Offensive Falsehood
Live from Ukraine
Odesa – Anton Gross is an Italian citizen of Ukrainian origin, born in Mariupol’ when Ukraine was still part of the Soviet Union. As the owner of a consulting agency, after having worked and lived permanently in the Bel Paese for years, he received his first passport in 2009. Under the place of birth entry, the document correctly stated ‘UKR’ (i.e., Ukraine). The European driving license that he had obtained six years earlier – again in Italy – equally rightly stated ‘SU’, i.e., Soviet Union. Congruently, all subsequent renewals and releases of legally valid certificates have always carried equally impeccable acronyms up until the moment of the crime.
Russia invades Ukraine and, following farce referendums not recognized by the international community, unilaterally annexes five regions: Crimea in 2014 and Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, Luhansk, and Donetsk in 2022.
In that year, Anton Gross went, as usual, to the offices of the Italian Civil Motorization to renew your driving license for the second time. However, when he receives the new laminated document in his hands, he notes with amazement that the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport, chaired by Matteo Salvini, has recognized in all respects the annexation of Mariupol’ (which is located in the Ukrainian oblast’ of Donetsk) to the Russian Federation. Next to the name of the martyr city of Ukraine, in the new driving license, Anton reads ‘RUS’ (Russian Federation). Outraged and deeply offended, he published photos of his documents on his Instagram channel (suitably obscured in the fields reserved for sensitive data), asking for explanations from the Italian government.
The affair was reported by Lia Quartapelle, the vice-president of the Foreign Affairs Commission in the Chamber, who ensured on her social media accounts that she was presenting a parliamentary question to verify the truth. Joining the action of his colleague from the Democratic Party, the secretary of the Italian Radicals, Matteo Hallissey, goes further by asking for the immediate intervention of Giorgia Meloni and Minister Salvini, reiterating the gravity of the humiliation suffered by Gross. The MIT responds, explaining in an official note that «Mariupol’ was not identified as a Ukrainian city due to a manual data entry error». According to the Ministry of Transport, this ‘crab’ dates back to 2003, while it appears clear that no document issued in the past by that or other Italian authorities to Anton Gross has ever reported that blunder.
Regardless of the (un)likely reasons given in this circumstance, it seems at least necessary to remember that the current representative of that Ministry (Matteo Salvini, leader of the Italian «League» party) publicly recognized several times the legitimacy of the farce referendum with which Crimea was wrested from Ukraine by the Russians. In fact, one of his interventions recorded on a small boat just a few days after that very serious offense is memorable: at that moment, pointing to the docks of a Crimean port that Putin had just stolen from Ukraine, Matteo Salvini praised the order and discipline Russians, hoping to soon see the same in Italy too.
Get Giorgio Provinciali’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
From which authorities did Matteo Salvini obtain permission to visit Crimea?
This question is legitimate, and the answer is not at all obvious. The only authorities responsible for doing so should have, in fact, been the Ukrainian ones, but all the investigations carried out in recent years confirm that they never authorized him to go to Crimea. Consequently, the crime of illegal immigration would arise for him. A former Interior Minister and current Deputy Prime Minister, who has made the fight against this crime his primary political slogan, should know this better than anyone else. This also applies to all the other (ex?) pro-Putinists in Italy who have confirmed in recent years that they have been in Crimea.
Furthermore, as Anton Gross himself underlined by recalling that Mariupol’ is Ukrainian and he is not Russian, what would happen if he asked for a Russian passport?
In accordance with the art. Article 35 of Presidential Decree 445/2000, containing the «Consolidated text of legislative and regulatory provisions regarding administrative documentation», states that the driving license is, in fact, to be considered a valid identification document equivalent to the identity card.
Ultimately, to avoid possible escalations, a cautious and non-aggressive approach to Russian institutions has always been preferred. Perhaps it would be more appropriate to start considering the passports issued by them in the occupied territories of Ukraine as invalid?
What happens when a Ukrainian or Russian citizen travels to the EU with a passport indicating a Ukrainian city as Russian?
Formally and for all legal purposes, it should, in fact, be considered counterfeit and invalid, whereas this does not appear to be the case.
