Le rassegne dell'Accademia Diritto e Migrazioni - ADiM

La sezione dedicata alle rassegne di ADiM fornisce ogni mese:

  • una selezione di articoli di stampa (“Rassegna stampa”) e di pubblicazioni scientifiche (“Rassegna scientifica”) ritenuti utili a promuovere un dibattito pubblico e scientifico informato;
  • un aggiornamento sulle principali pronunce della giurisprudenza internazionale, europea e nazionale (”Rassegna giurisprudenziale”).

RASSEGNA STAMPA - ADiM

Consulta la rassegna stampa mensile dell'Accademia Diritto e Migrazione - ADiM

RASSEGNE SCIENTIFICHE - ADiM

Consulta la rassegna scientifica mensile dell'Accademia Diritto e Migrazione - ADiM

LIBRI

  • Raymond Taras, Nationhood, Migration and Global Politics. An Introduction, First Edition, Edinburgh University Press, November 2018
  • A new introduction to contemporary nationhood that sets it apart from national identity, nationalism and diversity. Drawing on extensive research in transnationalism and ethnic conflict around the world, Raymond Taras introduces the concepts of nation and nationalism as they now stand in light of major demographic changes brought about by global migration. The result is a framework for understanding the emergence of postmodern nationhood in the era of globalisation and beyond. Based on rich case studies of immigration worldwide, Taras shows that nationhood occurs when the receiving state negotiates ethnic differences to form a natural bond with immigrants, rather than insisting on blind loyalty to the majority culture. The goal is a broad, value-added society of diverse peoples and successful prevention of criminality, ghettoisation, extremism and even radicalisation through reasonable immigrant integration.

 

 

  • Mary Crock and Lenni B. Benson (eds.), Protecting Migrant Children. In Search of Best Practice, Elgar, 2018
  • Unprecedented numbers of children are crossing international borders seeking safety. Framed around compelling case studies explaining why children are on the move in Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Oceania, this book explores the jurisprudence and processes used by nations to adjudicate children’s protection claims. The book includes contributions from leading scholars in immigration, refugee law, children’s rights and human trafficking which critically examine the strengths and weaknesses of international and domestic laws with the aim of identifying best practice for migrant children.

 

 

  • Reihan Salam, Melting Pot or Civil War?: A Son of Immigrants Makes the Case Against Open Borders, New York, September 2018
  • For too long, liberals have suggested that only cruel, racist, or nativist bigots would want to restrict immigration. Anyone motivated by compassion and egalitarianism would choose open, or nearly-open, borders—or so the argument goes. Now, Reihan Salam, the son of Bangladeshi immigrants, turns this argument on its head. In this deeply researched but also deeply personal book, Salam shows why uncontrolled immigration is bad for everyone, including people like his family. Our current system has intensified the isolation of our native poor, and risks ghettoizing the children of poor immigrants. It ignores the challenges posed by the declining demand for less-skilled labor, even as it exacerbates ethnic inequality and deepens our political divides. If we continue on our current course, in which immigration policy serves wealthy insiders who profit from cheap labor, and cosmopolitan extremists attack the legitimacy of borders, the rise of a new ethnic underclass is inevitable. Even more so than now, class politics will be ethnic politics, and national unity will be impossible. Salam offers a solution, if we have the courage to break with the past and craft an immigration policy that serves our long-term national interests. Rejecting both militant multiculturalism and white identity politics, he argues that limiting total immigration and favoring skilled immigrants will combat rising inequality, balance diversity with assimilation, and foster a new nationalism that puts the interests of all Americans—native-born and foreign-born—first.

 

 

  • Francesca Ippolito, Seline Trevisanut (ed.), Migration in the Mediterranean. Mechanisms of International Cooperation, Cambridge, December 2018
  • Mediterranean states have developed various cooperation mechanisms in order to cope with the issues that arise from migration. This book critically analyses how institutional actors act and interact on the international scene in the control and management of migration in the Mediterranean. It highlights how, even though the involvement of ‘universal’ international organisations guarantees a certain balance in setting the goals of cooperation mechanisms and buttresses a certain coherence of the actions, the protection of migrants’ fundamental rights is still an objective as opposed to a reality, and security imperatives and trends still prevail in the aftermath of the 2011 Arab Spring.

 

 

 

 

 

ARTICOLI

 

 

  • Marko Valenta, Moa Nyamwathi Lønning  Jo Jakobsen  Drago Župarić-Iljić, European Asylum Policies and the Stranded Asylum Seekers in Southeastern Europe, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019
  • This article focuses on the restrictive European asylum policies and on their humanitarian consequences in Southeastern Europe. We discuss two interrelated topics: (i) the dynamic of the migration of asylum seekers to Europe and (ii) the specific position of Southeastern European countries and the situation of stranded migrants in the region. We identify central elements in the European asylum system and suggest that different parts of the system may be seen as a set of interacting lines of deterrence used to curb asylum migrations. It is argued herein that Greece and the other countries at the southern borders of the European Union have an idiosyncratic position within the European system of deterrence. Furthermore, we discuss how European deterrence policies and local responses influence the migration patterns of asylum seekers in Southeastern Europe. It is maintained that the deterrence measures have contributed to increasing the number of stranded asylum seekers in the region, especially in Greece with clear and regrettable humanitarian consequences.

 

 

  • Rogier Bartels, The Relationship between International Humanitarian Law and the Notion of State Sovereignty, in Journal of Conflict and Security Law, December 2018, Volume 23, Issue 3, p. 461–486.
  • This article explores the relationship between the laws of armed conflict, or international humanitarian law (IHL), and the international legal concept of State sovereignty. Historically, only wars between sovereign States were subject to regulation by the laws of war. From the 19th century onwards, States agreed upon a significant number of IHL treaties and in 1949, despite calls upon sovereignty, they accepted that international law can also regulate non-international armed conflicts by extending a limited part of the IHL rules to this type of conflict. Since then, through the formation of customary international law and, in part, as result of new treaties, it has been accepted that the majority of IHL rules have become applicable to armed conflicts of a non-international character. In addition, international institutions have been set up to prosecute individuals for serious violations of IHL. The author discusses how IHL and sovereignty have influenced each other’s development. The analysis shows that the development of IHL must not be seen as limiting State sovereignty, but rather ought to be regarded as a manifestation of sovereignty, expressed through the formation of this branch of international law by its core subjects: States. At the same time, as a result of the increased reliance on means other than treaties for clarification and development of IHL, the role of States has become more limited; it is reduced to either accepting or rejecting the prospective developments of IHL and any consequential impact on their sovereignty.

 

 

  • Mario Giro, Le migrazioni dall’Africa: una “rivoluzione dell’io”, in il Mulino, n. 5/18

    “Lo Stato africano indipendente nasce come una realtà forte, accentratrice e autoritaria. Il potere si concentra attorno a poche élite (nella definizione africana: i clan/le famiglie/i lignaggi più importanti), strette a loro volta attorno al «capo», in genere il «presidente fondatore» o il «rifondatore» della Repubblica. Attorno al capo agiscono le rivalità dei vari clan, sia quelli già autorevoli, sia quelli che vogliono emergere. Il miglior capo è colui che sa creare attorno a sé un equilibrio stabile tra le varie dispute (fazioni?). In tale contesto di alleanze, dall’inizio degli anni Sessanta fino alla fine degli anni Ottanta, il potere reale del sistema risiede nella capacità dello Stato (e di chi lo dirige) di distribuire risorse e prebende. Lo Stato è tutto: rappresenta non solo l’ordinatore della vita sociale, ma anche l’economia, intesa come impiego pubblico. L’unico vero sbocco lavorativo per i giovani è entrare nella «funzione pubblica». Nel corso degli anni, la burocrazia statale africana diviene sempre più esorbitante: una forma di controllo pervasivo, ma anche un metodo di redistribuzione…”

 

  • Carmelo Danisi, What ‘Safe Harbours’ are There for People Seeking International Protection on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Grounds? A Human Rights Reading of International Law of the Sea and Refugee Law, in GenIUS, 2018, n. 2
  • Nel contesto della “crisi” del Mediterraneo con la chiusura dei porti ai migranti diretti in Europa, questo contributo si interroga su cosa sia efettivamente un “porto sicuro” per coloro che chiedono protezione internazionale sulla base dell’orientamento sessuale e/o dell’identità di genere (SOGI). A tal fne, si procede con una lettura delle norme applicabili, specie quelle relative al diritto internazionale del mare e al diritto internazionale dei rifugiati, alla luce degli sviluppi in materia di diritti umani. Inoltre, si guarda anche alla questione della possibile applicazione extraterritoriale degli obblighi assunti in tale materia sia dagli Stati europei sia dall’Ue al fne di garantire rotte sicure a tali richiedenti. Si ritiene, infatti, che garantire un “porto sicuro” ai richiedenti SOGI implichi una visione più ampia del concetto di “place of safety” a esso collegato, tanto in termini di rotte, di destinazioni dopo le operazioni di salvataggio in mare e di accoglienza. A ben vedere, se applicate in modo efettivo e con la dovuta diligenza, gli obblighi già assunti dagli Stati europei e dall’Ue potrebbero migliorare la condizione di tali richiedenti durante il loro viaggio e arrivo in Europa.

 

 

RAPPORTI

Libri

 

  • Charlotte Lülf, Conflict Displacement and Legal Protection, Understanding Asylum, Human Rights and Refugee Law, Routledge, 2019 (febbraio)
  • While the 21st century bears witness to several conflicts leading to mass displacement, the conflict in Syria has crystallised the need for a solid legal framework and legal certainty. This book analyses the relevant legal instruments for the provision of a protection status for persons fleeing to Europe from conflict and violence. It focuses on the conceptualisation of conflict and violence in the countries of origin and the different approaches taken in the interpretation of them in the 1951 Refugee Convention, the Recast Qualification Directive of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights. It traces the hierarchical order of protection granted, starting with refugee protection status, to subsidiary protection status and finally with the negative protection from non-refoulement. Recent case law and asylum status determination practices of European countries illustrate the obstacles in the interpretation as well as the divergence in the application of the legal instruments. The book fills an important gap in examining the current practices of key actors, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and European states, tracing changes in national and international policies and revealing discrepancies towards contemporary approaches to conflicts. It refines the interaction and cross-fertilisation of the different relevant fields of European asylum law, human rights law and the laws of armed conflict in order to further the development of a harmonised protection regime for conflict-induced displacement

 

  • Jane Freedman, Zeynep Kivilcim, Nurcan Özgür Baklacıoğlu (Eds.), A Gendered Approach to the Syrian Refugee Crisis, Routledge, 2019 (gennaio)
  • The refugee crisis that began in 2015 has seen thousands of refugees attempting to reach Europe, principally from Syria. The dangers and difficulties of this journey have been highlighted in the media, as have the political disagreements within Europe over the way to deal with the problem. However, despite the increasing number of women making this journey, there has been little or no analysis of women’s experiences or of the particular difficulties and dangers they may face. A Gendered Approach to the Syrian Refugee Crisis examines women’s experience at all stages of forced migration, from the conflict in Syria, to refugee camps in Lebanon or Turkey, on the journey to the European Union and on arrival in an EU member state. The book deals with women’s experiences, the changing nature of gender relations during forced migration, gendered representations of refugees, and the ways in which EU policies may impact differently on men and women. The book provides a nuanced and complex assessment of the refugee crisis, and shows the importance of analysing differences within the refugee population. Students and scholars of development studies, gender studies, security studies, politics and middle eastern studies will find this book an important guide to the evolving crisis.

 

  • Katherine Tonkiss, Tendayi Bloom (Edited by), Theorising Noncitizenship Concepts, Debates and Challenges, Routledge, 2019 (gennaio)
  • ‘Noncitizenship’, if it is considered at all, is generally seen only as the negation or deprivation of citizenship. It is rarely examined in its own right, whether in relation to States, to noncitizens, or citizens. This means that it is difficult to examine successfully the status of noncitizens, obligations towards them, and the nature of their role in political systems. As a result, not only are there theoretical black holes, but also the real world difficulties created as a result of noncitizenship are not currently successfully addressed. In response, Theorising Noncitizenship seeks to define the theoretical challenge that noncitizenship presents and to consider why it should be seen as a foundational concept in social science. The contributions, from leading scholars in the field and across disciplinary backgrounds, capture a diversity of perspectives on the meaning, position and lived experience of noncitizenship. They demonstrate that, we need to look beyond citizenship in order to take noncitizenship seriously and to capture fully the lived realities of the contemporary State system. This book was previously published as a special issue of Citizenship Studies.

 

  • Isabel M. Borges, Environmental Change, Forced Displacement and International Law. From legal protection gaps to protection solutions, Routledge, 2018 (dicembre)
  • This book explores the increasing concern over the extent to which those suffering from forced cross-border displacement as a result of environmental change are protected under international human rights law. Formally they are not entitled to admission or stay in a third state country, a situation that has been identified as an international “legal protection gap”. The book seeks to provide answers to two basic questions: whether and to what extent existing international law protects cross-border environmental displacement, and whether and how existing formalized regional complementary protection standards can interpretively solidify and conceptualize protection for cross-border environmental displacement. The discussion outlines that the protection of the human person is not only an ex post facto obligation of states, but must be increasingly seen as an ex ante one. The analysis further suggests that the European Union regionally orientated protection regime can help states to consolidate an evolving protection paradigm of proactive and reactive measures being erected at the international level. It can also narrow the identified legal protection gaps. In so doing, it helps states to reconceptualise protection as a holistic and dynamic enterprise. This book will be of great interest to academics in law, political science and human rights, policy makers and civil society organisations both at national and international level.

 

  • Ilenia Ruggiu, Culture and the Judiciary. The Anthropologist Judge, Routledge, 2018 (dicembre)
  • How can jurists resolve multicultural conflicts? Which kind of questions should judges ask when culture enters the horizon of the law? Are they then called to become anthropologists? Through the analysis of hundreds of cases produced through decades of multicultural jurisprudence, this book reconstructs the constitutional and anthropological narratives and the legal techniques used by Western judges to face the challenges posed by multiculturalism: from Japanese parent–child suicide to the burqa, from Jewish circumcision to Roma begging, from kissing a son on his genitals to the claim of indigenous people to fish salmon in natural parks, the book brings the reader into a fascinating journey at the crux of the encounter between the relativism of anthropology and the endeavor toward a democratic coexistence pursued by the law. After identifying the recurrent themes or topoi used by judges and lawyers, this book critically analyzes them, evaluates their persuasive power and suggests a “cultural test” that gathers together the crucial questions to be answered when resolving a multicultural dispute. The “cultural test” is a matrix that guides the judge, lawyers and legislatures across the intricate paths of multiculturalism, to assure a relational dialogue between the law and anthropology.

 

  • Alessandra Annoni, La protezione dei minori non accompagnati al centro del dibattito europeo ed italiano, Napoli – Jovene, 2018.
  • Il volume raccoglie gli atti del Workshop organizzato dal CDE di Ferrara in collaborazione con il Gruppo di interesse Diritto Internazionale ed Europeo delle Migrazioni e dell’Asilo (DIEMA) della Società italiana di Diritto internazionale e di Diritto dell’Unione europea, nell’ambito del Progetto 2017 della Rete italiana dei CDE «60 anni di Unione europea: sfide e prospettive per l’Europa di oggi e di domani», con il contributo finanziario della Rappresentanza in Italia della Commissione europea. I contributi affrontano il tema della protezione dei minori non accompagnati nel diritto internazionale, nel diritto UE e nel diritto italiano, soffermandosi sulla questione della nozione giuridica di vulnerabilità, sul tema della detenzione dei minori stranieri non accompagnati e sull’istituto della tutela, così come disciplinato dalla legge n. 47 del 2017 (c.d. Legge Zampa).

 

Articoli

 

  • Philipp Lutz, Variation in policy success: radical right populism and migration policy, in West European Politics, 2019, Volume 42 – Issue 3, p. 517 ss.
  • How do radical right populist parties influence government policies in their core issue of immigration? This article provides a systematic analysis of the direct and indirect effects of radical right anti-immigration parties on migration policy reforms in 17 West European countries from 1990 to 2014. Insights from migration policy theory serve to explain variations in the migration policy success of the radical right. While previous studies mostly treat migration policy as uniform, it is argued that this approach neglects the distinct political logics of immigration and integration policy. This article reveals significant variations in policy success by policy area. While immigration policies have become more liberal despite the electoral success of the radical right, when the radical right is in government office it enacts more restrictions in integration policies. Accordingly, anti-immigrant mobilisation is more likely to influence immigrants’ rights than their actual numbers.

 

  • Edgar Grande, Politicizing immigration in Western Europe, in Journal of European Public Policy, 2019.
  • Immigration has become a hot topic in West European politics. The factors responsible for the intensification of political conflict on this issue are a matter of considerable controversy. This holds in particular for the role of socio-economic factors and of radical right populist parties. This article explores the politicization of immigration issues and its driving forces in the electoral arena. It is based on a comparative study using both media and manifesto data covering six West European countries (Austria, France, Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, and the UK) for a period from the early 1990s until 2017. We find no association between socio-economic factors and levels of politicization. Political conflict over immigration follows a political logic and must be attributed to parties and party competition rather than to ‘objective pressures.’ More specifically, we provide evidence that the issue entrepreneurship of radical right populist parties plays a crucial role in explaining variation in the politicization of immigration.

 

  • Simone Moriconi, Giovanni Peri, Riccardo Turati, Skill of the Immigrants and Vote of the Natives: Immigration and Nationalism in European Elections 2007-2016, in NBER Working Paper No. 25077.
  • In this paper we document the impact of immigration at the regional level on Europeans’ political preferences as expressed by voting behavior in parliamentary or presidential elections between 2007 and 2016. We combine individual data on party voting with a classification of each party’s political agenda on a scale of their “nationalistic” attitudes over 28 elections across 126 parties in 12 countries. To reduce immigrant selection and omitted variable bias, we use immigrant settlements in 2005 and the skill composition of recent immigrant flows as instruments. OLS and IV estimates show that larger inflows of highly educated immigrants were associated with a change in the vote of citizens away from nationalism. However the inflow of less educated immigrants was positively associated with a vote shift towards nationalist positions. These effects were stronger for non-tertiary educated voters and in response to non-European immigrants. We also show that they are consistent with the impact of immigration on individual political preferences, which we estimate using longitudinal data, and on opinions about immigrants. Conversely, immigration did not affect electoral turnout. Simulations based on the estimated coefficients show that immigration policies balancing the number of high-skilled and low-skilled immigrants from outside the EU would be associated with a shift in votes away from nationalist parties in almost all European regions.

 

  • Damian Lilly, UNRWA’s Protection Mandate: Closing the ‘Protection Gap’, in International Journal of Refugee Law, Volume 30, Issue 3, 30 December 2018, Pages 444–473.
  • Palestinian refugees represent the largest protracted displacement situation in the world. It has been suggested that they experience a ‘protection gap’ because of the limited applicability of international refugee law and the lack of a UN entity with an explicit mandate for their protection. Such claims, however, have overly focused on the status of Palestinian refugees under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the lack of a UN agency with responsibility for promoting durable solutions for them. This article argues that there are many aspects of international law other than the Refugee Convention, that are relevant to the protection of Palestinian refugees, and that the protection mandate of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) has also evolved significantly in recent years and now addresses many of the protection challenges they face. As such, the suggestion that they face a ‘protection gap’ is significantly exaggerated. While Palestinian refugees continue to be confronted by serious protection challenges, the protection that UNRWA is able to provide them is not too dissimilar to that provided by other humanitarian organizations, including the protection UNHCR provides for other refugees globally. In this sense, the legal and institutional impediments to the protection of Palestinian refugees have narrowed.

 

  • Shani Bar-Tuvia, Australian and Israeli Agreements for the Permanent Transfer of Refugees: Stretching Further the (Il)legality and (Im)morality of Western Externalization Policies, in International Journal of Refugee Law, Volume 30, Issue 3, 30 December 2018, Pages 474–511.
  • This article examines a new and unprecedented policy that has been recently implemented by Australia and Israel against refugees, namely their permanent transfer to less developed and less stable countries in return for some form of payment to these receiving countries. It argues that these policies should be seen as part of an all-Western ‘externalization’ trend, encompassing various policies that were implemented by Western countries over the past two decades with the goal of reducing the number of asylum seekers on a country’s territory. The Australian and Israeli transfers share not only this goal of previous externalization policies, but also some of their methods. Notwithstanding these similarities, the article explores how the Australian and Israeli transfers differ from the externalization precedents, and particularly from ‘Safe Third Country’ transfers. Two main distinctions are discussed. First, these are not transfers for the purpose of Refugee Status Determination, but rather permanent transfers of people with a clear need for international protection. Secondly, the receiving countries are not ‘transit’ countries through which people have crossed. These two differences mean that the Australian and Israeli policies stretch the already questionable legality and morality of previous externalization policies. It is argued that, legally, even if the transfers do not amount to direct refoulement, they constitute ‘constructive’ refoulement, clearly putting Israel in violation of article 32 of the 1951 Refugee Convention (prohibition on expulsion), and both countries in violation of article 3 (prohibition on discrimination), and potentially additional articles. It is further argued that the transfers are unconscionable for several important non-legal reasons: they affect the well-being of vulnerable people, they have no justification (apart from deterrence), they are confidential and extremely expensive, and they constitute a new level of arbitrary burden shifting to poorer and less stable countries. As long as they are seen as a continuation of an established all-Western externalization trend, their unconscionability should prompt scrutiny of the trend as a whole.

 

  • Jinske Verhellen, Cross-Border Portability of Refugees’ Personal Status, in Journal of Refugee Studies, Volume 31, Issue 4, 1 December 2018, Pages 427–443.
  • European countries will sooner or later inevitably be confronted—again—with important legal issues that transcend the current short-term crisis management (reception of refugees, ‘bed-bath-bread’ and other logistical issues). This article will take a closer look at one of the long-term legal concerns, namely the cross-border portability of refugees’ personal status (age, parental status, marital status, etc.). It will discuss legal problems encountered by asylum seekers/refugees with regard to their personal status acquired in one country and transferred to another country (such as the absence of documentary evidence, the issue of limping legal relationships). At present, insufficient research data exists on the interaction between international refugee law (relating to the rights and obligations of states regarding the protection of refugees) and private international law (dealing with private relationships in a cross-border context). These interactions are not new, but the current refugee flows into Europe prove in a striking way how ineffective the interplay between the two sets of rules is. The article will discuss the private international law concept of personal status in international refugee law and the international refugee protection in private international law instruments.

 

  • Murdoch Stephens, Rethinking Frameworks for Refugee Advocacy: An Analysis Grounded in Political and Democratic Institutions, in Journal of Refugee Studies, Volume 31, Issue 4, 1 December 2018, Pages 528–543.
  • A human rights framework has become the default approach to framing advocacy for the rights of refugees. However, with the process of refugee resettlement expanding, there is a need for a framework that would help refugee advocates to conceptualize their relationship to the democratic institutions that facilitate and maintain rights-based approaches. Working through Chantal Mouffe’s distinction between liberal and democratic ideals, this article proposes a democratic framework that works as a supplement to a rights framework. The democratic framework orientates advocates towards working with other advocacy groups, media, politicians and the general public. This framework is illustrated through three key points in the efforts of New Zealand refugee advocates to achieve the first refugee quota increase in that country since 1987.

 

 

  • Daniela Vitiello, The Dublin System and Beyond: Which Way Out of the Stalemate?, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2018, n. 3 (settembre-dicembre), pp. 463-480.
  • The Common European Asylum System can be envisioned as a ‘progressive development’ of the international refugee regime at the regional level. However, the foundational “raison d’être” of its prime operational tool – the Dublin Regulation – is connected to the ‘exclusionary function’ of the common external borders of the Union. The inherent irrationality of Dublin cooperation has led to its recurrent deadlocks. Their impact on both asylum seekers’ rights and the principles guiding intra-EU cooperation has been tested before the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice on several occasions since the landmark rulings in the cases “M.S.S.” and “N.S.” The dialogue between the Courts offers precious guidance for a sustainable and effective reform of the Dublin system, but also calls on the EU legislator to do its part. On the contrary, the replacement of Dublin with greater externalisation, proposed by the European Council and the Commission since June 2018, seems unsuited for the purpose. This paper charters relevant case law and legislative “status quo”, in order to explore more legitimate and feasible alternatives to eventually escape from the Dublin stalemate.

 

 

 

 

  • Yvonne Donders, Towards a Right to Cultural Identity? Yes, Indeed!, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2018, n. 3 (settembre-dicembre), pp. 523-548.
  • The aim of this contribution is to ascertain whether a right to cultural identity can be considered as existing in the context of international human rights law. In the past two decades the recognition of such a right in relevant practice has in fact progressively grown, to the point that it has attained huge consideration among human rights experts and practitioners. Is the said practice sufficient to support the position that a right to cultural identity actually exists as a ‘self-standing’ right? The answer should be no if ‘exist’ means that it is a rule incorporated in positive law. So far States have not incorporated cultural identity as a substantive right in an international treaty or other legal instrument. The lack of common State practice and “opinio juris”, reflected in the limited amount of and specialized caselaw, makes that the right to cultural identity can probably not be considered a rule of international customary law. However, the answer is instead yes if one looks beyond a strict rule and sees the right to cultural identity as an important emerging norm. This norm can be part of other existing human rights, but it is increasingly becoming a self-standing norm developed by caselaw and other interpretative documents.

 

  • Federico Lenzerini, Freewheeling and Provocative: Why Using Pre-established Criteria for Settling Culturally-based Human Rights Disputes Is Impracticable, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2018, n. 3 (settembre-dicembre), pp. 549-576.
  • While human rights reclaim universalism, the concrete expectations arising from them are in many cases determined by the cultural specificity of the people concerned. The fact of trying – to the extent possible – to meet these expectations is an imperative inherent in human rights, for the reason that the main aspiration of the latter is to guarantee their own effectiveness, which translates into a requirement that they are guaranteed on the basis of “effective equality”. But effective equality inescapably requires that different situations are treated differently. This is the reason why the search for objective pre-determined criteria aimed at settling culturally-determined human rights controversies, as well as at establishing whether a given cultural practice is compatible with human rights standards, is impracticable. In fact, in such cases the solution may only be determined on a case-by-case basis, through balancing the different rights at stake with each other and ascertaining (to the extent possible) which of them is to be attributed more weight in each concrete case.

 

 

  • Silvia Scarpa, Contemporary Forms of Slavery, Brussels: European Union, 2018 (dicembre)
  • This briefing aims to clarify the concept of contemporary forms of slavery and analyse the legal obligations of States, as well as recent international developments at global and EU levels. It highlights the inconsistent application of the concept by global governance actors and discusses the inclusion of various exploitative practices within this conceptual framework. It also examines the prevalence of contemporary forms of slavery and assesses the policy framework for EU external action. The briefing then recommends possible action by the EU, including: promotion of a more consistent definition and use of the concept of contemporary forms of slavery and further clarifications on the relationship with the human trafficking and forced labour frameworks; a role for the EU as catalyst in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and Targets in the field of all contemporary forms of slavery; support for standardising methods of data collection globally. Finally, the paper invites the EU to assess the possibility of drafting a new treaty on contemporary forms of slavery, as a way to fill some existing loopholes at the international level.

 

  • Cristiana Fiamingo, Ma davvero il Franco CFA è la causa del fenomeno migratorio?, in federalismi.it, 2019, n. 3
  • Nella recente polemica circa l’incidenza del Franco CFA sul fenomeno migratorio, innescata il 20 gennaio da un autorevole esponente del M5S quale Di Battista, nel corso della nota trasmissione “Che tempo che fa”, e rimbalzata da un comizio elettorale ad Avezzano dal vice-presidente del consiglio Di Maio, il giorno successivo, molti sono i punti quantomeno controversi, ma si possono cogliere anche aspetti positivi. Parto proprio da questi ultimi.

 

  • Alberta De Fusco, Il diritto allo sport per i minori di origine straniera, in federalismi.it, 2019, n. 4.
  • Tra i percorsi dei giovani di origine straniera nel tessuto sociale italiano vi è certamente quello della pratica sportiva; pertanto, è proprio in rapporto alle enormi potenzialità di tale veicolo di integrazione che si intende indagare l’effettività del diritto allo sport per i minori con background migratorio. Non appare neanche in questa sede preliminarmente opportuno chiarire che si individuano attualmente diverse tipologie di minori stranieri, che possono in generale essere ricondotte alla categoria delle “seconde generazioni dell’immigrazione” considerata nella sua accezione più estesa, che ricomprende: i minori nati in Italia da genitori stranieri, i minori ricongiunti, i minori non accompagnati, i minori rifugiati, i minori arrivati per adozione internazionale, i figli di coppie miste, che più di recente sta assumendo la denominazione di “nuove generazioni italiane”. Se la realizzazione di una società multiculturale a basso livello di conflittualità passa attraverso l’effettiva integrazione degli immigrati, una particolare attenzione deve essere dedicata proprio ai ragazzi di origine straniera ed alla loro inclusione, ciò fondandosi specialmente sull’accesso ai diritti, tra i quali vi è senz’altro il diritto allo sport.

 

  • Giovanni Guzzetta, Il caso Diciotti: tra responsabilità giuridica e responsabilità politica, in federalismi.it, 2019, n. 4.
  • Come spesso accade, quando questioni ad alta infiammabilità politica incrociano procedure costituzionali vi è il rischio concreto che anche l’interpretazione delle norme da applicare diventi oggetto di scontro politico. Il caso dell’autorizzazione per il Ministro Salvini ne è un esempio da manuale, per più di una ragione. La prima ovviamente riguarda l’oggetto del procedimento. L’ipotesi di reato di sequestro di persona per la vicenda Diciotti è già di per sé sufficiente a riscaldare gli animi, tanto più se ciò accade dopo mesi di confronto molto aspro sulla politica dell’immigrazione e a fronte di una palese divergenza tra gli stessi organi della magistratura, attesa la nota (anche se non divulgata) richiesta di archiviazione del Procuratore della Repubblica di Catania, disattesa del Tribunale dei Ministri che ha richiesto, invece, l’autorizzazione a procedere. La seconda ragione di incandescenza della questione risiede nelle possibili conseguenze politiche discendenti dall’uno o dall’altro esito del voto. Conseguenze destinate, in entrambi i casi, a ripercuotersi sulle preoccupazioni per la tenuta della maggioranza che sostiene il governo, e che il “sondaggio” tra gli iscritti di una delle forze politiche che la compongono non sembra aver del tutto scongiurato. La terza ragione deriva dalla una certa approssimazione con la quale, nel dibattito pubblico, l’autorizzazione a procedere nei confronti dei membri del governo per i reati funzionali, viene sovrapposta e talvolta assimilata al modello di autorizzazione a procedere del vecchio art. 68 cost. e allo stesso modello di giustizia “speciale” previsto dal vecchio art. 96 Cost.

 

 

  • Annick Pijnenburg, Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen and Conny Rijken, From Italian Pushbacks to Libyan Pullbacks: Is Hirsi 2.0 in the Making in Strasbourg?, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2018
    This article discusses the application that was recently lodged with the European Court of Human Rights alleging that Italy is responsible for its involvement in pullbacks by the Libyan coast guard. It places the case in the wider context of migration control policies and the Hirsi case in particular. The article examines different pullback scenarios which feature in the application lodged with the Court, and discusses different ways in which the Court can address the issues raised. The analysis focuses particularly on the question whether the Court is likely to find that Italy exercises jurisdiction and whether Italy could incur derived responsibility for its involvement in the pullbacks. The article concludes by suggesting that holding Italy responsible would require the Court to move beyond established precedent in its case-law. Although this is a move which can be difficult to make given the political tide in Europe, it would not be the first time that the Court takes its case-law, and thereby human rights protection, a step further.

 

  • Thomas Spijkerboer, The Global Mobility Infrastructure: Reconceptualising the Externalisation of Migration Control, in European Journal of Migration and Law, no. 3, 2018
    Since the end of the Cold War, migration law and policy of the global North has been characterised by externalisation, privatisation and securitisation. These developments have been conceptualised as denying access to migrants and as politics of non-entrée. This article proposes to broaden the analysis, and to analyse unwanted migration as merely one form of international human mobility by relying on the concept of the global mobility infrastructure. The global mobility infrastructure consists of the physical structures, services and laws that enable some people to move across the globe with high speed, low risk, and at low cost. People who have no access to it travel slowly, with high risk and at high cost. Within the global mobility infrastructure, travellers benefit from advanced forms of international law. For the excluded, international law reflects and embodies their exclusion before, during and after their travel to the global North. Exclusion is based on nationality, race, class and gender. The notion of the global mobility infrastructure allows for questioning the way in which international law reproduces these forms of stratification.

