05 November 2024
First there was the Bologna judge who asked the European Court of Justice to be able to disapply the decree on safe countries issued by the government last 23 October. Yesterday, the new twist. Three other magistrates from the Catania court went further, rejecting the new rules introduced by the executive two weeks ago. The president of the first civil section Massimo Escher and the judges Rosario Cupri and Stefania Muratore signed the collegial measures with which they did not validate the detention of three Egyptians and two Bangladeshis who landed in Pozzallo. According to them, Egypt is not safe, it matters little that the executive has included it in the new and updated list of states where illegal immigrants can be repatriated.
It is the first time that magistrates have refused to apply this decree. It had already happened with judge Silvia Albano of Rome who returned twelve migrants to Italy who had just been brought to the new centers in Albania. The difference, then, was that the list of safe countries was contained in an inter-ministerial decree, a secondary law. Reason why the Rome court decided not to take it into account, making the interpretation of a sentence of the European Court of Justice prevail. An interpretation which, according to the Minister of Justice Carlo Nordio, was in any case incorrect. The judges of Catania appealed yesterday to respect this sentence, according to which “the interpretative sentences of the European Court of Justice are binding on the national judge”.
President Escher writes that «in Egypt there are serious violations of human rights which, in contrast with the aforementioned European law, persist in a general and constant manner and affect not only large and indefinite categories of people (as demonstrated by the inclusion among the exceptions of the category of “human rights defenders”, which identifies the existence of violations of the rights of subjects who act for the same protection of human rights) but also the core of the fundamental freedoms that characterize a democratic order and which should constitute the framework of reference in which we insert the notion of a safe country according to the European directive”.
The government, however, carries on. Also because the Navy ship Libra is currently ready to bring other migrants to the hotspots in Albania. Probably already tomorrow or Thursday. The deputy prime minister and leader of the League Matteo Salvini thunders: «Due to some communist judges who do not apply the laws, the unsafe country is now Italy. But we don’t give up.”
Clear reference to what happens every day in Italian cities or near stations. As happened for example yesterday, with the train conductor stabbed by a 21-year-old Egyptian in the company of a girl of North African origins. The League points out another contradiction in the Catania sentence: «For the Democratic Party and the red robes, Egypt is safe for tourists but not for illegal immigrants». In fact, just think that in 2023 it marked a record number of visitors: 14.9 million, of which 850 thousand from Italy alone.
The conflict is total, so much so that yesterday the Court of Rome returned to action again, accepting the request of one of the first 12 migrants who had been taken to the CPR in Albania against the territorial commission which rejected the asylum request. The judges referred the decision on the Safe Countries decree to the European Court of Justice, as did the Bologna judge.
For the group leader of Forza Italia in the Senate, Maurizio Gasparri, “the political use of justice continues”, while for the president of the FdI deputies, Tommaso Foti, “it is up to the State to identify the safe countries”. Instead, celebrate the opposition. The Green Angelo Bonelli even goes so far as to claim that “fascist politicians trample on the rule of law”. Same reading from the Democratic Party, with the vice-president of the Dem senators Antonio Nicita according to which the Court of Catania “is a lesson in law to the government”.
#illegal #immigrants #free #Tempo
**Interview with Legal Expert Maria Rossi on Italy’s “Safe Country of Origin” Concept**
*Dario Martini*: Welcome, Maria! Recent developments in Italian courts have raised significant concerns about the government’s decree on safe countries. Can you break down for us what the core issue is here?
*Maria Rossi*: Certainly, Dario. The core issue revolves around the concept of the “safe country of origin,” which allows the Italian government to designate certain countries as safe for migrants, thereby facilitating their deportation. The recent ruling from courts in Bologna and Catania, which rejected the government’s designation of Egypt as a safe country, points to a growing backlash against these policies. Judges are emphasizing that serious human rights violations in Egypt fundamentally challenge its status as a “safe” country.
*Dario Martini*: Why is the Catania court’s decision particularly significant in this scenario?
*Maria Rossi*: It’s significant because it marks the first time judges have outright refused to apply the new decree from the government. Judges Massimo Escher, Rosario Cupri, and Stefania Muratore have highlighted that many fundamental freedoms and human rights concerns persist in Egypt. They’ve made it clear that international law and European directives take precedence over national decrees when it comes to safeguarding the rights of individuals, particularly those vulnerable migrant communities.
*Dario Martini*: How is the government responding to these judicial rulings, especially from a political stance?
*Maria Rossi*: The government, particularly figures like Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, are pushing back vigorously. They frame the judicial resistance as a form of judicial activism that undermines national security and public order, suggesting that the real unsafe condition lies within Italy itself. This rhetoric is politically charged, leveraging public fear and dissatisfaction stemming from ongoing migration issues.
*Dario Martini*: There seems to be a broader context involving European law in these judicial decisions. Can you explain that?
*Maria Rossi*: Yes, absolutely. Judges are grounding their decisions in the need to comply with European Court of Justice rulings, which state that national judges must consider interpretative sentences from Europe as binding. This creates a legal framework that protects migrants’ rights and underscores the importance of evaluating the safety of countries not just through a political lens but through a robust human rights perspective.
*Dario Martini*: What does this mean for the future of migration policy in Italy?
*Maria Rossi*: The tensions we are seeing between the judiciary and the government could lead to significant changes in how migration policy is crafted and enforced. If courts continue to prioritize human rights considerations, we might see a shift towards more humanitarian approaches. Conversely, if the government persists in labeling countries as “safe” regardless of evidence, it risks undermining judicial authority and fostering further conflict.
*Dario Martini*: Thank you, Maria. There’s definitely a lot at stake as these legal battles unfold.
*Maria Rossi*: Thank you for having me, Dario. It’s an important discussion that will shape Italy’s approach to migration in the years to come.
