This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS ROME 000894 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
FOR DRL, EUR, AND PA 
 

E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM PREL ELAB KSPR IT HUMAN RIGHTS
SUBJECT:  COUNTRY REPORTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES FOR 2001 
- REQUEST FOR GUIDANCE 
 
REF: A. STATE 28413 
¶B. 01 STATE 185194 
 
SUMMARY 
------- 
¶1.  (SBU) SEVERAL POINTS IN THE ITALY CHAPTER OF THE 2001 
COUNTRY REPORTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES (HRR) REPRESENT 
DEPARTURES FROM PREVIOUS PRACTICE.  ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE 
NATURE OF SOME OF THE CHANGES, WHICH MAY BE PERCEIVED AS 
SIGNIFICANT IN THE CONTEXT OF DOMESTIC ITALIAN POLITICS, WE 
EXPECT TO RECEIVE INQUIRIES FROM EITHER GOI INTERLOCUTORS OR 
THE PRESS.  THIS MESSAGE REQUESTS DEPT GUIDANCE WE CAN USE IN 
RESPONDING TO SOME OF THE INQUIRIES THESE CHANGES MAY PROMPT. 
WE WOULD ENCOURAGE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF WAYS WE CAN MAKE 
CLEAR THAT, DESPITE THE CHANGES INSERTED INTO THIS YEAR'S 
REPORT, WE ARE NOT TAKING SIDES IN ITALY'S LOUD AND 
ACRIMONIOUS POLITICAL DEBATE BETWEEN THE CENTER-LEFT AND 
CENTER-RIGHT PARTIES. 
 
THE GOI "GENERALLY" RESPECTS CERTAIN HUMAN RIGHTS 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
¶2.  (SBU) Q: WE NOTE THAT THE BERLUSCONI GOVERNMENT'S HUMAN 
RIGHTS PERFORMANCE SCORES LOWER (IN THE 2001 HRR) THAN DID 
PREDECESSOR CENTER-LEFT GOVERNMENTS.  FOR EXAMPLE, YOU SAY 
THE BERLUSCONI GOVERNMENT ONLY "GENERALLY" RESPECTED THE 
JUDICIARY'S INDEPENDENCE (SECTION 1.E), FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND 
THE PRESS (SECTION 2.A), AND RELIGIOUS FREEDOM (SECTION 2.C). 
YOU ALSO NOTE THAT HUMAN RIGHTS GROUPS, UNDER BERLUSCONI, 
"IN GENERAL" OPERATE WITHOUT GOVERNMENT RESTRICTION (SECTION 
4).  PREVIOUS HRRS SAID THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT "RESPECTS 
(THESE RIGHTS) IN PRACTICE."  DOES THIS MEAN THE USG 
PERCEIVES DETERIORATING RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS BY ITALY'S 
CENTER-RIGHT GOVERNMENT? 
 
¶3.  (SBU) POST COMMENT: IN YOUR RESPONSE, PLEASE ACCOUNT FOR 
ANOMALOUS EVALUATIONS IN THE 2001 HRR THAT GIVE THE GOI A 
CLEAN BILL OF HEALTH (E.G., SECTION 2.A ON ACADEMIC FREEDOM, 
SECTION 6.A ON THE RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION, SECTION 6.B ON THE 
RIGHT TO ORGANIZE AND BARGAIN COLLECTIVELY). 
 
WHAT DOES "GENERALLY RESPECTS" MEAN? 
------------------------------------ 
¶4.  (SBU) POST BACKGROUND COMMENT: PER REF B, DEPT ADVISED 
THAT "THE PHRASE 'GENERALLY RESPECTS' IS USED...BECAUSE THE 
PROTECTION AND PROMOTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IS A SITUATION THAT 
IS CONSTANTLY CHANGING AND EVOLVING, AND IT CANNOT ACCURATELY 
BE STATED THAT ANY GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES, 
FULLY PROTECTS THESE RIGHTS WITHOUT QUALIFICATION IN EVEN THE 
BEST OF CIRCUMSTANCES."  IN USING THIS LANGUAGE TO EXLAIN 
THE MEANING OF "GENERALLY RESPECTS," IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO 
HAVE RESPONSES TO FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS SUCH AS: 
 