 

  • Lena Riemer, The ECtHR as a drowning ‘Island of Hope’?’ Its impending reversal of the interpretation of collective expulsion is a warning signal, in verfassungsblog.de, 19 Febbraio 2019.
    The outcome of the currently pending case ND and NT v. Spain before the Grand Chamber may determine the future course of the Court in other migration policy related cases. This particular case deals with Spain’s policy of ‘devoluciones en caliente’ or ‘hot returns’ in Melilla. These are immediate returns of foreign citizens who have been intercepted at the Spanish-Moroccan border area without even assessing these individuals’ identity. The public hearing before the Grand Chamber took place last fall and the pronouncement of the judgment is expected soon. The judgment could be yet another setback for the interpretation of the prohibition of collective expulsion, for push-back policies and, more broadly, for the minimum level of protection for migrants and refugees by the European Convention on Human Rights and its additional protocols. Thus, the ruling might be a further step in a development to cut minimum guarantees for migrants and asylum seekers – a development encouraged by pressure from certain governments.

 

 

  • Alexander Aleinikoff, The Unfinished Work of the Global Compact on Refugees, in International Journal of Refugee Law, 24 December 2018.
    As a result of a mass flow of Syrian refugees and African migrants across the Mediterranean, which peaked in 2015, European States wanted something done at the international level. The United Nations (UN) General Assembly responded by convening a ‘high-level plenary meeting on addressing large movements of refugees and migrants’ the following year.
    In ways not fully anticipated by those who pressed for the high-level meeting, the General Assembly’s New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants addressed issues considerably broader than the Mediterranean question. It affirmed fundamental international and human rights norms relating to the movement of people across borders (while recognizing the sovereign right of States to control their borders), noted the positive contribution migrants make to the social and economic development of host States, pledged to combat xenophobia and discrimination, and committed to addressing the root causes of mass migration. The Global Compact on Refugees (Refugee Compact) and the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (Migration Compact) were envisioned to embody and promote these and other commitments.

 

 

Rapporti

 

  • Aliyyah Ahad and Natalia Banulescu-Bogdan, Communicating Strategically about Immigrant Integration: Policymaker Perspectives, in The Online Journal of the Migration Policy Insitute, January 2019
    This report takes stock of the communication strategies and common narratives employed by integration policymakers, as well as the slew of obstacles that can lead messages to be misremembered, ignored, or inadvertently inflame tensions. It draws on insights shared in interviews by policymakers and communication experts as part of MPI Europe’s Integration Futures Working Group. Among the key lessons of this analysis: messages that are overly positive may be perceived as disingenuous or out of sync with on-the-ground realities, while those that fail to tap into an audience’s lived experiences or that do not come from a trusted messenger are likely to be dismissed. And though communications strategy and outreach are sometimes viewed as an add-on to well-crafted integration policy, they can be integral to its success—or failure.

 

  • RETS, Demographic Observatory of Latin America 2018: International migration
    This edition of the Demographic Observatory, which offers immigration tables for 19 Latin American countries for which data were available on the population censuses of the 2000 and 2010 decades. The data included are from the programme Research on International Migration in Latin America (IMILA). Information is compiled on the structure of the immigrant population by sex, age, years of schooling and participation in economic activity, according to census data. Also included are lifetime and recent international immigration, i.e. immigrants in Latin American countries who were born in different countries and those who resided in a different country five years prior to the census. The information is presented for total immigrants and for those from bordering countries, other Latin American countries, North America, Europe and the rest of the world. The analytical chapter in this edition addresses the theme of intrarregional and cross-border migration in Latin America and the Caribbean in the 2000 and 2010 decades.

Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza

Fascicolo 1, Marzo 2019

 

Editoriale

 

Nazzarena Zorzella, Il disordine sociale del decreto sicurezza

 

Saggi

 

Paolo Morozzo della Rocca, Residenza, dimora, domicilio e condizione alloggiativa nella disciplina del permesso di soggiorno

Marco Benvenuti, Il dito e la luna. La protezione delle esigenze di carattere umanitario degli stranieri prima e dopo il decreto Salvini

Donatella Loprieno, Il trattenimento dello straniero alla luce della l. n. 132 del 2018

Monia Giovannetti, La frontiera mobile dell’accoglienza per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati in Italia. Vent’anni di politiche, pratiche e dinamiche di bilanciamento del diritto alla protezione

Elisa Cavasino, Ridisegnare il confine fra “noi” e “loro”: interrogativi sulla revoca della cittadinanza

Nicola Canzian, Profili di diritto intertemporale del decreto-legge n. 113/2018

Angelo Danilo De Santis, L’impatto del c.d. «decreto sicurezza» sul processo civile

Alessia Di Pascale e Chiara Cuttitta, La figura del tutore volontario dei minori stranieri non accompagnati nel contesto delle iniziative dell’Unione europea e della nuova normativa italiana

 

Accedi all’intero fascicolo

https://www.dirittoimmigrazionecittadinanza.it

 

Libri

 

  • Anna Liguori, Migration Law and the Externalization of Border Controls. European State Responsibility, Routledge, 2019 (marzo).
    Over the last few decades, both the European Union and European States have been implementing various strategies to externalize border controls with the declared intent of saving human lives and countering smuggling but with the actual end result of shifting borders, circumventing international obligations and ultimately preventing access to Europe. What has been principally deplored is the fact that externalizing border controls risks creating ‘legal black holes’. Furthermore, what is particularly worrying in the current European debate is the intensification of this practice by multiple arrangements with unsafe third countries, exposing migrants and asylum seekers to serious human rights violations. This book explores whether European States can succeed in shifting their responsibility onto Third States in cases of human rights violations. Focusing, in particular, on the 2017 Italy-Libya Memorandum of Understanding, the book investigates the possible basis for triggering the responsibility of outsourcing States. The second part of the book examines how the Italy-Libya MoU is only a small part of a broader scenario, exploring EU policies of externalization. A brief overview of the recent decisions of the EU Court vis-à-vis two aspects of externalization (the EU-Turkey statement and the issue of humanitarian visas) will pave the way for the conclusions since, in the author’s view, the current attitude of the Luxembourg Court confirms the importance of focusing on the responsibility of European States and the urgent need to investigate the possibility of bringing a claim against the outsourcing States before the Court of Strasbourg. Offering a new perspective on an extremely topical subject, this book will appeal to students, scholars and practitioners with an interest in European Law, International Law, Migration and Human Rights.

 

  • Lindsey N. Kingston, Fully Human Personhood, Citizenship, and Rights, Oxford, 2019 (aprile).
    Citizenship within our current international system signifies being fully human, or being worthy of fundamental human rights. For some vulnerable groups, however, this form of political membership is limited or missing entirely, and they face human rights challenges despite a prevalence of international human rights law. These protection gaps are central to hierarchies of personhood, or inequalities that render some people more “worthy” than others for protections and political membership. As a remedy, Lindsey N. Kingston proposes the ideal of “functioning citizenship,” which requires an active and mutually-beneficial relationship between the state and the individual and necessitates the opening of political space for those who cannot be neatly categorized. It signifies membership in a political community, in which citizens support their government while enjoying the protections and services associated with their privileged legal status. At the same time, an inclusive understanding of functioning citizenship also acknowledges that political membership cannot always be limited by the borders of the state or proven with a passport. Fully Human builds its theory by looking at several hierarchies of personhood, from the stateless to the forcibly displaced, migrants, nomadic peoples, indigenous nations, and “second class” citizens in the United States. It challenges the binary between citizen and noncitizen, arguing that rights are routinely violated in the space between the two. By recognizing these realities, we uncover limitations built into our current international system–but also begin to envision a path toward the realization of human rights norms founded on universality and inalienability. The ideal of functioning citizenship acknowledges the persistent power of the state, yet it does not rely solely on traditional conceptions of citizenship that have proven too flawed and limited for securing true rights protection.

 

  • David Scott FitzGerald, Refuge beyond Reach. How Rich Democracies Repel Asylum Seekers, Oxford, 2019 (aprile).
    Media pundits, politicians, and the public are often skeptical or ambivalent about granting asylum. They fear that asylum-seekers will impose economic and cultural costs and pose security threats to nationals. Consequently, governments of rich, democratic countries attempt to limit who can approach their borders, which often leads to refugees breaking immigration laws.  In Refuge beyond Reach, David Scott FitzGerald traces how rich democracies have deliberately and systematically shut down most legal paths to safety. Drawing on official government documents, information obtained via WikiLeaks, and interviews with asylum seekers, he finds that for ninety-nine percent of refugees, the only way to find safety in one of the prosperous democracies of the Global North is to reach its territory and then ask for asylum. FitzGerald shows how the US, Canada, Europe, and Australia comply with the letter of law while violating the spirit of those laws through a range of deterrence methods — first designed to keep out Jews fleeing the Nazis — that have now evolved into a pervasive global system of “remote control.” While some of the most draconian remote control practices continue in secret, Fitzgerald identifies some pressure points and finds that a diffuse humanitarian obligation to help those in need is more difficult for governments to evade than the law alone. Refuge beyond Reach addresses one of the world’s most pressing challenges — how to manage flows of refugees and other types of migrants — and helps to identify the conditions under which individuals can access the protection of their universal rights.

 

  • Sandra M. Bucerius and Michael Tonry, The Oxford Handbook of Ethnicity, Crime, and Immigration, Oxford, 2019 (marzo).
    Social tensions between majority and minority populations often center on claims that minorities are largely responsible for crime and disorder. Members of some disadvantaged groups in all developed countries, sometimes long-standing residents and other times recent immigrants, experience unwarranted disparities in their dealings with the criminal justice system. Accusations of unfair treatment by police and courts are common. The Oxford Handbook of Ethnicity, Crime, and Immigration provides comprehensive analyses of current knowledge about these and a host of related subjects. Topics include legal and illegal immigration, ethnic and race relations, and discrimination and exclusion, and their links to crime in the United States and elsewhere. Leading scholars from sociology, criminology, law, psychology, geography, and political science document and explore relations among race, ethnicity, immigration, and crime.  Individual chapters provide in-depth critical overviews of key issues, controversies, and research. Contributors present the historical backdrops of their subjects, describe population characteristics, and summarize relevant data and research findings. Most articles provide synopses of racial, ethnic, immigration, and justice-related concerns and offer policy recommendations and proposals for future research. Some articles are case studies of particular problems in particular places, including juvenile incarceration, homicide, urban violence, social exclusion, and other issues disproportionately affecting disadvantaged minority groups. The Oxford Handbook of Ethnicity, Crime, and Immigration is the first major effort to examine and synthesize knowledge concerning immigration and crime, ethnicity and crime, and race and crime in one volume, and does so both for the United States and for many other countries.

 

Articoli

 

  • Enkelejda Koka and Denard Veshi, Irregular Migration by Sea: Interception and Rescue Interventions in Light of International Law and the EU Sea Borders Regulation, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, Volume 21, Issue 1.
    Since 2011, due to the Syrian civil war, Libya’s institutional breakdown and Eritrea’s political unrest, record high numbers of irregular migrants have been arriving at the EU’s south-eastern external borders, publicly known as the ‘Europe’s refugee crisis’. The most pressurised borders have been those of Greece and Italy. The human smuggler’s ‘organised refugee’ strategy has identified various legal issues resulting from the application of parallel legal frameworks both at regional and at international level. The EU Member States’ policy-making response to human smuggling has created loopholes through conflicting interpretations of the international legal framework on search and rescue and the inconsistent application of human rights law. Hence, this article will argue that although the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) and the EU Sea Borders Regulation purportedly adopted to set out clear rules on when to initiate search and rescue, have not addressed the issue of responsibility for and the consequences of failed rescue scenarios by inactive SAR States; thereby creating a gap in the legal framework on State responsibility for negligent or intentional failed rescues.

 

 

  • Dáire McCormack-George, Equal Treatment of Third-Country Nationals in the European Union: Why Not?, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, Volume 21, Issue 1.
    This paper outlines an argument for the equal treatment of third-country nationals in the EU. The argument is in two parts. It argues, doctrinally, that the reasons in favour of treating third-country nationals equally are weighty. Second, it suggests that, politically, conceptually and sociologically, third-country nationals should generally be entitled to equal treatment, a guarantee which may be subject to specific exceptions. The reasons for such exceptions should be clearly stipulated by public authorities. The approach which emerges from this position should lead to a more coherent concept of equality emerging in EU law, something which should be amenable to European egalitarians.

 

  • Anna Magdalena Kosińska and Barbara Mikołajczyk, Does the Right to Migration Security Already Exist? Considerations from the Perspective of the EU’s Legal System, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, Volume 21, Issue 1.
    The aim of this article is to attempt constructing a conceptual framework and define the right to migration security and include it in the Europe-wide discourse on the migration crisis. In the adopted approach, the right to migration security is a third-generation right, i.e. a solidarity right in the doctrine of human rights. This right protects primarily the receiving society against the threats resulting from migration flows. On the other hand, non-voluntary immigrants have the right to seek protection in a secure way. The study analyses the range of the right to security in the context of human security and points out the necessity of ensuring the security of migration processes, which poses a special challenge to the international system of human rights. The authors also focus on highlighting the strengths of third-generation rights as a remedy to the problems faced by the international community. Finally, the authors propose to include the right to migration security in the EU’s system for the protection of fundamental rights and the guarantees functioning within the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice.

 

 

  • Roos Haer – Tobias Hecker, Recruiting Refugees for Militarization: The Determinants of Mobilization Attempts, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 1.
    International concern over refugee militarization has grown greatly in recent years. Despite the growing prominence attached to this issue by scholars and international organizations alike, few have examined refugee recruitment from the perspective of the recruiter. Drawing on the signalling theory, we argue that recruiters will only approach those refugees who show willingness to get involved in militancy. Empirically, we focus on four attributes that might show this willingness: the role of ethnicity, economic deprivation, camp insecurity and the social network of the refugee. We examine the importance of these factors with the help of new data collected via interviews with more than 280 Congolese refugees. Our analyses show that recruiters especially approach those refugees who feel economically deprived, have combat experience and already know people that were successfully mobilized. Contrary to our expectations, ethnicity plays only a limited role.

 

  • Mona Harb, Ali Kassem and Watfa Najdi, Entrepreneurial Refugees and the City: Brief Encounters in Beirut, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 1.
    Lebanon is hosting more than 1 million Syrian refugees. For a country of its size, and a population of around 4 million, this influx of Syrians into Lebanon has exposed many of its already established ailments. A prevailing perception is that Syrians are establishing businesses and competing with the Lebanese, leading to violent reactions on the part of host communities. In this article, we seek to debunk the reductionist framing of ‘the Syrian refugee’ as a burden, and showcase the economic contribution that some Syrian entrepreneurs have been making to urban neighbourhoods. While entrepreneurs certainly represent a minority of the refugees in Lebanon, we argue that, rather than being competition, Syrian entrepreneurs are complementary to Lebanese businesses in urban areas, and that Syrian businesses are enriching spatial practices in the city. As such, we claim their experiences are significant to document as they can inform useful policy interventions that can render Syrian self-employment an opportunity for local economic development in cities and towns.

 

  • Simon Behrman, Refugee Law as a Means of Control, in Journal of Refugee Studies, Volume 32, 2019, Issue 1.
    International refugee law has evolved as a means of control over the refugee. The first principles on which it has been built place the rights of the state above those of the refugee. Insofar as there is such a thing as a ‘right of asylum’, it is a right vested in the state rather than the refugee. As such, from the perspective of seeking a protection regime that places the needs of the refugee at its centre, it is a system that is fundamentally unreformable. My argument rests upon the historical development of the first principles developed by jurists from the seventeenth century through to the twentieth century, on the basis of historical development of refugee law between the two world wars, and on the drafting history of the 1951 Refugee Convention and its subsequent implementation.

 

  • Annett Bochmann, The Power of Local Micro Structures in the Context of Refugee Camps, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019,  Volume 32, Issue 1.
    This article examines social orders of refugee camps, showing that they have a much higher complexity than is captured in theoretical conceptions that emphasize top-down notions of camp regime structures and power. The plurality of governing actors and power relations is highlighted by refugee camp studies, serving as a starting point for this article. Drawing on an ethnomethodologically informed ethnographic research approach, the example of aid delivery in a Burmese refugee camp in Thailand is used to show how camp residents establish powerful social micro structures. These are, for example, the locally achieved ‘disciplinary institution’ and ‘public camp secrets’. The article argues that the association of these micro structures generates the social order of camps. Further, it demonstrates the fruitfulness of an ethnomethodological approach for refugee studies that goes beyond discourses surrounding the camp, governing techniques and narratives of refugees—instead focusing in on people’s practices in concrete situations and events.

 

  • Benjamin J Kaplan, The Legal Rights of Religious Refugees in the ‘Refugee-Cities’ of Early Modern Germany, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 1.
    Nowhere in early modern Europe (fifteenth to eighteenth centuries) did religious refugees enjoy more special legal protections than they did in the so-called ‘refugee-cities’ (Exulantenstädte) of Germany. These were new cities founded, mostly in the seventeenth century, by German princes with the express intention of attracting religious refugees to settle them. Offering two case studies, of Neuhanau and Neuwied, this article examines the legal provisions that extended personal, economic, civil and religious rights to the refugees who settled them. The article shows that these rights reflected the needs and desires of refugees as well as the agendas of early modern princes. It also shows why, to achieve the goals of both parties, it became standard practice to combine the refugees’ special rights with separate urban status for their settlements.

 

  • Anna Kvittingen, Marko Valenta, Hanan Tabbara, Dina Baslan and Berit Berg, The Conditions and Migratory Aspirations of Syrian and Iraqi Refugees in Jordan, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 1.
    This article focuses on the experiences of Iraqi and Syrian refugees in Jordan and their aspirations to migrate onwards. It is based on interviews carried out between October 2015 and January 2016—a time that coincided with unprecedented irregular movement of refugees and migrants to Europe, partly a result of secondary migrations from countries neighbouring Syria such as Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. Our data includes more than 60 in-depth interviews with refugees, some of whom have recently started moving and others who have been on their migratory journey for many years. We argue that changing circumstances and the structural constraints of life in exile forced refugees to reconsider their integration and migration strategies in host countries such as Jordan. We also demonstrate how inadequate reception is a generator of further fragmented migrations and how variations in refugee perceptions, resources and strategies propel different migratory practices and decisions. Importantly, we add a comparative perspective to current studies of Syrian refugees in the Middle East, highlighting key differences in Iraqi and Syrian refugees’ migration aspirations and movement plans.

 

  • Breanne Leigh Grace, Family from Afar? Transnationalism and Refugee Extended Families after Resettlement, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 1.
    One of the unintended consequences of the US refugee resettlement program is that it separates extended families through the resettlement process. Although the Trump administration has focused on what types of familial relationships ‘count’ as family in resettlement and family reunification, extended families have long been a point of contention and difficult to navigate under US resettlement policy. The policy and consequent debates draw upon US-normative assumptions about refugees, family, and what it means to live apart from family. Drawing upon a multi-sited ethnography of a Somali Zigula refugee community in the US and their loved ones in Tanzania and Kenya, this paper examines how refugees negotiate and maintain extended familial relationships after US resettlement.

 

 

  • Alessandra Algostino, Il decreto “sicurezza e immigrazione” (decreto legge n. 113 del 2018): estinzione del diritto di asilo, repressione del dissenso e diseguaglianza, in costituzionalismo.it, 2018, n. 2.
    Il decreto legge n. 113 del 2018 si inserisce in continuità con i provvedimenti precedenti (in ultimo il “pacchetto Minniti”), coniugando sicurezza e immigrazione, proseguendo nel cammino della criminalizzazione del migrante e del dissenso. Da un lato, vi è la decisione di respingere le persone, restringendo lo spazio del diritto di asilo e rendendolo sempre più ostile e vuoto di diritti; dall’altro, la volontà di reprimere il dissenso e rendere invisibile il disagio sociale. È un provvedimento privo dei requisiti di necessità e urgenza, costellato di profili di incostituzionalità, eterogeneo, ma percorso da un fil rouge (o, meglio, noir): un intento repressivo, di limitazione, se non negazione, dei diritti, dal diritto di asilo alla libertà di manifestazione del pensiero, nella prospettiva di un nazionalismo iure sanguinis autoritario.

 

 

 

 

  • Graziella Romeo, Diritti fondamentali e immigrazione, in federalismi.it, 2019, focus n.2.
    Il titolo di questa sezione monografica è “Italia, Europa: i diritti fondamentali nella rotta dei migranti”. La tesi che questo progetto editoriale intende sviluppare è che le vicende concernenti i flussi migratori debbano essere pensate in due prospettive: l’appartenenza dell’Italia all’Europa, intesa quale spazio fisico e giuridico, e la centralità dei diritti fondamentali, a partire dai quali le politiche dell’immigrazione devono essere costruite.

 

  • Luca Masera, La criminalizzazione delle ONG e il valore della solidarietà in uno Stato democratico, in federalismi.it, 2019, focus n.2.
    Non più tardi di nove mesi fa, in un articolo dedicato al medesimo tema oggetto di questo contributo, avevamo ricostruito il percorso che, nel volgere di pochi mesi, aveva portato nel dibattito pubblico gli operatori umanitari che praticano attività di soccorso in mare dall’essere considerati eroi che salvano vite, al venire additati alla stregua di trafficanti e fiancheggiatori delle organizzazioni criminali operanti in Libia. Ora, nel febbraio 2019, l’ascesa al governo del Paese della nuova maggioranza ha impresso un’ulteriore accelerazione a tale processo di progressiva criminalizzazione delle ONG operanti in mare.

 

 

  • Laura Montanari, La giurisprudenza costituzionale in materia di diritti degli stranieri, in federalismi.it, 2019, focus n.2.
    Il tema di questo intervento è molto ampio, ma la scelta di analizzare la giurisprudenza della Corte costituzionale nasce dalla constatazione che lo studio dei diritti degli stranieri trova nell’opera della Corte un punto di riferimento essenziale: controllando la legittimità degli atti del legislatore, infatti, quest’ultima ha progressivamente delineato lo statuto dello straniero, attraverso una lettura della Carta fondamentale che non si ferma al dato testuale delle disposizioni. E’ ovviamente impossibile ricostruire in questa sede tutta la giurisprudenza costituzionale in materia, mi limiterò perciò a tratteggiare alcuni quadri, finalizzati a mettere in evidenza le peculiarità della posizione dello straniero e, soprattutto, la problematicità dell’approccio che il nostro Paese mantiene nei confronti del fenomeno migratorio.

 

  • Caterina Severino, Uno sguardo Oltralpe. Aspetti problematici della disciplina dell’immigrazione in Francia, in federalismi.it, 2019, focus n.2.
    A differenza dell’Italia o della Spagna ‑ Paesi che, come la Francia, si affacciano sul Mediterraneo, ma che solo di recente hanno conosciuto una forte immigrazione, e sono quindi ancora privi di un’esperienza importante nel campo della regolamentazione della condizione giuridica dello straniero ‑ la Francia vanta una plurisecolare storia di immigrazione nel proprio territorio, dovuta non solo al fenomeno della colonizzazione (e della conseguente decolonizzazione), ma anche ad una peculiare tradizione dell’accoglienza, che si è tradotta, ad esempio, negli anni del fascismo italiano e del franchismo spagnolo, nella concessione dell’asilo ai rifugiati politici provenienti da questi Paesi o, negli anni tra le due guerre e del secondo dopoguerra, nell’impiego ingente di manodopera proveniente da Paesi europei che si trovavano in quel momento in condizioni di ristrettezze economiche.

 

  • Simone Penasa, L’accertamento dell’età dei minori stranieri non accompagnati: quali garanzie? Un’analisi comparata e interdisciplinare, in federalismi.it, 2019, focus n.2.
    L’accertamento dell’età di una persona (age assessment) può essere definito quale «the process by which authorities seek to establish the chronological age or range of age of a person in order to establish whether an individual is a child or an adult». Tale processo può assumere rilievo giuridico in ambiti molto diversi, tra i quali negli ultimi anni è venuto ad assumere una particolare centralità quello della determinazione dell’età delle persone che, dichiarandosi minori di età, presentano o esprimono la volontà di presentare una domanda di protezione internazionale, una volta raggiunto il territorio di uno Stato terzo rispetto a quello di cittadinanza o residenza (o transito, cfr. la Libia). In tale contesto, la fase – e le concrete modalità attraverso le quali si svolge – dell’accertamento dell’età della persona richiedente asilo può risultare problematica dal punto di vista tecnico-procedurale e decisiva dal punto di vista normativo, alla luce delle molteplici conseguenze in termini di tutele che ne possono derivare.

 

  • Paolo Oddi, La tutela giurisdizionale dei migranti e il ruolo dell’avvocato “immigrazionista” in federalismi.it, 2019, focus n.2.
    L’avvocato immigrazionista sarebbe tentato di raccontare le storie e le voci raccolte durante gli anni dell’impegno professionale su questo tema. Per dare voce ai tanti migranti che gli hanno dato mandato per avere giustizia. Per dare conto delle battaglie amministrative e giudiziarie per cercare di ripristinare diritti negati o violati. Infatti, lo scambio di esperienze e il continuo confronto sono fondamentali in questa materia, che è diritto vivente per eccellenza. Si tratta di un ambito del diritto che cambia di continuo, per la molteplicità delle fonti (specie quelle secondarie) che la governano e per la continua oscillazione della giurisprudenza, tanto europea, quanto nazionale. Il presente scritto è dunque, un tentativo, per forza di cose parziale, di fare il punto su anni lunghi e, si potrebbe dire, drammatici.

 

  • Melissa Miedico, Il fenomeno migratorio: una risorsa da valorizzare, in federalismi.it, 2019, focus n.2.
    All’interno del corso di laurea in Giurisprudenza dell’Università Bocconi abbiamo avviato da tempo una riflessione sul tema dell’immigrazione che ha portato al desiderio di un confronto ed un incontro con alcuni esperti. L’incontro si è svolto alla fine del 2017, coordinato da Graziella Romeo e da me, ed ha affrontato diversi aspetti di questo fenomeno complesso e globale. Alcune delle riflessioni emerse durante l’incontro sono state pubblicate ora in questa raccolta monografica, cui mi accingo ad aggiungere alcune brevi considerazioni finali, che spero possano essere lo spunto per ulteriori occasioni di confronto.

 

Blog

 

  • Dimitry Kochenov, Investor Citizenship and Residence: the EU Commission’s Incompetent Case for Blood and Soil, in Verfassungsblog, 23 gennaio 2019.
    Today, on 23 January 2019 the Commission released its ‘Report on Investor Citizenship and Residence Schemes in the European Union.’ Given the negative attention the whole issue of selling EU citizenship and residence has been receiving from the powers that be in the European Union, be it the European Parliament or the individual Commissioners from Reading’s ‘EU citizenship should not be for sale’ from several years ago to Jourová’s more recent proclamations, lawyers and policy-makers could expect much more from the Commission’s treatment of this much inflated, but hugely important topic.

 

  • Maira Seeley, Dignity and the Needs of Young Syrian Refugees in the Middle East, in Lawfareblog, 10 febbraio 2019.
    The Syrian refugee populations living long-term in Jordan and Lebanon will likely prove one of the Syrian conflict’s most enduring—and possibly most destabilizing—consequences. Although extremist groups’ capacity and territorial control in Syria has now fallen sharply, the risk of recruitment of refugee children and youth (ages 12-24) will remain. While Jordan’s Nasib crossing reopened in 2018 and some refugees have returned from both Lebanon and Jordan, conditions inside Syria make protracted displacement likely for many others. As a July 2018 START study reported, Syrian refugees in camps in Jordan and Lebanon can be receptive to extremist ideas, though refugees’ precarious status in host countries and the nature of refugees’ experiences can also discourage extremist activity. Historical examples, such as the experience of Palestinian refugees, suggest that the risk of radicalization and violence increases in the decades following displacement, rather than within the first few years. Conditions of persistent poverty and alienation among large Syrian refugee populations are likely to contribute to the threat of youth extremism in coming decades, whether violent extremist groups exert significant territorial control or not.

 

  • Francesca Capone, Is Trump Right? Foreign Fighters and the States’ Obligation to Repatriate Them, in Verfassungsblog, 10 marzo 2019.
    In a widely commented upon tweet, President Trump asked “Britain, France, Germany and other European allies to take back over 800 ISIS fighters”. He added to the request also a not-so-subtle threat by claiming that otherwise the fighters will be released. The tweet has been published on 17 February 2019, but the situation of foreigners, including European citizens, stranded in Syria and Iraq after the nearly complete defeat of the Islamic State is not a new problem, nor an unpredictable one given the unprecedented number of individuals and families who flocked to the Middle East in recent years. Yet, so far the States most affected by the situation have adopted heterogeneous and even contradictory approaches, without ever facing the question of whether they are acting or not in compliance with the existing international legal framework. Leaving aside moral and long-term security considerations that have been eloquently expressed in a recent ICCT perspective, the focus here is on whether States of origin have or have not an obligation under international law to “take back” (i.e. proactively repatriate) their nationals.

 

  • Marie-Laure Basilien-Gainche, Children of Men. Comments on the ECtHR’s Judgment in Khan v. France, in Verfassungsblog, 12 marzo 2019.
    The Jamil Khan case illustrates the lack of care unaccompanied foreign minors face in France. Jamil Khan is an Afghan migrant who fled his home country in August 2015 and arrived in Calais being 11 years old at that time. He lived alone in a squalid slum for about six months, before he illegally entered England in March 2016 where he has been cared for since by the UK’s child welfare services in Birmingham. Yet, during all the time he spent in France, this isolated minor was left in destitution, as he received no support by the national authorities, so much so the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) condemned France in a judgment of 28 February 2019 (Application no. 12267/16) for inflicting on him “degrading treatment”, for leaving him “in an environment manifestly unsuitable for children, characterized by insalubrity, precariousness and insecurity”, for failing to protect this particularly vulnerable migrant. As the département of Pas-de-Calais did not do everything they could and should have done to comply with their positive care obligation, the judges of the Strasbourg Court (fifth section) concluded unanimously that France had violated Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). The same day, the Court sentenced Greece in the H.A. & alii case (ECtHR, 28 February 2019, Application no. 19951/16). Such condemnations were expected as they correspond to a constant position of the Court, as exposed in the Rahimi case (ECtHR, 5 April 2011, Application no. 8684/08). Let’s focus on the Khan case and France’s violations of Article 3 ECHR.

Libri

 

  • David Scott FitzGerald, Refuge beyond Reach. How Rich Democracies Repel Asylum Seekers, Oxford 2019 (aprile).
    Media pundits, politicians, and the public are often skeptical or ambivalent about granting asylum. They fear that asylum-seekers will impose economic and cultural costs and pose security threats to nationals. Consequently, governments of rich, democratic countries attempt to limit who can approach their borders, which often leads to refugees breaking immigration laws. In Refuge beyond Reach, David Scott FitzGerald traces how rich democracies have deliberately and systematically shut down most legal paths to safety. Drawing on official government documents, information obtained via WikiLeaks, and interviews with asylum seekers, he finds that for ninety-nine percent of refugees, the only way to find safety in one of the prosperous democracies of the Global North is to reach its territory and then ask for asylum. FitzGerald shows how the US, Canada, Europe, and Australia comply with the letter of law while violating the spirit of those laws through a range of deterrence methods — first designed to keep out Jews fleeing the Nazis — that have now evolved into a pervasive global system of “remote control.” While some of the most draconian remote control practices continue in secret, Fitzgerald identifies some pressure points and finds that a diffuse humanitarian obligation to help those in need is more difficult for governments to evade than the law alone. Refuge beyond Reach addresses one of the world’s most pressing challenges — how to manage flows of refugees and other types of migrants — and helps to identify the conditions under which individuals can access the protection of their universal rights.

 

  • Lindsey N. Kingston, Fully Human Personhood, Citizenship, and Rights, Oxford, 2019 (aprile).
    Citizenship within our current international system signifies being fully human, or being worthy of fundamental human rights. For some vulnerable groups, however, this form of political membership is limited or missing entirely, and they face human rights challenges despite a prevalence of international human rights law. These protection gaps are central to hierarchies of personhood, or inequalities that render some people more “worthy” than others for protections and political membership. As a remedy, Lindsey N. Kingston proposes the ideal of “functioning citizenship,” which requires an active and mutually-beneficial relationship between the state and the individual and necessitates the opening of political space for those who cannot be neatly categorized. It signifies membership in a political community, in which citizens support their government while enjoying the protections and services associated with their privileged legal status. At the same time, an inclusive understanding of functioning citizenship also acknowledges that political membership cannot always be limited by the borders of the state or proven with a passport. Fully Human builds its theory by looking at several hierarchies of personhood, from the stateless to the forcibly displaced, migrants, nomadic peoples, indigenous nations, and “second class” citizens in the United States. It challenges the binary between citizen and noncitizen, arguing that rights are routinely violated in the space between the two. By recognizing these realities, we uncover limitations built into our current international system–but also begin to envision a path toward the realization of human rights norms founded on universality and inalienability. The ideal of functioning citizenship acknowledges the persistent power of the state, yet it does not rely solely on traditional conceptions of citizenship that have proven too flawed and limited for securing true rights protection.

