Italy to respond to Milan clashes and looting ‘with great firmness’, foreign minister says

Italy is preparing a broad security package after clashes and looting in Milan, Turin, and Bologna. The response combines more personnel with preventive powers and tougher criminal penalties. The government says the measures aim to make it harder for minors to engage in crime and to curb violence linked to demonstrations and rowdy nightlife.

The proposals include deploying 500 military personnel with judicial police powers. They could also extend preventive detention from 12 to 24 hours, including for minors when legal conditions are met. Other ideas include delayed arrests based on photographs or video, a possible offence for group property damage, gathering bans, stronger warnings, and tougher rules on roadblocks and assaults on officials.

The measures are not all final. Some already exist in current law, while others may be introduced or revised through a new decree. The final package could also strengthen juvenile courts and detention capacity, and increase administrative penalties for parents in some cases. Its exact scope remains to be confirmed.

The planned deployment adds 500 military personnel to a security operation already under way in Milan. Their presence is intended to help the authorities respond to clashes and looting, while protecting important sites and maintaining order in public areas. Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani announced the figure as part of the government’s promised firm response.

The soldiers are expected to guard key locations and assist with security operations. The government also says they will receive judicial police powers. That means their duties can include specified law-enforcement functions connected with preventing or responding to offences, although the article does not list every power they will have.

The deployment is only one part of a wider package. Italy is also considering preventive detention of up to 24 hours, delayed arrests for group property damage, gathering restrictions, and harsher penalties. The troops reinforce an existing operation; they do not by themselves settle which proposed legal changes will become law.

Preventive detention is a short-term security measure, not a punishment after trial. Authorities may use it when specific legal conditions are satisfied and concrete grounds suggest that a person poses a threat to public order. Its purpose is prevention: stopping a feared risk rather than declaring that someone is guilty.

The proposal would extend the maximum period from 12 to 24 hours. It could also apply to people under 18, but only where the legal conditions are met. This makes the measure particularly sensitive because detention would affect minors before any conviction and requires the safeguards provided by law.

A conviction is different. It follows a legal process that establishes responsibility for an offence, while preventive detention does not establish guilt. The article stresses that detention does not necessarily mean an offence has already been committed. The government’s proposal therefore concerns short-term control, not an automatic criminal judgment.

Granting judicial police powers would give deployed soldiers a formal role in law enforcement, not merely a visible security presence. They could support actions connected with preventing offences and protecting public order. The article links these powers to robust preventive measures, but does not provide a complete list of what soldiers could do.

In practice under the proposal, the troops would help secure Milan’s streets, guard key locations, and maintain order in public areas. Their added legal status could allow them to assist more directly with police operations. However, the article does not say that soldiers would have unlimited authority or replace ordinary police forces.

The power would operate within the wider legal package and existing security operation. Other proposed changes include preventive detention, delayed arrests, and gathering restrictions. Because the government is still considering the package, the final duties and limits of the soldiers depend on the text ultimately adopted and the legal conditions attached to their powers.

Deferred arrest allows authorities to arrest a suspect after a property-damage incident rather than at the exact moment it happens. The basis can include evidence such as photographs and video footage. This matters during chaotic group violence, when identifying and apprehending every participant immediately may be difficult.

The proposed mechanism would extend arrest in flagrante delicto on a deferred basis to group damage. Someone could therefore be arrested later if the available evidence links them to destruction committed by a group, even though police did not catch them damaging property in the act. The government is considering this change to strengthen action against participants in destruction.

Some deferred-arrest powers already exist under current law. The article says the government may change their scope and the offences covered. The League is also calling for deferred arrests within 48 hours, but that is a political demand, not a confirmed final rule. The final decree will determine the details.

If adopted, the measures could make public gatherings more restrictive and make property damage during protests easier to prosecute. The government is considering extending gathering bans beyond political demonstrations, especially where group violence is feared. People already known for violence, assaults, or damage could be targeted when legal conditions are met.

For property damage, a specific offence of aggravated group damage could bring harsher penalties. A Senate security bill already proposes damage by at least five people carrying up to five years in prison and fines up to €15,000. Deferred arrests could also be used when photographs or video identify suspects later. Tighter rules on roadblocks and assaults on officials are under consideration.

These consequences are not all settled. Some powers already exist, and the government may revise them in a new decree. The article also mentions possible offences connected with organised violence and stronger formal warnings. The final text will determine which gatherings, people, and acts are covered.

Public-order powers are designed to prevent violence, but they can restrict liberty before a conviction. That makes legal safeguards essential. Authorities must show that specific conditions are met and that concrete grounds support the measure, rather than treating suspicion alone as proof of guilt.

The concern is sharper for minors. Italy is considering extending preventive detention to people under 18 and increasing the maximum period from 12 to 24 hours. The article says preventive detention is not a conviction and does not necessarily mean an offence has already occurred. It also states that use against minors must follow safeguards provided by law.

Those limits matter as the government considers wider gathering bans, delayed arrests, and tougher penalties. The proposals are intended to address clashes, looting, and youth crime, but their final reach remains unsettled. Safeguards can help ensure that preventive powers respond to genuine public-order risks without turning temporary measures into automatic punishment.