She announced it in a quick press point in Beirut, and in the Council of Ministers she moved from words to deeds. Giorgia Meloni goes straight to the migrant dossier and, after explaining that “it is the responsibility of the government and not of the judiciary to establish which countries are safe and which are not”, responds with an ad hoc decree law to the judges of the Immigration section of the Court of Rome which on Friday they had not validated the detentions of 12 migrants in Albania, citing a ruling by the European Court of Justice. The Council of Ministers thus passes a legislative decree which, as explained by the Minister of the Interior Matteo Piantedosi, is made up “of an intervention which essentially summarizes in law, therefore in primary source, what is the indication of the so-called safe countries. This allows us to offer judges throughout Italy a parameter which is the application of a law with respect to some vague interpretation, and I say this with profound respect for the judiciary”. “It is a list of 19 countries, compared to the 22 originally foreseen – underlines the owner of the Interior Ministry -. Those we have excluded are Cameroon, Colombia and Nigeria on the basis of considerations that come precisely from that ruling of the Court of Justice European Union which had somehow introduced a criterion for evaluating the integrity of the territory of the countries that are affected by this declaration. The operation we have done is to summarize them in a law, therefore elevated to the rank of primary law, and this for a logic also to create uniformity of judgment on the national territory”.
According to Piantedosi, therefore, now the Court of Rome will no longer be able to send back the migrants from Albania “because it is foreseen by a primary law, therefore it would have to somehow disapply a law. What was done was done on the assumption of the power of non-application of administrative acts that ordinary judges can do. It is now a primary rule and therefore a state law”. This thesis is shared by the Keeper of the Seals, Carlo Nordio, according to whom “the disapplication of a secondary law dates back to 1865, a judge can disapply a secondary law but this does not apply to a primary law. If the list of safe countries is included in a law, the judge cannot disapply it.” For the Minister of Justice “we have reached this point following a ruling from the European Court of Justice which has not been well understood. In other words this ruling, in addition to reiterating the principle that it is the task of the States to identify which States are safe , then sets conditions when a judge intends to give a different definition of a safe state regarding the situation of certain people. The crux of this sentence is that the judge must, when ruling, say in an exhaustive manner and completes, in the specific case, the reasons why that specific country is not considered safe for that individual. In the reasons for the decrees at the center of the debate in recent days” this is missing.
The decree approved by the government, explains Undersecretary Alfredo Mantovano, “is not an antithesis and does not contrast, beyond whether it is acceptable or not, the ruling” of the European Court of Justice, “and is part of a regulatory context. further interventions certainly cannot be ruled out, let’s see what happens.” “We would like to make the European rules on repatriations work – is the reasoning -. If we read the provisions, and I say this without any controversy, of the Court of Rome a few days ago, not Albania but the repatriation mechanism simply no longer exists , and we will have to account at European level for why we don’t protect our borders, which are European borders. A whole series of problems would be created.”
#Migrants #Meloni #carries #CDM #Safe #Countries #bill #Nordio #freezes #red #robes #Tempo
Interview with Political Analyst Dr. Elena Rossi on Italy’s New Immigration Decree
Editor: Good afternoon, Dr. Rossi. Thank you for joining us to discuss the recent developments regarding Italy’s immigration policy, particularly the decree announced by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.
Dr. Rossi: Good afternoon. Thank you for having me.
Editor: To begin, can you explain the key points of the decree that was recently passed by Meloni’s government concerning the designation of safe countries for migrants?
Dr. Rossi: Certainly. The decree aims to establish a formal list of countries deemed ‘safe’ for migrants, which simplifies the legal framework for immigration judges in Italy. This follows a ruling from the European Court of Justice that prompted the government to clarify its stance on what constitutes a safe country for the purpose of migrant detentions.
Editor: What impact do you think this decree will have on the judicial process regarding immigration cases in Italy?