 

Articoli

 

  • Alessandro Quattrocchi, La rilevanza penale del sistema di pagamento “hawala” nelle condotte di favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione clandestina, in pen. cont., 2019, n. 2.
    Con la pronuncia del G.U.P. del Tribunale di Palermo del 22 marzo 2018, in maniera innovativa e tendenzialmente inedita, si attinge allo strumentario del diritto penale dell’economia per arricchire le strategie di contrasto e le connesse risposte sanzionatorie al fenomeno dello smuggling of migrants. In particolare, applicando fattispecie incriminatrici poste a tutela della stabilità e del funzionamento del sistema finanziario, si colpisce il sistema informale di pagamento denominato hawala, che le organizzazioni criminali operanti a livello internazionale utilizzano per trasferire le risorse finanziarie provento dei reati fine al di fuori dei canali regolamentati e, quindi, del controllo statuale: nel caso di specie, il prezzo pagato dai migranti per acquistare il viaggio dalle coste libiche a quelle italiane su natanti di fortuna. Il presente lavoro, muovendo dalla fattispecie concreta e dalla soluzione interpretativa fatta propria dal giudice di prime cure, ricostruisce i meccanismi operativi dell’hawala e le incriminazioni concretamente applicabili alla luce delle più recenti riforme legislative, evidenziando infine l’opportunità di un espresso intervento del legislatore penale in materia.

 

 

  • Antonello Ciervo, Ancora sul parere della Giunta del Senato per le immunità sul caso Diciotti, in Questione giustizia, 18 marzo 2019.
    Vorrei provare, con questa breve nota, ad analizzare il parere della Giunta del Senato per le immunità sul caso Diciotti: il mio intento è quello di valutare eventuali profili di illegittimità del parere, nella convinzione che tali vizi possano giustificare la sollevazione di un conflitto di attribuzioni da parte del Tribunale dei ministri di Catania, nell’eventualità che il Senato dovesse approvarlo. La sindacabilità del parere della Giunta – e del voto dell’Aula che sarà chiamata ad esprimersi su di esso – viene considerata del tutto pacifica dalla dottrina costituzionalistica, anche se come è noto non esistono precedenti giurisprudenziali della Consulta in materia. Tuttavia, appare chiaro come una valutazione sulla legittimità delle motivazioni sottese al voto dell’Aula non possa essere negato dalla Corte costituzionale, rischiando altrimenti la decisione parlamentare di porsi in una zona franca dell’ordinamento, non suscettibile di alcuna valutazione giurisdizionale neppure in sede di conflitto di attribuzioni.

 

  • Luca Masera, Chi fissa e quali sono i limiti all’azione politica del Governo in uno Stato democratico?, in Questione giustizia, 29 gennaio 2019.
    Sta succedendo qualcosa di eccezionale quando un Tribunale della Repubblica chiede che il Ministro dell’interno venga processato per un reato che prevede la pena della reclusione da tre a quindici anni. E la situazione è ancora più anomala, se si considera che il fatto per cui la magistratura chiede ad una Camera di procedere (in questo caso il Senato, essendo il Ministro dell’interno anche senatore della Repubblica) non è un episodio corruttivo o comunque legato a fatti che l’indagato nega o sono discutibili. In questo caso il reato che si contesta risulta integrato da una condotta, la chiusura dei porti ai migranti provenienti dalla Libia, che il Ministro dell’interno continua tuttora a rivendicare come parte fondamentale del proprio programma politico e di governo. Il contrasto all’ingresso di stranieri irregolari in Italia viene attuato con la strategia dei “porti chiusi”, che riscuote, stando ai sondaggi, un larghissimo consenso nel corpo elettorale. Il contributo propone una “guida alla lettura” dell’articolato percorso argomentativo seguito dai giudici siciliani, per svolgere poi alcune riflessioni riguardo ai prossimi esiti cui può dare luogo la vicenda.

 

  • Chiara Stoppioni, Tratta, sfruttamento e smuggling: un’ipotesi di finium regundorum a partire da una recente sentenza, in Legislazione penale, 24 gennaio 2019.
    Guardando alle caratteristiche che, negli ultimi anni, ha assunto il fenomeno migratorio, ci si accorge di come, nella maggior parte dei casi, il viaggio dei migranti che giungono in Italia sia il frutto di una deliberazione complessa in cui volontà, coercizione e approfittamento di una preesistente condizione di debolezza tendono a confondersi e a sovrapporsi, sfumando i confini tra favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione clandestina e traffico di esseri umani. Il presente contributo trae spunto da una recente decisione del Tribunale di Napoli, concernente una vicenda che vede coinvolti alcuni bengalesi reclutati nel loro Paese d’origine e, successivamente, impiegati in Italia in condizioni di sfruttamento, per interrogarsi sul rapporto tra le diverse fattispecie di favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione clandestina (art. 12 commi 3, 3 bis, 3 ter e 5 D.lvo 286/1998), intermediazione illecita e sfruttamento lavorativo (art. 603 bis c.p.) e tratta di esseri umani (art. 600 c.p.), con l’intento di tracciare una linea di discrimine fra le predette fattispecie fondate sulla genuinità del consenso degli stranieri.

 

  • Jean Galbraith, Trump Administration Tightens Procedures with Respect to Asylum Seekers at the Southern Border, in American Journal of International Law, 2019, 113(2), 377-386
    The Trump administration undertook a variety of actions related to the southern U.S. border in late 2018 and early 2019. Pointing to the progress of thousands of migrants traveling together from Central America to the U.S. border, President Trump deployed troops to the border and issued a proclamation providing that access to asylum would only be available at the southern border to those who entered through an authorized port of entry. Legal challenges to this proclamation and its implementation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) immediately followed, and a federal district court issued a temporary restraining order on November 19 and a preliminary injunction on December 19 against its enforcement. In addition, after ongoing negotiations with Mexico, the Trump administration announced that it would implement an arrangement under which asylum seekers would await their court date in Mexico rather than the United States. These ongoing developments are part of broader attempts by the Trump administration to erect barriers to migration across the southern border.

 

  • Lea Müller-Funk , Osama Alaa Aldien, Arij Basrak, Weam Ghabash, Mustafa Hatip, Rand Shamaa, Mouran Tourkmani, Researching urban forced migrants in Turkey and Lebanon: Alternative ways to study a vulnerable population in fragile political contexts, in IMI Working Papers, febbraio 2019 Paper 151
    Studying mobility aspirations of forced migrants is a challenge. Refugees are a particularly vulnerable group and displaced persons are often described as a rare or hidden group whose members are hard to identify and to locate. Representative micro-level data is scarce, with surveys frequently based on non-probability sampling techniques. Furthermore, most refugees flee to neighbouring countries which are often politically unstable and sometimes at war with the origin country, posing additional security risks to participants and researchers alike. Building on existing literature and recent fieldwork conducted in Lebanon and Turkey in 2018, we suggest a methodological approach to study mobility aspirations of Syrian urban self-settled refugees in four cities in these two countries. In doing so, we highlight the importance of considering ethical challenges, adopting a mixed methods research design which incorporates randomness in data collection (multi-stage sampling, random walks combined with limited focused enumeration of the nearest neighbour technique), the advantages of including members of the targeted population in research teams, as well as challenges encountered during the research with regards to representativeness, confidentiality, security issues and positionality.

 

  • Hein de Haas , Simona Vezzoli , María Villares-Varela, Opening the floodgates? European migration under restrictive and liberal border regimes 1950-2010, in IMI Working Papers, febbraio 2019, Paper 150
    The effect of ‘open borders’ on migration has been the subject of substantial controversy. Political rhetoric and media images help stoke fear of uncontrolled mass migration that in turn fuels arguments in favour of tighter immigration regulations and border controls to ‘bring migration back under control’. In public debates, removing migration barriers is frequently portrayed as tantamount to ‘opening the floodgates’. However, immigration liberalisation may increase also circulation and return, rendering the effect on net migration theoretically ambiguous. Drawing on bilateral flow data over the 1959-2010 period contained in the DEMIG C2C database, this paper uses European Union (EU) enlargement as a case study to assess how liberalising border regimes affected migration flows. The analysis suggests that, with some exceptions, liberalisation boosted circulation rather than led to a structural increase in intra-EU migration. While removing migration barriers can lead to migration surges—particularly when economic gaps between origin and destination countries are large—these tend to be temporary, after which migration becomes more circular and tends to consolidate at lower levels. And while intra-regional circulation in the EU has grown, closing external EU borders has increasingly pushed non-EU migrants into permanent settlement along with significant family migration. These factors help to explain the structural rise in non-EU immigration, defying policy expectations that opening internal borders would decrease non-EU immigration.

 

  • Elaine McGregor, Money Matters: The Role of Funding in Migration Governance, in IMI Working Papers, gennaio 2019, Paper 149.
    Since the 1990s, the agencies of the United Nations (UN) have increasingly been financed through earmarked contributions from an increasingly diverse set of donors. Since the concept of voluntary contributions was absent from the UN charter owing to the concern that it would undermine multilateralism, current funding trends raise concerns about the functioning of the UN as a multilateral system. Despite this concern there is a limited but growing body of literature that examines the relationship between funding and governance. Taking migration as a case study, this paper uses a newly created data set of earmarked contributions to the International Organization for Migration (IOM) between 2000 and 2016 (n=13,306) to examine thematic and temporal patterns in the contributions of IOM’s main donors. The fragmented nature of migration governance may well be a product of the earmarked nature of its funding, and, without concrete changes in how migration is financed, is likely to remain fragmented. However, this fragmentation can be viewed from two broad perspectives. On the negative side of the ledger, it may be observed that contributions to IOM have largely focused on issues relating to the management of certain aspects of migration that are reflective of the specific interests of its donors lending weight to the argument that the fragmented nature of global migration governance may be a product of the largely earmarked nature of migration financing which has allowed bilateral interests to dominate multilateral responses to migration issues. On the other hand, earmarked funding has arguably also allowed the international community to extend protection to displaced populations not covered by the refugee convention.

 

 

Blog

 

  • Anna Lübbe, The CJEU (Unintentionally) Opens New Avenues of “Free Choice” in Asylum Law, in verfassungsblog.de, 15 aprile 2019.
    With the CJEU judgment H & R of 2 April 2019, the never-ending story of clarifying the preconditions for Dublin transfers took a turn that will again entail needs for clarification. The CJEU has decided that a Member State in which a second application is made (in principle) does not have to check on the responsibility for carrying out the asylum procedure within the framework of the take-back procedure. It is the first Member State in which an application is made that has to determine responsibility and, in the case of secondary movement, to continue doing so after the person concerned has been returned. If the Member State of the first application already completed this procedure and has declared itself to be responsible, another examination of the responsibility question in the Member State of the second application would run counter to the effet utile of the Dublin system. The CJEU’s interpretation was essentially motivated by the aim to keep, or render, the Dublin system efficient and to lessen the time and effort involved in handling secondary migrations. Was it successful?

 

  • Steve Peers, The revised EU visa code: controlling EU borders from a distance, in eulawanalysis.blogspot.com, 17 aprile 2019.
    Today, the European Parliament is due to approve a revision of the law on the EU visa code, which sets out the basic rules on how to get a short-term visa to visit Schengen countries. Since this law was previously agreed with the EU Council, it is likely to be finally adopted by the Council in the near future. This law simplifies the visa application process a little, in return for increased application fees. But more significantly, it integrates EU visa policy even more closely with the EU’s external migration control policy, providing for incentives and sanctions for non-EU countries which respectively cooperate or fail to cooperate on readmission.

 

  • Mariana Gkliati, The new European Border and Coast Guard: Do increased powers come with enhanced accountability?, in eulawanalysis.blogspot.com, 17 aprile 2019. 
    With the political agreement on the new Regulation reached at the beginning of April, due to be approved by the European Parliament today, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, Frontex, is now closer than ever to its original conception as a fully-fledged European Border Police Corps. The new law, with its enhanced rules on removal to non-EU countries, will be approved in parallel to changes to the EU’s visa code aimed at readmitting more irregular migrants to non-EU countries […]. The Commission’s proposal was presented in September 2018 and was agreed hastily within only six months, as the goal was for an agreement to be reached within the current Parliament before the European Parliament elections in May 2019. The new agency is expected to become operational this summer.

 

  • Steve Peers, Citizens of Somewhere Else? EU citizenship and loss of Member State nationality, in eulawanalysis.blogspot.com, 27 marzo 2019.
    Member States’ rules on the acquisition or loss of nationality are in principle a national competence. But this issue is nevertheless central to EU law, because citizenship of the EU is based on having the nationality of a Member State, according to Article 20(1) TFEU: Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to and not replace national citizenship. So in light of the importance of Member State nationality to EU citizenship, can the loss of Member State nationality be reviewed for compliance with EU law? The recent judgment in Tjebbes was the latest of the CJEU’s rare opportunities to rule on this issue, and offers some important clarification of the law.

 

  • Steve Peers, Guardianship, free movement and the rights of the child: the SM judgment, in eulawanalysis.blogspot.com, 26 marzo 2019.
    When is a child a ‘family member’? Many people regard others they love dearly as children, parents or other relatives, but the law is rather stricter. This strictness is particularly important where children are involved, in order to ensure their welfare, and where it impacts on immigration law. Moreover, different countries have different approaches to the legal definition of family members. All these issues come to a head in today’s judgment of the CJEU in SM, a case concerning the intersection between EU free movement law and the family law of non-EU countries.

 

  • Ellen Lefley, Making life so unbearable for people without leave cannot be enforced without creating a hostile environment for all of us, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 9 aprile 2019.
    A recent case challenged successfully part of the UK’s ‘hostile environment’, the self-titled immigration policy created by Theresa May when she was Home Secretary to deter irregular migration to the UK. R (Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department was handed down by the High Court of England and Wales on 1 March 2019. In dispute was the so-called ‘right to rent’ scheme (‘the Scheme’) which stipulated that certain ‘disqualified persons’ (those who need but do not have leave to enter or remain in the UK) were prohibited from renting or occupying private residential accommodation (section 21(2) Immigration Act 2014). Notably the Scheme deputised landlords by prohibiting them from authorising any occupation of their privately owned properties by disqualified persons and obliging them to conduct ‘reasonable enquiries (i.e. documentary checks) into the immigration status of tenants (section 22). Failure to do so incurred a civil penalty of up to £3,000 (section 23) and any landlord who knew or had reasonable cause to believe that the premises were being occupied by a disqualified person committed a criminal offence (section 33A) punishable by up to five years in prison or an unlimited fine (section 33C).

 

  • Eleni Karageorgiou and Vladislava Stoyanova, Lund UniversityWhat has the 2015/2016 crisis left us with?, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 26 marzo 2019.
    The New Asylum and Transit Countries in Europe During and in the Aftermath of the 2015/2016 Crisis edited by Vladislava Stoyanova and Eleni Karageorgiou discusses the state of asylum at a national and sub-regional level, and respective realities and legal challenges. The situation captured across the book’s varied contributions suggests that the Common European Asylum System is beyond repair or reform, and that a radical rethink is needed. This short piece highlights three main dynamics that are critically reflected upon to consider a radical rethink of a new base for European asylum law and policy.

 

  • Caitlyn Yates, A Case Study in the Outsourcing of U.S. Border Control, in lawfareblog.com, 11 aprile 2019.
    Over the past year, the Trump administration has put forth an array of measures to deter immigration to the United States, including separating families, enacting a zero-tolerance stance toward irregular crossings, and—most recently—requiring asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while awaiting their asylum claim decisions. Despite these efforts, in February 2019, apprehension numbers from the United States’s southern border hit their highest levels in 10 years. The administration’s ongoing frustration with the ineffectiveness of its domestic migration policies has pushed its focus southward, with President Trump slashing foreign aid for El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras after accusing the governments of all three countries—and Mexico—of not doing enough to stem migration.

Libri

  • Sergio Carrera, Valsamis Mitsilegas, Jennifer Allsopp, Lina Vosyliute, Policing Humanitarianism EU Policies Against Human Smuggling and their Impact on Civil Society, Hart Publishing, 2019 (gennaio).
    Policing Humanitarianism examines the ways in which European Union policies aimed at countering the phenomenon of migrant smuggling affects civil society actors’ activities in the provision of humanitarian assistance, access to rights for irregular immigrants and asylum seekers. It explores the effects of EU policies, laws and agencies’ operations in anti-migrant smuggling actions and their implementation in the following EU Member States: Italy, Greece, Hungary and the UK.The book critically studies policies designed and implemented since 2015, during the so called ‘European refugee humanitarian crisis’. Building upon the existing academic literature covering the ‘criminalisation of migration ‘ in the EU, the book examines the wider set of punitive, coercive or control-oriented dynamics affecting Civil Society Actors’ work and activities through the lens of the notion of ‘ policing the mobility society’. This concept seeks to provide a framework of analysis that allows for an examination of a wider set of practices, mechanisms and tools driven by a logic of policing in the context of the EU Schengen border framework: those which affect not only people, who move (qualified as third-country nationals for the purposes of EU law), but also people who mobilise in a rights-claiming capacity on behalf of and with immigrants and asylum-seekers.

 

  • Maria O’Sullivan, Refugee Law and Durability of Protection. Temporary Residence and Cessation of Status, Routledge, 2019 (maggio).
    This book examines the link between refugee protection, duration of risk and residency rights. It focuses on two main issues of importance to current state practice: the use of temporary forms of refugee status and residency and the legal criteria for cessation of refugee status under Article 1C(5) of the 1951 Refugee Convention. In analysing this issue, this book canvasses debates which are pertinent to many other contentious areas of refugee law, including the relationship between the refugee definition and complementary protection, application of the Refugee Convention in situations of armed conflict, and the role of non-state bodies as actors of protection. It also illustrates some of the central problems with the way in which the 1951 Refugee Convention is implemented domestically in key asylum host states. The arguments put forward in this book have particular significance for the return of asylum seekers and refugees to situations of ongoing conflict and post-conflict situations and is therefore highly pertinent to the future development of international refugee law.

 

  • Vincent Chetail, International Migration Law, Oxford, 2019 (maggio)
    International Migration Law provides a detailed and comprehensive overview of the international legal framework applicable to the movement of persons.The role of international law in this field is complex, and often ambiguous: there is no single source for the international law governing migration. The current framework is scattered throughout a wide array of rules belonging to numerous branches of international law, including refugee law, human rights law, humanitarian law, labour law, trade law, maritime and air law, criminal law, and consular and diplomatic law. This textbook therefore cuts through this complexity by clearly demonstrating what the current international law is, and assessing how it operates. The book offers a unique and comprehensive overview of this growing field of international law. It brings together and critically analyses the disparate conventional, customary, and soft law on a broad variety of issues, such as undocumented migration, nationality, trafficking, family reunification, refugee protection, non-discrimination, regional free movement schemes, and trade and development. It also offers a particular focus on important groups of migrants, namely migrant workers, students, and refugees. It maps the current status of the law governing their movement, providing a thorough critical analysis of the various stands of international law which apply to them, suggesting how the law may continue to develop in the future. This book provides the perfect introduction to all aspects of migration and international law.

 

Articoli

  • Alessandro Bufalini, The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration: What is its contribution to International Migration Law?, in QIL – Zoom-in, 2019, vol. 58, n. 5.
    The recent endorsement by the United Nations General Assembly of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (Global Compact on Migration or GCM)[1] has been the subject of extensive political debate at both the national and international level. This significant public attention is undoubtedly due to the importance that migration policies have assumed as a crucial battlefield of political confrontation. Public concern in this field has indeed considerably increased in recent years, following the so-called European ‘migrant crisis’ and the advent of the Trump administration. Against this backdrop, the adoption of the Global Compact on Migration manifests the widespread belief that States need to grasp migration on a global scale and establish common ground and shared expectations.

 

  • Fulvio Cortese, The Global Compact and national legislation: quid iuris?, in QIL – Zoom-in, 2019, vol. 58, n. 5.
    With regard to the possible approaches of national legislation to its ongoing process of refinement, the Global Compact for safe, orderly and regular migration[1] raises a number of questions: a) The first question concerns the relationship between Government and Parliament: what role can the two institutions play, and what role have they in fact had in relation to Italy’s (non) involvement in the Compact? b) The second question is in regards to the specific content of the Global Compact and the real effects of Italy’s non-accession: in other words, what impact does Italy’s non-involvement have? Further does the outcome change anything with regard to the current legislation on migration and the actual scope of the rights of the persons involved? c) The third question is a ‘flip’ of the previous one: if it were to sign the agreement, what would change for Italy? At this stage we can provide a tentative answer to each of these questions.

 

  • Dragana Kaurin, Data Protection and Digital Agency for Refugees, in World Refugee Council Research Paper, 2019, n. 12.
    For the millions of refugees fleeing conflict and persecution every year, access to information about their rights and control over their personal data are crucial for their ability to assess risk and navigate the asylum process. While asylum seekers are required to provide significant amounts of personal information on their journey to safety, they are rarely fully informed of their data rights by UN agencies or local border control and law enforcement staff tasked with obtaining and processing their personal information. Despite recent improvements in data protection mechanisms in the European Union, refugees’ informed consent for the collection and use of their personal data is rarely sought. Using examples drawn from interviews with refugees who have arrived in Europe since 2013, and an analysis of the impacts of the 2016 EUTurkey deal on migration, this paper analyzes how the vast amount of data collected from refugees is gathered, stored and shared today, and considers the additional risks this collection process poses to an already vulnerable population navigating a perilous information-decision gap.

 

  • Devyani Prabhat, Ann Singleton and Robbie Eyles, Age is Just a Number? Supporting Migrant Young People with Precarious Legal Status in the UK, in The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 2019, vol. 27, n. 2.
    This paper challenges the focus on age 18 as an exclusionary point in law for migrant young people, particularly unaccompanied migrants, with insecure legal status. Initially meant to provide a protective category of “childhood” in law, focus on age 18 creates a sharp transition point in law for young people. This chronological concept of age does not match up with the reality of lives of many young people who step into adulthood without being able to live in a self-supporting manner. Law recognises the constraints and provides some respite for British national children who are in care; however, non-UK migrant and/or asylum-seeking young people in this situation are immediately at risk of losing their liberty. We suggest that non-British migrant young people aged 18–21 should be treated as a youth category in a manner similar to that used for British young people in care.

 

 

  • Angelo Rinella, La Sharì’a in Europa: questioni di diritto comparato, in Diritto pubblico, comparato ed europeo, 2019, n. 2, pp. 633-656.
    The purpose of this paper is to draw the reference framework, not only legal, of the complex expressions of the Sharì’a in European legal systems. The Islamic communities in Europe invoke the application of Sharì’a for the resolution of the controversies that pertain to the area of personal law (family, marriage, succession). The nerve center lies in the balance between the protection of the freedom of religion in its various expressions and the respect for Western legal values. The tools for tearing up the tensions are entrusted to the system of courts or to alternative forms of dispute resolution.

 

  • Kiri Santer, Governing the Central Mediterranean through Indirect Rule: Tracing the Effects of the Recognition of Joint Rescue Coordination Centre Tripoli, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 2.
    The gradual empowerment of the Libyan Coast Guard through EU training and funding has introduced them as a new actor in the Central Mediterranean amongst other civil and military actors intervening to prevent loss of life at sea. This article examines the contested recognition of the authority of the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre Tripoli over the newly formalized Libyan Search and Rescue Region. It argues that the recognition of the Libyan coordination authority made by the International Maritime Organisation, has changed the way the international waters separating Libya and Europe are governed. Through the close analysis of three ethnographic vignettes depicting instances of rescue of migrants by an NGO vessel, this article illustrates how the Italian authorities are able to exercise control over this vast area indirectly via the formalization of the Libyan authority and concomitantly imped the operations of civil rescue NGO boats in the zone. This formalization enables Italian authorities (and their EU counterparts) to establish a form of indirect governance in this liminal border zone that clashes with other preceding legal orders which regulate distress cases at sea, i.e. international maritime law.

 

  • Daniel Thym, A Bird’s Eye View on ECJ Judgments on Immigration, Asylum and Border Control Cases, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 2.
    Many experts of EU migration law deal with ECJ judgments on a regular basis, but they rarely reflect on how individual rulings on diverse themes such as asylum, family reunification or return relate to each other. This article fills that gap and presents a horizontal analysis of 155 judgments combining quantitative and qualitative findings. Our statistical survey shows that selected themes and references from certain countries dominate the ECJ’s activities. In qualitative terms, the article considers three overarching themes: the concept of public policy; the practice of statutory interpretation, including in light of objectives: the principle of proportionality and interaction with domestic courts. Our study shows that the search for cross-sectoral coherence defines much of the case law, although success of this venture is compromised by enduring inconsistencies, which complicate the emergence of a reliable and predictable judicial approach towards the interpretation of secondary legislation on migration.

 

  • Pauline Melin, The Global Compact for Migration: Lessons for the Unity of EU Representation, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 2.
    In December 2018, the Global Compact for Migration was first adopted at the Marrakesh intergovernmental conference to be later endorsed as an UN General Assembly Resolution in New York. From an EU perspective, what started out as a common project to manage migration globally, not to say externally, became a fiasco for the unity of EU representation on the international scene. Unlike the negotiations of international agreements which are framed by the procedure set out in Article 218 TFEU, the negotiations of international soft law do not benefit from a clear legal framework. The Court of Justice has given some indications on the procedural and institutional aspects relevant for the negotiations of international soft law instruments in the Council v. Commission (C-660/13) case but many uncertainties remain. The purpose of this article is to draw lessons from the negotiation process of the Global Compact for the unity of EU representation.

 

  • Juan Pablo Aris Escarcena, Expulsions: The Construction of a Hostile Environment in Calais, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 2.
    After the dismantling of “the great Jungle” of Calais, migrants have returned to settle in the territory of the region. In this article I analyse how different instances of the government have developed policies to expel them from the region. We will focus on how security and humanitarian techniques have been used to create an area (a hostile environment) where the physical and social life of migrants in transit is not sustainable. In particular, it will analyse the closing of service areas to freight trucks, the prohibition of food distribution to migrants in Calais, and the use of physical and symbolic violence against volunteers and migrants. The article is based on an analysis of forms of government through the concept of Milieu (Foucault, 2009) and proposes the concept of Hostile Environment as the materialization of the “Politics of Exhaustion” (De Vries & Guild, 2018).

 

  • Cecilia Rizcallah, Facing the Refugee Challenge in Europe: A Litmus Test for the European Union A Critical Appraisal of the Common European Asylum System through the Lens of Solidarity and Human Rights, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 2.
    According to mainstream discourse, the EU is facing a ‘refugee crisis’ due to a mass influx of asylum seekers, which is putting the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) under pressure. Although this article acknowledges that the CEAS is currently under pressure, it aims to take a different view from the assumption that the—admittedly significant—arrival of asylum seekers constitutes in itself a problem for the EU. It suggests that the problems encountered by the CEAS are rather symptomatic of a deeper gridlock resulting from this system’s lack of compliance with two main EU’s fundamental values, the respect of which constitutes the ‘fundamental premise’ of EU integration, namely solidarity and human rights. From both an historical and a legal perspective, the EU is indeed founded on a set of values comprising the respect of human rights and solidarity. The treaties further require their respect internally (i.e. Articles 2 and 6 TEU), but also vis-à-vis the rest of the world (i.e. Articles 3(5) and 21 TEU). However, the current responses to the arrival of asylum-seekers are, in several respects, in contradiction with these founding values. On the one hand, the internal management of the influx of refugees reveals a lack of solidarity and results in breaches of asylum-seekers’ fundamental rights. On the other, the EU’s asylum policy does not meet the requirement according to which the Union shall, in its relations with the wider world, uphold and promote these values. These observations lead us to believe that facing the refugee challenge constitutes, from a normative perspective at least, a litmus test for the EU at large. Indeed, the EU’s difficulties in dealing with the arrival of the asylum seekers—which have already been the subject of extensive research—appear to be the evidence of an identity crisis. The way the EU, hand in hand with its Member States, responds to this challenge thus amounts to a ‘decisively indicative test’ for its normative foundations that are a prerequisite for the viability of the entire undertaking, and, notably, of the principle of mutual trust.

 

  • Anna-Maria Konsta, Is There a Right to Human Dignity? The Example of the Right to Education of Refugees, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 2.
    The present article attempts a brief presentation of the legal framework in relation to the protection of the right to education and the protection of the human dignity of refugees, with reference to international and emphasis on European law, in an effort to recognize the inviolability of the right to education of refugees. At the same time, the question is raised if there is an independent right to human dignity or if human dignity is merely a framework term in light of which one could interpret, for example, the right to education of refugees. Through the discussed case-law of the European judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, which use the concept of human dignity, in order to protect asylum seekers, a European concept of human dignity has emerged, which may be acknowledged as an absolute fundamental right.

 

  • Marc de Leeuw and Sonja van Wichelen, Un-signing Geneva: legal pragmatics in the management of asylum, in International Journal of Law in Context, 2019, vol. 15, n. 1, p. 20-32.
    In the last decade, several states have increasingly tried to ‘un-sign’ to their humanitarian obligations by seeking ways to circumvent European or international law. Through an analysis of a recently passed act in Australia on the management of asylum seekers, this paper examines how the practice of ‘un-signing’ can be seen as a symptomatic instance of reconfiguring asylum in late modernity. We focus on the proliferation of ‘legal pragmatics’ in the management of refugees. By ‘legal pragmatics’, we refer to the processual ways in which the state attempts to hollow out international refugee law and in which courts respond by reinstating it. Normative consequences are the criminalisation and the juridification of refugees. We argue that the proliferation of ‘legal pragmatics’ illuminates not only the ever-expanding reach of neoliberal changes in domestic legislation, but also the limitations of human rights to adequately respond to the neoliberal vicissitudes of humanitarian government.

 

 

 

 

Blog

  • Anna Lübbe, Administrative Court of Munich on Seehofer Push Backs: No Protection of Interim Legal Protection?, in verfassungsblog.de, 11 maggio 2019.
    Last summer the German Asylstreit – the controversy about push backs of asylum seekers at the Austrian-Bavarian border called for by Minister of Interior Seehofer – jeopardized the stability of the federal government. Seehofer finally arranged take back agreements with a few Dublin member states. Based on the German-Greek agreement, asylum seekers who had already claimed asylum in Greece are to be rejected at the Austrian-Bavarian border and returned to Greece within 48 hours. Is such a bilateral Dublin bypass lawful? In a case of precedence, the Administrative Court of Munich now issued an interim decision (M 5 E 19.50027).

 

 

  • Elspeth Guild, Amending the Visa Code: Collective Punishment of Visa Nationals?, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 10 maggio 2019.
    The EU legislature has agreed about a substantial reform of the Visa Code which still needs to be adopted officially. It will tie the cost, processing time of visas and availability of multiple entry visas to the success rate of Member States’ return efforts to the relevant country. The idea, proposed by the Commission and accepted both by the Council and the Parliament, is that nationals of countries on the EU’s visa black list, should be punished for the inability of EU Member States to return people (both nationals of the state and where permitted non-nationals who travelled through) to their state.

 

  • Hannes Jöbstl, An Unforeseen Pandora’s Box? Absolute Non-Refoulement Obligations under Article 5 of the ILC Draft Articles on Crimes Against Humanity, in ejiltalk.org, 20 maggio 2019.
    In 2013, the International Law Commission (ILC) added to its long-term work programme the topic of a convention on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. This proposed convention is meant to join sibling conventions addressing genocide and war crimes and would stand in the tradition of other conventions addressing serious crimes, such as torture and enforced disappearance. So far, the ILC has adopted 15 Draft Articles which include a wide range of obligations for future State parties regarding the prevention of crimes against humanity, as well as on measures relating to domestic criminalization, mutual legal assistance and extradition. This blog post, however, focusses on Draft Article 5, which includes an absolute non-refoulement obligation with regard to crimes against humanity.

 

Libri

 

  • Peter Chambers, Border Security, Shores of Politics, Horizons of Justice, Routledge, 2019 (giugno).
    What kind of a world is one in which border security is understood as necessary? How is this transforming the shores of politics? And why does this seem to preclude a horizon of political justice for those affected? Border Security responds to these questions through an interdisciplinary exploration of border security, politics and justice. Drawing empirically on the now notorious case of Australia, the book pursues a range of theoretical perspectives – including Foucault’s work on power, the systems theory of Niklas Luhmann and the cybernetic ethics of Heinz Von Foerster – in order to formulate an account of the thoroughly constructed and political nature of border security. Through this detailed and critical engagement, the book’s analysis elicits a political alternative to border security from within its own logic: thus signaling at least the beginnings of a way out of the cost, cruelty and devaluation of life that characterises the enforced reality of the world of border security.

