Italy-Albania Protocol

Migrants in centres in Albania, EU Court: safe country designation can be assessed by judges. Wrath of Palazzo Chigi: spaces that do not belong to it

"A Member State cannot include in the list of safe countries of origin" a country that "does not offer sufficient protection to its entire population". The European Court of Justice therefore wrongs the Italian government and pushes further and further away the full use of the centres set up in Albania

by Rome Editorial Staff

1 August 2025

5' min read

Key points

EU court, judges must be able to assess choice of safe countries
The Rome court appeal
The definition of safe country
Chigi: Court goes against policies against illegal entry
Schlein: on centres in Albania they made an illegal choice
Conte to Meloni: no more victimisation, pronouncement was obvious
Anm: for EU Court, Italian judges' work is correct
Full utilisation of centres in Albania is complicated
The Structures of Shengjin and Gjader

5' min read

"A member state may not include in the list of safe countries of origin" a country that "does not offer sufficient protection to its entire population". This was established by the EU Court of Justice in its ruling on the Italy-Albania Protocol and the definition of safe country of origin. The Court specifies that this condition is valid until the entry into force of the new EU regulation, "which allows designations with exceptions for certain clearly identifiable categories of persons", expected on 12 June 2026. However, 'the EU legislator may bring the date forward'.

EU court: judges must be able to assess choice of safe countries

The Court also states that an EU country 'may designate safe countries of origin by a legislative act, provided that such designation can be subject to effective judicial review'. This guarantee is particularly important when a national of that country appeals against the rejection of his application for international protection, which was rejected under an accelerated procedure. The EU Court also specifies that the sources on which the designation is based must be "sufficiently accessible to both the applicant and the judge" to ensure "effective legal protection". The judge may also use information he has collected himself, provided he verifies its reliability and allows both parties to the proceedings to comment on it

The Appeal of the Court of Rome

The EU Court ruled at the request of the Court of Rome, which has so far not recognised the legitimacy of the detentions ordered against the migrants rescued in the Mediterranean Sea and transferred to the CPR in Albania because they came from countries deemed safe by the Italian government, in particular Egypt and Bangladesh.

The definition of a safe country

The central issue concerns the definition and application of the concept of 'safe third country' in the context of the accelerated procedures for examining asylum applications. EU countries can examine applications for international protection more quickly, even at the border, if they come from nationals of countries considered sufficiently safe and - the Luxembourg judges recall - since October 2024, in Italy, the list of so-called safe countries of origin is established by an act of legislation. Among these there is also Bangladesh, explains the EU Court, reconstructing the facts at the origin of two appeals submitted by migrants to the Court of Rome. The Italian judge had raised doubts about the new Italian law, which does not indicate the sources used to assess the safety of the country, arguing that this limits both the applicants' right to challenge the decision and the judges' right to verify its legitimacy, as it is not possible to assess the reliability and updating of the information on which the presumption of safety is based.

Chigi: Court goes against policies against illegal entry

"We are surprised by the decision of the EU Court of Justice regarding the safe countries of origin of illegal migrants. Once again the jurisdiction, this time European, revokes spaces that are not its own, in the face of responsibilities that are political. The EU Court of Justice decides to hand over to any national judge the decision not on individual cases, but on the part of the migration policy concerning the regulation of returns and expulsions of irregular migrants. Thus, for example, for the identification of the so-called safe countries, the decision of the national judge, based even on private sources, prevails over the outcomes of the complex investigations conducted by the ministries concerned and assessed by the sovereign Parliament'. This is what is written in a note issued by Palazzo Chigi.

"It is a step that should worry everyone - including the political forces that are today rejoicing over the ruling - because it further reduces the already narrow margins of autonomy of governments and parliaments in the regulatory and administrative direction of the migration phenomenon. The Court's decision weakens the policies to fight mass illegal immigration and defend national borders," continued the note from Palazzo Chigi after the Court's ruling. "It is singular that this should happen a few months before the entry into force of the EU Pact on Immigration and Asylum, which contains more stringent rules, including with regard to the criteria for identifying those countries: a Pact that is the result of the joint work of the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of the European Union. For the ten months remaining until the European Pact comes into force, the Italian government will not stop seeking every possible solution, technical or regulatory, to protect the security of its citizens,' the note concludes.

Nordio: judge reasons his information,not always happens

"The judgment recognises Italy's right to designate a third country as a 'safe country of origin'," commented Justice Minister Carlo Nordio, "even through a legislative act, as we have done. As for the judge's review, it must be effective and motivated. The judge, says the Court, must ascertain the reliability of the information from which he derives his conviction and give adequate reasons. And it does not appear that this has always been the case'.

Schlein: on centres in Albania they made an illegal choice

"The European Court has proved the Italian government wrong, who knows if this time too they will say that we inspired them and that the European Court is only trying to block justice reform in Italy. They must take responsibility for not having read Italian and European laws and for having made an illegal choice with inhuman centres in Albania that trample on the fundamental rights of migrants and asylum seekers, for which they have squandered more than 800 million of Italians' money," commented the secretary of the PD, Elly Schlein

Conte to Meloni: no more victimisation, pronouncement was obvious

And nothing, Giorgia Meloni just can't cope! You can't stop with the empty propaganda and your false victimisation. It's stronger than you. It's your way of doing politics, it's your way of trying to maintain consensus. But how long will this castle of artifice last?" Thus Giuseppe Conte in a long post on Facebook. "And so after the failures of the naval blockade and the expedition to Albania, Giorgia Meloni lashes out at the European judges, who are also bad and "politicised". Now on the right will begin the unbearable drumbeat of a misunderstood government, but determined to defend Italian sovereignty" is the conclusion

Anm: for EU Court Italian judges' work is correct

"Nobody was rowing against the government. An interpretation had been proposed by the Italian judges that today the Court of Justice of the European Union says was correct. It is right to know, without polemics but for the sake of clarity,' says instead the president of the National Association of Magistrates Cesare Parodi

The full utilisation of the centres in Albania is complicated

The European Court of Justice therefore seems to prove the Italian government wrong and is pushing further and further away the full use of the centres built in Albania, which for many months now have been destined to host 25-30 migrants in the CPR area, while the approximately 400 places that, in Giorgia Meloni's original project, were supposed to host asylum seekers rescued at sea remain empty.

The structures of Shengjin and Gjader

The facilities in Shengjin and Gjader were created precisely to 'externalise' the accelerated procedure for migrants picked up in international waters and coming from countries identified by Italy as safe. Then, however, the executive decided to extend to the guests of the CPRs the audience of those who can be taken to Albania. A road taken also in order to bypass the flops of the operation linked to the numerous referrals of the Italian courts to the EU Court that, on the basis of the ruling of 4 October 2024, asked the judges in Luxembourg whether a state can designate a country as safe by excluding categories of people or parts of territory (this is true for many of the 19 countries on the Italian list) and suspend the validation of detentions.