Recent changes in Italy’s immigration policy have classified more countries as ‘safe,’ enabling the deportation of asylum seekers to Albania. The ‘Albania model’ accelerates asylum processing to 28 days, with individuals awaiting decisions in Albanian camps. Legal challenges have emerged, questioning the safety of countries like Bangladesh and Egypt, leading to a referral to the European Court of Justice. Italy’s approach has faced criticism for potentially endangering vulnerable groups, while the government defends its strategy as legally sound.
What Defines a Safe Country of Origin? Recent changes in Italy’s immigration policy have led to the designation of additional countries as safe, facilitating the deportation of more asylum seekers to Albania. Meanwhile, the European Court of Justice is currently reviewing the situation.
By Egzona Hyseni, ARD Legal Editorial Team
Italy’s government has introduced the ‘Albania model’ to streamline the asylum application process. This initiative mandates that decisions on asylum requests be completed within 28 days, with refugees remaining outside of Italy and EU territory by waiting in designated asylum camps in Albania.
Here’s how it operates: Italian border patrols intercept asylum seekers in the Mediterranean before they reach Italy. Onboard the vessels, officials assess who qualifies for the expedited processing. This fast-track procedure is only permissible for individuals from ‘safe countries of origin.’ Countries such as Bangladesh and Egypt have been categorized as safe by Italy. Consequently, mostly young, healthy men from these nations are relocated to asylum camps in Albania, where they await the results of their applications. If their claims are approved, they can then proceed to Italy; otherwise, they face immediate deportation.
The deportation facilities in Albania currently stand unused, but plans are underway to repurpose them.
Legal Challenges in Italy
This strategy places a considerable psychological strain on the individuals involved. Wiebke Judith, a legal policy spokesperson for the human rights organization PRO ASYL, expressed concerns: ‘This method leaves individuals arriving in Albania feeling extremely frightened, uncertain, and lost. They are left to wonder about their fate and dread potential long-term detention followed by deportation.’
Two asylum seekers have legally contested this strategy, achieving a favorable outcome. A court in Rome determined that Bangladesh and Egypt do not qualify as safe countries of origin. However, the court sought further clarification and has referred the matter to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg, expected to convene in November 2024.
Towards a Unified Asylum Framework in Europe?
The ECJ’s task is to delineate the criteria under which countries can be deemed safe and to assess the extent of national courts’ authority to evaluate such classifications. Lawyer Dario Belluccio, representing one of the asylum seekers, hopes the proceedings will address a broader political question: ‘We must determine whether we want a cohesive asylum system across Europe or if each nation will pursue its own path,’ Belluccio stated after the hearing to the ARD Legal Editorial Team.
During the hearing, Belluccio criticized the Italian government’s rapid expansion of its list of safe countries, which currently includes 19 nations. He pointed out that in several of these countries, certain vulnerable groups, such as LGBTQ+ individuals, face persecution and thus cannot be considered safe. In contrast, Germany recognizes only ten countries as safe, excluding Bangladesh and Egypt from this classification.
The Italian Prime Minister remains steadfast in her controversial strategy of processing asylum applications in Albania.
Italian Government’s Defense and EU Perspectives
The Italian administration has defended its approach, asserting that a country can be legally deemed safe if it is largely secure for the general populace. Government representatives were unavailable for comment during the ECJ proceedings.
While the EU Commission and some member states, including Hungary, have raised no legal objections to Italy’s policy, the German federal government holds a contrasting view. Ralf Kanitz, who represented Germany in the hearing, emphasized that a country should only be classified as safe under EU law if it is secure for all demographics.
Italy aims to process up to 36,000 asylum applications annually outside EU borders.
Meloni’s Ambitions
The ECJ is set to examine these and other arguments in the months ahead. However, even if the court dismisses Italy’s approach, Wiebke Judith from PRO ASYL warns that it may not spell the end for the Albania model. There is a concern that the Italian government might repurpose the centers in Albania for individuals whose asylum requests have been denied, housing them until their deportation. This model represents a significant initiative for Meloni, and it is unlikely she will abandon it easily, Judith concludes.
A ruling from the ECJ is not expected for several months.