CIVICUS discusses Italy’s policy of outsourcing the management of asylum seekers to Albania with Valeria Carlini, Deputy Director of the Italian Council for Refugees, a civil society organisation (CSO) that defends the rights of refugees and asylum seekers in Italy and Europe.

An Italian court recently blocked Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s new migration policy, which seeks to outsource asylum processing to Albania. The policy states that male migrants from countries deemed to be safe will have to stay in newly established processing centres in Albania or be returned to their home countries. The government claims this will reduce human trafficking and discourage irregular sea crossings. The court has argued that the government is classifying as safe several countries the European Union (EU) considers unsafe, such as Bangladesh and Egypt.

What are the main aspects of the migration agreement between Italy and Albania?

The agreement, presented as a milestone in bilateral cooperation, allows Italy to outsource the management of asylum and return procedures. Under the agreement, migrants rescued by Italian vessels in international waters are transferred to two detention centres in Albania. These are funded by Italy and run by Italian staff, while Albanian authorities are responsible for maintaining order and security. Because people detained there are under Italian jurisdiction, they must be guaranteed all the rights provided for in our legislation. Only single adult men from safe countries who don’t fit a ‘vulnerability profile’ can be transferred to these centres while their asylum application is processed.

Although Meloni claims this agreement will improve Italy’s control over asylum procedures, it’s valued more for its symbolic status than its practical effects. Meloni claims it will have a deterrent effect because it will make those trying to reach Italy aware of the risks before they embark on the journey. But we think no migration policy should be based on fear and punishment.

Meloni’s migration response has included several legislative measures aimed at significantly reducing the rights of asylum seekers and refugees, limiting their access to protection, reception and integration in Italy.

How could the policy affect the human rights of migrants?

A major human rights concern relates to the assessment of vulnerability. Since the protocol only applies to people who aren’t considered vulnerable, there’s a risk that a hasty and discretionary assessment will be made during a rescue at sea and only the most obvious vulnerabilities will be identified, such as those concerning minors, pregnant women and people with disabilities.

Another key concern is the extraterritorial application of Italian jurisdiction. There is no clear precedent for such an arrangement, and we fear detainees may not have adequate access to legal representation, interpreters or information about their rights. We are also very concerned about the use of generalised forms of detention and the application of fast-track procedures with limited safeguards. We fear the right to defence may not be adequately protected in this context.

How does the policy reflect broader European trends?

The Italian policy reflects and deepens a worrying trend that has characterised European politics in recent years and inspired the EU pact on migration and asylum: speeding up asylum procedures and increasing the use of detention, particularly through the application of the ‘safe country of origin’ concept. This approach runs the risk of standardising asylum procedures with the bare minimum of safeguards, without taking into account individual circumstances or vulnerabilities. It loses sight of the essence of the right to asylum, which is to ensure each person is protected from persecution.

The emphasis on border control and detention could lead to widespread human rights violations, including the risk of forcible return to countries where people face danger, known as refoulement. The ultimate goal of these policies appears to be to increase the number of returns and deportations from Europe. The pact marks a very strong regression of the European asylum system, and Italy’s migration policy is part of it. But Italy is taking this trend further by becoming the first European country to deport people to countries outside the EU. In this sense, its policy is both a reflection of and a precursor to broader European migration strategies.

Why was the policy blocked by the courts?

The Court of Rome initially blocked the new migration policy because of concerns about the ‘safe country of origin’ concept, which allows for accelerated asylum procedures and detention. It then ruled that the accelerated procedures and detention measures should not have been applied to 12 applicants from Bangladesh and Egypt who were transferred to Albania because they didn’t come from safe countries. This decision was based on a ruling by the Court of Justice of the EU on 4 October, which clarified the interpretation of European Directive 2013/32 on the concept of safe countries of origin.

The ruling by the Court of Rome strengthened compliance with European standards, particularly with regard to the protection of asylum seekers’ rights. It effectively blocked the government’s attempt to use Albania as a detention centre for asylum seekers under accelerated procedures.

However, we remain concerned the Italian government may try to circumvent this decision. The government has passed a decree-law with a list of countries considered safe, which was previously established by an inter-ministerial decree, a lower-level norm. However, it’s hard to understand the point of this law, since it cannot override European law, which is at the top of the hierarchy and which the courts are obliged to apply.

Unfortunately, we fear the mechanism provided for by the protocol may find wider scope for implementation when the new European Asylum Pact comes into force in 2026.

How is Italian civil society working to defend the rights of migrants and refugees?

Italian civil society is actively working to defend the rights of migrants and refugees, with many organisations, including ours, taking action to counter the negative effects of policies such as the Albanian migration protocol. From the outset, we’ve highlighted the risks to procedural guarantees and the potential for human rights violations that could result from outsourcing asylum procedures to non-EU countries.

Our organisation is part of Tavolo Asilo, a network of CSOs working on migration and asylum issues in Italy. We monitor procedures through this platform, starting with the initial screening on board the Italian navy ship Libra. Some of our members, together with a delegation of opposition parliamentarians, have gained access to the centres where asylum seekers are sent, and are working to ensure transparency and hold the government to account.

On 5 November, we took part in a hearing on the ‘safe countries’ decree-law before the Constitutional Committee of the Chamber of Deputies, where we pointed out that national laws cannot override higher-ranking European legislation, such as the European Directive protecting the rights of migrants. Other CSOs are also engaged in strategic litigation.

In the coming weeks, we will continue to monitor the implementation of the protocol and its impact on migrants’ rights. While the political and social climate makes our work challenging, it also underlines the importance of our role in ensuring that migrants and refugees are treated fairly and in accordance with international standards.