In the interview, Cavaliere Domenico De Rosa draws attention to the direct link between legal certainty, freedom, and economic development, arguing that without public safety, there can be no favorable environment for either families or businesses.

Mr. De Rosa explains that he chose to speak out because, in his view, security cannot be reduced to a slogan or a matter of ideological conflict. He defines it as a prerequisite for civil life and productive activity, emphasizing that an entrepreneur invests only where they perceive clear rules, predictable timelines, and a government capable of preventing and responding; in the absence of these conditions, capital tends to withdraw and the social fabric weakens.

According to De Rosa, security is also an economic factor in the most concrete sense of the term: it guarantees operational continuity, allows people to work without fear, ensures the functioning of transportation and services, and keeps cities attractive. In his view, it even affects the reputation of regions, because when an area is perceived as risky, those who need to invest and create jobs tend to hesitate.

In the central passage, Il Cavaliere insists on the principle that decisions must have consequences. He argues that a credible state is one in which measures do not remain on paper but are carried out. He adds that if an individual is deemed dangerous, they must be neutralized through legal means, and, more generally, the rules must actually be enforced; otherwise, all that remains is bureaucracy, and reality ends up moving in the opposite direction.

In this context, De Rosa identifies the protection of law enforcement as a particularly sensitive issue. He describes them as the daily safeguard protecting citizens and businesses, but asserts that it is unacceptable to expect them to operate “at their own risk” within a system of rules and procedures that is sometimes inadequate to protect those who intervene. He also highlights the human and civic value of those who wear a uniform, arguing that these individuals must be guaranteed respect, adequate tools, and clear rules.

The problem, for De Rosa, arises when the rules are unclear: a paradox is created in which rapid and effective intervention is demanded, yet at the same time, the officer is left in a gray area where every decision can turn into a personal, professional, and legal risk. In his view, this does not strengthen the state; it weakens it, leading to mistrust and operational paralysis.

When asked how to truly protect those who uphold public order without slipping into propaganda, De Rosa proposes a “serious and technical” approach: clearer rules of engagement, ongoing training, adequate equipment, and a regulatory framework that protects those who act correctly in complex situations, avoiding ambiguity and operational isolation. He also clarifies that judicial decisions must always be respected, but emphasizes that policymakers have a duty to establish a regulatory framework that is understandable and proportionate to the reality on the ground.

Cavaliere De Rosa then outlines three operational priorities. The first is the effective enforcement of measures, with deportations and removals that actually work and do not remain merely on paper. The second is the traceability and interoperability of systems to reduce gaps and blind spots. The third is a technical, not ideological, review of regulations and operational protocols, so as to protect both citizens and law enforcement and reduce the “fear of intervening” effect.

Regarding the risk that these issues fuel fears and social tensions, De Rosa argues that tensions rise when the state appears inconsistent or powerless: when the perception is one of impunity or ineffectiveness, society tends to polarize. In his view, the alternative is not to have fewer rules, but to better enforce existing ones, with guarantees and clear timelines.

In conclusion, Cavaliere De Rosa identifies inaction as a red line, because he considers it a real cost in terms of lives, social cohesion, and trust. He reiterates that trust is a country’s most valuable asset and that, without trust, there can be no peace of mind for families nor the courage to invest, hire, and plan. He concludes by defining security not as a luxury, but as an invisible infrastructure.