E/C.12/75/D/226/2021 E/C.12/75/D/227/2021 17 September 2021, it emerged that, following an assessment, Mr. Saydawi’s family, living in unit No. 1 of the block of houses at 37 via Silvio Latino, had been found to have an annual income of €60,000. The State party argues that, for the reasons mentioned above, both in its general remarks and in its comments on admissibility and the merits, the communication is not admissible. Communication No. 227/2021 4.5 With regard to the communication submitted by Mr. Farah, the State party reports that, in the past, the emergency social service of the Municipality of Rome, the Sala Operativa Sociale, proposed emergency solutions to the persons living at 37 via Silvio Latino and that all proposals were refused by Mr. Farah because they were only temporary. The State party notes that, during the COVID-19 pandemic, among other relevant measures, an emergency income scheme was activated, and Italy introduced so-called citizenship income, as was acknowledged in the context of the universal periodic review in November 2019.2 The State party highlights the fact that, among other measures, it introduced the single and universal allowance to provide economic support to families. The allowance is allocated for each dependent child below the age of 21 if certain conditions are met and without age limits for children with disabilities. The State party argues that, for the reasons mentioned in the general remarks above, as well as in its comments on admissibility and the merits, the communication is groundless and thus not admissible. Authors’ comments on the State party’s observations on admissibility and the merits General remarks and comments on admissibility common to the cases 5.1 On 21 April 2023 and 12 June 2022, the authors submitted comments on the State party’s observations on the admissibility and merits of cases No. 226/2021 and No. 227/2021, respectively. 5.2 The authors reject the claim that the communications are inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, contend that the State party is acting in bad faith and consider that the Interministerial Committee for Human Rights, which prepared the State party’s observations, is not the appropriate body to provide such observations, as it is not independent from the executive branch. 5.3 The authors highlight that the domestic remedies that complainants have to exhaust must be available and effective, and the specific circumstances of each individual case must be taken into account when determining whether they have been exhausted. 3 They contend that the application of the requirement to have exhausted domestic remedies is subject to a degree of flexibility and should not constitute an unjustified impediment to access to international remedies. 5.4 The authors also contend that, in common with the great majority of vulnerable people who are threatened with eviction in the State party, they did not lodge an appeal against their eviction. They further contend that they decided not to lodge an appeal because of a legislative reform that made appeals extremely expensive and not eligible for funding under the free justice system, thus rendering them virtually inaccessible for people with scarce economic resources who are already indebted. The authors argue that, through Decree No. 55 of 10 March 2014, the Ministry of Justice of Italy introduced new parameters for the calculation of the legal costs to be borne by unsuccessful parties in civil trials. Those parameters, which were later modified by decree on 8 March 2018, are based on the costs of the trial itself, and the costs ultimately awarded may be raised or lowered according to the judge’s decision. However, in accordance with an order of the Supreme Court of Cassation, 4 unless there are clear reasons, the costs cannot differ significantly from the professional fees set by the order of lawyers. The authors contend that to be condemned to the payment of legal 2 3 4 GE.24-03814 See A/HRC/43/4. The other documents considered during the review are available at https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/it-index. International Justice Resource Center, “Exhaustion of domestic remedies in the United Nations system” (2017). Supreme Court of Cassation, Decision No. 8146 of 23 April 2020. 5