of weapons even by only one of them, or by more than ten persons, even without the use of weapons…"
I will close with a line from the New Testament, to remind myself how difficult and complex it is to be a Christian — from the Letter of James (1, 22–24):
"Be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror; for he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like."