Italy’s plan to send asylum seekers to Albania has suffered a setback after a court in Rome ruled against detaining seven individuals from Bangladesh and Egypt in the Balkan nation.
This decision marks a significant challenge for the Italian government, which has championed the controversial programme as part of its strategy to manage the increasing flow of migrants.
The case involved seven asylum seekers who were rescued by the Italian navy while attempting to reach Europe. After being brought to Albania, the court ruling stated that they should be sent back to Italy.
This is not the first time the plan has faced legal hurdles. Just a month prior, 12 asylum seekers from Egypt and Bangladesh were also sent back to Italy after a similar court decision.
Under the terms of a deal signed between Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama, Albania agreed to host two processing centres where up to 3,000 asylum seekers per month would be screened. The aim was to quickly determine whether the migrants qualified for asylum or should be sent back to their home countries.
While the agreement between Italy and Albania was hailed by the Italian government as a solution to the growing migrant crisis, it has been met with criticism.
Rights groups have voiced concerns over the deal, calling it a dangerous precedent and questioning whether it aligns with international refugee laws. The controversial plan has sparked fierce debate over the treatment of asylum seekers and whether the countries involved are complying with European Union standards.
The setback for the Italian government follows a similar situation last month when a court in Italy ruled against the detention of asylum seekers sent to Albania under the same arrangement.
In both cases, the Italian courts referred the cases to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg to determine whether the countries from which the asylum seekers originated can be considered “safe” for repatriation.
The list of “safe countries of origin” proposed by the Meloni government includes Egypt and Bangladesh, which were both included in the initial screening. However, the European Union has not recognized these countries as safe, complicating the government’s plan to fast-track deportations. This legal uncertainty over what constitutes a “safe country” has created a major obstacle for the government’s strategy.
In its latest ruling, the court clarified that it was seeking further clarification on the procedure to follow, particularly when determining which countries can be classified as “safe.” Despite this, the court maintained that the exclusion of certain countries from the safe list does not prevent the repatriation of migrants whose asylum applications have been rejected.
The legal challenges have placed Meloni’s far-right government in a difficult position. Meloni and her allies have been pushing for more stringent measures to control migration, arguing that the current system puts a strain on Italy’s resources and social services. The Albanian processing centres were part of her plan to alleviate this burden by outsourcing asylum screenings outside the European Union.
Italy’s decision to process asylum claims outside the EU has drawn attention from other European countries, several of which are considering similar measures in response to the growing number of irregular migrants.
The programme, although controversial, has sparked a broader conversation about migration policies within the EU, particularly as more countries grapple with how to handle asylum seekers and manage the strain on their resources.
Follow us