 

  • Moritz Baumgärtel, Demanding Rights Europe’s Supranational Courts and the Dilemma of Migrant Vulnerability, Cambridge, 2019 (maggio).
    While nominally protected across Europe, the human rights of vulnerable migrants often fail to deliver their promised benefits in practice. This socio-legal study explores both the concrete expressions and possible causes of this persistent deficit. For this purpose, it presents an innovative multifaceted evaluation of selected judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the EU pertaining to such complex questions as the protection of persons fleeing from indiscriminate violence, homosexual asylum seekers, the Dublin Regulation, and the externalisation of border control. Highlighting the demanding character of migrant rights, the book also discusses some steps that could be taken to improve the effectiveness of Europe’s supranational human rights system including changes in judicial and litigation practice as well as a reconceptualization of human rights as existential commitments.

Articoli

 

 

  • Massimo Starita, Il dovere di soccorso in mare e il “diritto di obbedire al diritto” (internazionale) del comandante della nave privata, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 1.
    Shipmasters are commonly considered the addressees of an international legal duty to rescue at sea. This article describes the evolution of international law in this field, from the first maritime conventions of the 1910’s to the IMO Safety Committee’s resolutions of the 2010’s. It then argues that behind the duty to rescue there is a hidden right of the shipmaster. This right has a moral pedigree and is functional to the full compliance of the duty itself. It can be enforced in the national legal order against any State (or private entity) that tries to obstruct the shipmaster’s activities of assistance or to penalize her or him for the assistance given. National judges enforce this right in light of international law of human rights. The responsibility for an injury caused to the shipmaster for the violation of this right can be implemented in international law through the diplomatic protection by the State of nationality or through the protection by the flag State.

 

  • Gianluca Bascherini, Brevi considerazioni storico-comparative su cittadinanza, “ius sanguinis” e “ius soli” nella vicenda italiana, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 1.
    The essay begins with a reconstruction of the different cultural approaches to the constitutional notion of citizenship which lie behind the notions of “ius sanguinis” and “ius soli”; legislative developments on these matters are analysed considering the various sources of law and the areas (such as gender, race, class, religious beliefs…) historically influenced by citizenship as a factor of inclusion/exclusion. The following part includes a historical overview of Italian legislative measures concerning citizenship. The first two examples are the 1849 Constitution of the “Repubblica romana” and the 1865 Civil Code, the former representing a ‘democratic’ vision of citizenship, while the latter is an example of the ‘liberal’ vision, in nineteenth century constitutional culture. A further case is law n. 555 of 1912, enacted in view of the major emigration flows from Italy which had begun already shortly after the unification of the country: this act was aimed at granting that migrants and their descendants would maintain Italian citizenship. Meanwhile, the colonial experience introduced major factors of ‘complication’ in the vision of Italian citizenship, introducing many forms of fragmentation and hierarchy based on race and origin. The regulation on citizenship presently in force is Act n. 91 of 1992, which eliminated the remaining forms of gender discrimination in this field and transposed the new EU norms on European citizenship, but did not respond in the same way to other historical developments, such as the changes in migration flows. Indeed, according to the 1992 Act, Italian citizenship remains granted to individuals who no longer have any real relationship with Italy, while it is very difficult to acquire for people who have lived in the country for a long time and actively participate in economic and social life, and also for their offspring, born in Italy or arrived in the country at a very young age. The failure of many attempts to reform the legislation on citizenship is a further proof of its shortcomings in promoting effective integration of second generation immigrants. Furthermore, the surge of a form of populism which is more and more openly publicizing its xenophobia, confirms how urgent it is to rethink the rules on the acquisition of citizenship, in an increasingly pluralistic and ‘post-national’ social context.

 

 

  • Pietro Franzina, Sangue, suolo e cultura: declinazioni dell’idea di appartenenza nel diritto internazionale privato, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 1.
    The rules of private international law largely build on the ties that bind an individual to a given community. Different ties, including nationality, are used as connecting factors as regards, in particular, personal status and family relations. The paper looks at the different ways in which private international law shapes the idea of belonging for its own purposes. Having analysed the traditional opposition of domicile and nationality, the article illustrates the distinctive features of habitual residence and the reasons behind its current success. Habitual residence is meant to reflect (and facilitate) social integration, thereby serving the needs of changing societies faced with the accrued mobility of persons across borders. Habitual residence, it is contended, embodies an idea of membership and belonging that national legislators might want to take into consideration when reforming the law of nationality. Based as it is on social practice, habitual residence speaks of the ‘here and now’ of persons, not of their origin and their acquired legal status. It reflects the steps taken by the individual concerned to shape its social relationships, irrespective of such ‘accidents’ as birth and descent. It fosters the equal treatment of those taking part in social life in a particular community. While habitual residence and nationality are different in both nature and legal significance, the merits of the former notion are in fact close to the advantages that some present-day nationality reforms aim to achieve, namely where they treat the completion of education in a country as a gateway to acquiring the status of citizen of that country.

 

  • Lucia Della Torre, Comitato ONU contro la tortura e rinvii ‘Dublino’ dalla Svizzera verso l’Italia, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 1.
    The recent decision taken by the CAT in the “A.N. v. Switzerland” case sheds a grim light on the deportations carried out by Switzerland to Italy under the ‘Dublin’ Regulation. The Committee considers that the deficiencies of the Italian reception system may hinder the therapeutic treatment needed by the applicant as a torture survivor. Deportation from Switzerland to Italy may thus imply a violation of art 3 (“non-refoulement”), art. 14 (right to rehabilitation) and art. 16 (prohibition of ill-treatment) of the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment. The decision may potentially have a very significant impact on the Swiss implementation of the Dublin III Regulation. A more thorough and careful assessment of the peculiarities and vulnerabilities of each case is needed or, in the alternative, a broader use of the sovereignty clause.

 

  • Jerker Edström e Chris Dolan, Breaking the Spell of Silence: Collective Healing as Activism amongst Refugee Male Survivors of Sexual Violence in Uganda, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 2.
    Whilst sexual violence against men in armed conflicts has long been marginalized in research and policy, the recognition that it is far more widespread than previously understood is slowly gaining ground. Based on research carried out in Uganda in 2015, this article explores how a group of male refugee survivors of sexual violence have been able to organize, heal and become activists, and reflects on how we should understand and engage with this struggle. We hear how these men have begun to heal through mutual support and politicized collective action, and how humanitarian organizations and service providers can play crucial roles in support. The authors call for: challenging binary views of gender that permeate much current policy; developing open-ended, survivor-driven psycho-social support models; and supporting refugee male survivors’ activism through action research into advocacy and global networking strategy, to continue destabilizing the silence over male victimization in conflict-related sexual violence.

 

  • Kelly A. Yotebieng, Jennifer L. Syvertsen e Paschal Awah, ‘Is Wellbeing Possible when You Are Out of Place?’: Ethnographic Insight into Resilience among Urban Refugees in Yaoundé, Cameroon, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 2.
    Social scientists studying forced migration are confronted with raw human experiences under extreme conditions, but also bear witness to the strength reflected in how people endure and reorganize. Cities in developing countries are the destination of the majority of the world’s refugees. In light of recent policies for urban refugees and alternatives to camps and an increased focus on resilience-building programmes by humanitarian agencies, global donors and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, this article explores the congruity, or lack thereof, between these draft agendas, emic (insider) and etic (outsider) concepts of wellbeing and resilience, and the priorities and realities of urban refugees in Cameroon. We also discuss challenges and ways forward in developing a resilience framework that is sufficiently flexible given the multitude of stakeholders concerned by urban refugee issues, from host government city and regional planning authorities, to humanitarian agencies, and the diversity of communities themselves.

 

  • Tim Jacoby, Roger Mac Ginty e Bülent Senay, Islam, the State and Turkey’s Syrian Refugees: The Vaiz of Bursa, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 2.
    This study looks at the work of Turkey’s network of state ‘preachers’ in the management of Syrian refugees in Bursa—a city in the north-west of the country. Based on interviews and workshops undertaken between 2015 and 2017, it traces out how these civil servants have approached a rapidly changing social situation in which belief and organized religion continue to be highly important. It focuses on the role of Islam in the provision of basic assistance programmes, the management of local conflicts and broader efforts at ensuring long-term integration. In each of these areas, our research reveals that faith remains a significant motivational element in the Turkish state’s response to the Syrian refugee crisis.

 

  • Daniel Hedlund, Thomas Wimark, Unaccompanied Children Claiming Asylum on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 2.
    This study explores the asylum claims of unaccompanied children concerning sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) and examines how case officers at the Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) responded to the credibility of their claims. The SMA provided one calendar year of asylum decisions concerning unaccompanied children, and 16 SOGI cases were identified. A thematic analysis of the cases was conducted. The results showed that case officers directed their focus to the quality of the children’s sexual relationships. This indicates that the case officers expect children to engage in long-term relationships similar to adults, despite their age. Furthermore, case officers tended to only render narratives credible if the society as whole was narrated as perpetrators. This indicates that case officers expect origin societies to be monolithic. The main conclusion, therefore, is that case officers are guided both by homonormative as well as homonationalist views in their decision-making process.

 

  • Rebecca Murphy, Brian Keogh, Agnes Higgins, Erosion of Meaning in Life: African Asylum Seekers’ Experiences of Seeking Asylum in Ireland, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 2.
    The narratives of 16 African asylum seekers indicated that the asylum system in Ireland eroded the various sources from which they could derive meaning in life (MIL). The endurance of a protracted asylum process, prohibition from entering the labour force and residence in institutionalized accommodation appeared to erode asylum seekers’ sense of self-efficacy, purpose, worth, value and belonging. Experiencing a cumulative erosion of all derivations of MIL appeared to inform asylum seekers’ appraisals that they were living a post-migratory life devoid of meaning and consequently reduced psychological wellbeing. Study findings warrant further investigation into the mediating role MIL may play in asylum seekers’ post-migratory mental health while also indicating that current and future responses to asylum seekers’ mental distress must be adequately cognisant of and actively address the socio-cultural and socio-political context that asylum seekers inhabit.

 

  • Tamar Arev, Between Clothes and the Body: National and Gender Identity among Eritrean Women Refugees, in Journal of Refugee Studies, 2019, Volume 32, Issue 2.
    This article focuses on issues of agency, material culture, and national and gender identity in the life experiences of Eritrean women refugees in Tel Aviv, Israel. This anthropological research examined two main styles of dress: everyday dress that reflects Western lifestyle and traditional patterns of dress. I demonstrate how clothes serve as a political site within which perceptions of gender and nationalism are reshaped, thus creating the women’s refugee identity. I conclude by suggesting that the refugee experience can be seen to reinforce expressions of liberation and empowerment. I further argue that the dressed body can be seen as an active agent that shapes the new reality of the women refugees in their host country.

 

 

  • Devyani Prabhat, Ann Singleton, Robbie Eyles, Age is Just a Number? Supporting Migrant Young People with Precarious Legal Status in the UK, in The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 2019, Volume 27, Issue 2.
    This paper challenges the focus on age 18 as an exclusionary point in law for migrant young people, particularly unaccompanied migrants, with insecure legal status. Initially meant to provide a protective category of “childhood” in law, focus on age 18 creates a sharp transition point in law for young people. This chronological concept of age does not match up with the reality of lives of many young people who step into adulthood without being able to live in a self-supporting manner. Law recognises the constraints and provides some respite for British national children who are in care; however, non-UK migrant and/or asylum-seeking young people in this situation are immediately at risk of losing their liberty. We suggest that non-British migrant young people aged 18–21 should be treated as a youth category in a manner similar to that used for British young people in care.

 

 

  • Mikkel Barslund, Mattia Di Salvo e Lars Ludolph, Can regular replace irregular migration across the Mediterranean?, in CEPS, 27 giugno 2019
    Irregular migration from Africa across the Mediterranean to the EU has become a central policy issue. While the establishment of a Libyan SAR zone and of a Libyan coast guard has lowered the numbers crossing the Mediterranean since mid-2017, there are strong concerns about the sustainability of the current approach and its reliability given the severe political instability in Libya. Due to this state of affairs, increasing legal access to the EU – for study and work purposes – has re-appeared on the European agenda as one potential way to reduce irregular crossing in the future. This comes at a time where legal access to the EU labour markets for African citizens has been steadily reduced. Moreover, actions aimed at streamlining access to existing pathways for legal migration, or opening new ones, can be used as lever in improving cooperation in migration management with countries of origin when it comes to returns and readmissions.

 

 

Blog

  • David Fernandez-Rojo, The Umpteenth Reinforcement of FRONTEX’s Operational Tasks: Third Time Lucky?, in EU Law Analysis, 4 giugno 2019.
    On 6 October 2016, the European Border and Coast Guard (EBCG), the successor of FRONTEX, was officially established. Less than two years after the adoption of Regulation (EU) No. 2016/1624, the president of the European Commission announced in his speech on the 2018 State of the Union made on 12 September, the Commission’s intention to, once more, reinforce FRONTEX. On the same day, the Commission proposed an updated version of the Regulation establishing the recently adopted EBCG, which (following agreement between the European Parliament and the Council) was one of the very last texts voted at the European Parliament under the 2014-2019 mandate. In particular, on 17 April 2019, the Parliament adopted the proposal put forward by the European Commission to further strengthen the EBCG with a standing corps of 10,000 border guards with executive powers by 2027. It is now only a question of time until the Council adopts the Regulation (henceforth referred to as Regulation 2019/XXX). (The provisionally agreed text of the new Regulation is here.) This blog post centres on comparatively analysing the most controversial, significant and novel operational tasks conferred by Regulations 2016/1624 and 2019/XXX to the EBCG. (See earlier this analysis of the new powers concerning returns and data sharing, and of the accountability of the agency in human rights terms).

 

  • Irini Papanicolopulu, Tutela della sicurezza o violazione del diritto del mare?, in SIDIBlog, 26 giugno 2019.
    Il giorno 14 giugno 2019 il governo italiano ha adottato il “Decreto-legge recante disposizioni urgenti in materia di ordine e sicurezza pubblica”. Il testo solleva vari problemi, già affrontati da post su questo e su altri blog, ma tra di essi è sicuramente di rilievo la questione della liceità delle misure nei confronti di navi che intendano entrare nel mare territoriale italiano, anche alla luce delle vicende di questi giorni, che coinvolgono la nave Sea Watch 3.

 

  • Evelien Brouwer, Interoperability and Interstate Trust: a Perilous Combination for Fundamental Rights, in EU Immigration and Asylum Law and Policy, 11 giugno 2019.
    On 14 May 2019, the Council adopted two regulations, Regulation 2019/817 and Regulation 2019/818, establishing a framework for the interoperability between EU information systems in the Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice. The new rules on interoperability, upon which the European Parliament agreed in April 2019, will allegedly provide for easier information sharing and ‘considerably improve security in the EU, allow for more efficient checks at external borders, improve detection of multiple identities and help prevent and combat illegal migration’. All this, according to the press release of the Council, ‘while safeguarding fundamental rights’.

 

 

  • Priya Pillai, Stymieing Humanity – On the Prosecution of Aid to Migrants, in Opinio Juris, 11 giugno 2019.
    Six United Nations Special Rapporteurs released a statement last week, urging the dropping of charges against an American aid worker for aiding migrants in the Arizona desert. A day later, I read an op-ed on the increased criminalization of humanitarian aid in the European context. While this issue seems to be the subject of increased scrutiny lately, there have been multiple prosecutions in the U.S. and Europe over the past few years. A recent study by openDemocracy has ascertained a “sharp increase” in the number of prosecutions in Europe since 2018, with the most number taking place in Italy, Greece, France, the UK, Germany, Denmark and Spain. Those targeted for prosecution include pastors in Switzerland, boat captains in Spain, Italy and Greece, as well as pensioners penalized for providing a lift to migrants in Denmark and Greece. In the U.S., following the European lead, there seems to be a trend of an increase in arrests and prosecutions in 2018.

Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico

Fascicolo n. 2 del 2019

 

Ripensare il diritto dell’immigrazione

 

  • Mario Savino, Il diritto dell’immigrazione: quattro sfide
  • Michele Pifferi, Antinomie e caratteri costanti dello ius migrandi tra Otto e Novecento
  • Enrica Rigo, Le parole dell’ospitalità nel lessico culturale dei giuristi
  • Michele Colucci, Le stagioni del governo dell’immigrazione nell’Italia repubblicana
  • Fulvio Cortese, La crisi migratoria e la gestione amministrativa
  • Alessandro Spena, Il «gelo metallico dello Stato»: per una critica della crimmigration come nuda forza
  • Madia D’Onghia, Immigrazione irregolare e mercato del lavoro. Spunti per una discussione
  • Carla Bassu, Flussi migratori e democrazie costituzionali: tra diritti umani e sicurezza pubblica
  • Alessio Rauti, La cittadinanza tra «sostanza», mercato e persona
  • Irini Papanicolopulu, Le operazioni di search and rescue: problemi e lacune del diritto internazionale
  • Salvatore Fabio Nicolosi, La riforma del sistema europeo comune di asilo tra impasse negoziale e miopia normativa
  • Federico Casolari, Il ricorso dell’Unione europea a strumenti informali per il contrasto all’immigrazione irregolare
  • Giuliano Amato, Immigrazione e asilo: problemi e prospettive

 

Vai alla rivista

 

 

Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza

Fascicolo 2, Giugno 2019

  • Guido Savio, Editoriale

Saggi

  • Antonio Ruggeri, Cittadini, immigrati e migranti, alla prova della solidarietà
  • Enrico Gargiulo, L’appartenenza negata: la residenza e i suoi significati, tra ambivalenze interpretative e conflitti politici
  • Chiara Stoppioni, Intermediazione illecita e sfruttamento lavorativo: prime applicazioni dell’art. 603 bis c.p.
  • Giammaria Milani, Ius linguae e status civitatis: verso un nuovo paradigma della cittadinanza italiana?
  • Eleonora Di Molfetta, La traduzione degli atti per lo straniero alloglotto: un diritto incompiuto tra incertezze legislative e resistenze giurisprudenziali
  • Filippo Venturi, Il diritto di asilo: un diritto “sofferente”. L’introduzione nell’ordinamento italiano del concetto di «Paesi di origine sicuri» ad opera della l. 132/2018 di conversione del c.d. «Decreto Sicurezza» (d.l. 113/2018)
  • Giuseppe Cataldi e Adele Del Guercio, I Global Compact su migranti e rifugiati. Il Soft Law delle Nazioni Unite tra spinte sovraniste e potenziali sviluppi

 

Accedi all’intero fascicolo 

 

 

Libri

  • Elizabeth G. Ferris, Katharine M. Donato, Refugees, Migration and Global Governance. Negotiating the Global Compacts, Routledge, 2019 (luglio).
    As debates about migrants and refugees reverberate around the world, this book offers an important first-hand account of how migration is being approached at the highest levels of international governance. Whereas refugees have long been protected by international law, migrants have been treated differently, with no international consensus definition and no one international migration system. This all changed in September 2016, when the 193 members of the United Nations unanimously adopted the New York Declaration on Refugees and Migrants, laying the groundwork for the creation of governance frameworks for migrants and refugees worldwide. This book provides a fly on the wall analysis of the opportunities and challenges of the two new Global Compacts on Refugees and Migration as governments, international NGOs, multilateral institutions and other actors develop and negotiate them. Looking beyond the compacts, the book considers migration governance over time, and asks the bigger questions of what the international community can do on the one hand to affirm and strengthen safe, orderly and regular migration to help drive economic growth and prosperity, whilst on the other hand responding to the problems caused by increasing numbers of refugees and irregular migrants. This highly engaging and informative account will be of interest to policy-makers, academics and students concerned with global migration and refugee governance.

 

  • Holly Ventura Miller, Anthony Peguero, Routledge Handbook on Immigration and Crime, Routledge, 2019 (luglio).
    The perception of the immigrant as criminal or deviant has a long history in the United States, with many groups (e.g., Irish, Italians, Latinos) having been associated with perceived increases in crime and other social problems, although data suggest this is not necessarily the case. This Handbook examines the relationship between immigration and crime by presenting chapters reflecting key issues from both historical and current perspectives. The volume includes a range of topics related to immigration and crime, such as the links between immigration rates and crime rates, nativity and crime, and the social construction of the criminal immigrant, as well as historical and current immigration policy vis-à-vis perceptions of the criminal immigrant. Other topics covered in this volume include theoretical perspectives on immigration and assimilation, sanctuary cities, and immigration in the context of the “war on terror.” The Routledge Handbook on Immigration and Crime fills the gap in the literature by offering a volume that includes original empirical work as well as review essays that deliver a complete overview of immigration and crime relying on both historical and contemporary perspectives. It is a key collection for students in immigration courses; scholars and researchers in diverse disciplines including criminal justice, criminology, sociology, demography, law, psychology, and urban studies; and policy makers dealing with immigration and border security concerns.

 

Articoli

  • E. Tendayi Achiume, Migration as Decolonization, in The Stanford Law Review, 2019, Vol. 72, n. 6, p. 1509.
    International migration is a defining problem of our time, and central to this problem are the ethical intuitions that dominate thinking on migration and its governance. This Article challenges existing approaches to one particularly contentious form of international migration, as an important first step toward a novel and more ethical way of approaching problems of the movement of people across national borders. The prevailing doctrine of state sovereignty under international law today is that it entails the right to exclude nonnationals, with only limited exceptions. Whatever the scope of these exceptions, so-called economic migrants—those whose movement is motivated primarily by a desire for a better life—are typically beyond them. Whereas international refugee law and international human rights law impose restrictions on states’ right to exclude nonnationals whose lives are endangered by the risk of certain forms of persecution in their countries of origin, no similar protections exist for economic migrants. International legal theorists have not fundamentally challenged this formulation of state sovereignty, which justifies the assertion of a largely unfettered right to exclude economic migrants. This Article looks to the history and legacy of the European colonial project to challenge this status quo. It argues for a different theory of sovereignty that makes clear why, in fact, economic migrants of a certain kind have compelling claims to national admission and inclusion in countries that today unethically insist on a right to exclude them. European colonialism entailed the emigration of tens of millions of Europeans and the flow of natural and human resources across the globe, for the benefit of Europe and Europeans. This Article details how global interconnection and political subordination, initiated over the course of this history, generate a theory of sovereignty that obligates former colonial powers to open their borders to former colonial subjects. Insofar as certain forms of international migration today are responsive to political subordination rooted in colonial and neocolonial structures, a different conceptualization of such migration is necessary: one that treats economic migrants as political agents exercising equality rights when they engage in “decolonial” migration.

 

  • Alessandro Bufalini, Cittadinanza russa offresi nel Donbass: quali limiti dal diritto internazionale?, in Ordine internazionale e diritti umani, 2019, p. 550 ss.
    Nell’arco di una settimana, tra il 24 aprile e il primo maggio di quest’anno, il presi-dente russo Vladimir Putin ha firmato due diversi decreti volti a semplificare le procedure per l’acquisto della nazionalità russa per alcune categorie di persone1. In buona sostanza, attraverso una prima misura, la Federazione russa riconosce ai cittadini ucraini e agli apolidi che risiedono nelle regioni di Donetsk e Lugansk il diritto di chiedere la cittadinanza russa. Il secondo decreto è diretto invece ad estendere la procedura semplificata agli ucraini (e ai loro figli, coniugi e genitori) che sono nati e hanno vissuto permanentemente in Crimea e che hanno lasciato la penisola prima del 18 marzo 2014. Questa ulteriore misura, particolarmente espansiva nei suoi possibili effetti, si rivolge inoltre a tutti i cittadini ucraini che sono in possesso di un permesso di soggiorno, anche soltanto temporaneo, nella Federazione russa.

 

  • Giovanni Moschella, La legislazione sull’immigrazione e le prospettive della tutela dei diritti fondamentali: l’ordinamento europeo e l’esperienza italiana, in Ordine internazionale e diritti umani, 2019, p 473 ss.
    Analizzare un fenomeno di profonda complessità e rilevante impatto sociale quale quello della migrazione implicherebbe, sul piano metodologico, una riflessione di ampio respiro che tenga conto di tutti gli elementi che possono contribuire a comporre un efficace quadro descrittivo: dall’analisi dei flussi migratori alle politiche di regolamentazione, dall’impatto sul sistema economico e sul mercato del lavoro alle politiche di integrazione. Tuttavia, riteniamo che il fenomeno migratorio costituisca in primo luogo una questione di alta valenza politica, riconducibile soprattutto alla capacità delle istituzioni di garantire sostenibilità e integrazione, attraverso processi che tendano da un lato a valorizzare le risorse umane che il fenomeno migratorio conduce e, dall’altro, ad includere nel sistema sociale persone di cultura e lingua diverse. Il livello di integrazione dei cittadini immigrati è legato soprattutto alle politiche ed agli strumenti legislativi che l’ordinamento adotta per superare le differenze culturali, ideologiche, religiose. In tale quadro, va tenuto presente che la nozione di integrazione non coincide con quella di omologazione e che l’intervento dello Stato sarà tanto più efficace quanto più esso, attraverso le sue diverse articolazioni istituzionali, sarà in grado di assicurare, nell’ambito del principio costituzionale del pluralismo, ma anche di quello di uguaglianza, convivenza e compatibilità tra culture differenti, garantendo nel contempo un adeguato livello di diritti, soprattutto sociali, agli immigrati.

 

  • Giovanni Cellamare, In tema di informazioni sui Paesi di origine nella procedura di riconoscimento della protezione internazionale, in Freedom, Security & Justice: European Legal Studies, 2019, n. 2, p. 4 ss.
    L’UNHCR ha fornito indicazioni sui principi e metodi volti a stabilire i fatti che presiedono al riconoscimento dello status di rifugiato. Dette indicazioni mostrano la centralità del ruolo dell’autorità competente nel cooperare con il richiedente protezione per l’acquisizione delle informazioni sul Paese di origine del medesimo richiedente, nonché l’importanza di quelle informazioni ai fini della ricostruzione del contesto e dell’effettiva situazione, in tale contesto, della persona interessata al riconoscimento dello status in parola. La disciplina contenuta negli atti pertinenti dell’UE è coerente con dette indicazioni. Le stesse trovano riscontro in decisioni della Corte di giustizia dell’UE, della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo e della Corte di cassazione. Le statuizioni di quest’ultima hanno dato luogo a un preciso orientamento in materia, consolidato da recenti pronunce della stessa Corte. Il ruolo da riconoscere alle informazioni sul Paese di origine del richiedente protezione è accresciuto dall’attivazione nell’ordinamento italiano del concetto di Paese di origine sicuro.

 

  • Marco Magri, Obbligo di soccorso in mare, funzioni della Guardia costiera e respingimenti “delegati”: sui poteri del Ministro dell’interno, in Istituzioni del federalismo, 2019, n. 1, p. 149 ss.
    L’articolo esamina le recenti direttive adottate dal Ministro dell’interno in materia di polizia delle frontiere, con le quali è stato raccomandato ai corpi amministrativi competenti in materia di soccorso marittimo (inclusa la Marina militare) di considerare come “passaggio non inoffensivo” nelle acque territoriali italiane il transito di navi delle organizzazioni non governative che trasportano migranti soccorsi in alto mare. Stando agli ordini del Ministro, la nave delle ONG, per ottenere l’assegnazione di un place of safety da parte delle autorità italiane ai sensi della Convenzione di Amburgo sulla ricerca e il salvataggio marittimo (c.d. Convenzione SAR), non deve essersi spinta in una zona SAR diversa da quella di responsabilità italiana, per poi farvi intenzionalmente ingresso, eludendo le indicazioni operative o, comunque, sottraendosi alla giurisdizione del Paese responsabile del salvataggio. L’analisi intende porre alcune questioni soprattutto sul versante del diritto interno, con riferimento alle competenze del Ministro dell’interno a regolare mediante atti di “direttiva” l’attività di ricerca e soccorso della Guardia costiera.

 

 

  • Chiara Parisi, La nécessaire harmonisation du visa humanitaire dans le droit de l’Union Européenne au prisme de l’asile, in Freedom, in Security & Justice: European Legal Studies, 2019, n. 2, p. 140 ss.
    Dans un contexte qui voit l’Union Européenne confrontée, chaque jour, au franchissement illicite des frontières extérieures par des personnes fuyant la guerre et des situations de danger, mettant en péril leurs vies au profit des réseaux de trafiquants d’êtres humains, le manque d’un moyen commun qui permette l’accès légal et sûr aux territoires des Etats membres de l’Union Européenne en vue de demander l’asile a réanimé le débat autour du visa humanitaire. Ce titre, aujourd’hui fondé sur le Code des Visas Schengen, permettrait d’harmoniser davantage le droit d’asile des Etats membres et, également, de concrétiser l’objectif d’un système d’asile européen commun. Néanmoins, l’instrument actuel ne parait pas approprié à une demande de visa aux fins de l’asile. La création d’un visa ad hoc viendrait alors combler les lacunes que présente aujourd’hui le système en la matière.

 

  • Luca Masera, La legittima difesa dei migranti e l’illegittimità dei respingimenti verso la Libia (caso Vos-Thalassa), in Dir. pen. cont., 24 giugno 2019.
    La sentenza del GIP di Trapani del 23 maggio 2019 definisce, in sede di giudizio abbreviato, la nota vicenda dei migranti che nel luglio 2018 si erano opposti con la minaccia dell’uso della forza al loro rimpatrio in Libia da parte della nave commerciale italiana che li aveva soccorsi, costringendo il capitano della stessa ad invertire la rotta e condurli verso le coste italiane. Il Tribunale ha riconosciuto in capo ai due migranti individuati dalla pubblica accusa come capi della ribellione – e in tale veste chiamati a rispondere in concorso dei reati aggravati di violenza o minaccia e resistenza a pubblico ufficiale (artt. 336, 337 e 339 c.p.) e di favoreggiamento aggravato dell’immigrazione irregolare (art. 12 co. 3 d.lgs. 286/1998) – la causa di giustificazione della legittima difesa. Nel contributo si ripercorrono in modo puntuale gli snodi argomentativi di della decisione, svolgendo poi qualche riflessione in ordine alla valenza generale delle affermazioni ivi contenute.

 

 

 

 

  • Luigi Viola, La revoca della cittadinanza dopo il decreto Salvini, in federalismi.it, 2019, n. 13.
    Appare ormai evidente come uno dei provvedimenti che dovevano caratterizzare l’azione del Governo in materia di immigrazione e lotta alla criminalità, il cd. decreto Salvini (si tratta del d.l. 4 ottobre 2018, n. 113,  intitolato «disposizioni urgenti in materia di protezione internazionale e immigrazione, sicurezza pubblica, nonché misure per la funzionalità del Ministero dell’interno e l’organizzazione e il funzionamento dell’Agenzia nazionale per l’amministrazione e la destinazione dei beni sequestrati e confiscati alla criminalità organizzata» e convertito in legge, con modificazioni, dalla l. 1° dicembre 2018, n. 132) non abbia avuto una buona accoglienza in dottrina. Alle critiche generali già emerse in sede di audizione di alcuni costituzionalisti presso la Commissione Affari costituzionali del Senato, si sono, infatti, progressivamente aggiunte ulteriori ed autorevoli voci che hanno soprattutto riportato l’attenzione sui consistenti dubbi di costituzionalità insistenti sull’intero decreto legge per mancanza dei requisiti dell’eccezionalità ed urgenza e dell’omogeneità dei contenuti (in questo caso, soprattutto a seguito dell’evoluzione della giurisprudenza della Corte costituzionale) necessari per il ricorso alla decretazione d’urgenza. Più che sulle problematiche generali di incostituzionalità del decreto (ampiamente trattate negli scritti già richiamati in nota), questo breve scritto intende però soffermarsi sulla novità introdotta nell’ordinamento dall’art. 14, 1° comma lett d) del d.l. 4 ottobre 2018, n. 113, conv. in l. 1° dicembre 2018, n. 132, attraverso l’introduzione di un nuovo art. 10-bis alla l. 5 febbraio 1992, n. 91 (nuove norme sulla cittadinanza) che espressamente prevede la revoca della cittadinanza italiana acquisita ai sensi degli articoli 4, 2° comma  (relativo allo straniero nato in Italia, che vi abbia risieduto legalmente senza interruzioni fino al raggiungimento della maggiore età e che abbia dichiarato di voler acquistare la cittadinanza italiana entro un anno dalla suddetta data), 5 (relativo al coniuge di un cittadino italiano che abbia soddisfatto le condizioni previste dal detto articolo) e 9 (relativo agli stranieri cui sia stata concessa, per diverse ragioni, la cittadinanza con decreto del Presidente della Repubblica) della medesima legge, in caso di «condanna definitiva per i reati previsti dall’articolo 407, comma 2, lettera a), n. 4), del codice di procedura penale, nonché per i reati di cui agli articoli 270-ter e 270-quinquies.2, del codice penale»; in questo caso, «la revoca della cittadinanza è adottata, entro tre anni dal passaggio in giudicato della sentenza di condanna per i reati di cui al primo periodo, con decreto del Presidente della Repubblica, su proposta del Ministro dell’interno».

