Italy’s ambitious plan to expedite migrant processing in Albania has encountered a critical setback following a recent ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The court decreed that Italy’s current criteria for designating a country as “safe” for returning rejected asylum seekers violate EU law. Central to Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s scheme, established in 2023, was the notion that migrants intercepted at sea could be sent directly to Albania for swift processing. The framework intended for those from “safe” nations to be deported within a week if their asylum was denied.
Italy's Offshore Migrant Processing Plan Faces EU Court Setback
Italy's Offshore Migrant Processing Plan Faces EU Court Setback
A ruling by the European Court of Justice puts Italy’s offshore migrant processing initiative at risk.
However, the ECJ asserts that a nation can only be deemed “safe” if it guarantees protection for all its inhabitants. Presently, Italy's list includes Egypt and Bangladesh, even as it acknowledges that certain populations within those countries may need protection. The ruling has sparked outrage in Rome, with officials claiming that the court is overreaching and threatening national border security.
Moreover, the ECJ mandated transparency regarding the evidence on which Italy bases its designation of safe countries, enabling asylum seekers to contest such decisions. Katia Scannavini of ActionAid Italy commented on the ruling, stating, “The so-called Albania model collapses at its legal core.”
The scrutiny placed on Italy's Albania plan also draws attention from other countries, like the UK, which are exploring offshore asylum processing options to mitigate the influx of irregular migrants. Since its inception, the Albania deal has faced substantial legal challenges; migrants initially sent there were returned to Italy following legal interventions.
Despite an intent to streamline processing, the ECJ did not oppose the principle of a fast-track system for migrants from safe nations but indicated that Italian law must align with EU standards before such procedures could be enacted. Amnesty International's Adriana Tidona emphasized that the ruling halts Italy’s plans for Albania and criticized the initiative as fundamentally unlawful due to its reliance on enforced detention.
Looking ahead, the impact of the ECJ decision on the forthcoming EU migration pact, which introduces a standardized list of safe countries for returns—including Egypt and Bangladesh—remains uncertain. However, the ruling reinforces the dominance of judicial oversight over political claims regarding the safety of such countries. Daniele Gallo, a professor of EU law, noted that all Italian judges must adhere to EU law, irrespective of government designation of safe nations.
Moreover, the ECJ mandated transparency regarding the evidence on which Italy bases its designation of safe countries, enabling asylum seekers to contest such decisions. Katia Scannavini of ActionAid Italy commented on the ruling, stating, “The so-called Albania model collapses at its legal core.”
The scrutiny placed on Italy's Albania plan also draws attention from other countries, like the UK, which are exploring offshore asylum processing options to mitigate the influx of irregular migrants. Since its inception, the Albania deal has faced substantial legal challenges; migrants initially sent there were returned to Italy following legal interventions.
Despite an intent to streamline processing, the ECJ did not oppose the principle of a fast-track system for migrants from safe nations but indicated that Italian law must align with EU standards before such procedures could be enacted. Amnesty International's Adriana Tidona emphasized that the ruling halts Italy’s plans for Albania and criticized the initiative as fundamentally unlawful due to its reliance on enforced detention.
Looking ahead, the impact of the ECJ decision on the forthcoming EU migration pact, which introduces a standardized list of safe countries for returns—including Egypt and Bangladesh—remains uncertain. However, the ruling reinforces the dominance of judicial oversight over political claims regarding the safety of such countries. Daniele Gallo, a professor of EU law, noted that all Italian judges must adhere to EU law, irrespective of government designation of safe nations.
