The Italian government, led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, recently approved a decree law declaring 19 nations as “safe” for the return of illegal migrants, reflecting escalating tensions over Meloni’s controversial agreement with Albania regarding the offshore processing of migrants. This move comes on the heels of a ruling from the Court of Rome, which ordered the return of 12 migrants back to Italy from Albania. These migrants, originally from Bangladesh and Egypt, had been sent to detention centers in Albania under a framework established by Meloni’s administration. The court determined that both Bangladesh and Egypt are not safe countries, as defined by a recent ruling from the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which stipulates that countries can only be deemed safe if they are free from torture, political persecution, indiscriminate violence, or the death penalty throughout their territories.
In response to the court’s decision, Meloni convened her Council of Ministers with the intent to reinforce the Albanian scheme against further judicial challenges. Prior to the court ruling, the Italian foreign ministry had identified 22 nations as safe for deportations, but this list lacked formal legal backing. The enactment of the decree law, which officially declares 19 countries safe and omits Cameroon, Colombia, and Nigeria from the initial list, aims to circumvent the influence of the judiciary on the government’s immigration policies. Meloni emphasized the government’s commitment to strict border control and the principle that individuals must enter Italy through legal means and in accordance with established processes.
The decree law introduces a legal framework to bolster the Albanian detention strategy and could set the stage for a confrontation with the Court of Rome. Meloni’s administration is positioning the safe countries designation as a political decision rather than a judicial one. Justice Minister Carlo Nordio argued that defining a safe country should rest with political evaluations aligned with international law instead of judicial interpretations. The implications of this legal dispute may extend beyond Italy, influencing immigration policies throughout the European Union (EU), particularly as other member states look to adopt similar strategies.
There has been notable attention from both EU officials and member countries regarding the potential replication of Meloni’s Albanian model. Danish authorities and other EU nations are reportedly examining the feasibility of implementing similar offshore processing systems for illegal migrants. Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, has expressed support for expanding the Meloni approach across the EU’s borders, indicating a growing interest in collective efforts to manage migration effectively.
Despite the political momentum behind the decree law, European Commission officials stress the necessity for compliance with EU laws and treaties. Anitta Hipper, the European Commissioner for Home Affairs, reiterated that all measures undertaken by the Italian authorities must not undermine EU law. She noted that while the Court of Rome had cited the ECJ in its ruling regarding safe countries, there is currently no consensus on an EU-wide list of safe nations for the return of illegal migrants—a point that underscores the complexities and inconsistencies in migration policy across member states.
The Italian government’s move and the ensuing legal battle underscore the broader implications of a fragmented approach to migration within the European Union. The conflict between judiciary and legislative bodies over defining safe countries reflects deeper tensions about national sovereignty, human rights, and the appropriate means of managing immigration. As the situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how the Constitutional Court will rule on the matter and what precedent this will set for both Italy and the EU as a whole in addressing illegal migration challenges.
