Italy’s plan to send migrants to Albania for fast-track asylum processing has hit a major roadblock due to a ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The court declared that Italy's current definition of "safe countries" for returning rejected asylum seekers is illegal under EU law. This ruling directly challenges a deal made by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni in 2023, which aimed to streamline asylum applications by designating Albania as a safe haven for migrants intercepted at sea.
Under the deal, asylum seekers could be swiftly deported if their application was denied. However, the ECJ ruled that a country cannot be deemed "safe" if not all its inhabitants can expect protection against risks. This means Italy must revisit its criteria, as its present list includes countries like Egypt and Bangladesh, recognized for allowing certain groups to remain unprotected. Italy's government expressed frustration, claiming that the court's interference undermines national border security.
The court’s ruling stipulates that only countries providing comprehensive and verifiable safety for all individuals can be labeled "safe." Additionally, any evidence used to support such designations must be made public, allowing asylum seekers to challenge decisions effectively. Analysts and rights organizations argue that the ruling dismantles the legal foundation of the Albania agreement.
While the court acknowledged the possibility for a fast-track procedure for migrants from genuinely safe countries, it made clear that Italy must revise its approach. The ruling effectively pauses Italy's ambitious migration strategy in Albania, raising concerns about potential repercussions for future EU migration policies—especially with a uniform list of safe countries coming into effect next year. Ultimately, this decision reinforces that defining safety is not solely a political matter, but one that must adhere to legal standards enforced by judges.
Under the deal, asylum seekers could be swiftly deported if their application was denied. However, the ECJ ruled that a country cannot be deemed "safe" if not all its inhabitants can expect protection against risks. This means Italy must revisit its criteria, as its present list includes countries like Egypt and Bangladesh, recognized for allowing certain groups to remain unprotected. Italy's government expressed frustration, claiming that the court's interference undermines national border security.
The court’s ruling stipulates that only countries providing comprehensive and verifiable safety for all individuals can be labeled "safe." Additionally, any evidence used to support such designations must be made public, allowing asylum seekers to challenge decisions effectively. Analysts and rights organizations argue that the ruling dismantles the legal foundation of the Albania agreement.
While the court acknowledged the possibility for a fast-track procedure for migrants from genuinely safe countries, it made clear that Italy must revise its approach. The ruling effectively pauses Italy's ambitious migration strategy in Albania, raising concerns about potential repercussions for future EU migration policies—especially with a uniform list of safe countries coming into effect next year. Ultimately, this decision reinforces that defining safety is not solely a political matter, but one that must adhere to legal standards enforced by judges.