-- Q: THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION OF "GENERALLY" IS "ON THE 
WHOLE," "AS A RULE," "IN MOST (BUT NOT ALL) INSTANCES."  SO, 
WHAT ARE THE INSTANCES IN 2001 ON WHICH THE BERLUSCONI 
GOVERNMENT DIDN'T RESPECT THE JUDICIARY'S INDEPENDENCE (OR 
"FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND THE PRESS" OR "RELIGIOUS REEDOM")? 
-- Q: THE HRR HAS MULTIPLE EXAMPLES OF RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN 
SOME AREAS (E.G., SECTION 1.C ON SECURITY FORCE MISTREATMENT 
OF ANTI-GLOBALIZATION DEMONSTRATORS IN NAPLES AND GENOA) BUT 
NONE IN THESE (I.E., PARA 2 ABOVE).  COULD YOU PLEASE GIVE US 
SOME SPECIFIC INSTANCES IN 2001 WHEN FREEDOM OF SPEECH 
(PRESS/RELIGION/ETC.) WAS VIOLATED? 
 
-- Q: THE 2000 HRR REPORTS ON FRANCE AND GERMANY SAY THEY 
"GENERALLY" RESPECT FREEDOM OFRELIGION.  BUT THESE REPORTS 
REFER TO PROBLEMS SUCH AS CLOTHING BANS IN SCHOOLS (THAT 
AFFECT MUSLIMS), LIMITATIONS ON RELIGIOUS SLAUGHTER, AND 
MEASURES DIRECTED AGAINST "SECTS," ESPECIALLY SCIENTOLOGY AND 
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES.  AS THE REPORT ON ITALY DOESN'T MENTION 
SIMILAR LIMITATIONS, WHY IS THE SAME LANGUAGE USED TO 
DESCRIBE APPARENTLY DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM CONDITIONS? 
 
INTERNAL INCONSISTENCY? 
----------------------- 
¶5.  (SBU) Q: WE NOTE THAT IN ONE PLACE (SECTION 1.E) THE 
REPORT SAYS THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES FOR AN INDEPENDENT 
JUDICIARY AND THE GOVERNMENT "GENERALLY RESPECTS" THIS 
PROVISION.  IN ANOTHER PLACE (INTRODUCTION) THE REPORT SAYS 
THE GOVERNMENT "RESPECTS" THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION FOR AN 
INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY.  THESE SENTENCES APPEAR TO SAY TWO 
DIFFERENT THINGS.  IN THE U.S. GOVERNMENT'S VIEW, DOES THE 
BERLUSCONI GOVERNMENT "RESPECT" AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY OR 
NOT? 
 
ARBITRARY OR UNLAWFUL DEPRIVATION OF LIFE 
----------------------------------------- 
¶6.  (SBU) Q: SECTION 1.A IS HEADED, "ARBITRARY OR UNLAWFUL 
DEPRIVATION OF LIFE."  ONE PARAGRAPH IN THIS SECTION REFERS 
TO THE RED BRIGADES' COLD-BLOODED ASSASSINATION IN MAY 1999 
OF LABOR MINISTRY ADVISER MASSIMO D'ANTONA.  ANOTHER 
PARAGRAPH REFERS TO THE JULY 2001 SHOOTING OF A DEMONSTRATOR 
WHO WAS PART OF A MOB ATTACKING "AN ISOLATED JEEP WITH THREE 
POLICE OFFICERS."  WHY DOES THE U.S. GOVERNMENT CONSIDER THIS 
LATTER INCIDENT TO BE ARBITRARY OR UNLAWFUL DEPRIVATION OF 
LIFE? 
 
¶7.  (SBU) FOLLOW-UP Q: POLICE UNDER ATTACK IN PREVIOUS YEARS 
HAVE ALSO FIRED ON AND KILLED THEIR ASSAILANTS.  BUT SUCH 
INSTANCES WERE NEVER MENTIONED IN THE HRR SECTION ON 
"ARBITRARY OR UNLAWFUL DEPRIVATION OF LIFE."  WHAT MAKES THIS 
PARTICULAR CASE ARBITRARY AND UNLAWFUL? 
 
¶8.  (SBU) FOLLOW-UP Q: DOES THE USG CONSIDER EVERY DEATH BY 
SHOOTING BY AN AMERICAN POLICEMAN TO BE POTENTIALLY UNLAWFUL 
OR ARBITRARY? 
 

DEADLINE 
-------- 
¶9.  (U) PER REF A, THE HRR WILL BE PUBLICLY RELEASED AT 
APPROXIMATELY 12:00 NOON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, I.E., 6:00 
P.M. ROME TIME.  WE WILL NEED RESPONSES TO THESE QUESTIONS 
NLT WEDNESDAY MORNING (ROME TIME), FEBRUARY 27. 
 
SEMBLER