 

Blog

  • Priya Pillai, The EU and Migrant Detention in Libya: Complicity Under the Microscope Finally?, in Opinio Juris, 5 luglio 2019.
    The situation in Libya is deteriorating, with each day bringing news even more dire than the previous, regarding the state of the conflict and the plight of civilians. Caught up in this complex situation are significant numbers of individuals fleeing from their countries and seeking refuge, who have been forcibly relocated to Libya and are now languishing in multiple detention centres. The last few weeks have seen an escalation in the fighting – with accounts of detention centres being targeted. And finally on 3 July, with a certain  inevitability, an airstrike by a warlord on a detention centre in Tajoura, Tripoli, has killed 44 and injured over 130 individuals held there, at last count. This is the second time this particular detention centre has been hit, which houses over 600 migrants, including women and children, despite the centre’s coordinates having been provided to the warring parties.

 

  • Priya Pillai, Of Statelessness, Detention Camps and Deportations: India and the “National Register of Citizens” in Assam, in Opinio Juris, 12 luglio 2019.
    While much of the world is aghast and transfixed by the migrant detention camps in the U.S., there is another dire human rights and humanitarian crisis brewing and about to reach its zenith in the Indian state of Assam on 31 July 2019. A legal process is underway – updating the “National Register of Citizens” – that threatens to dispossess over 2 million individuals, leaving them stateless and without a remedy. In brief, and over simplifying perhaps, Assam – which borders Bangladesh and Bhutan, as well as other states in the Indian union – has a historically fraught relationship with the Indian state, linked to complex questions of borders, ethnic identity, cross-border migration and minority rights. With colonial roots, and extending to India post-partition, political Assamese nationalism has been a source of constant tension, spilling into violence such as the 1983 Nellie massacre. Eventually, the signing of the Assam Accord in 1985 formalized much of the discourse around ‘foreigners’ and what to do about them. (For a condensed timeline of the question of citizenship in Assam, see here).

 

  • Pasquale De Sena e Massimo Starita, Navigare fra istanze “stato-centriche” e “cosmopolitiche”: il caso “Sea-Watch” in una prospettiva conflittuale, in sidiblog.org, 14 luglio 2019. 
    Il caso della “Sea-Watch” pone una questione di grande importanza dal punto di vista teorico per il diritto internazionale. Si tratta del conflitto fra due modi di interpretare il funzionamento delle norme internazionali in gioco, che potremmo sinteticamente denominare prospettiva “stato-centrica” e prospettiva “cosmopolitica”. Per prospettiva “stato-centrica” intendiamo qui una duplice propensione, espressa da un certo numero di Governi; duplice, perché consistente, non solo nello spogliarsi delle responsabilità concernenti il rispetto di diritti individuali, ma anche nel negare che di tali responsabilità possano farsi direttamente carico soggetti non statali. Per prospettiva “cosmopolitica”, intendiamo invece l’atteggiamento specularmente opposto, assunto dai soggetti non statali convolti; e cioè, la propensione a farsi carico dei diritti fondamentali delle persone coinvolte, e a realizzarne la protezione, in quanto interesse collettivo giuridicamente rilevante, anche in contrasto con Governi nazionali.

 

  • Lorenzo Gradoni e Luca Pasquet, Lisistrata a Lampedusa: una riflessione sul caso Sea Watch 3, in sidiblog.org, 6 luglio 2019.
    «Come posso sbagliare se obbedisco al mio stesso comando?», si domanda Creonte, al culmine della sua autoreferenzialità. In ciò l’avversario di Antigone assomiglia un poco al Ministro dell’Interno Salvini, il quale non si capacita del fatto che i suoi decreti in materia di ordine pubblico e sicurezza non siano pacificamente assunti quale metro della legalità. In effetti, la forza degli editti dell’antico sovrano di Tebe non conosceva limiti formali di sorta, né Antigone, obiettore extra ordinem, intendeva trarne dalla legge non scritta cui era devota. Quello di Salvini, tuttavia, non è un potere creonteo. Bisogna ricordarlo? Nel moderno Stato costituzionale, il comando del legislatore, o del Governo, non è la sola fonte del diritto, né la più alta. Perciò, benché il Ministro dell’Interno si atteggi a paladino della legalità, del diritto egli fa un uso spregiudicato: il discutibile ricorso alla decretazione di urgenza, la svalutazione degli obblighi internazionali e degli atti giudiziari che li evocano, l’uso disinvolto di qualificazioni giuridiche impegnative come «atto di guerra», «omicidio», ecc. Il suo atteggiamento è quindi antitetico rispetto alla cieca, tragica adesione di Creonte al diritto della polis. Salvini, del resto, somiglia poco a Creonte anche dal punto di vista temperamentale.

 

  • Irini Papanicolopulu, Tutela della sicurezza o violazione del diritto del mare?, in sidiblog.org, 26 giugno 2019.
    Il giorno 14 giugno 2019 il governo italiano ha adottato il “Decreto-legge recante disposizioni urgenti in materia di ordine e sicurezza pubblica”. Il testo solleva vari problemi, già affrontati da post su questo e su altri blog, ma tra di essi è sicuramente di rilievo la questione della liceità delle misure nei confronti di navi che intendano entrare nel mare territoriale italiano, anche alla luce delle vicende di questi giorni, che coinvolgono la nave Sea Watch 3. Le disposizioni rilevanti si trovano nei primi due articoli che, per completezza, sono riportati alla fine di questo post. In sostanza, le due norme prevedono il potere per il Ministro degli interni di “limitare o vietare l’ingresso, il transito o la sosta di navi nel mare territoriale” (art. 1) e la sanzione prevista per il comandante che non dovesse rispettare tale divieto (art. 2). La legittimità della misura può essere valutata da vari settori, tra cui il diritto costituzionale, il diritto amministrativo, il diritto dei diritti umani (anche internazionali) e il diritto del mare. Questo breve commento valuterà se tali misure sono compatibili con gli obblighi gravanti sull’Italia in quanto Stato parte alla Convenzione delle Nazioni Unite sul diritto del mare (CNUDM) e ad altri trattati relativi al diritto del mare.

 

  • Eugenio Zaniboni, Quello che le norme non dicono. le ambiguità del Decreto sicurezza-bis, la gestione dei flussi migratori e l’Europa che verrà, in sidiblog.org, 26 giugno 2019.
    Il 15 giugno 2019 è entrato in vigore un nuovo Decreto-legge, il n. 53 del 14 giugno 2019, recante “Disposizioni urgenti in materia di ordine e sicurezza pubblica”, in G.U. serie generale n. 138 del 14 giugno 2019, disponibile qui). Pur adottato con la tecnica della decretazione d’urgenza, alla quale siamo ormai adusi, l’atto contiene disposizioni molto eterogenee, che spaziano dall’introduzione di specifiche circostanze aggravanti per reati commessi nel corso di manifestazioni sportive, all’inasprimento e ampliamento della fattispecie del reato di bagarinaggio, ed altre ancora. Tralasciando l’analisi delle disposizioni più pregnanti del Capo I del Decreto, “Disposizioni urgenti in materia di contrasto all’immigrazione illegale e di ordine e sicurezza pubblica”, che modificano il testo unico sull’immigrazione, incidono sull’applicazione di Convenzioni internazionali come la Convenzione di Montego Bay sul diritto del mare e saranno opportunamente oggetto di un post separato, ne rinveniamo altre che pongono interrogativi importanti e, come si vedrà, presentano numerosi profili di un certo interesse per il diritto internazionale e quello dell’Unione europea. Si tratta di norme le quali – pur incidendo, prima facie, solo in maniera riflessa sulla disciplina della condizione giuridica dello straniero, come è noto oggetto di una “doppia” (o rinforzata) riserva di legge ai sensi dell’art. 10, comma secondo, della Costituzione – sollevano questioni tecniche di cui si tenterà di dar conto ma alle quali non è facile, allo stato, dare una risposta esaustiva.

 

 

Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico

Fascicolo n. 2 del 2019

Ripensare il diritto dell’immigrazione

Vai alla rivista

 

Mario Savino, Il diritto dell’immigrazione: quattro sfide

Michele Pifferi, Antinomie e caratteri costanti dello ius migrandi tra Otto e Novecento

Enrica Rigo, Le parole dell’ospitalità nel lessico culturale dei giuristi

Michele Colucci, Le stagioni del governo dell’immigrazione nell’Italia repubblicana

Fulvio Cortese, La crisi migratoria e la gestione amministrativa

Alessandro Spena, Il «gelo metallico dello Stato»: per una critica della crimmigration come nuda forza

Madia D’Onghia, Immigrazione irregolare e mercato del lavoro. Spunti per una discussione

Carla Bassu, Flussi migratori e democrazie costituzionali: tra diritti umani e sicurezza pubblica

Alessio Rauti, La cittadinanza tra «sostanza», mercato e persona

Irini Papanicolopulu, Le operazioni di search and rescue: problemi e lacune del diritto internazionale

Salvatore Fabio Nicolosi, La riforma del sistema europeo comune di asilo tra impasse negoziale e miopia normativa

Federico Casolari, Il ricorso dell’Unione europea a strumenti informali per il contrasto all’immigrazione irregolare

Giuliano Amato, Immigrazione e asilo: problemi e prospettive

 

 

Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza

Fascicolo 2, Giugno 2019

Accedi all’intero fascicolo

 

 

Guido Savio, Editoriale

Saggi

Antonio Ruggeri, Cittadini, immigrati e migranti, alla prova della solidarietà

Enrico Gargiulo, L’appartenenza negata: la residenza e i suoi significati, tra ambivalenze interpretative e conflitti politici 

Chiara Stoppioni, Intermediazione illecita e sfruttamento lavorativo: prime applicazioni dell’art. 603 bis c.p.

Giammaria Milani, Ius linguae e status civitatis: verso un nuovo paradigma della cittadinanza italiana? 

Eleonora Di Molfetta, La traduzione degli atti per lo straniero alloglotto: un diritto incompiuto tra incertezze legislative e resistenze giurisprudenziali

Filippo Venturi, Il diritto di asilo: un diritto “sofferente”. L’introduzione nell’ordinamento italiano del concetto di «Paesi di origine sicuri» ad opera della l. 132/2018 di conversione del c.d. «Decreto Sicurezza» (d.l. 113/2018)

Giuseppe Cataldi e Adele Del Guercio, I Global Compact su migranti e rifugiati. Il Soft Law delle Nazioni Unite tra spinte sovraniste e potenziali sviluppi

 

 

Libri

 

  • Alessandro Simoni, Rom, antiziganismo e cultura giuridica. Prospettive di analisi, Roma, 2019.
    Nel dilagante gran parlare di Rom, risuonano di frequente termini come “legalità”, “diritto” e così via per evocarne soprattutto la violazione, naturalmente da parte dei Rom. Ciò nonostante, in un apparente paradosso, raramente i problemi così spesso richiamati nel dibattito politico e mediatico sono analizzati in una prospettiva giuridica. Il volume raccoglie una serie di scritti in cui si approfondiscono alcune difficoltà, contraddizioni e tensioni che vengono alla luce quando lo stato di diritto incontra i Rom, o chi è ritenuto tale. Un incontro da cui entrambe le parti escono malconce: i Rom perché poche “etichette etniche” sono più scomode da portare nel confrontarsi con polizie, pubblici ministeri, giudici; lo stato di diritto perché troppo spesso tende a trasformarsi in una caricatura quando si imbatte nello “zingaro”.

 

  • Sergio Carrera, Juan Santos Vara, Tineke Strik, Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of Eu Migration Policies in Times Of Crisis. Legality, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Reconsidered, Cheltenham, 2019.
    This discerning book examines EU migration and asylum polices in times of crisis by assessing old and new patterns of cooperation in EU migration management policies in the scope of third-country cooperation. The case studies explored reveal that there has been a clear tendency and strategy to move away from or go outside the decision making rules and institutional principles enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty to advance third country cooperation on migration management. It explores the implications of and effects of the adoption of extra-Treaty instruments and patterns of cooperation in the light of EU rule of law and fundamental rights principles and standards. The book, examines the ways in which ‘the politics of migration crisis’ and their patterns of cooperation and legal/policy outcomes evidenced since 2015 affect and might even undermine EU’s legitimacy in these policy areas.

 

  • Eve Lester, Making Migration Law. The Foreigner, Sovereignty and the Case of Australia, Cambridge, 2019.
    The emergence of international human rights law and the end of the White Australia immigration policy were events of great historical moment. Yet, they were not harbingers of a new dawn in migration law. This book argues that this is because migration law in Australia is best understood as part of a longer jurisprudential tradition in which certain political-economic interests have shaped the relationship between the foreigner and the sovereign. Eve Lester explores how this relationship has been wrought by a political-economic desire to regulate race and labour; a desire that has produced the claim that there exists an absolute sovereign right to exclude or condition the entry and stay of foreigners. Lester calls this putative right a discourse of ‘absolute sovereignty’. She argues that ‘absolute sovereignty’ talk continues to be a driver of migration lawmaking, shaping the foreigner-sovereign relation and making thinkable some of the world’s harshest asylum policies.

 

  • Bridget M. Haas, Amy Shuman (ed.), Technologies of Suspicion and the Ethics of Obligation in Political Asylum, Ohio, 2019.
    Across the globe, migration has been met with intensifying modes of criminalization and securitization, and claims for political asylum are increasingly met with suspicion. Asylum seekers have become the focus of global debates surrounding humanitarian obligations, on the one hand, and concerns surrounding national security and border control, on the other. In Technologies of Suspicion and the Ethics of Obligation in Political Asylum, contributors provide fine-tuned analyses of political asylum systems and the adjudication of asylum claims across a range of sociocultural and geopolitical contexts. The contributors to this timely volume, drawing on a variety of theoretical perspectives, offer critical insights into the processes by which tensions between humanitarianism and security are negotiated at the local level, often with negative consequences for asylum seekers. By investigating how a politics of suspicion within asylum systems is enacted in everyday practices and interactions, the authors illustrate how asylum seekers are often produced as suspicious subjects by the very systems to which they appeal for protection.

 

Articoli

 

 

  • Mirca Madianou, Technocolonialism: Digital Innovation and Data Practices in the Humanitarian Response to Refugee Crises, in Social Media + Society, 2019, July-September, p. 1-13
    Digital innovation and data practices are increasingly central to the humanitarian response to recent refugee and migration crises. In this article, I introduce the concept of technocolonialism to capture how the convergence of digital developments with humanitarian structures and market forces reinvigorates and reshapes colonial relationships of dependency. Technocolonialism shifts the attention to the constitutive role that data and digital innovation play in entrenching power asymmetries between refugees and aid agencies and ultimately inequalities in the global context. This occurs through a number of interconnected processes: by extracting value from refugee data and innovation practices for the benefit of various stakeholders; by materializing discrimination associated with colonial legacies; by contributing to the production of social orders that entrench the “coloniality of power”; and by justifying some of these practices under the context of “emergencies.” By reproducing the power asymmetries of humanitarianism, data and innovation practices become constitutive of humanitarian crises themselves.

 

  • Hein de Haas , Simona Vezzoli , María Villares-Varela, Opening the floodgates? European migration under restrictive and liberal border regimes 1950-2010, in IMI working paper series, vol. 150, 1-44.
    The effect of ‘open borders’ on migration has been the subject of substantial controversy. Political rhetoric and media images help stoke fear of uncontrolled mass migration that in turn fuels arguments in favour of tighter immigration regulations and border controls to ‘bring migration back under control’. In public debates, removing migration barriers is frequently portrayed as tantamount to ‘opening the floodgates’. However, immigration liberalisation may increase also circulation and return, rendering the effect on net migration theoretically ambiguous. Drawing on bilateral flow data over the 1959-2010 period contained in the DEMIG C2C database, this paper uses European Union (EU) enlargement as a case study to assess how liberalising border regimes affected migration flows. The analysis suggests that, with some exceptions, liberalisation boosted circulation rather than led to a structural increase in intra-EU migration. While removing migration barriers can lead to migration surges—particularly when economic gaps between origin and destination countries are large—these tend to be temporary, after which migration becomes more circular and tends to consolidate at lower levels. And while intra-regional circulation in the EU has grown, closing external EU borders has increasingly pushed non-EU migrants into permanent settlement along with significant family migration. These factors help to explain the structural rise in non-EU immigration, defying policy expectations that opening internal borders would decrease non-EU immigration.

 

  • Elaine McGregor, Money Matters: The Role of Funding in Migration Governance, in IMI working paper series, 149, 1 – 37.
    Since the 1990s, the agencies of the United Nations (UN) have increasingly been financed through earmarked contributions from an increasingly diverse set of donors. Since the concept of voluntary contributions was absent from the UN charter owing to the concern that it would undermine multilateralism, current funding trends raise concerns about the functioning of the UN as a multilateral system. Despite this concern there is a limited but growing body of literature that examines the relationship between funding and governance. Taking migration as a case study, this paper uses a newly created data set of earmarked contributions to the International Organization for Migration (IOM) between 2000 and 2016 (n=13,306) to examine thematic and temporal patterns in the contributions of IOM’s main donors. The fragmented nature of migration governance may well be a product of the earmarked nature of its funding, and, without concrete changes in how migration is financed, is likely to remain fragmented. However, this fragmentation can be viewed from two broad perspectives. On the negative side of the ledger, it may be observed that contributions to IOM have largely focused on issues relating to the management of certain aspects of migration that are reflective of the specific interests of its donors lending weight to the argument that the fragmented nature of global migration governance may be a product of the largely earmarked nature of migration financing which has allowed bilateral interests to dominate multilateral responses to migration issues. On the other hand, earmarked funding has arguably also allowed the international community to extend protection to displaced populations not covered by the refugee convention.

 

  • Laura Westerveen, Maryna Manchenko, (In)Visible Generations: from Integration to Equality, in Institute for European Studies, 2019, n. 2.
    Despite growing criticism on extending the category ‘immigrant’ to children of immigrants, research in the field of migration studies generally distinguishes between different generations within the population of migrant descent. Those who migrated as adults are called ‘the first generation’, while children of immigrants who were born in the host country are labelled ‘the second generation’ and children of immigrants who migrated before or during their teens comprise ‘generation 1.5’. Even though these later generations are socialised in the host country, they are often still viewed as in need of integration and targeted by integration policies. In this policy brief, we discuss the particularities of ‘generations 1.5 and 2.0’ throughout Europe and join others in arguing that policymakers and scholars need to move beyond the integration paradigm towards a paradigm of equality. We suggest that an equality paradigm needs to take into account the specific inequalities that children of immigrants might face, but, at the same time, needs to be critical of the homogenising group designations that are assigned to them.

 

  • Mohammad Salman, Tuba Bircan, Refugee Students’ Experience with the European Higher Education System. A Belgian Case Study, in Institute for European Studies, 2019, n. 2.
    The ‘Welcome Student-Refugee program’ was developed by the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) in 2015-2016 as a response to the great arrival of refugees to Belgium, mainly fleeing the war zones in the Middle East. The major goal of the programme is to help recognized refugees start or proceed with their studies in the Belgian higher educational system. This policy brief assesses the progress of the program, and the challenges the refugees have faced at the VUB. The responses are collected through a questionnaire about the obstacles refugee students faced while trying to get access to the university through the programme. The conclusions revolve around three aspects: (1) The enrolment and adaptation to EU schooling system, (2) the finances and housing issues, and (3) the integration within the university and into Belgian society. To overcome these challenges, we suggest a strategy that not only contributes to the development of the VUB refugees programme but also provides systematic indications for other European universities wishing to improve educational programs for refugees.

 

Blog

 

  • Cesare Pitea e Stefano Zirulia, “Friends, not foes”: qualificazione penalistica delle attività delle ONG di soccorso in mare alla luce del diritto internazionale e tipicità della condotta, in sidiblog.org, 26 luglio 2019.
    Le vicende che vedono protagoniste navi di organizzazioni non governative (ONG) impegnate nel soccorso di migranti lungo la rotta del Mediterraneo centrale stanno alimentando un delicato dibattito, per certi aspetti del tutto inedito, sui confini che separano un’attività umanitaria, lecita e a certe condizioni doverosa, dalla violazione della vigente disciplina italiana sull’immigrazione e sul contrasto al traffico di migranti, a sua volta adottata anche in attuazione di normative europee (direttiva 2002/90/CE e la decisione quadro 2002/946/GAI, rispettivamente sulla definizione e sulla repressione del favoreggiamento dell’ingresso, del transito e del soggiorno illegali). Il problema del “reato di solidarietà”, nei suoi profili fattuali e nei suoi principali risvolti politici e giudiziari, è noto (per una sintesi a livello europeo, v. la nota del 2018, e l’aggiornamento del 2019, dell’Agenzia dell’Unione europea per i diritti fondamentali). Sin dal 2015 alcune ONG tentano di colmare il vuoto di tutela della vita in mare venutosi a creare a fronte della contrazione delle operazioni italiane finalizzate al soccorso di migranti, predisponendo assetti navali per il monitoraggio e il salvataggio nel Mediterraneo centrale (Masera). Queste attività, tuttavia, hanno condotto all’avvio di indagini per favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione irregolare, seguite sul fronte governativo da iniziative specificamente volte, dapprima, a regolamentare con strumenti atipici e con una chiara finalità ostruttiva l’attività delle stesse (v. il Codice di condotta imposto dal Governo italiano nel 2017, sul quale v. Mussi e il documento redatto da ASGI) e, infine, a impedire e sanzionare condotte preordinate al trasporto in Italia delle persone tratte in salvo (v. le direttive del Ministro dell’Interno del 18 marzo, del 28 marzo, del 4 aprile e del 15 aprile 2019 e, in ultimo, il d.l. n. 53/2019, c.d. “decreto sicurezza-bis”, sul quale v. Zirulia e Zaniboni, nonché, per i profili di diritto internazionale del mare, Papanicolopulu e Cataldi); il tutto accompagnato da una campagna politica e mediatica che considera le stesse ONG complici degli scafisti e dunque fattore di aumento, anziché di diminuzione, dei rischi per la vita delle persone.

 

 

 

 

Libri

 

Laura Salvadego, The Respect for Fundamental Human Rights in the Fight against Human Trafficking and Migrant Smuggling across the Central Mediterranean Sea, Brill, 2019.
This study analyzes counter-smuggling and counter-trafficking operations carried out in the Mediterranean, mainly focusing on the EU operations Sophia and Themis. The purpose is to assess a number of issues linked with naval operations from a human rights perspective. These issues include the applicable law, the exercise of criminal jurisdiction over smugglers and traffickers, national strategies of coastal States as regards migration control policy and, finally, international responsibility for human rights violations perpetrated in connection with these operations. Although the study is primarily aimed at both Ph.D students and legal scholars specialized in the field, it also seeks to provide insights that may be of guidance to NGOs, legal practitioners and legislators within the EU and its Member States.

 

Tommaso Natoli, Alice Riccardi (eds.), Borders, Legal Spaces and Territories in Contemporary International Law. Within and Beyond, Springer, 2019.
The book examines the challenges posed to contemporary international law by the shifting role of the border, which has recently re-emerged as a central issue in international relations. It posits that borders do not merely correspond to States’ boundaries: indeed, while remaining a fundamental tool for asserting States’ power, they are in fact a collection of constantly changing spatial limits. Consequently, the book approaches borders as context-specific limits and revisits notions traditionally linked to them (jurisdiction, sovereignty, responsibility, individual rights), while also adopting the innovative approach of viewing borders as phenomena of both closedness and openness. Accordingly, the first part of the book addresses what happens “within” borders, investigating the root causes of the emergence of spatial limits and re-assessing apparent extra-territorial assertions of State power. In turn, the second part not only explores typical borderless spaces, but also more generally considers the exercise of States’ and international organisations’ powers and prerogatives across or “beyond” borders.

 

Francesco Fasani, Giovanni Mastrobuoni, Emily G. Owens, Paolo Pinotti (eds.), Does Immigration Increase Crime? Migration Policy and the Creation of the Criminal Immigrant, Cambridge, 2019.
Do migrants lead to an increase of crime rates in their host societies? This highly contentious issue has become a mainstay in the political debate and a lightning rod for the galvanization of populist movements, despite often lacking any empirical support. In this game-changing book, the authors examine what the existing data actually says, and provide their own novel evidence on the immigration-crime connection. Taking the unusual approach of analysing the subject from an economic perspective, the authors build on the pioneering work of Nobel Prize winner Gary Becker to construct their innovative arguments. By considering evidence from different countries, with a focus on establishing causal relationships, the authors are able to analyse not only if migrants do cause crime but also whether migration policies can play a role in shaping incentives for migrants to engage in crime. This book will appeal to students and academics across the social sciences, as well as citizens interested in this topical issue.

 

Annalisa Camilli, La legge del mare. Cronache dei soccorsi nel Mediterraneo, Rizzoli, 2019.
Per lungo tempo li abbiamo chiamati “angeli del mare”. Le Ong impegnate nel Mediterraneo per soccorrere i migranti erano considerate il simbolo della società civile europea pronta all’accoglienza, quella della solidarietà e degli striscioni “Refugees Welcome”, che aveva scelto di non abdicare al proprio ruolo dopo il conflitto in Siria e l’esodo legato al fallimento delle primavere arabe.Poi qualcosa è cambiato. Nel 2017, nel giro di pochi mesi, il discorso pubblico è stato deviato: gli angeli sono diventati vicescafisti, le loro navi taxi del mare. Un processo di criminalizzazione segnato da tappe precise: un dossier dell’agenzia europea Frontex, una campagna mediatica, la commissione d’indagine del Senato, poi le accuse (perlopiù archiviate) di alcune procure siciliane, i sequestri delle navi, infine le dichiarazioni dei politici di casa nostra e di esponenti della destra sovranista di tutta Europa. Fino allo stallo dei porti chiusi via Twitter, ai casi della Aquarius e della Diciotti, alla guerra di posizione sulla redistribuzione dei migranti che segna ogni giorno il dibattito politico italiano ed europeo. La legge del mare ripercorre da vicino le fasi di questa evoluzione, partendo da Josefa, la donna camerunense salvata dalla nave Open Arms nel luglio 2018, e dalla strumentalizzazione della foto delle sue unghie smaltate di rosso. Annalisa Camilli, giornalista di “Internazionale” da anni impegnata a seguire le rotte delle migrazioni verso l’Europa, racconta la caduta degli angeli del mare, la loro messa sotto accusa, l’origine della propaganda contro le Ong che contamina l’informazione in Rete e il dibattito pubblico. Lo fa portandoci a bordo delle navi dei soccorritori, spiegandoci chi sono davvero, come operano e in che modo finanziano le loro attività. Un viaggio necessario per capire che la legge del mare ha un unico obiettivo: salvare la vita di chi rischia di sparire tra le onde.

 

Articoli

 

Adele Del Guercio, Il caso della “Sea-Watch 3” tra obblighi di diritto del mare, diritti umani e tutela dell’infanzia, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 2, p. 331 ss.
This article focuses on the affair of the Sea Watch 3, a ship that, after rescuing forty-seven people in distress at sea, including fifteen minors, was blocked in Italian territorial waters for more than ten days, with the survivors forbidden from disembarking. Different profiles of the facts are analyzed, starting from the relevant obligations associated with international maritime law, and the question of the disembarkation in a place of safety. We then try to verify whether the naval blockade ordered by the Italian authorities, which forced the boat to moor in front of the port of Syracuse for more than ten days, can be considered a deprivation of freedom of the people on board. Finally, the investigation focuses on how far the Italian authorities’ treatment of unaccompanied minors complies with the international, European and national obligations to which Italy is bound.

 

Eugenio Zaniboni, Money for Nothing, Push-back ‘for Free’: On the (Missed) Implementation of the CEAS and the New Italian Agenda for Asylum Seekers Reception, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 2, p. 257 ss.
An international organization and its legal order rest on the assumption of compliance. This is also a crucial aspect of the (missed) realization of a Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and, more generally, of the crisis of the European Union. Italy has been particularly exposed to migration flows for more than thirty years; nevertheless, the development of an asylum seekers’ reception system in compliance with the standards set forth by the European Union Reception Conditions Directive (RCD) has been very slow. After a brief overview of Member States’ obligations under international and EU law on asylum-seekers’ reception, the article focuses on national and European case-law, which also gives the interpreter an helpful contribution to the reconstruction of the material reception conditions in Italy (quite critical in some cases). It is found that, according to recent inquiries by national enforcement authorities and also by the Italian Parliament, organized crime learned to profit from refugees’ reception. As a consequence, hosting asylum-seekers in Italy can sometimes be a “business”, riddled with corruption and illicit taking of public resources. Yet, under the (indirect) pressure of the courts’ decisions for practical achievement of the standard, Italy has undertaken a first effort to make the reception policies for asylum seekers compliant with the obligations incurred at a European level. Nevertheless, a new Law of December 2018, as a consequence of a growing general bias to contain the migrant flows and to tighten of the financial, administrative and procedural aspects linked both to the reception and to the examination of asylum applications, put into question the fate of some essential dimensions of the national and international solidarity legal obligations, including the “non-refoulement” principle.

 

Felice Giuffré, Alle radici dell’ordinamento: la solidarietà tra identità e integrazione, in Rivista AIC, 2019, n. 3.
La Costituzione italiana prevede in modo espresso il principio di solidarietà e lo declina sia sul piano politico, che sul versante economico-sociale. La solidarietà politica è stata conseguita con il patto costituente ed è stata sancita dalla approvazione della Carta costituzionale. Essa si esprime, innanzi tutto, nella cittadinanza, che evoca il particolare vincolo politico e identitario che lega l’elemento sociale dell’ordinamento, cioè il Popolo. Tale vincolo, tuttavia, non esclude ulteriori processi di integrazione, che scavalcano i confini della cittadinanza, secondo le finestre già previste in Costituzione e che possono condurre ad un allargamento della solidarietà “a cerchi concentrici”. La solidarietà economica e sociale, a differenza di quella politica, esprime una esigenza di integrazione che non è stata conseguita già al momento dell’entrata in vigore della Costituzione e che, piuttosto, va ricercata incessantemente, per assicurare a ciascuna persona le condizioni per una esistenza libera e dignitosa. Anche in questo ambito, comunque, alcune prestazioni di solidarietà devono prescindere dal possesso della cittadinanza; altre, invece, sono assicurate ai cittadini o, comunque, secondo criteri di ragionevolezza, a chi possa vantare uno stabile collegamento con il territorio e la relativa comunità. Tale ultimo legame, del resto, è quello che conduce con il trascorrere del tempo all’acquisto della cittadinanza da parte dello straniero e, dunque, alla massima estensione della solidarietà politica anche nei confronti di chi inizialmente non era componente della comunità politica.

 

Sandra Mantu, Elspeth Guild and Paul Minderhoud, Transforming Migrants into ‘Real’ Citizens — EU Citizenship and Some Unfulfilled Promises, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 3, p. 283 ss.
More than 25 years ago the EU launched citizenship of the European Union, a last minute addition to the Maastricht Treaty adopted in recognition of the EU’s new relationship with the countries of Central Europe after the tumultuous period following the fall of the Berlin Wall. The objective was to strengthen the common identity of nationals of the Member States as belonging not just to their Member State but also to ‘Europe’. While the EU treaties have been amended a number of times since then, little, other than the article numbers, has changed regarding the Treaty provisions on citizenship. Yet, at the time it was created Spanish and Portuguese workers still did not enjoy free movement as workers. The EU’s enlargement to include Austria, Finland and Sweden was around the corner (taking place in 1995) and already the possibility of the big bang enlargement of 2004 was in the air. EU citizenship gave the nationals of the Member States a series of rights, including the rights to move, reside, and work in another EU state. More importantly, EU citizenship brought along the promise of equal treatment with nationals of the host state suggesting that it had the potential to be more than a migration status.

 

Anthony Valcke, EU Citizens’ Rights in Practice: Exploring the Implementation Gap in Free Movement Law, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 3, p. 289.
The purpose of this article is to investigate how EU citizens’ free movement rights are applied and enforced in practice and determine whether the situation on the ground demonstrates the existence of a so-called ‘implementation gap’ involving a disconnect between, on the one hand, how the EU free movement rules are intended to operate and, on the other, their application in practice at the national level. Drawing upon a multitude of sources from Belgium, Ireland, Italy, France, Sweden and the UK, an exploration is undertaken of the ways in which this ‘implementation gap’ manifests itself through a review of the various instances where Member States have sought to restrict the exercise of free movement rights through the adoption of national measures relating to the transposition, application and enforcement of Directive 2004/38 on residence rights.

 

Sandra Mantu and Paul Minderhoud, Exploring the Links between Residence and Social Rights for Economically Inactive EU Citizens, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 3, p. 313.
This article examines the links between residence and social rights in the context of EU citizens’ mobility. It builds on national replies to a questionnaire concerning the implementation and application of Directive 2004/38 at the national level. Our focus is on how the EU28 are implementing the provisions on social assistance for economically inactive EU citizens, including five relevant European Court of Justice (ECJ) judgments in this area (Brey, Dano, Alimanovic, Garcia-Nieto and Commission v UK) and the provisions on permanent residence status. Based on the national replies we argue that asking for social benefits becomes a first step towards being considered by the administration as an unreasonable burden, which leads to the termination of EU residence rights. Our analysis shows that asserting and maintaining residence rights under Articles 7 and 16 of Directive 2004/38 is becoming problematic for certain categories of EU citizens and linked with the more restrictive position taken by some Member States in relation to accessing their national social assistance systems.

