Italy plans to handle migrants in Albania hit EU court

The EU Supreme Court ruling struck another blow to Italy’s attempts to create a quick system in Albania to process asylum applications on the shore.

The European Court (EC J. J.) stated that the Italian government determines whether the country is “safe” to return a person whose statement deviates from the EU legislation.

This “safe country” concept is the main place in the agreement Prime Minister Georgia Meloni impressed Albania in 2023 to send migrants intercepted to the sea right there for accelerated processing.

Anyone from a “safe country” who refused asylum was to be deported within a week.

But the EC J. has ruled that the nation could be included in the government list only if the entire population is safe there, which means that Italy will have to review its procedure.

Currently, it defines Egypt and Bangladesh, such as safe, taking certain groups there require protection.

The ruling provoked an angry reaction of the government in Rome, stating that the European court exceeds its role, adding that the decision would weaken the ability of countries to “defend national borders”.

The European Court also said the government should publish any evidence and sources that it uses when reaching its conclusions in safe countries so that the asylum seekers could challenge the decision in their affairs.

“Today, the court makes it clear that the country cannot be intended as safe if it does not offer effective, generalized protection for all and everywhere, and if this statement cannot be independently tested,” – explained Katia Skhenini from the Actid of Italy.

“The so-called Albania model is falling apart on its legal basis,” she claimed.

The Albania’s Fate project is closely monitored by other governments, including in the UK, seeking shelter application processing when they try to reduce the number of irregular migrants arriving in their countries.

Placed as a central spectrum of the rigid approach to immigration, the transaction with Albania suffered from legal obstacles from the beginning. A handful of migrants that were sent there eventually returned to Italy after the intervention of lawyers.

Many times the budget, the centers that were built have never been used as intended.

In its ruling, the European Court did not in principle not object to the rapid procedure for migrants from safe countries, but made it clear that the implementation of this policy should change.

“This is fundamentally: the concept of a” safe country of origin “can no longer be used to conduct the transfer to Albania until the Italian legislation that corresponds to the EU legislation,” the BBC said.

“This makes a significant stop of Italy’s plan in Albania.”

Amnesty, like others, considers more fundamentally violating human rights. “This is not due to the safe countries of origin, but to the fact that it is based on the automatic detention system,” said Adrian Tidon. “This is illegal.”

It is unclear what impact today may have a decree on the new EU migration migration pact next year, and introduces a common list of safe countries for return – including Egypt and Bangladesh.

But this decision makes it clear that the determination of safe countries does not eventually lie with politicians.

“The court states that the judge has powers to assess safe countries,” explains Daniel Galllo, Professor of Legal Law at Luis University. “No matter what the government says, every judge in Italy is now obliged to abolish the Italian legislation and apply the EU law.”