A democracy also protects those who oppose it. Letizia Moratti writes to us

There is a paradox in the story of Youssef Siher that should give us all pause for thought. And which, perhaps, says far more about our democracy than many words ever could.

A man who has radically challenged the state and its institutions, who, through social media, has promoted a mobilisation characterised by a fierce and violent opposition to the institutions, calling for a ‘war against the present’, is today free following a decision by a judge of that very same state. While I have serious reservations about his release from prison, I naturally respect the judiciary’s decision, while also expressing solidarity with and my continued esteem for the police. The investigations will continue and it will be for the judiciary, acting independently, to determine any liability.

However, I would like to focus on the deeper significance of what has happened.

For it was precisely the state – portrayed as an enemy to be fought and overthrown – that guaranteed Siher an independent judge. It guaranteed him the right to a defence. It guaranteed him the presumption of innocence. It subjected the actions of its own Public Prosecutor’s Office to the scrutiny of another judicial authority. And when that judge ruled that there were no grounds to validate the detention, the state opened the door to his cell.

It is hard to imagine a clearer demonstration of the strength of democracy and, at the same time, the petty failure of the revolutionary ideology and the authoritarian drift advocated by Siher.

True democracy is not measured by how it treats those who applaud it. It is measured by how it treats those who challenge it. Even those who despise it. Even those who would seek to overthrow it through violence.

And it is here that the full gulf between the rule of law and the ideology of violence becomes apparent. Violence divides the world into friends and enemies. Democracy recognises rights. Violence seeks to impose its own truth. Democracy accepts that a judge may say ‘no’ even to the state. Violence seeks culprits. Justice seeks proven accountability. This does not mean being weak. On the contrary.

Milan has witnessed devastation, looting and assaults. I have seen shop windows smashed, streets turned into battlefields, and police officers attacked. Behind every shuttered shopfront there is a family; behind every ransacked shop there are years of sacrifice; behind every uniform that has been struck there is a woman or a man who, that evening, simply wanted to go home to their children.

We owe them safety. We owe the police our gratitude, respect and adequate resources. Those who vandalise, loot or attack must be held firmly to account for their actions.

But just as we call for a stronger state, we must remember which state it is that we want to make stronger.

Not an arbitrary state. Not a state that punishes people for what they think. But a state that commands respect because it subjects even itself to the law. Capable of protecting a shop window whilst, at the same time, safeguarding the rights of a suspect. Of defending a police officer whilst upholding the right to a defence. Of exercising its power without ever becoming what its opponents claim it to be.

This is the paradox that Siher – and the left that supports him – should recognise. The state that he has challenged, even going so far as to call for an insurrection, has guaranteed his freedom. The institutions he has branded as enemies have protected his rights. That democracy, portrayed as oppressive, allowed him to be released from prison because an independent judge deemed the evidence insufficient to keep him detained.

That is why those who dream of taking to the streets against the state did not win today. The rule of law has prevailed. And it is perhaps this, for Siher and his followers’ extremism, that constitutes the most profound defeat.