 

Stamatia Devetzi, EU Citizens, Residence Rights and Solidarity in the Post-Dano/Alimanovic Era in Germany, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, 338 ss.
The Dano and Alimanovic decisions of the ECJ have triggered various developments in German social security law and (social) court jurisprudence. While the German courts’ rulings regarding the rights of non-active EU migrants still vary, the legislator has moved towards excluding more EU citizens from receiving non-contributory benefits. In the aftermath of Dano and, more specifically, Alimanovic, the provisions of Book II of the German Social Code were revised at the end of 2016. The new rules not only ‘confirm’ the ECJ-decisions, but also go beyond, as far as to exclude EU migrants who have residence rights according to Reg. (EU) No. 492/2011. This article discusses these recent developments. It focuses on the ECJ-case law regarding Art. 10 of Reg. (EU) No. 492/2011 (former Art. 12 of Reg. 1612/68), in particular the Ibrahim and Teixeira rulings. Which residence rights do prevail—those according to Dir. 2004/38/EC or those based on Reg. (EU) No. 492/2011? It is argued that a new discussion on the interrelation between Dir. 2004/38/EC and Reg. (EU) No. 492/2011—an aspect ignored by the German legislator—is emerging: What started as a restriction of access to national welfare for economically non-active persons has obviously reached the ‘economically active’ (= workers) as well. The German example shows that Member States may be testing which other residence rights—in addition to those for short stays and job searches—might be valid before the ECJ ‘as residence rights without social rights’.

 

Elspeth Guild, EU Citizens, Foreign Family Members and European Union Law, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 3, p. 358 ss.
While international human rights law enshrines family life as a cornerstone of society, when it intersects with migration, issues and problems arise in countries where migration is high on the political agenda. This is true in a number of EU states. Both EU law and European human rights commitments, however, require states to provide for family reunification subject to a margin of discretion to the state. While family reunification for refugees and beneficiaries of international protection has been at the top of some political agendas in Europe, this article looks at family reunification (generally known as family reunion) for another group—nationals of the Member States. In particular it poses two questions: do EU Member States accept their own nationals to come back to their home state with third country national family members they have acquired while abroad? Secondly, to what extent do EU Member States discriminate against their own nationals in comparison with the generous EU rules of family reunion for nationals of other Member States who have exercised a free movement right in their country. This article is based on reports by experts from all EU Member States in light of the 2014 judgment in O & B (C-456/12) by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

 

Bernard Ryan, Selective Citizenship: How the Court of Justice Linked Security of Residence to Integration, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 3, p. 374 ss.
This article examines the case-law of the Court of Justice concerning security of residence for EU citizens and family members under Directive 2004/38. The relevant provisions of the Directive confer a right of permanent residence, and enhanced protection against expulsion, upon longer-term residents. It is argued that, in interpreting these provisions from 2006 onwards, the Court of Justice adopted a discourse which conceived of the rights as dependent on an individual’s social integration. The initial effect of the Court’s ‘turn’ to integration was benign, as it supported the retrospective extension of permanent residence, and ensured the efficacy of enhanced protection against expulsion. Later, however, the Court would treat integration as a precondition, in ways which would limit the rights of long-term residents who were not economically active or self-sufficient, or who had been sentenced to periods of imprisonment. That Court’s integration discourse was presumably influenced by developments in policy concerning third-country nationals at the state level which had linked immigration status to integration tests. The result was a selective approach to security of residence, which tended to deny protection to persons whose presence was unlikely to be favoured by Member States.

 

Tyler Dickens Ward and Dennis Raphael, Canada’s Detention of Children in Immigration Holding Centres, in The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 2019, vol. 27, n. 3, p. 562 ss.
Between 2015–2016, 201 children were held in detention in the Toronto Immigration Holding Centre (Canada Border Services Agency, 2017). There may have been even more held across Canada, but these figures are unavailable. Child detention is illegal under international law and causes serious mental, physical, and emotional health complications. In this article we discuss Canada’s detention of children drawing upon scholarship in the areas of (a) human rights and the law; (b) children’s health and health equity; and (c) the political economy of the welfare state. The paper provides alternatives to Canadian practices by describing child detention best practices.

 

Liberty Chee, ‘Supermaids’: Hyper-resilient Subjects in Neoliberal Migration Governance, in IMI Working Papers, 2019, vol. 153.
Resilience is a concept in world politics that emerged, in part, as a way to respond to the impossibility of guaranteeing security in an era of complexity. Absent a central authority that provides security, risk is devolved to the individual, and those who cannot secure themselves are enjoined to constantly adapt to the unknown. Where control over complex systems is now thought to be impossible, the path to managing risks is through self-control. This paper demonstrates how such a subject is produced, and indeed whose production, I argue, is crucial to the functioning of a global labor market that is governed ‘without government.’ Migrant domestic workers acutely instantiate the kind of human subjectivity called forth by neoliberalism – a ‘resilient subject.’ The paper describes how this ideal worker is produced through resilience training in various stages of the migration trajectory – during recruitment, training prior to deployment and while on their overseas residency. This paper demonstrates how managing the insecurities of migrant domestic work means working on the ‘self’ rather than addressing gaps in legal or regulatory mechanisms. In resilience training, the worker becomes the necessary component of neoliberalism as a governmental rationality, one that is enjoined to transform risk into opportunity. This paper draws from an eight-month multi-sited ethnography in the major migrant domestic worker sending and receiving in Southeast Asia – notably the Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia.

 

Blog

Elena Pizzaroli, La legge del mare, in rivistailmulino.it, 16 settembre 2019

Nel corso di questa estate 2019, diverse sono state le navi di Ong rimaste per giorni in stallo nel Mediterraneo in attesa di ottenere l’autorizzazione all’attracco e allo sbarco. Ogni volta si è assistito a un analogo susseguirsi di fatti: l’individuazione di un’imbarcazione in difficoltà, il salvataggio da parte degli operatori, la richiesta di un porto sicuro (Pos, Place of Safety), il diniego della possibilità di entrare in un porto italiano effettuato tramite social media da Matteo Salvini – titolare del Viminale fino alla fine di agosto –, le disposizioni effettive firmate dai ministri delle Infrastrutture e della Difesa, la lunga attesa a bordo fino alla soluzione, negoziata caso per caso.

 

 James C. Hathaway, Acquiescing in Refoulement, in verfassungsblog.de, 12 settembre 2019.
The judgment of the US Supreme Court issued on Wednesday (Attorney General v. East Bay Sanctuary Covenant) purports to be simply procedural: it overturns a lower court injunction that prevented President Trump’s unilateral “safe third country” rule from coming into force before its legality is tested on the merits. But in truth, the Supreme Court knowingly acquiesced in the refoulement of refugees arriving at the US southern border.  Especially since any reversal of the lower court’s decision is supposed to be “extraordinary” relief – with the government bearing an “especially heavy” burden – the US Supreme Court cannot avoid its own complicity in this tragic result.

 

Graziella Romeo, Il diritto all’asilo e la nebulizzazione dell’indirizzo politico: cosa racconta Attorney General v. East Bay Sanctuary Covenant?, in diritticomparati.it, 26 settembre 2019.
La decisione della Corte Suprema nel caso Attorney General v. East Bay Sanctuary Covenant (588 U. S. __ (2019) ha guadagnato la dignità sostanziale di sentenza benché si tratti di un decreto di sospensione, privo di motivazione e, però, accompagnato da una brevissima dissenting opinion, firmata da Justice Sotomayor e condivisa da Justice Ginsburg. La sospensione colpisce due ordinanze della corte distrettuale dello Stato della California, con le quali era stata bloccata l’applicazione della rule 16 luglio 2019 (84 Fed. Reg. 33829), adottata dal Department of Justice di concerto con il Department of Homeland Security. Il provvedimento normativo inibisce la presentazione di domande di asilo e di protezione internazionale agli immigrati che giungono alla frontiera meridionale degli Stati Uniti, avendo precedentemente attraversato il Messico ovvero altro paese terzo senza aver ivi richiesto rifugio.

Libri

  • Yasmin Ibrahim, Anita Howarth, Calais and its Border Politics. From Control to Demolition, Routledge, 2019.
    Calais has a long history of transient refugee settlements and is often narrated through the endeavour to ‘sanitize’ it by both the English and the French in their policy and media discourses. Calais and its Border Politics encapsulates the border politics of Calais as an entry port through the refugee settlements known as the ‘Jungle’. By deconstructing how the jungle is a constant threat to the civilisation and sanity of Calais, the book traces the story of the jungle, both its revival and destruction as a recurrent narrative through the context of border politics. The book approaches Calais historically and through the key concept of the camp or the ‘jungle’ – a metaphor that becomes crucial to the inhuman approach to the settlement and in the justifications to destroy it continuously. The demolition and rebuilding of Calais also emphasises the denigration of humanity in the border sites. The authors offer a comprehensive insight into the making and unmaking of one of Europe’s long-standing refugee camps. The book explores the history of refugee camps in Calais and provides an insight into its representation and governance over time. The book provides an interdisciplinary perspective, employing concepts of space making, human form and corporeality, as well as modes of representation of the ‘Other’ to narrate the story of Calais as a border space through time, up to its recent representations in the media. This book’s exploration of the representation and governance of the contentious Calais camps will be an invaluable resource to students and scholars of forced migration, border politics, displacement, refugee crisis, camps and human trauma.

 

  • Devyani Prabhat (eds.), Citizenship in Times of Turmoil? Theory, Practice and Policy, Elgar, 2019.
    This innovative book considers the evolution of the contemporary issues surrounding British citizenship, integrating the social aspects and ideas of identity and belonging alongside its legal elements. With contributions from renowned lawyers and academics, it challenges the view that there are immutable values and enduring rights associated with citizenship status. The book is organised into three thematic parts. Expert contributors trace the life cycle of the citizenship process, focusing on becoming a British citizen, retaining this citizenship with its associated rights, and the potential loss of citizenship owing to immigration controls. Through a critical examination of the concepts and content of British citizenship, the premise that citizenship retracts from full membership in society in times of turmoil is questioned. Wide-ranging and interdisciplinary, Citizenship in Times of Turmoil? will be a key resource for scholars and students working within the fields of migration, citizenship and immigration law. Including details of legal practice, it will also be of benefit to practitioners.

 

  • Sergio Carrera, Juan Santos Vara, Tinek Strik (eds), Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis. Legality, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Reconsidered, Elgar. 2019.
    This discerning book examines EU migration and asylum polices in times of crisis by assessing old and new patterns of cooperation in EU migration management policies in the scope of third-country cooperation. The case studies explored reveal that there has been a clear tendency and strategy to move away from or go outside the decision making rules and institutional principles enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty to advance third country cooperation on migration management. It explores the implications of and effects of the adoption of extra-Treaty instruments and patterns of cooperation in the light of EU rule of law and fundamental rights principles and standards. The book, examines the ways in which ‘the politics of migration crisis’ and their patterns of cooperation and legal/policy outcomes evidenced since 2015 affect and might even undermine EU’s legitimacy in these policy areas. Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis will be a key resource for academics and students focussing on EU Law and migration more specifically. Timely and engaging, it will also appeal to policy- makers, legal practitioners and international organisation representatives alike.

 

Articoli

  • Marco Benvenuti, Lo strano caso Diciotti. Diritti, rovesci e argomenti in una (brutta) pagina di diritto costituzionale italiano, in costituzionalismo.it, 2019, n. 2.
    Il contributo affronta in una prospettiva di diritto costituzionale il caso Diciotti, ossia la vicenda del trattenimento di 177 naufraghi per oltre cinque giorni a bordo di una nave militare ormeggiata nel porto di Catania avvenuto nell’agosto del 2018. Da tale episodio è scaturito un procedimento penale nei confronti del Ministro dell’interno pro tempore M. Salvini, che ha visto la Camera competente pronunciarsi sull’autorizzazione a procedere, trattandosi di un reato ministeriale. Il lavoro si apre con una rapida rassegna dei fatti in cui è consistito il caso Diciotti; propone una duplice disamina della disciplina del soccorso marittimo e di quella del giudizio sui reati ministeriali; affronta, soprattutto, i principali argomenti addotti in sede parlamentare al fine di motivare il diniego dell’autorizzazione a procedere, i quali risultano per l’autore tanto più innovativi quanto meno convincenti.

 

  • Susanna Quadri, Sovranità funzionale e solidarietà degli Stati a tutela dei diritti dei migranti, in Diritto pubblico, comparato ed europeo, 2019, n. 2, p. 663 ss.
    Migrations are not a contingent event, because in the context of international society the mass movement of human beings from some territories to other places has occurred continuously for the most different reasons. Despite the international character of migration, it has been governed almost exclusively through national law measures, which have not pursued the overall interests involved, similar to the few rules adopted at supranational level (such as those originating from the TFEU). We believe that the concept of «functional» sovereignty emerged in the Italian doctrine and European case law together with the application of the principle of solidarity may constitute the legal basis for a balanced management of migratory phenomena in Europe, originated from international cooperation.

 

  • Lucia Aleni, Revoca dello status di rifugiato e principio di non refoulement: in margine a una recente pronuncia della Corte di Giustizia dell’UE, in Osservatorio AIC, 2019, n. 5.
    The article examines the ruling of the EU Court of Justice on the validity of the provisions contained in Directive 2011/95/EU (Qualification Directive) related to revocation of refugee status or refusal to grant refugee status based on danger to the security or the community of the host Member State (art. 14, para. 4 to 6, Qualification Directive), in the light of the relevant provisions both of the TFEU and of the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union. The article explores the legal status of the refugee deprived of status recognition in the country of asylum on the basis of this judgement. Moreover, it argues that the provision derogating from the principle of non-refoulement in the 1951 Geneva Convention has exceptional character. Hence it tries to envisage scenarios and contradictions that could arise in the case of “extensive” application.

 

  • Gerasimos Tsourapas, The Syrian Refugee Crisis and Foreign Policy Decision-Making in Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey, in Journal of Global Security Studies, 2019, vol. 4, n. 4, p. 464 ss.
    How does forced migration affect the politics of host states and, in particular, how does it impact states’ foreign policy decision-making? The relevant literature on refugee politics has yet to fully explore how forced migration affects host states’ behavior. One possibility is that they will employ their position in order to extract revenue from other state or nonstate actors for maintaining refugee groups within their borders. This article explores the workings of these refugee rentier states, namely states seeking to leverage their position as host states of displaced communities for material gain. It focuses on the Syrian refugee crisis, examining the foreign policy responses of three major host states—Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey. While all three engaged in post-2011 refugee rent-seeking behavior, Jordan and Lebanon deployed a back-scratching strategy based on bargains, while Turkey deployed a blackmailing strategy based on threats. Drawing upon primary sources in English and Arabic, the article inductively examines the choice of strategy and argues that it depended on the size of the host state’s refugee community and domestic elites’ perception of their geostrategic importance vis-à-vis the target. The article concludes with a discussion of these findings’ significance for understanding the international dimension of the Syrian refugee crisis and argues that they also pave the way for future research on the effects of forced displacement on host states’ political development.

Blog

  • Paolo Barcella, Una riflessione a partire dal libro di Concetto Vecchio. La memora non basta, in rivistailmulino.it, 3 ottobre 2019.
    I protagonisti dei fatti raccontati da Cacciateli! Quando i migranti eravamo noi (Feltrinelli, 2019) sono centinaia di migliaia di emigranti italiani che, dopo la Seconda guerra mondiale, cercarono fortuna in Svizzera, un piccolo ma ricco Paese dove, all’epoca, vivevano meno di sei milioni di abitanti. Inizialmente erano Gastarbeiter, lavoratori ospiti, donne e uomini emigrati per lavorare, senza la famiglia al seguito: costretti a lunghi periodi di precarietà; dovettero sopportare di tutto, lo statuto dello stagionale, le baracche, il freddo, i rischi per la vita e per la salute nei grandi cantieri, i permessi annuali, una vita al risparmio, la xenofobia subita. Nel giro di un ventennio, raggiunsero percentuali impressionanti, in alcune città superiori al 20% della popolazione, e – grazie agli accordi bilaterali firmati nel 1964 tra il governo italiano e quello elvetico – sempre più spesso si stabilizzavano, portando con sé mogli, mariti, figli. Proprio in quel momento, mentre cresceva l’impatto di queste persone sui servizi sanitari e scolastici, si accesero violente campagne anti-italiani di cui divenne emblema James Schwarzenbach: a capo del principale partito xenofobo svizzero, Schwarzenbach fomentava i connazionali alla difesa della Confederazione dall’invasione italiana. Fecero parte di quell’ondata migratoria anche i genitori di Concetto Vecchio, autore di un volume pubblicato nelle scorse settimane. Grazie a una ricognizione tra fonti dell’epoca e fonti recenti, intrecciate alle memorie familiari, Vecchio consegna ai lettori italiani una efficace ricostruzione giornalistica di una pagina poco studiata dell’esperienza italiana in Europa.

 

  • Daniel Thym, The German Migration Package: A New Deal on Labour Migration?, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 1° ottobre 2019.
    Notwithstanding a lack of popular support, the German government managed to bring a rather extensive set of eight bills on immigration through parliament before the 2019 summer break. This blogpost aims at introducing the core piece of legislation of Germany’s recent migration package to a transnational audience: the Skilled Immigration Act, which indicates the determination of the largest Member State not to confine migration policy reform to supranational harmonisation, even though the reform step may reinforce the international debate about legal migration and its interaction with the asylum system. Closer inspection of the Skilled Immigration Act also offers insights into specificities of the German debate.

 

  • Silvia Bartolini, Return Directive or Criminal Law? The next episode of the series is called Arib, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 24 settembre 2019.
    On 19 March 2019, the Court of Justice of the EU (hereinafter, the “CJEU”) delivered its long-awaited ruling in the Arib case, where it was asked once again to verify the compatibility of Article L. 621-2 of the Ceseda (the French code on foreigners and asylum as amended by the law of 31 December 2012), which penalizes with a term of imprisonment the irregular entry of third country nationals, with Directive 2008/115 (hereinafter, the “Return Directive”). Article L. 621-2 of the Ceseda had already come under the spotlight in the Affum case. There the CJEU held that the imprisonment of third-country nationals on the sole basis of their irregular entry would only be possible when the return procedure has come to its formal end. In particular, the CJEU singled out two specific circumstances where Member States are allowed to impose such term of imprisonment. Firstly, when the return procedure has been applied and the third-country national continues to stay in the territory without justified reasons for non-return. Secondly, when the third-country national re-enters the territory of that Member State in breach of an entry ban.
  • Fenella Billing, The ECtHR on Disembarkation of Rescued Refugees and Migrants at Greek Hotspots, in EJIL:Talk!, 25 ottobre 2019.
    The pressure of mass migration in the Mediterranean on EU sea-border states calls for other member states to contribute to humanitarian efforts at sea that respect the human rights of refugees and migrants. Article 98 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) codifies the maritime duty to rescue persons in distress and creates the complementary duty on coastal states to cooperate in operating search and rescue (SAR) services. Under the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR Convention) and the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS Convention) the relevant coastal state must ensure timely disembarkation of survivors at a ‘place of safety’ (see e.g. 1979 SAR Convention Annex ch. 3, 3.1.9). However, poor reception and detention conditions at Greek hotspots in the Aegean Sea raise the question of whether disembarkation at these EU assigned facilities will be in contravention of obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), in particular the Article 3 prohibition on inhuman and degrading treatment.

Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza

Fascicolo 2, Giugno 2019

Guido Savio, Editoriale

 

Saggi

Antonio Ruggeri, Cittadini, immigrati e migranti, alla prova della solidarietà

Enrico Gargiulo, L’appartenenza negata: la residenza e i suoi significati, tra ambivalenze interpretative e conflitti politici

Chiara Stoppioni, Intermediazione illecita e sfruttamento lavorativo: prime applicazioni dell’art. 603 bis c.p.

Giammaria Milani, Ius linguae e status civitatis: verso un nuovo paradigma della cittadinanza italiana?

Eleonora Di Molfetta, La traduzione degli atti per lo straniero alloglotto: un diritto incompiuto tra incertezze legislative e resistenze giurisprudenziali

Filippo Venturi, Il diritto di asilo: un diritto “sofferente”. L’introduzione nell’ordinamento italiano del concetto di «Paesi di origine sicuri» ad opera della l. 132/2018 di conversione del c.d. «Decreto Sicurezza» (d.l. 113/2018)

Giuseppe Cataldi e Adele Del Guercio, I Global Compact su migranti e rifugiati. Il Soft Law delle Nazioni Unite tra spinte sovraniste e potenziali sviluppi

Accedi all’intero fascicolo

 

Libri

Tom Farer, Migration and Integration. The Case for Liberalism with Borders, Cambridge, 2019
Migration and Integration clarifies and proposes answers for all of the politically toxic questions associated with large-scale migration from the Global South to the Western liberal democracies. Driven by the conviction that the Alt-Right is using the issues of migration and integration effectively to batter the defenses of liberal democracy, Professor Tom Farer argues that despite its strength, the moral case for open borders should be rejected and that while broadly tolerant of different life styles, the state should enforce core liberal values. Examining closely the policies and practices of various European states, Farer draws on their experience, contrasts it with that of the United States, and provides a detailed strategy for addressing the issues of who should be allowed to enter, how migrant families should be integrated and cultural conflicts resolved. This remarkable elaboration of a liberal position on migration and integration to which moderate conservatives could adhere combines powerful analysis with passionate advocacy.

 

 

Nergis Canefe, Transitional Justice and Forced Migration. Critical Perspectives from the Global South, Cambridge, 2019.
This volume brings together critical legal scholarship and theories of forced migration that draw attention to the dual role of law as it pertains to transitional justice and mass violence resulting in forced population movements. Contributors to the volume analyze how forced migration in the Global South have impacted contemporary realities. While there has been considerable focus on refugees and asylum seekers from conflict zones, there is less attention paid to the far more numerous internally displaced peoples (IDPs), stateless people, warehoused refugees, non-status displaced and returnees in the Global South. In this volume, a multidisciplinary group of scholars question the reasons behind the restrictive choices that lock us into area studies modalities instead of genuine interdisciplinary analysis by linking the traditional subject matter of transitional justice with the realities of forced migration in the Global South.

 

Satvinder Singh Juss (ed.), Research Handbook on International Refugee Law, Elgar, 2019
In recent years the UNHCR has expressed increasing concern at how war, violence and persecution have resulted in an age of unprecedented mass displacement. The global financial crisis, the rise of populist leaders, and the growth of anti-EU parties, raises the need to interrogate the ‘refugee’, ‘migrant’, ‘citizen’, ‘stateless’, ‘legal’, and ‘illegal’ as concepts. This Research Handbook maintains that refugees need to be seen as core indicators of the failure of national, international, economic, and political governance, and provides critical analyses of the legal ordering of refugees, giving a glimpse at what the future of refugee law could – and should – look like. Bringing together experts in the field, the innovative and groundbreaking chapters provide a critical perspective on the legal landscape for refugees at a time when the politics and legitimacy of transnational regulatory governance are in question as never before. In an age of growing ethnic nationalism and anti-immigrant rhetoric, the contributing authors examine key issues surrounding refugees and migration, and build a new outlook on social justice, as the post-war international order ends. With its informative analysis and moving accounts, this Research Handbook will be a critical tool for students of law, especially those with an interest in human rights and migration. Its insights will also be valuable for policy practitioners and policymakers.

 

 

Articoli

 

  • Eugenio Cusumano, Matteo Villa, Sea Rescue NGOs: a Pull Factor of Irregular Migration?, in MPC Policy Brief, 2019, n. 22.
    The argument that maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) operations act as a ‘pull factor’ of irregular seaborne migration has become com- monplace during the Mediterranean ‘refugee crisis’. This claim has frequently been used to criticize humanitarian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) conducting SAR off the coast of Libya, which are considered to provide “an incentive for human smugglers to arrange departures” (Italian Senate 2017: 9). In this policy brief, we scrutinize this argument by examining migratory flows from Libya to Italy between 2014 and October 2019. We find no relationship between the presence of NGOs at sea and the number of migrants leaving Libyan shores. Although more data and further research are needed, the results of our analysis call into question the claim that non-governmental SAR operations are a pull factor of irregular migration across the Mediterranean sea

 

  • Giuseppe Campesi, Genealogies of Immigration Detention: Migration Control and the Shifting Boundaries Between the ‘Penal’ and the ‘Preventive’ State, in SAGE, novembre 2019.
    The aim of this article is to explore the ambiguous legal status of immigration detention by discussing the main theoretical perspectives on its nature and the functions it plays in contemporary migration policies. After presenting a typological and genealogical reconstruction of immigration detention, the article contends that it should not be seen as being related either to the politics of ‘exception’ or to the expanding reach of ‘penal’ power in a context of mass migration. Instead, the argument presented here is that immigration detention exhibits the characteristics of preventive measures typically related to the exercise of police powers and that its increased role in migration policies should be read in the wider framework of the shifting boundaries between the ‘penal’ and the ‘preventive’ state in contemporary societies

 

  • Jo Shaw, ‘Shunning’ and ‘seeking’ membership: Rethinking citizenship regimes in the European constitutional space, in Global Constitutionalism, 2019, vol. 8, n. 3
    his article explores parallels between the ‘shunning’ and ‘seeking’ of membership of the EU in the context of Brexit and stalled enlargement in south-east Europe, via a focus on the partial, fragmentary and contested governance of citizenship. The case studies place Union citizenship into a wider political and socio-economic context, demonstrating its central importance as an enabler of personal freedom. At the same time, they highlight how the denial or removal of Union citizenship can engender individual strategies to recover lost or denied benefits. From the analysis, parallels emerge between Union citizenship and national citizenship; both offer a promise of equality, but a reality of differentiation and inequality. At the same time, by delving deep into the case studies, it proves possible to illuminate the complex and often ‘messy’ constitutional edifice of the European Union, involving sometimes contradictory processes of Europeanisation and de-Europeanisation affecting citizenship regimes at all levels.

 

  • Daniela Irrera, ‘Non-governmental Search and Rescue Operations in the Mediterranean: Challenge or Opportunity for the EU?’, in European Foreign Affairs Review, 2019, vol. 24, n. 3, pp. 265–286
    The article analyses the development of Search and Rescue (SAR) Operations in the Central Mediterranean by NGOs as a controversial but efficient practice and aims to discuss its impact on states’ and EU performances in coping with the migrant and refugee crisis. Using empirical data provided by the Italian Coast Guard from 2014 to 2018, it focuses on these questions: Are non-governmental SAR operations at sea becoming a civilian practice to be associated with governmental ones? Can the consolidation of such practice impact (complement) governmental and intergovernmental policies? It is divided into three parts. First, civil society organizations, and specifically NGOs, are analysed within the theoretical studies on migration, to stress their roles and approaches and to understand their relevance. Second, the recent use of SAR operations at sea by NGOs to rescue people in the Mediterranean are discussed as a complementary tool to governmental one. Their potentiality to become more than a temporary solution and instead to constitute an innovative and consolidated practice of ‘non-governmental SAR operations’ is assessed. Last, empirical data are used to evaluate the perception of such practice and to discuss its political and social legitimation.

 

  • Eva Magdalena Stambøl, ‘The Rise of Crimefare Europe: Fighting Migrant Smuggling in West Africa’, in European Foreign Affairs Review, 2019, vol. 24, n. 3, pp. 287–307
    This article explores the incremental role of criminalization and crime control in European Union (EU) foreign policy and external action. Protecting Europe from dangerous or unwanted mobility has come to drive the EU’s relations with Africa. Consequently, the EU’s liberal state-building agenda (promoting peace, democracy and human rights) seems to be increasingly accompanied or even sometimes supplanted by illiberal practices (criminalization, policing, surveillance, border security and militarization). Based on fieldwork in Niger, Mali and Senegal, the article nvestigate show West African countries’ internal security apparatuses and borders are increasingly becoming a main target sector for European assistance. Yet scrutinizing policy implementation reveals that some European crime definitions and control models are locally resisted and contribute to greater insecurity by upsetting fragile micro-political stability. As such, the article problematizes the compatibility of European and African security, and argues for a collaborative engagement between Criminology and International Relations (IR) in analysing the EU’s emerging global crime-fighting role.

 

  • Julia Schmidt, The European Union and the Responsibility to Protect, in European Foreign Affairs Review, 2019, vol. 24, n. 3, pp. 309–325
    The European Union (EU) has committed itself to the promotion and the implementation of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in political statements, most recently in the EU Global Strategy. When taking a closer look at the activities of the EU in the context of humanitarian crises that can be brought within the R2P framework, the strength and effectiveness of the EU’s support might be questioned. This article examines the EU’s interest in the R2P by addressing the factors that inspired the EU’s openness towards the concept and by examining whether the EU’s commitment to the R2P falls within its general ambitions to contribute to international security or whether the EU is placing human suffering at the core of its considerations. In addition, this article questions to what extent the EU is capable of pursuing its own interest in the R2P and to what extent the EU is held back in implementing its commitment to the R2P by differing EU Member State approaches. It will be shown that the EU is strongly committed to fulfilling its collective responsibilities in partnership with the United Nations and that the focus of the EU’s activities has been put on atrocity prevention.

 

  • Helene Thiollet, Immigrants, Markets, Brokers, and States: The Politics of Illiberal Migration Governance in the Arab Gulf, in IMI Working Papers, 2019, n. 155
    Despite seemingly open immigration policies and rights-based reforms, the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries recently engaged in international and domestic policies to better control immigration. This article unpacks the realpolitik of mass immigration conducted by the Gulf states by showing how they use retaliatory and coercive migration diplomacies as well as migrant rightswashing on the international scene to shape immigration flows. At the domestic level, Gulf governments’ reforms seek to police labour market segmentation and institutionalise a regime of “differential exclusion” that officialises intersectional discriminations across nationalities and class. Drawing upon sources in English and Arabic, as well as interviews with public officials, businessmen, and migrants in the region over a decade (2006-2017), this article describes how states and nonstate actors, including businessmen, migrant networks, and brokers, operate policies and practices of control. I first find that a recent sovereign turn has transformed migration politics in the Gulf. I show that contingent state policies and reforms in the past decades more accurately account for migration governance processes than oil prices and market dynamics, the nature of political regimes, or the rentier structures of Gulf polities. This study thus fills a gap in migration research on the Global South that usually focuses on emigration countries and diaspora policies and underestimates the role of immigration policies. Secondly, I find that migration policies have become more discriminatory across migrant categories in the GCC, as other studies have shown for OECD countries. Such findings lead us to discuss the global relevance of illiberal practices and policies and introduce the hypothesis of a global convergence in illiberal migration governance.

 

  • Lea Müller-Funk, Adapting to staying, or imagining futures elsewhere: Migration decision-making of Syrian refugees in Turkey, in IMI Working Papers, 2019, n. 154
    There is a lack of research into the question of how refugees make migration decisions. Building upon the literature concerning migration aspirations and drivers of migration in contexts of forced displacement, this working paper examines the questions of how and why Syrian refugees in Istanbul and Izmir experience mobility and immobility. Drawing on the findings of a mixed-methods study conducted in 2018 amongst refugees in those two cities, it disentangles the many different ways of staying in Turkey. It offers insights into the perspectives of Syrians who aspire to return to Syria but stayed; those who want to remain in the country; those who aspire to move on to another country but stayed; and those who left for Europe but returned to Turkey. The findings of this study show a strong desire to return among the Syrian refugee population in Turkey, should the conflict come to an end. It also finds moderate aspirations to stay in Turkey, and a strong resistance to the idea of migrating further, into Europe. However, aspirations with regard to return and onwards migration were higher than actual migratory behaviour on the ground. The paper highlights that subjective factors such as life satisfaction, imaginings of the future, and hope, are crucial factors at the micro-level that shape refugees’ migration decision-making on a micro-level. The hope for return, one day, to Syria had initially motivated many Syrians to remain in Turkey. However, a combination of having given up hope of safely returning to Syria in the future, relatively high life satisfaction in Turkey, and negative ideas about what life in Europe might entail, have led Syrians to consider settling down in Turkey. Access to work is perceived as being easier there than in Europe, and a sense of a common cultural belonging has created strong counter-narratives to Europe as a potential destination

 

  • Cesare Pitea, La nozione di «Paese di origine sicuro» e il suo impatto sulle garanzie per i richiedenti protezione internazionale in Italia, in Rivista di diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 3, pp. 627-662
    L’articolo esamina le questioni giuridiche e di politica del diritto derivanti dall’introduzione nell’ordinamento italiano della nozione di “Paese di origine sicuro” nell’esame delle domande di protezione internazionale. Dopo aver chiarito i criteri per la designazione nell’elenco dei Paesi sicuri e l’effettiva portata della “presunzione di protezione” che tale designazione determina, l’articolo esamina le novellate disposizioni sullo sfondo del diritto derivato dell’Unione Europea, della protezione dei diritti fondamentali ai sensi della Carta dell’Unione Europea e degli obblighi internazionali derivanti dalla Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo. L’articolo pone in evidenza diversi aspetti critici nella trasposizione della “direttiva procedure” Tra queste: la possibilità di designazione geografica parziale, la mancanza di un obbligo di motivazione nelle decisioni di rifiuto da parte delle autorità amministrative, i ristretti termini della procedura accelerata, l’applicabilità della nozione ai minori non accompagnati e le deboli garanzie in materia di protezione contro il refoulement in pendenza di un ricorso giudiziario. Nel quadro delle politiche di contenimento delle migrazioni, si dubita infine che la nozione di “Paese di origine sicuro” possa contribuire all’efficienza della procedura di asilo, se non al costo di operare contestualmente, nella sua applicazione pratica, una significativa limitazione delle garanzie fondamentali poste a protezione dei richiedenti asilo.