Dr. Rossi: The intention behind the decree is to create uniformity across the judicial system. By elevating the designation of safe countries to primary law, the government effectively limits the capacity of judges to reject these classifications without substantial justification. This could lead to quicker resolutions in immigration cases but raises concerns about judicial independence.
Editor: There has been some contention surrounding the exclusion of certain countries, such as Cameroon, Colombia, and Nigeria, from the safe list. Why were these countries specifically excluded?
Dr. Rossi: The government cited the European Court’s criteria as the basis for these exclusions, which presumably stemmed from an assessment of the integrity of the territories in question. This has sparked debate over whether these exclusions are politically motivated or genuinely based on safety assessments.
Editor: How does this move reflect on Meloni’s broader immigration agenda?
Dr. Rossi: This decree is very much in line with Meloni’s hardline approach to immigration, emphasizing national sovereignty over judicial discretion. It signals a commitment to tightening immigration controls and reducing the number of asylum seekers who might be granted refuge in Italy.
Editor: Many critics argue that this could undermine the rule of law. What are your thoughts on this criticism?
Dr. Rossi: There is valid concern among legal experts and human rights advocates regarding the implications for rule of law and judicial independence. When a government legislates classifications that judges cannot challenge, it raises alarms about the balance of power in governance, particularly in a democratic society where the judiciary should act as a check on the executive.
Editor: As this situation evolves, what should be the prioritized response from the European Union?
Dr. Rossi: The EU should closely monitor the implementation of this decree and engage in dialogue with the Italian government to ensure that it adheres to both EU policies and human rights standards. It’s essential to remind member states that while sovereignty is important, it should not come at the cost of fundamental rights and legal obligations.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Rossi, for your valuable insights. We’ll be sure to follow this developing story closely.
Dr. Rossi: Thank you for having me; I look forward to discussing this further as it unfolds.
Interview with Political Analyst Dr. Elena Rossi on Italy’s New Immigration Decree
Editor: Good afternoon, Dr. Rossi. Thank you for joining us to discuss the recent developments regarding Italy’s immigration policy, particularly the decree announced by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.
Dr. Rossi: Good afternoon. Thank you for having me.
Editor: To begin, can you explain the key points of the decree that was recently passed by Meloni’s government concerning the designation of safe countries for migrants?
Dr. Rossi: Certainly. The decree aims to establish a formal list of countries deemed ‘safe’ for migrants, which simplifies the legal framework for immigration judges in Italy. This follows a ruling from the European Court of Justice that prompted the government to clarify its stance on what constitutes a safe country for the purpose of migrant detentions.
Editor: What impact do you think this decree will have on the judicial process regarding immigration cases in Italy?
Dr. Rossi: The intention behind the decree is to create uniformity across the judicial system. By elevating the designation of safe countries to primary law, the government effectively limits the capacity of judges to reject these classifications without substantial justification. This could lead to quicker resolutions in immigration cases but raises concerns about judicial independence.
Editor: There has been some contention surrounding the exclusion of certain countries, such as Cameroon, Colombia, and Nigeria, from the safe list. Why were these countries specifically excluded?
Dr. Rossi: The government cited the European Court’s criteria as the basis for these exclusions, which presumably stemmed from an assessment of the integrity of the territories in question. This has sparked debate over whether these exclusions are politically motivated or genuinely based on safety assessments.
Editor: How does this move reflect on Meloni’s broader immigration agenda?
Dr. Rossi: This decree is very much in line with Meloni’s hardline approach to immigration, emphasizing national sovereignty over judicial discretion. It signals a commitment to tightening immigration controls and reducing the number of asylum seekers entering Italy, showcasing her administration’s desire to assert control over the immigration process.
Editor: Thank you for your insights, Dr. Rossi. It will be interesting to see how this decree unfolds in practice and its implications for both migrants and the Italian judicial system.
Dr. Rossi: Thank you for having me. It’s certainly a pivotal moment for Italy’s immigration policy and will be worth following closely.
