
ACI Prensa Staff, Jan 15, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).
The Vatican City State has toughened sanctions for those who try to illegally enter its territory in areas where free access is not allowed.
In a decree issued last month by the Holy See, the monetary sanctions and prison sentences for those who violate the strict security regulations of Vatican City have been considerably increased.
The document, signed by Cardinal Fernando Vérguez Alzaga, president of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State, provides for monetary fines ranging from 10,000 to 25,000 euros (about $10,200 to $25,700) and prison sentences ranging from one to four years.
These fines will apply especially to those who enter by means of violence, threats, or deception, bypassing border controls or security systems. In addition, those who enter with expired permits or do not meet the established requirements will receive administrative sanctions ranging from 2,000 to 5,000 euros (about $2,060 to $5,145).
The decree emphasizes that the penalties can be increased if the crime is committed with firearms, corrosive substances, by a person in disguise, or by several people together. Likewise, if illegal access is made in a vehicle, the penalty can increase by up to two-thirds.
The document also stipulates that unauthorized overflight of Vatican airspace, including through the use of drones, may be punished with prison sentences from six months to three years in addition to a fine that could reach 25,000 euros (about $26,000).
Anyone convicted of illegal entry will be banned from entering Vatican territory for a period of up to 15 years. If this sanction is breached, the offender may be punished with a prison sentence of one to five years.
In addition, the Vatican’s promoter of justice may summon any person who has committed an offense to appear before the court the day after receiving the complaint or immediately after questioning him.
Vatican City is the smallest state in the world and currently has a population of just over 800 inhabitants. The city-state covers 0.17 square miles. If it were perfectly square, the Vatican would be less than a half mile by a half mile.
The Vatican City State includes areas with free access, such as St. Peter’s Basilica or the Vatican Museums, which require prior security checks.
However, there are other entrances flanked by high walls, such as Porta Santa Ana, Piazza del Sant’Uffizio, or Porta Perugino, reserved for authorized personnel or visitors with special permits.
This story was first published by ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Pope Francis: Tear down these walls!
“Anyone convicted of illegal entry will be banned from entering Vatican territory for a period of up to 15 years. If this sanction is breached, the offender may be punished with a prison sentence of one to five years.”
**********
That’s pretty hardcore.
Unbelievable hypocrisy?
Anything but, given what we have experienced both of ‘unbelievable’ and of ‘hypocrisy’ over the current pontificate.
More like: ‘par for the course’ from this pope.
According to Francis, countries overrun by illegal immigrants are not to do as Francis’ Vatican aims to do through its Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State Decree on persons illegally entering Vatican territory?
Doublespeak again, louder please, so all can hear it unambiguously!
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/259061/catholic-immigration-experts-respond-to-pope-francis-comment-that-repelling-migrants-is-a-grave-sin
Migrants must be granted free access to every neighborhood of Europe, North American and Australia, but there are a few areas that are strictly off-limits: Martha’s Vineyard, Davos, and now, we find out, the Vatican. Francis and company truly love the downtrodden, but from a safe distance. The rest of us get to enjoy a much more intimate experience.
I don’t know about Martha’s Vineyard but a family member worked for a couple from Nantucket Island who said there were quite a few illegal immigrants there. Somebody has to do the cleaning and yardwork, etc. and it’s not practical for workers to ferry back and forth constantly, so they stay on the island.
Large numbers of migrants without employment dumped on Nantucket or Martha’s Vineyard would be a different situation.
The Vatican needs to have tight security for many reasons. I honestly understand this, and support it.
But incoming President Trump, and 77.3 million Americans are wrong for wanting stricter security measures and illegal immigration/deportation crackdowns here in our own country?
Sounds perfectly logical to me.
“I was a stranger, and you did not welcome me.”
The goats are in trouble now …
Strangers are welcomed, but trespassers aren’t, even if said trespassers do not happen to be strangers.
So according to Pope Francis it is a disgrace for the US to apprehend, deport and ban illegal immigrants from the USA. But it is OK for the Vatican to do the same? Do as I say not as I do? And we wonder why the Catholic Church is shrinking?
Catholic Immigration: corrected – There would be no basis for ill feeling toward foreign nationals, if every country accepted the responsibility to pay for their own citizens’ politically defined entitlements and socialization costs. (health, welfare, education and criminal/restitution/incarceration.)
It is the responsibility of every nation to provide for the politically defined health, education, welfare and criminal costs incurred by their citizens while their citizens are in a foreign country. Because of the diversity of means by which the needs of citizens are provided for through out the world, often ranging from high taxation for many benefits to no taxation for no benefits, and because a country’s citizen’s first and primary recourse for the proper and customary administration of defined rights, responsibilities and entitlements is to his own country’s policies and resources, whenever a citizen is “abroad” the host nation shall have the ability to charge a visiting citizen’s home country for expenses which the host nation has incurred to its own citizens due to the needs of the visiting citizen. These costs may also be reimbursed by “sponsoring” groups, insurance companies, or individuals. Enforcement of these payments shall be enacted through the issuance or denial of visas. A host country can deny entry to citizens from a delinquent country. And a country that cannot afford the social costs of another country can place restrictions on the issuance of visas to its citizens for that other country. This law/policy should also state that a child born to a foreign national while in the United States is granted dual citizenship, but that the responsibility for the “entitlement” costs of the child remain with the parents and the home country of the parents until the child turns 18 or becomes a citizen of the host nation alone, which ever comes later. Nothing in this policy should ever prevent charitable organizations from providing care or services to whom ever they choose.
It is a blessing and responsibility of the individual, family and church to take care of the poor, indigent and marginalized, not the government. All blessings come from God. When the individual, family and church are the “free will” source of charity then all are blessed; the giver, the receiver and the common good of the community.iWhen the government is the source of blessings for those in need, then the government becomes the source of blessings; supplanting God, changing a blessing into a “right” (without the corresponding responsibility) of “entitlement” there-in making losers out of all involved by stealing the free will charity of the giver (taxation replaces charity), conditioning the receiver to demand his “right to be taken care of” without owing anyone–even God– a prayer of gratitude, and conditioning the community towards atheistic socialism. The move (back–before 1930 there were no government entitlements! With few exceptions, the church –through her people –was the source of all charity.) to this new “charity of the heart and soul” paradigm must be gradual, but sure, to ensure that the transition allows for the prudent care of those in need. This can best be done by allowing a 100% tax deduction for gifts to charitable organizations, and by removing the ceiling on how much can be donated–as a percentage of income– while cutting back on the duration and degree of entitlements.
This is the opposite of what current representatives are proposing. There have been suggestions that all charitable donations deductions be deleted from the tax code… do you see what a Machiavellian power grab this is, do you see what an atheistic socialist and communistic power maneuver this is? And as a Catholic, who loves the Church deeply, I must tell you many Catholic religious have embraced the false notion that the government — not the church—should be required to take care of the needy. (Caritas in Veritate –Charity in Truth articulates an accurate implementation of these principles)
Well can’t go in the Vatican but the pope is applaud to the US picking up illegal aliens maybe our pope should stay out of politics. I’ve been a catholic for 80 years but this pope so far is far from the best.