 

  • Paolo Fois, Integrazione degli immigrati e rispetto della diversità culturale nel diritto dell’Unione europea, in FS&J, 2019, n. 3
    Da un esame dei numerosi scritti dedicati alla disciplina dell’immigrazione nel diritto dell’Unione europea si coglie agevolmente l’esistenza di tre distinte, ma al tempo stesso connesse, questioni: quella dell’ingresso nel territorio dell’Unione e del controllo delle frontiere esterne; quella dello status riconosciuto agli immigrati e ai rifugiati; la questione, infine, del rimpatrio degli immigrati irregolari. Nel Capo 2 del Titolo V TFUE (artt. 77-80), riguardante lo “Spazio di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia”, sono delineati i principi sulla cui base dette questioni devono essere regolate. Rispetto alla varietà e alla ricchezza dei contributi apparsi in merito alle questioni ora richiamate, colpisce l’interesse relativamente modesto dedicato all’aspetto dell’“integra- zione” degli immigrati, al quale peraltro il Trattato sul funzionamento dell’Unione europea, all’art. 79, fa espresso riferimento.

 

  • Nicola Colacino, La Corte di giustizia UE afferma l’irrevocabilità della qualità di rifugiato e il carattere assoluto del divieto di respingimento. Quali indicazioni per il giudice nazionale?, in FS&J, 2019, n. 3
    Nel percorso di costruzione dello spazio di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia inaugurato dal Consiglio europeo di Tampere del 1999, la disciplina del sistema comune di asilo può considerarsi uno degli ambiti di normazione più rappresentativi, caratterizzato, com’è noto, da uno sviluppo “per fasi”. Nell’ultimo periodo, l’assetto complessivamente delineato dalla legislazione europea denuncia alcune problematiche emergenti, determinate dalla crescente diffusione di orientamenti politici contrari all’osservanza dei doveri di solidarietà gravanti sugli Stati membri in forza dell’art. 80 del Trattato sul funzionamento dell’Unione europea (d’ora in poi, TFUE). Il riferimento non è solo all’incertezza che grava sull’esito del processo di riforma dei criteri di determinazione della competenza degli Stati membri per l’esame delle domande di protezione internazionale, di cui al regolamento “Dublino III”, ma anche alla possibile regressione del contenuto delle garanzie finora riconosciute ai soggetti beneficiari quale effetto della tendenza alla cd. “securitizzazione” dello spazio giuridico europeo.

 

  • Rossana Palladino, Cittadinanza europea, perdita della cittadinanza nazionale, in federalismi.it, 2019, n. 20
    Al tempo della Brexit, l’istituto della cittadinanza europea ed il suo essere inscindibilmente connesso alla cittadinanza degli Stati membri rappresenta uno dei temi di maggiore dibattito dottrinario, che ha condotto ad una rivitalizzazione delle riflessioni sulla definizione di una “cittadinanza autonoma” dell’Unione europea. Pur non potendo essa profilarsi, a “trattati vigenti” le Istituzioni dell’Unione europea hanno, in linea generale, progressivamente mostrato di accentuare il grado di “pervasività” del diritto dell’Unione europea nella domestic jurisdiction degli Stati, per quanto concerne sia l’acquisto che la perdita della cittadinanza. Sotto il primo profilo, è ben nota la questione riguardante i cd. “programmi di cittadinanza per investitori” (cd. “passaporti d’oro”) che, in particolare, ha condotto la Commissione europea a richiedere agli Stati membri interessati ad assicurarsi che la cittadinanza sia concessa in presenza di un “legame effettivo” e ad attivare un meccanismo di monitoraggio sulla conformità delle legislazioni nazionali con il diritto dell’Unione europea. Il criterio del cd. “genuine link”, sotto il diverso profilo della perdita della cittadinanza, è anche al centro della recente sentenza della Corte di giustizia relativa al caso Tjebbes che, sulla scia della precedente sentenza Rottman, invoca il “due regard” per il diritto dell’Unione europea, ossia il rispetto del diritto dell’UE nelle determinazioni nazionali inerenti alla perdita della cittadinanza di uno Stato membro che si riverbera sulla cittadinanza europea e sul godimento dei diritti ad essa connessi. Su questi ultimi profili intende proprio concentrarsi il presente scritto, analizzando, alla luce della giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea (parr. 2-3), le implicazioni del “rispetto del diritto dell’Unione europea” e il tipo di sindacato su cui la Corte appare orientato, specie a seguito della sentenza Tjebbes (par. 4), e prendendo poi in considerazione la recente novella che ha interessato l’ordinamento italiano con la previsione della “revoca” della cittadinanza nell’ipotesi di condanna definitiva per alcune fattispecie di reati, istituto che trova applicazione solo nei confronti di coloro che abbiano ottenuto la cittadinanza per concessione e non anche per i cittadini iure sanguinis (par. 5).

 

  • Pierfrancesco Rossi, Politica dei “porti chiusi” e diritto internazionale: il caso Sea Watch 3, in Osservatorio AIC, 2019, n. 6.
    In June 2019 the Sea Watch 3, an NGO ship carrying migrants rescued at sea, was banned to enter Italian ports and territorial waters under the so-called ‘closed ports’ policy of the Italian government. After a two-week standoff, the ship contravened the prohibition and entered the port of Lampedusa, where the captain Carola Rackete was arrested for violence against public officers. However, a judge soon ordered her release on grounds that her actions were required by the international law of the sea. This paper analyzes the main international law issues raised by this incident, notably including the legitimacy of the ban on entering Italian territorial waters and ports. It is argued that, while the ‘closure’ of the territorial sea appears to be unlawful, that of Italy’s ports does not. This reflects the deficiencies of the international law norms concerning disembarkation of people rescued at sea.

 

  • Thomas Spijkerboer, Elies Steyger, European External Migration Funds and Public Procurement Law, in European Papers, 2019, vol. 4, n. 2, p. 493.521
    Since 2014, the European Union has established three funds (for Africa, Syria, and refugees in Turkey) to implement its external migration policy. In this Article, we analyse whether these funds and their implementation are compatible with EU public procurement law. This leads to a mixed picture. The wholesale exemption of expenditure under the EU Trust Fund for Africa from public procurement is incompatible with EU law; the exemption is not motivated, and it is implausible that there is a crisis in all 26 African countries where the Trust Fund operates thorough the duration of the Trust Fund. However, some more limited exceptions may apply, allowing for exempting particular projects from public procurement. Whether or not public procurement has taken place is often not transparent. It is remarkable that the notion of emergency is used in a cursory manner. It is equally remarkable that European public procurement law is not well integrated in external migration policy.

 

 

Post

 

  • Federico Ferri, L’assassino è il maggiordomo? Primi rilievi sulle conclusioni dell’Avvocato generale nel giudizio di infrazione contro Polonia, Ungheria e Repubblica ceca in materia di ricollocazioni, in SIDI blog, 20 novembre 2019
    Il 31 ottobre 2019 l’Avvocato generale Eleanor Sharpston ha reso le proprie conclusioni nelle cause attivate dalla Commissione europea ai fini dell’accertamento delle presunte violazioni commesse da Polonia, Ungheria e Repubblica Ceca rispetto a obblighi di ricollocazione di richiedenti asilo derivanti dalla decisione (UE) 2015/1601 (C-715/17, C-718/17, C-719/17). Come prevedibile, l’Avvocato generale ha ravvisato la sussistenza dei profili di responsabilità individuati dalla Commissione. Tuttavia, vuoi per l’originalità dell’oggetto, vuoi per il delicato contesto di riferimento, le conclusioni dell’Avvocato Sharpston meritano di essere analizzate già prima della sentenza che la Corte di giustizia pronuncerà a breve. Prima di addentrarsi nei contenuti dell’opinione è però opportuno ripercorrere, benché per sommi capi, gli eventi più significativi che hanno indotto la Commissione ad attivare la procedura prevista dall’art. 258 TFUE.

 

  • Minos Mouzourakis, All but last resort: The last reform of detention of asylum seekers in Greece, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 18 novembre 2019
    Unlawful deprivation of liberty is a longstanding and amply highlighted concern in the Greek asylum system. Greece consistently resorts to systematic detention of people seeking international protection at its borders and on its soil. In 2018, during which 66,969 applicants registered claims with the Asylum Service, the Hellenic Police detained 18,204 asylum seekers in pre-removal detention centres alone, while holding many more in unsuitable police stations. This is almost double the number of asylum seekers held in pre-removal centres in 2017 (9,534). Albeit reflecting only part of detention landscape in the country, these figures reveal the continuation of a policy of migration management largely based on coercion.

 

 

  • Thomas Spijkerboer & Elies Steyger, Does the EU violate public procurement law in its external migration policy?, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 28 novembre 2019.
    In 2014-2015, the European Union adopted three financial measures in order to cooperate with neighbouring countries in the field of migration policy. By July 2019, the Trust Fund in response to the Syrian crisis, also called the Madad Fund, was worth a total of €1.8 billion; the European Union Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa was worth €4.6 billion; and the Facility for Refugees in Turkey €5.6 billion. The European external migration funds are subject to the ordinary public procurement rules to which both the member states and EU institutions themselves are subject. This requires open, transparent and objective procedures so as to open up markets for public contracts, stimulating competition and therefore quality of contractors and the proper spending of public money.

 

  • Niels Kirst, The Three Villains and the Lifeblood of the European Union Project – Advocate General Sharpton’s Opinion in C-715/17 (the asylum relocation mechanism), in EU Law Analysis, 27 novembre 2019
    Recently, Advocate General Sharpston (hereafter ‘the AG’) had to give her opinion on the failure to implement Decisions of the Council regarding the relocation of migrants within the European Union. The opinion deserves distinction due to its firmness and its comprehensive categorization of the concept of solidarity in the European Union legal order. The case itself has a political importance since it relates to the ongoing rule of law crisis within the European Union. The case concerned the Area of Freedom, Justice and Security (hereafter ‘AFJS’), Article 72 TFEU (the safeguard clause) and the Dublin Regulation, which allocates responsibility for asylum applications within the EU. In the proceedings, the European Commission (hereafter ‘the Commission’) brought infringement proceedings under Article 258 TFEU against Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic for not implementing Decisions of the Council within their legal order. The case occurred at the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereafter ‘the Court’ or ‘Court of Justice’) as a direct cause of the migration crisis of 2015 in the European Union.

 

  • Thomas Spijkerboer & Elies Steyger, Does the EU violate public procurement law in its external migration policy?, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 28 novembre 2019.
    In 2014-2015, the European Union adopted three financial measures in order to cooperate with neighbouring countries in the field of migration policy. By July 2019, the Trust Fund in response to the Syrian crisis, also called the Madad Fund, was worth a total of €1.8 billion; the European Union Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa was worth €4.6 billion; and the Facility for Refugees in Turkey €5.6 billion. The European external migration funds are subject to the ordinary public procurement rules to which both the member states and EU institutions themselves are subject. This requires open, transparent and objective procedures so as to open up markets for public contracts, stimulating competition and therefore quality of contractors and the proper spending of public money.

 

  • Niels Kirst, The Three Villains and the Lifeblood of the European Union Project – Advocate General Sharpton’s Opinion in C-715/17 (the asylum relocation mechanism), in EU Law Analysis, 27 novembre 2019
    Recently, Advocate General Sharpston (hereafter ‘the AG’) had to give her opinion on the failure to implement Decisions of the Council regarding the relocation of migrants within the European Union. The opinion deserves distinction due to its firmness and its comprehensive categorization of the concept of solidarity in the European Union legal order. The case itself has a political importance since it relates to the ongoing rule of law crisis within the European Union. The case concerned the Area of Freedom, Justice and Security (hereafter ‘AFJS’), Article 72 TFEU (the safeguard clause) and the Dublin Regulation, which allocates responsibility for asylum applications within the EU. In the proceedings, the European Commission (hereafter ‘the Commission’) brought infringement proceedings under Article 258 TFEU against Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic for not implementing Decisions of the Council within their legal order. The case occurred at the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereafter ‘the Court’ or ‘Court of Justice’) as a direct cause of the migration crisis of 2015 in the European Union.

Libri

 

Katja Franko, The Crimmigrant Other, Migration and Penal Power, Routledge, 2019
Western societies are immersed in debates about immigration and illegality. This book examines these processes and outlines how the figure of the “crimmigrant other” has emerged not only as a central object of media and political discourse, but also as a distinct penal subject connecting migration and the logic of criminalization and insecurity. Illegality defines not only a quality of certain acts, but becomes an existential condition, which shapes the daily lives of large groups within the society. Drawing on rich empirical material from national and international contexts, Katja Franko outlines the social production of the crimmigrant other as a multi-layered phenomenon that is deeply rooted in the intricate connections between law, scientific knowledge, bureaucratic practices, politics and popular discourse.

 

David Miller, Christine Straehle, The Political Philosophy of Refuge, Cambridge, 2019
How to assess and deal with the claims of millions of displaced people to find refuge and asylum in safe and prosperous countries is one of the most pressing issues of modern political philosophy. In this timely volume, fresh insights are offered into the political and moral implications of refugee crises and the treatment of asylum seekers. The contributions illustrate the widening of the debate over what is owed to refugees, and why it is assumed that national state actors and the international community owe special consideration and protection. Among the specific issues discussed are refugees’ rights and duties, refugee selection, whether repatriation can be encouraged or required, and the ethics of sanctuary policies.

 

Matthew Scott, Climate Change, Disasters, and the Refugee Convention, Cambridge, 2019
Climate Change, Disasters and the Refugee Convention is concerned with refugee status determination (RSD) in the context of disasters and climate change. It demonstrates that the legal predicament of people who seek refugee status in this connection has been inconsistently addressed by judicial bodies in leading refugee law jurisdictions, and identifies epistemological as well as doctrinal impediments to a clear and principled application of international refugee law. Arguing that RSD cannot safely be performed without a clear understanding of the relationship between natural hazards and human agency, the book draws insights from disaster anthropology and political ecology that see discrimination as a contributory cause of people’s differential exposure and vulnerability to disaster-related harm. This theoretical framework, combined with insights derived from the review of existing doctrinal and judicial approaches, prompts a critical revision of the dominant human rights-based approach to the refugee definition.

 

Caroline Taylor, Daniel Joseph Torpy, Dilip K. Das, Policing Global Movement, Tourism, Migration, Human Trafficking, and Terrorism, Routledge, 2019
The movement of humans across borders is increasing exponentially—some for benign reasons, others nefarious, including terrorism, human trafficking, and people smuggling. Consequently, the policing of human movement within and across borders has been and remains a significant concern to nations. Policing Global Movement: Tourism, Migration, Human Trafficking, and Terrorism explores the nature of these challenges for police, governments, and citizens at large.

 

Anna Lise Purkey, Refugee Dignity in Protracted Exile Rights, Capabilities and Legal Empowerment, Routledge, 2019
This book investigates how effective human rights and the inherent dignity of refugees can be secured in situations of protracted exile and encampment. The book deploys an innovative human rights-based capabilities approach to address fundamental questions relating to law, power, governance, responsibility, and accountability in refugee camps. Adopting an original theoretical framework, the author demonstrates that legal empowerment can change the distribution of power in a given refugee situation, facilitating the exercise of individual agency and assisting in the reform of the opportunity structure available to the individual. Thus, by helping to increase the capability of refugees to participate actively in the decisions that most affect their core rights and interests, participatory approaches to legal empowerment can also assist in securing other capabilities, ultimately ensuring that refugees are able to live dignified lives while in protracted exile. Ultimately, the book demonstrates that legal empowerment of refugees can bring lasting benefits in establishing trust between refugees, the state, and local communities. It will be of interest to researchers within the fields of refugee studies, international law, development studies, and political science, as well as to policy-makers and practitioners working in the fields of refugee assistance and humanitarian intervention.

 

Elspeth Guild, Steve Peers, and Jonathan Tomkin, The EU Citizenship Directive: A Commentary, Oxford, 2019
The EU Citizenship Directive defines the right of free movement for citizens of the European Economic Area. It applies to EU citizens and their family members who move to another Member State. This might at first seem like a straightforward definition, but immediately questions arise. Who determines if a person is an EU citizen at all? What about dual citizens of two Member States, or of one Member State and a non-Member State (a ‘third State’)? What is the position of EU citizens who move to one Member State, and then return to their home Member State? This book provides a comprehensive commentary of the EU’s Citizens’ Directive tracing the evolution of the Directive’s provisions, placing each article in its historical and legislative context. Special emphasis is placed on highlighting the connections and interactions between the Directive’s constituent provisions so as to permit a global appreciation of the system of free movement rights to which the Directive gives effect. Each provision is annotated containing a detailed analysis of the case-law of the Court of Justice as well as of related measures impacting upon the Directive’s interpretation including European Commission reports and guidelines on the Directive’s implementation. This fully-updated new edition includes dscussion of relevant case law since the first edition, and has been expanded to include detailed discussion of rights of EU and UK citizens after Brexit in the withdrawal agreement.

 

Articoli

 

Chiara Feliziani, Giustizia amministrativa ed immigrazione. A proposito di alcuni nodi irrisolti, in Diritto Pubblico Comunitario, 2019, n. 2, p. 267
Given the great relevance that the phenomenon of migration has taken on in the last years, the article is devoted to analyse the level of protection that is offered to migrants by the Italian administrative judge. Especially taking into account both ECJ and ECHR case law, the paper focuses on some of the shortcomings of the national system of administrative justice. In so doing, the article argues that the latter is still far from achieving the objective of an effective judicial protection for migrants.

 

 

Susan Fratzke, Lena Kainz, Hanne Beirens, Emma Dorst, Jessica Bolter, Refugee Sponsorship Programs: A Global State of Play and Opportunities for Investment, in MPI, 2019, n. 15
A pair of contradictory trends is challenging humanitarian protection systems around the world: the number of refugees in need of protection has climbed to an all-time high, while at the same time, many countries have reduced their commitments to refugee resettlement. With protection needs high and generosity low, it has become more important to find new ways for refugees to reach safety and to rebuild public consensus around the value of offering protection to those in need. To meet these challenges, governments and civil-society groups in a growing number of countries have begun to explore refugee sponsorship (also called community or private sponsorship), either as a complement or alternative to traditional protection pathways. This MPI Europe policy brief takes stock of sponsorship programs worldwide—from the well-established Canadian private sponsorship program, to much newer and smaller-scale initiatives in countries such as Argentina, Germany, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Although government investment and support for such programs are essential, this study also lays out a variety of ways private philanthropic actors can support these programs. Among them: funding the development of informational materials and hotlines for sponsors; investing in program infrastrucrture, such as staff positions within civil-society organizations; and monitoring and evaluation by civil society and/or government. Crucially, the authors note that while much effort in recent years has gone into developing and launching new initiatives, existing programs also face important capacity and funding gaps. “To ensure the capacity of refugee protection systems at a global level,” they write, “strengthening these programs should be viewed as a priority equal in importance to setting up new schemes”.

 

Patrizia Rinaldi, Unaccompanied Migrant Minors at the Frontier of Human Rights. The Spanish Case, in The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 2019, vol. 27, n. 4
Protecting children is paramount for upholding the European values of respect for human rights, dignity and solidarity. It is also about enforcing European Union law and respecting the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and international human rights law on the rights of the child. The existing EU legislation provides a framework for the protection of the rights of the child in migration, including reception conditions, dealing with their applications and integration. This article elaborates on provisions concerning the international protection system for minor migrants. It examines entry strategies put into place by young migrants facing the Spanish migration system. The first part examines the guidelines of the reception system for unaccompanied migrant minors arriving in Spain. An assessment of the Spanish arrangements for the reception of umms is carried out in the second part, focussing on three key aspects: refoulement at the border (pushback), age determination and guardianship.

 

Hein de Haas, Paradoxes of Migration and Development, in IMI, 2019, vol. 157
This paper argues why and how migration should be conceptualised as an intrinsic part of broader processes of development and social change instead of as the antithesis of development, as dominant discourses hold. When societies go through the various economic, cultural, technological, political and demographic transitions associated with ‘development’, this leads to increasing levels of internal and international out-migration. Low-income societies generally have lower emigration levels because poverty tends to constrain people’s movements. Development leads to more instead of less migration because it increases people’s capabilities and aspirations to move. The paradox of development-driven emigration hikes shows the inability of conventional push–pull and neoclassical models to explain migration as well as the need for a new vision of migration as part of broader development. Migration is shaped by development in both origin and destination societies and also contributes to further change in its own right. However, the embeddedness of migration in broader processes of social transformation and development also means that its potential to affect structural change is fundamentally limited. This shows the logical fallacy of narratives that cast development as a ‘solution’ for perceived migration problems or that cast migration and remittances as panaceas with which to solve fundamental development problems.

 

Daniela Irrera, Non-governmental Search and Rescue Operations in the Mediterranean: Challenge or Opportunity for the EU?, in European Foreign Affairs Review, 2019, vol. 24, n. 3
The article analyses the development of Search and Rescue (SAR) Operations in the Central Mediterranean by NGOs as a controversial but efficient practice and aims to discuss its impact on states’ and EU performances in coping with the migrant and refugee crisis. Using empirical data provided by the Italian Coast Guard from 2014 to 2018, it focuses on these questions: Are non-governmental SAR operations at sea becoming a civilian practice to be associated with governmental ones? Can the consolidation of such practice impact (complement) governmental and intergovernmental policies? It is divided into three parts. First, civil society organizations, and specifically NGOs, are analysed within the theoretical studies on migration, to stress their roles and approaches and to understand their relevance. Second, the recent use of SAR operations at sea by NGOs to rescue people in the Mediterranean are discussed as a complementary tool to governmental one. Their potentiality to become more than a temporary solution and instead to constitute an innovative and consolidated practice of ‘non-governmental SAR operations’ is assessed. Last, empirical data are used to evaluate the perception of such practice and to discuss its political and social legitimation.

 

Douglas S. Massey, Creating the exclusionist society: from the War on Poverty to the war on immigrants, in Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2020, vol. 43, n. 1
A series of policy decisions beginning in 1965 produced an exclusionist climate in the United States. Lyndon Johnson sought to eliminate prejudice from the nation’s immigration system but inadvertently curtailed opportunities for legal entry from Mexico that created a large undocumented population. In waging the Cold War, Ronald Reagan launched an intervention in Central America that displaced many more thousands who also became undocumented residents. The Wars on Crime and Drugs of Presidents Nixon and Reagan created a prison industrial complex that imprisoned blacks and Hispanics. George Bush’s War on Terror unleashed a rising tide of deportations swept Latino migrants into the immigrant detention system. Finally, President Trump transformed a humanitarian problem affecting Central American families and children into a manufactured immigration crisis for the nation as a whole. The result is among the most repressive and exclusionist context of immigrant reception in American history.

 

Eva Magdalena Stambøl, The Rise of Crimefare Europe: Fighting Migrant Smuggling in West Africa, in European Foreign Affairs Review, 2019, vol. 24, n. 3, pp. 287–307
This article explores the incremental role of criminalization and crime control in European Union (EU) foreign policy and external action. Protecting Europe from dangerous or unwanted mobility has come to drive the EU’s relations with Africa. Consequently, the EU’s liberal state-building agenda (promoting peace, democracy and human rights) seems to be increasingly accompanied or even sometimes supplanted by illiberal practices (criminalization, policing, surveillance, border security and militarization). Based on fieldwork in Niger, Mali and Senegal, the article investigates how West African countries’ internal security apparatuses and borders are increasingly becoming a main target sector for European assistance. Yet scrutinizing policy implementation reveals that some European crime definitions and control models are locally resisted and contribute to greater insecurity by upsetting fragile micro-political stability. As such, the article problematizes the compatibility of European and African security, and argues for a collaborative engagement between Criminology and International Relations (IR) in analysing the EU’s emerging global crime-fighting role.

 

Charlotte O’Brien, B. National Courts Acte cryptique? Zambrano, welfare rights, and underclass citizenship in the tale of the missing preliminary reference, Common Market Law Review, 2019, vol. 56, n. 6, pp. 1697–1732
What kind of right to reside did Zambrano create? Are Zambrano families entitled to rely on the fundamental principle of equal treatment to access subsistence benefits? And when is a question of EU law sufficiently unclear to create an objective duty for the national court of last instance to make a preliminary reference?The UK Supreme Court recently concluded that Zambrano families are not entitled to any particular quality of life or to any particular standard of living – so consigning a potentially vulnerable group of EU national children to underclass citizenship. It did so with surprising certainty, without troubling the ECJ with a preliminary reference. But it is hard to imagine a matter less acte clair, or more in need of clarification and consistency at EU level. There is ample reasonable doubt on the matter, strongly suggesting that the Supreme Court breached its duty to refer. Very little of what the ECJ did say in Zambrano was clear – never mind what it did not say.

 

Sonja Fransen , Hein de Haas, The Volume and Geography of Forced Migration, in IMI, 2019, vol. 156
This paper studies the long-term evolution of global refugee migration, with a particular emphasis on the post-World War II period. We use the UNHCR Population Statistics Database to explore the intensity as well as the geographical spread and distance of refugee migrations at a global, regional, and country level between 1951 and 2018. The analyses refute the idea that there has been a substantial and linear increase in the intensity of global refugee migration. Moreover, problems with coverage and quality of earlier data give reason to think that levels of past refugee migration were underestimated. Apparent increases in the global number of displaced are mainly driven by the recent inclusion of other populations (such as the internally displaced and people in “refugee-like” situations) and countries that were previously excluded from statistics. Yet the analyses reveal several geographical shifts in refugee migration over the past decades. Refugees tend to come from a shrinking number of origin countries and go to an increasing number of destination countries. This trend reflects an overall long-term global decline in the levels of violent conflict and a concentration of recurrent conflict cycles in a few particular states. The average distance between origin and residence countries has increased over time, although the vast majority of refugees continue to stay near origin countries. Refugee populations continue to be concentrated in countries with low to medium GDP levels, and there has not been a major increase in South-North refugee migration.

 

Francesco Manganaro, Politiche e strutture di accoglienza delle persone migranti, in federalismi.it, 2019, n. 22
Il lavoro passa in rassegna la complessa evoluzione normativa in tema di immigrazione, fino alla recente emanazione dei due decreti sicurezza ed alla decisione della Corte costituzionale su uno di essi. Questioni antropologiche e sociologiche confluiscono in una disciplina normativa troppo spesso segnata da fatti occasionali e che ha portato ad una sottovalutazione del fenomeno, impedendo di impiantare politiche di lungo periodo. E’ necessario che i diritti umani dei migranti non siano solo enunciati, ma realizzati attraverso strutture di accoglienza e percorsi di integrazione, che garantiscano la dignità umana e consentano di perseguire quella coesione sociale che è in grado di garantire anche il diritto alla sicurezza.

 

Post

 

Philippe De Bruycker, Towards a New European Consensus on Migration and Asylum, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 2 dicembre 2019
The crisis of 2015-16 challenged the entire migration and asylum policies of the EU and its member states. The rules patiently built over 15 years tumbled down like a house of cards. Despite the European Commission’s 2015 Agenda on Migration launched in reaction, the EU plunged into a multi-dimensional – political, moral, legal, institutional, financial – crisis: Some member states openly refused to apply some of the solidarity measures, like the relocation of asylum seekers, despite it being adopted as a legally binding decision, thereby violating the rule of law upon which the EU is built. Member states re-established within the Schengen area which is one of the foundations of the EU, internal border controls without consideration of the limitations imposed by the Schengen Borders Code. The EU and member states’ support to third countries of transit for migrants led to violations of their basic human rights, involving inhuman or degrading treatments and arbitrary detention like in the case of Libya.

 

Maura Marchegiani, Revoca delle condizioni materiali di accoglienza e minori richiedenti protezione: l’orientamento della corte di giustizia nel caso Haqbin, in SIDIBlog, 30 novembre 2019
Nella recente sentenza Haqbin, la Corte di giustizia (GS) si è pronunciata per la prima volta sulla portata dell’articolo 20(4) della Direttiva accoglienza, relativo al potere degli Stati membri di adottare sanzioni nei confronti di richiedenti protezione internazionale che si siano resi responsabili di “gravi violazioni delle regole del centro di accoglienza” presso cui si trovano. Il rinvio pregiudiziale ha avuto origine da una controversia tra Zubair Haqbin, di cittadinanza afgana, richiedente protezione internazionale in Belgio in qualità di minore non accompagnato e la Fedasil, vale a dire l’agenzia federale belga per l’accoglienza dei richiedenti asilo. A seguito di reiterati comportamenti aggressivi e particolarmente violenti posti in essere da Haqbin nel centro di accoglienza in cui era stato collocato, le autorità belghe hanno adottato nei suoi confronti una sanzione disciplinare, implicante l’esclusione temporanea del minore dal centro di accoglienza e da tutti i servizi ad esso associati e la cessazione dell’assistenza medica, sociale e psicologica.

 

Daniela Vitiello, Emilio De Capitani, Il Regolamento (UE) 2019/1896 relativo alla riforma di Frontex e della Guardia di frontiera e costiera europea: da “Fire brigade” ad amministrazione europea integrata?, in SIDIBlog, 6 dicembre 2019
Lo scorso 4 dicembre è entrato in vigore il regolamento (UE) 2019/1896 del 13 novembre 2019, relativo alla guardia di frontiera e costiera europea. Il nuovo statuto dell’Agenzia della guardia di frontiera e costiera europea (Frontex) è frutto di un iter legislativo “lampo”, che prende le mosse dalla proposta della Commissione del 12 settembre 2018, elaborata a partire dalle conclusioni del Consiglio europeo del 28 giugno 2018 (su cui v. Di Filippo, in questo blog). In quelle conclusioni si auspicava, tra l’altro, il rafforzamento del mandato e delle risorse dell’Agenzia, inteso ad assicurare un controllo efficace delle frontiere esterne e l’effettivo rimpatrio dei migranti irregolari, anche per mezzo dell’intensificazione della cooperazione con i paesi terzi (ivi, punto 10). A tal fine, il nuovo regolamento abroga il regolamento (UE) 2016/1624, anch’esso adottato con inconsueta rapidità, che trasformava l’Agenzia europea per la cooperazione operativa alle frontiere esterne nell’Agenzia della guardia di frontiera e costiera europea, in risposta alla c.d. “crisi dei rifugiati” (Stato dell’Unione 2015). Come sottolineato da buona parte della dottrina (v. tra gli altri Carrera e den Hertog, De Bruyker, Ferraro e De Capitani, Peers, Rjipma), la riforma del 2016 andava poco oltre la mera metamorfosi “nominale” dell’Agenzia. Il regolamento 2019/1896, invece, attribuisce nuovi compiti e più incisivi poteri all’Agenzia, portando a compimento l’antica idea di un corpo permanente di guardie di frontiera, dotato di poteri esecutivi e in grado di soddisfare il fabbisogno operativo del dispositivo di sicurezza delle frontiere europee.

 

Niovi Vavoula, Is Processing Biometric Data of Turkish Nationals in a National Database Lawful under the EEC-Turkey Agreement? Reflections on the Judgment in A, B and P (C-70/18), in eumigrationlawblog.eu,16 dicembre 2019
In the aftermath of Digital Rights Ireland -the landmark ruling that invalidated Directive 2006/24/EC on the retention of telecommunications metadata for law enforcement purposes– Steve Peers heralded a new era of ‘privacy spring’. Indeed, since then, a series of important judgments –such as Schrems Tele2 and Opinion 1/15– have been released, affirming the prime importance of the rights of private life and personal data protection particularly in the law enforcement context. However, the Luxembourg Court’s judgment of 3 October 2019 in the case of A, B and P leads us to wonder whether in the case of third-country nationals we are still amidst the ‘privacy winter’.

 

Giancarlo Anello, Constitution Before Administration, The Latest Decision of the Italian Constitutional Court Fosters the Freedom of Religion in Italy, in Verfassungsblog, 13 dicembre 2019
On 5 December 2019, Italy’s Constitutional Court nullified regional legislation which made it extremely difficult for religious minority groups to set up places of worship. The provisions in question vested the administrative authorities with nearly unfettered discretion in deciding on the approval of applications. The Constitutional Court has now made clear that the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion cannot be circumvented by administrative procedures.

