In an ongoing migration crisis, one of the eight migrants intercepted in international waters and brought to a processing center in Albania has returned to Italy due to his specific vulnerabilities. An Egyptian national with diagnosed mental health issues was deemed unfit to remain at the Gjadër reception center following a visit by a delegation of Italian activists and lawmakers. This incident highlights the complexities surrounding the processing conditions for migrants, as only seven individuals remain at the Albanian center: five from Bangladesh and two from Egypt. The Italian government’s arrangement with Albania marks a significant shift in handling migrant flows in the Mediterranean region, following the implementation of processing centers under a bilateral agreement.
This agreement, solidified in October, allows for the transfer of up to 3,000 migrants intercepted by the Italian coast guard to be housed in Albania each month. There, they can undergo vetting for asylum—a crucial step in determining their legal standing and potential return to their home countries. However, the deal faced immediate backlash from human rights organizations and NGOs that argue it sets a precarious precedent and conflicts with established international laws regarding refugee rights and protections. The scrutiny on the deal raises questions about its implications for migrant treatment and safety, as many apprehensive voices worry that such arrangements might lead to the erosion of human rights standards in response to the ongoing migration crisis.
The agreement’s operationalization quickly unfolded, with the first transfers occurring shortly after its initiation. A group of 16 migrants comprising individuals from Bangladesh and Egypt was sent to Albania on October 16. However, four of these migrants—specifically minors or those requiring medical care—were sent directly to Italy on the same day. This reflects Italy’s attempt to navigate humanitarian obligations while implementing the controversial migration deal, further complicated by subsequent legal challenges regarding the safety of certain countries designated for repatriation.
Judicial decisions have played a key role in shaping Italy’s approach to migrants under the new policy. A ruling from Rome judges led to the release of twelve individuals just three days after their arrival in Albania, as it was determined that their countries of origin—Bangladesh and Egypt—were not safe for deportation. This legal finding narrowed the criteria for what constitutes a “safe” country, thereby affecting the rapid deportation processes that were central to the Italy-Albania migration framework. Italy’s Premier, Giorgia Meloni, criticized these judicial outcomes, suggesting that if countries like Bangladesh and Egypt are deemed unsafe, it creates an environment where virtually all migrants can challenge their exclusion from the Albania program.
In light of these challenges, Italy’s far-right government moved to address potential judicial impediments by approving a new decree aimed at circumventing these legal hurdles. This initiative reflects an urgent effort to stabilize the implementation of the Albania migration agreement and restore procedural timelines for migrant vetting and deportation. This decree signifies a push for more streamlined operations within the complexities of the new policy, as fears grow over the efficacy and safety of current processing frameworks for vulnerable populations.
The situation remains dynamic, with further legal rulings expected regarding the remaining seven migrants currently in Albania. These developments underscore the ongoing tensions between national policies aimed at managing migration, the responsibilities toward asylum seekers, and the critical assessments from various stakeholders concerned with human rights protections. The ultimate outcome of these migrants’ fates, alongside the broader implications of Italy and Albania’s agreement, will likely set important precedents for migration policy in the Mediterranean and beyond, warranting close attention from policymakers, advocates, and the international community.