 

Niels Kirst, The Three Villains and the Lifeblood of the European Union Project – Advocate General Sharpton’s Opinion in C-715/17 (the asylum relocation mechanism), in EU Law Analysis, 27 novembre 2019
Recently, Advocate General Sharpston (hereafter ‘the AG’) had to give her opinion on the failure to implement Decisions of the Council regarding the relocation of migrants within the European Union. The opinion deserves distinction due to its firmness and its comprehensive categorization of the concept of solidarity in the European Union legal order. The case itself has a political importance since it relates to the ongoing rule of law crisis within the European Union. The case concerned the Area of Freedom, Justice and Security (hereafter ‘AFJS’), Article 72 TFEU (the safeguard clause) and the Dublin Regulation, which allocates responsibility for asylum applications within the EU. In the proceedings, the European Commission (hereafter ‘the Commission’) brought infringement proceedings under Article 258 TFEU against Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic for not implementing Decisions of the Council within their legal order. The case occurred at the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereafter ‘the Court’ or ‘Court of Justice’) as a direct cause of the migration crisis of 2015 in the European Union.

 

Charlotte Gilmartin, Supreme Court unanimously rules detention of asylum seekers pending removal was unlawful, in UK Human Rights Blog, 3 dicembre 2019
In a significant public law decision, the Supreme Court dismissed the Secretary of State’s appeal and held that the policy governing detention pending removal fails to comply with the Dublin III Regulation as it lacks adequate certainty and predictability. The respondents were five individuals who had travelled to the UK illegally and made claims of asylum, having entered via at least one other member state of the European Union in which they had already claimed asylum. Relying on the procedure set out in the Dublin III Regulation (Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of 26 June 2013) (“Dublin III”), the Secretary of State requested those states to take responsibility for examining the asylum claims. Each such state agreed.

 

Martin Ruhs, Philip Martin, The Global Compact on Migration: From Ideals to Reality, in EUIdeas, 12 giugno 2019
The new Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) – a UN agreement adopted by 164 countries in December 2018 – aims to promote more effective international cooperation on international migration and enhance the protection of migrants, including migrant workers. The Compact is not legally binding, but it urges governments to adopt and implement its principles, objectives, and policy commitments. While it is important to set out goals and aspirations for better governance of global labour migration, the GCM suffers from a profound lack of ‘labour market realism’, especially in its recommendations on labour migration. There are large gaps between the GCM’s labour migration policy recommendations and the current labour market policies and realities in the countries that host most of the world’s migrant workers. These gaps will limit the agreement’s impacts and effectiveness to improve protections for migrant workers.

Libri

Stefano Amadeo, Fabio Spitaleri, Il diritto dell’immigrazione e dell’asilo dell’Unione Europea. Controllo delle frontiere, Protezione internazionale, Immigrazione regolare, Rimpatri, Relazioni esterne, Giappichelli, 2019

Il volume offre al lettore una ricostruzione organica del diritto dell’immigrazione e dell’asilo dell’Unione europea. Sono dunque esaminati i requisiti d’ingresso degli stranieri nello spazio giuridico europeo e le modalità comuni di sorveglianza delle frontiere esterne degli Stati membri; il sistema normativo diretto alla tutela dello straniero bisognoso di protezione internazionale; la disciplina del trattamento dello straniero autorizzato a soggiornare in uno Stato membro e del diritto di questi al ricongiungimento familiare; le regole sostanziali e procedurali per l’allontanamento dello straniero privo di un titolo di soggiorno (c.d. disciplina del rimpatrio); gli strumenti di rilevanza internazionale (accordi, dichiarazioni, atti politici e programmi d’azione) con i quali l’Unione e i suoi Stati membri attuano una collaborazione strutturata con Stati terzi, intesa al contenimento dei flussi migratori e alla protezione c.d. extraterritoriale degli stranieri che necessitano di accoglienza e rifugio. Lo studio fornisce un quadro d’insieme del diritto dell’immigrazione e dell’asilo dell’Unione europea, facendo emergere i principi propri della disciplina e, grazie ai numerosi rinvii incrociati, la loro applicazione orizzontale nei diversi settori regolamentati. L’auspicio è che questa visione d’insieme possa rendere l’opera fruibile anche come ausilio didattico per i corsi universitari. Ma ambizione degli autori è che essa possa costituire altresì un utile strumento per i professionisti, le amministrazioni e i giudici che, confrontati a un problema concreto, intendano trarre chiarimenti e ispirazione da una trattazione sistematica della materia, nutrita di ampi riferimenti alla giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia e della Corte EDU

 

Simon Behrman, Law and Asylum Space, Subject, Resistance, Routledge, 2020

In contrast to the claim that refugee law has been a key in guaranteeing a space of protection for refugees, this book argues that law has been instrumental in eliminating spaces of protection, not just from one’s persecutors but also from the grasp of sovereign power. By uncovering certain fundamental aspects of asylum as practised in the past and in present day social movements, namely its concern with defining space rather than people and its role as a space of resistance or otherness to sovereign law, this book demonstrates that asylum has historically been antagonistic to law and vice versa. In contrast, twentieth-century refugee law was constructed precisely to ensure the effective management and control over the movements of forced migrants. To illustrate the complex ways in which these two paradigms – asylum and refugee law – interact with one another, this book examines their historical development and concludes with in-depth studies of the Sanctuary Movement in the United States and the Sans-Papiers of France.The book will appeal to researchers and students of refugee law and refugee studies; legal and political philosophy; ancient, medieval and modern legal history; and sociology of political movements.

 

David Miller, Christine Straehle, The Political Philosophy of Refuge, Cambridge, 2019

How to assess and deal with the claims of millions of displaced people to find refuge and asylum in safe and prosperous countries is one of the most pressing issues of modern political philosophy. In this timely volume, fresh insights are offered into the political and moral implications of refugee crises and the treatment of asylum seekers. The contributions illustrate the widening of the debate over what is owed to refugees, and why it is assumed that national state actors and the international community owe special consideration and protection. Among the specific issues discussed are refugees’ rights and duties, refugee selection, whether repatriation can be encouraged or required, and the ethics of sanctuary policies.

 

Martin Ruhs, Kristof Tamas, Joakim Palme, Bridging the gaps: linking research to public debates and policy-making on migration and integration, Oxford, 2019

This book explores the interplay between social science research, public debates, and policy-making in the area of international migration and integration. It has three core aims. First, it seeks to contribute to the conceptualization and theorization of the potential relationships between research, public debates, and policy-making on migration and integration. A second aim of the book is critically to discuss and identify the reasons for the failure or success of a range of initiatives aimed at using research to inform public debates and/or policy-making on migration and integration, both within national contexts and at supra-national levels of governance. A third core goal is to identify effective strategies and institutional designs for linking research to public debates and policy-making on migration and integration in different national and institutional contexts. This book provides a unique combination of scholarly research and personal experience from a group of experts and specialists in migration and integration policies, as well as media studies and public opinion. It includes contributions from researchers and public policy experts who are deeply involved in attempts to link research to policy-making in the field of migration and integration. It demonstrates the importance of going beyond the ‘research-policy nexus’ to show how the media, public opinion, and other dimensions of public debate can interact with research and policy-processes.

 

Maria Giulia Bernardini, Migranti con disabilità e vulnerabilità. Rappresentazioni, politiche, diritti, Jovene, 2019

 

Articoli

Ane Aranguiz, Miriam Quené, Is There a Way Where There’s a Will? The Tensions between the Court’s Case Law and the Pillar in Delimiting Transnational Solidarity, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 4

European citizenship has often served as a proxy for political visions of far-reaching social integration within the EU. Over the last years, this has been challenged by a number of judgments of the CJEU, which appear to increasingly restrict the access of economically inactive mobile EU citizens to social benefits under the Citizens Directive. By contrast, the more recent European Pillar of Social Rights enshrines the right to a minimum income for all citizens of the Union, regardless of their economic status or the legality of their residence. This article aims to address the resulting asymmetry between the Pillar and the CJEU’s current interpretation of the Citizens Directive, examining whether and to what extent the former could influence the latter. In doing so, it will discuss the background, objectives and interpretation of the Citizens Directive’s right to equal treatment, examine the scope of the minimum income principle contained in the Pillar, and highlight the key differences between the two.

 

Eva Brems, Lourdes Peroni, Ellen Desmet, Migration and human rights: The law as a reinforcer of gendered borders, in Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 2019, vol. 37, n. 4

Borders follow migrants even inside the territory of their State of destination. These ‘sticky’ figurative borders may flow directly from immigration norms and practice or indirectly from other areas of law. This Special Issue focuses on the gendered nature of these borders, as they rely on/reinforce socially constructed norms of masculinity and femininity. As a result, these figurative borders undermine the equal enjoyment of human rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers along gender lines. Specifically, gendered borders are analysed in relation to the themes of asylum, domestic labour and gender-based violence. The human rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in these domains are analysed in an integrated and complex fashion. The analysis demonstrates that migrants, refugees and asylum seekers navigate and challenge not only sticky figurative borders, but also borders between different areas of law. The (non)interaction between these different areas of law may equally create or reinforce unequal human rights protection along gender lines. The law, across different areas and through the workings of diverse categories, definitions and standards, may thus work as a border-reinforcer.

 

David James Cantor, Farai Chikwanha, Reconsidering African Refugee Law, in International Journal of Refugee Law, 2019, vol. 31, n. 2-3

Fifty years have now passed since the 1969 Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa was adopted by the Organization of African Unity (OAU). Within international refugee law, the OAU Refugee Convention (OAU Convention) is often taken to encapsulate the ‘African’ legal approach to refugees. This anniversary represents an opportune moment to review the state of ‘African’ refugee law. This article seeks to contribute to that regional undertaking by providing insights based on a comparative analysis of national refugee laws in African States. This encompasses consideration of how national law engages with the OAU Convention, as a centre of gravity for refugee law development in the region, but it extends also to exploring whether an ‘African’ approach to refugee law can be discerned in the novel ways in which the national refugee laws of African States (i) implement other refugee and human rights law treaties, and (ii) create new refugee law rules without precedent in treaty law. By building a more comprehensive picture of comparative refugee law in Africa, the study aims to complement existing refugee law studies in Africa that focus mainly on the international law level or on local implementation within only one or two States.

 

Carmelo Danisi, Crossing borders between International Refugee Law and International Human Rights Law in the European context: Can human rights enhance protection against persecution based on sexual orientation (and beyond)?, in Netherlands Quarterly of H

In the last decades, international refugee law (‘IRL’) and international human rights law (‘IHRL’) have increasingly taken into account sexual minorities’ needs. Despite not being one of the grounds of persecution under the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees, sexual orientation has been identified as a relevant factor for the recognition of refugee status for more than twenty years. In parallel, IHRL has evolved to a point where sexual minorities are more fully included within the scope of rights and freedoms set forth in universal and regional human rights treaties, especially via the prohibition of discrimination. Yet, strange as it may seem, this simultaneous evolution has not always led to a fruitful intersection between IRL and IHRL, even in terms of interpretation despite what the Law of Treaties requires. Drawing from documentary and qualitative data and by taking people fleeing homophobia as example, this article looks at the role that IHRL may play in complementing and in intersection with IRL. It argues that IHRL may, firstly, raise obligations to facilitate the access of these claimants to asylum determination procedures and, secondly, inform the notion of persecution used in IRL more comprehensively than it currently does in practice.

 

Mel Cousins, The European Convention on Human Rights and Residence Requirement for the Purposes of Social Assistance Benefits, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 4

This article examines the case law on whether a requirement that a person have a legal right of residence in order to be entitled to social assistance benefits is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. It looks, in particular, at a recent series of Dutch cases before the European Court of Human Rights in which the Court rejected as inadmissible arguments that the Dutch residence requirement was in breach of the Convention. The recent cases are of particular relevance as the ECtHR had previously taken a negative view of residence requirements in cases such as Niedzwiecki v Germany.1 In contrast to that case, the recent Dutch cases involved the residence status of a co-resident rather than the claimant herself.

 

Tiffany S Chu, Hosting Your Enemy: Accepting Refugees from a Rival State and Respect for Human Rights, in Journal of Global Security Studies, vol. 5, n. 1, 2020

This article argues that dynamics among rivals can affect how host states respond to refugees. Particularly, refugees from rival states can motivate host countries to promote inclusive action because they are exiled from an adversary. By treating refugees well and openly respecting their human rights, host states can, in effect, shame their rival, thereby undermining the adversary’s legitimacy and discrediting the opposing government in the eyes of the international community. In the absence of a strategic rivalry, host governments do not have this incentive to support refugee human rights. Using statistical analyses, I find support for these hypotheses. In particular, the arrival of refugees from a neighboring rival state are associated with the strongest increase in respect for human rights within the host country, whereas refugees from a noncontiguous, nonrival state are related to a decrease in respect for human rights.

 

Julia van Dessel, International Delegation and Agency in the Externalization Process of EU Migration and Asylum Policy: the Role of the IOM and the UNHCR in Niger, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 19, n. 4

This article examines the role of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in the implementation of the European Union (EU) migration and asylum policy in Niger. Building on policy analysis and qualitative interviews with stakeholders, it contributes to the literature on the externalization process of EU borders. The first part of the article focuses on the international and local context in which this process has taken place in Niger since 2015. The second part refers to the principal-agent (PA) theory inspired from economics to model the dynamics of the delegation relationships linking the European Commission (EC) to the IOM and the UNHCR in Niger. It is argued that the two main objectives pursued by the EU through the externalization of its migration and asylum policy—namely the offshoring of border control and the outsourcing of asylum claims processing—are respectively fulfilled by the IOM and the UNHCR in Niger. As such, this article highlights how the cooperation of International Organizations (IOs) is critical to enable the EU to filter and restrict human mobility from the Sahel region.

 

Giovanni Di Cosimo, Giudici e politica alle prese con i conflitti multiculturali, in Rivista AIC, 2019, n. 4

Nella società multiculturale si registrano divergenze, talvolta ampie, fra le culture degli immigrati e la cultura occidentale, radicata nel nostro Paese nelle sue molteplici e plurali espressioni. Spesso i punti di frizione fra la cultura maggioritaria e le culture minoritarie corrispondono ad aspetti sensibili della vita delle persone, a cominciare dai rapporti familiari. Frizioni che si trasformano in conflitti multiculturali quando le contrapposte culture danno indicazioni di comportamento inconciliabili. Dall’altra parte, l’irrompere sulla scena delle culture ‘altre’ non è soltanto causa di conflitti, ma anche, naturalmente, di opportunità.

 

Gemma Marolda Gloninger, From Humanitarian Rescue to Border Security: Managing Migration in the Central Mediterranean, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 4

While images of boats in distress, overflowing with migrants in the Central Mediterranean, flash on television screens and front pages of Italian and European newspapers, search and rescue (SAR) missions continue to draw attention. This article takes a look at migratory flows across the Central Mediterranean from 2012 to 2018 and focuses on the response of governmental, inter-governmental, and non-governmental actors rescuing lives at sea. Using aggregate data on migrants’ sea arrivals and deaths as well as official documents from the UNHRC, the European Union, Italy’s Ministry of Interior, and NGOs, this study investigates 1) how different actors have responded to migratory flows across the Central Mediterranean, and 2) how actors’ narratives and response have impacted the situation at sea. The study finds that, although all three actors act on the humanitarian principle ‘to save lives,’ their narratives and response diverge as the intensity of sea arrivals persists.

 

Isaac Lenaola, The Role of African Courts in Promoting Refugee Rights, in International Journal of Refugee Law, 2019, vol. 31, n. 2-3

In every democracy, courts play a vital role in safeguarding, promoting, and protecting human rights. With the mandate of interpreting and applying the law, courts are the ultimate custodians of the law and hence occupy a sacrosanct place in the justice system. Refugees are entitled to human rights protection just like every other person. Furthermore, as vulnerable members of society – in that they reside in a foreign country – they deserve special protection. By adjudicating the cases that come before them, courts strengthen the refugee protection regime and develop the law to advance refugee rights.

 

J O Moses Okello, In Lieu of a Travaux Préparatoires: A Commentary on the Kampala Convention for IDPs, in International Journal of Refugee Law, 2019, Volume 31, Issue 2-3

The Kampala Convention was adopted on 23 October 2009 and came into force on 4 January 2013. The first binding international instrument for the protection and assistance of internally displaced persons, it occupies an important space among the body of African regional humanitarian and human rights law. The Convention addresses all stages of internal displacement and provides a framework for coordinating activities by governments and humanitarian actors aimed at preventing and addressing internal displacement. The Kampala Convention is the result of many years of work, although no formal records of its drafting and negotiation were kept. This article contributes towards addressing this gap. Based on the author’s personal involvement in the Convention’s drafting, and supplementing earlier research, this article shares information previously unavailable in the public domain and provides a commentary on some of the Convention’s provisions.

 

Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi, Mauritian Courts and the Protection of the Rights of Asylum Seekers in the Absence of Dedicated Legislation, in International Journal of Refugee Law, 2019, vol. 31, n. 2-3

Mauritius became a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention through succession but is yet to accede to the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees. It has signed but not yet ratified the OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa and has not signed the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa. Unlike many other countries in Africa, Mauritius has not yet enacted domestic legislation dealing with the issue of refugees. However, international human rights obligations and domestic legislation allow the rights of asylum seekers to be protected in Mauritius. This article argues that the principle of non-refoulement bars Mauritius from extraditing or deporting an asylum seeker to a country where he or she will be persecuted or where his or her rights will be violated, and that asylum seekers and citizens are equally protected by the Constitution with regard to absolute rights. However, limitations may be imposed on asylum seekers in their enjoyment of non-absolute rights. For such limitations to be lawful, they must aim to achieve the objectives stipulated in section 3 of the Constitution.

 

Çiğdem Akın Yavuz, Analysis of the EU-Turkey Readmission Agreement: a Unique Case, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 4

The European Union (EU) has thus far developed a standard approach towards the negotiation processes and the content of readmission agreements with third countries. This approach encompasses offering a visa facilitation agreement and visa liberalization to third countries as an incentive for the conclusion of a readmission agreement. The approach has, however, changed in the case of the EU-Turkey Readmission Agreement. This Agreement was signed simultaneously with the initiation of a Visa Liberalization Dialogue, by-passing the conclusion of a visa facilitation agreement. The content of the Agreement has also distinguishing features compared to EU readmission agreements. This article seeks to explain why the EU has changed its standard approach in the case of Turkey through analysing both the negotiation process and the content of the EU-Turkey Readmission Agreement. In this way, this article strives to demonstrate that this shift is mainly due to EU’s concerns about effective return of irregular migrants who have been ordered to leave the EU, as well as the unique characteristics of the multidimensional relationship between the EU and Turkey.

 

Christel Querton, Gender and the boundaries of international refugee law: Beyond the category of ‘gender-related asylum claims’, in Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 2019, vol. 37, n. 4

The adoption of gender guidelines aiming to ensure consistency in gender-sensitive interpretation of the UN Refugee Convention definition demonstrates a general acceptance that gender is relevant to the question of who is a refugee. However, there is evidence that States have failed to adequately undertake the process of gender-sensitive interpretation and implement these guidelines comprehensively. Accordingly, this article argues that the general rule of treaty interpretation in international law enables the identification of a legal obligation of State Parties to the Refugee Convention to take gender into account when interpreting the refugee definition. The precise scope and nature of the duty of States to take gender into account is identified through a dynamic approach to interpretation by reference to international human rights norms. Overall, this article claims that the conceptualisation of a legal obligation in international law to interpret the refugee definition in a way that takes gender into account is inhibited by the development of a distinct category of ‘gender-related asylum claims’ within gender and refugee law scholarship. Consequently, this article presents a challenge to the borders implicit in the category of ‘gender-related asylum claims’ by revisiting the boundaries of international refugee law.

 

Octávio Sacramento, Kati Turtiainen, Pedro Gabriel Silva, Policies of Refugee Settlement and Integration in Europe: the Cases of Portugal and Finland, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2019, vol. 21, n. 4

Though geographically distant from each other, Portugal and Finland present an interesting comparison concerning the policies and devices of asylum. Both provide an informed and critical appraisal of the current international response to the refugee issue, especially considering the European Union. The Finnish situation evidences a long-standing integrated resettlement frame, associated with the inclusive and pluralistic character of Nordic immigration policies, in spite of the growing threat of regression under the emergent xenophobic pressure. Unlike Portugal, where a finely-tuned response system is still lacking in spite of the existence of an assumed political will and commitment to receive increasing numbers of refugees.

 

Irene Schöfberger, The EU’s Negotiation of Narratives and Policies on African Migration 1999-2019, in European Foreign Affairs Review, 2019, vol. 24, n. 4

The European Union (EU) has been struggling to find a shared course on African migration since the entry into force of the Schengen Agreement (1995). It has done so through two interrelated processes of negotiation. To begin, parties have negotiated internal and external migration policies. In addition, they have negotiated narrative frames about migration and whether migration should be interpreted rather as an opportunity or as a threat. In times in which narrative frames increasingly shape policy negotiations, it becomes very important to analyse how policymakers negotiate narrative frames on migration and how these shape policy responses. However, such an analysis is still missing. This article investigates how the negotiation of EU policies on African migration from 1999 until 2019 has been influenced by a simultaneous process of negotiation of narrative frames on migration. It does so based on policy analysis and interviews with European and African policymakers. It finds two major trends in EU negotiation processes: migration-security narratives have strengthened national-oriented approaches, and migration-development narratives have strengthened transnational-oriented approaches. The two approaches have always been interlinked. However, in the last years, security-oriented national approaches have increasingly influenced development-oriented transnational approaches.

 

Natalie Sedacca, Migrant domestic workers and the right to a private and family life, in Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 2019, vol. 37, n. 4

Domestic workers are mainly women, are disproportionately from ethnic minorities and/or international migrants, and are vulnerable to mistreatment, often receiving inadequate protection from labour legislation. This article addresses ways in which the conditions faced by migrant domestic workers can prevent their enjoyment of the right to private and family life. It argues that the focus on this right is illuminating as it allows for the incorporation of issues that are not usually within the remit of labour law into the discussion of working rights, such as access to family reunification, as well as providing for a different perspective on the question of limits on working time – a core labour right that is often denied to domestic workers. These issues are analysed by addressing a case study each from Latin America and Europe, namely Chile and the UK. The article considers impediments to realising the right to private and family life stemming both from the literal border – the operation of immigration controls and visa conditions – and from the figurative border which exists between domestic work and other types of work, reflected in the conflation of domestic workers with family members and stemming from the public/private sphere divide.

 

Chantal Thomas, The Struggle Against Empire Continues. Reflections on Migration as Decolonization, in Stanford Law Review, 2019, vol. 72

Migration as Decolonization telegraphs the essence of a postcolonial approach to the assertion of sovereign territorial exclusion. Tendayi Achiume’s concept of “de-imperial migration” clarifies and enhances a set of important critiques and should justly impact not just legal scholarship but also broader public discourse. One of the article’s most valuable elements is its contribution to reframing the discourse on migration. By reinforcing the reframing of migration from the global South to the global North as a response to a history of domination and exploitation, the article sounds in a rich tradition of anti-colonial theoretical and political work on what it means to act and speak – to “strike back” – against empire.

 

Volker Türk, Madeline Garlick, Addressing Displacement in the Context of Disasters and the Adverse Effects of Climate Change: Elements and Opportunities in the Global Compact on Refugee, in International Journal of Refugee Law, 2019, vol. 31, n. 2-3

The Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) aims fundamentally to strengthen the way in which the international community responds to large-scale and protracted displacement worldwide. Based on the New York Declaration of September 2016, and affirmed by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on 17 December 2018,3 it acknowledges the challenges associated with refugee movements in many regions worldwide, providing a framework for more predictable and equitable responsibility sharing to reinforce support for refugees and the communities that host them.

 

Simona Vezzoli, State Expansion, Changing Aspirations and Migration: The Case of Cisternino, Southern Italy, in IMI Working Papers, 2020, vol. 158

This paper examines the social transformation processes that led to a mobility transition in Cisternino, a small agricultural town in Southern Italy. This transition entailed a shift from seasonal regional mobility in the 1940s to migration towards long-distance national and international destinations from the 1950s and to regional commuting and return migration from the 1970s. Building on mobility transition theories and the social transformation framework, the analysis examines the relation between the profound social change that affected this small agricultural town in the post-World War II period and shifts in migration. A combination of three broad processes explains the changing migration patterns: the expansion and consolidation of the state, the reshaping of the local economy and cultural transitions. By analysing the interplay and sequencing of these processes, we observe that, firstly, long-distance migration initially increased largely in reaction to deep cultural and political-economic shifts that altered local livelihoods; however, long-distance migration subsequently decreased as it was substituted by commuting in association with local economic growth and the expansion of state-driven sectors and safety net provisions that bore fruit in the 1960s. The article reveals the powerful and varied ways in which, in crucial moments of transition, the state affects local livelihoods and the population’s decision to either adapt locally or migrate.

 

Janna Wessels, The boundaries of universality – migrant women and domestic violence before the Strasbourg Court, in Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 2019, vol. 37, n. 4

This article explores the boundaries encountered by women fleeing domestic violence in countries located outside the Council of Europe (‘CoE’) when claiming non-refoulement before the Strasbourg Court. The main argument is that these boundaries are embedded in the different standards the Court applies in its Article 3 ECHR case law. To develop this argument, the article conducts an exemplary critical analysis of A.A. and Others v. Sweden in comparison with, firstly, Opuz v. Turkey and secondly, Othman v. UK. The first comparison exposes a territorial bias in the case law. It shows that the risk assessment is much more lenient in cases of women seeking international protection in CoE Member States, than in cases of women who suffer domestic violence within their CoE home States. The second comparison reveals a gender bias in the jurisprudence of different types of non-refoulement cases. The assessment of available protection from an established risk is separately assessed in cases of men fleeing harm from State actors, but not in cases of women escaping ‘private’ harm. As a result, migrant women’s rights are limited by two intersecting and mutually reinforcing inequalities – both as migrants and as women. Taken together, these biases make the purportedly absolute prohibition of torture as laid down in Article 3 ECHR malleable in respect of migrant women. In order to respond to these dissonances, the article suggests a reformulation of the real risk assessment in migrant women’s cases: It should consist in a two-step assessment, establishing first the risk and then the available protection, and be guided by due diligence standards.

 

Tamara Wood, Who Is a Refugee in Africa? A Principled Framework for Interpreting and Applying Africa’s Expanded Refugee Definition, in International Journal of Refugee Law, 2019, vol. 31, n. 2-3

Africa’s expanded refugee definition – article I(2) of the 1969 Convention – provides the legal basis of protection for a significant number of the world’s refugees. It is a gateway to a host of rights aimed at protecting refugees from future harm and preserving their dignity until a durable solution can be found. The expansive nature of the African definition has seen it praised for being more humanitarian, more reflective of current causes of displacement, and an exemplar for the development of refugee protection regimes elsewhere. Despite this, the scope of the definition and the meaning of its terms remain poorly understood in both literature and practice. Attempts to interpret the definition to date have been largely superficial and often lacking in any principled interpretative framework. This undermines its implementation in practice, potentially risking the lives and security of those entitled to protection as refugees in Africa. This article sets out a principled framework for interpreting and applying Africa’s expanded refugee definition. The framework is drawn from international law principles of treaty interpretation, as set out in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and customary international law. However, this article goes beyond merely reciting the relevant principles: it analyses their scope, applicability to Africa’s expanded refugee definition, and implications for the interpretation of the definition’s terms. It also identifies, and describes in detail, four key principles for interpreting the expanded refugee definition. These four key principles are critical to addressing the shortcomings of existing understandings of the definition and some of the main controversies that arise in its interpretation and application. They also provide a practical and accessible source of guidance for refugee status decision makers and others that could assist in promoting consistency, transparency, and fairness in refugee status determination within African States.

 

Post

Vitalba Azzolini, Accoglienza senza criteri. Il caos normativo in materia di accoglienza di richiedenti e titolari di protezione umanitaria, in rivistailmulino.it, 9 gennaio 2020

La continuità con il passato delle attuali politiche in tema di immigrazione è già stata rilevata sotto molteplici aspetti. Nei giorni scorsi ne ha fornito ulteriore dimostrazione una circolare dal Servizio Centrale Siproimi, istituito dal ministero dell’Interno, che ribadisce la prosecuzione di quanto disposto dal precedente governo in tema di accoglienza di richiedenti asilo e titolari di protezione umanitaria. Al riguardo, serve fare una premessa: in base al primo decreto Sicurezza (d.l. 113/2018 convertito in l. 132/2018), le citate categorie di stranieri non possono più essere ospitate negli ex Sprar, ora Siproimi – sistema di accoglienza finalizzato all’integrazione e alla formazione – in quanto tali centri sono oggi riservati esclusivamente a titolari di protezione internazionale e minori non accompagnati. La disciplina transitoria di tale decreto, peraltro, prevede che richiedenti asilo e titolari di protezione umanitaria possano rimanere nel Sistema di protezione “non oltre la scadenza del progetto di accoglienza” (art. 12, commi 5 e 6). I primi sono ora destinati a strutture di prima accoglienza (Cas), all’interno delle quali permangono fino alla definizione del loro status.

 

Harald Bauder, Urban Citizenship: A Path to Migrant Inclusion, in verfassungsblog.de, 23 gennaio 2020

If urban citizenship is emancipated from national citizenship, then all inhabitants of a municipality could be recognised as members of the local communities in which they live. Such emancipation would mitigate the tension between the de-facto political community and the categories imposed by the nation state that exclude people who lack national citizenship or resident status. This tension has recently erupted into open conflict between the Trump administration and New York, Chicago, and many other sanctuary cities in the USA. It can also be observed in solidarity cities like Berlin in Germany, cities of refuge like Barcelona in Spain, or the “Commune of Reception” (Comuna de Acogida) of Quilicura outside of Santiago de Chile.

 

David Scott FitzGerald, Remote Control of Asylum Seekers. How States Evade their Protection Obligation, in publicseminar.org, 17 dicembre 2019

Aristide Zolberg coined the term “remote border control” in 1997 to describe the system of issuing visas at consulates abroad and screening passengers at European ports of embarkation. These mechanisms devised in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries created for the first time a permanent means to select migrants from abroad before they could reach an intended destination like the United States. Scholars from neighboring disciplines and traditions have developed concepts similar to “remote control,” such as policies of “non-entrée,” shifting migration control “out” from state borders, “deterritorialized” control, and “externalization”.

 

Antonio Morone, Verso una guerra regionale?, in nigrizia.it, 3 gennaio 2020

C’è il rischio di uno scontro tra Turchia ed Egitto, a spese dei libici. La prima ha alzato l’asticella e deciso l’invio di truppe a sostegno del governo di al-Sarraj, il secondo è a fianco di Haftar e del suo Esercito nazionale libico. L’Unione europea è divisa e gli Usa sembrano voler stare alla finestra.

 

Michael Spencer, Immigration and Article 8: what did we learn in 2019?, in ukhumanrightsblog.com, 17 gennaio 2020

Another year passes, with another series of higher court cases on human rights in the immigration context. As in previous years, the courts in 2019 were particularly concerned with Theresa May’s attempts as Home Secretary to codify the Article 8 proportionality exercise into legislation.  Those changes have had a significant impact on the approach of tribunals to appeals against deportation and removal on grounds of private and family life.  Judges now have to apply a series of prescribed tests under the immigration rules, before going on to consider whether there are exceptional circumstances requiring a grant of leave.

 

Vladislava Stoyanova, The Grand Chamber Judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary: Immigration Detention and how the Ground beneath our Feet Continues to Erode, in strasbourgobservers.com, 23 dicembre 2019

The ECtHR has been for a long time criticized for its approach to immigration detention that diverts from the generally applicable principles to deprivation of liberty in other contexts. As Cathryn Costello has observed in her article Immigration Detention: The Ground beneath our Feet, a major weakness in the Court’s approach has been the failure to scrutinize the necessity of immigration detention under Article 5(1)(f) of the ECHR. The Grand Chamber judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary delivered on 21 November 2019 has further eroded the protection extended to asylum-seekers under the Convention to the point that restrictions imposed upon asylum-seekers might not even be qualified as deprivation of liberty worthy of the protection of Article 5. The Grand Chamber overruled on this point the unanimously adopted Chamber judgment that found that the holding of asylum-seekers in the ‘transit zone’ between Hungary and Serbia actually amounts to deprivation of liberty.

 

Catherine Warin, Individual rights in EU migration and asylum law, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 6 gennaio 2020

Individual rights have been a key concept of EU law ever since the CJEU laid down its methodology for identifying such rights in Van Gend en Loos and Defrenne. These founding cases made clear that individual rights are correlatives of obligations laid down by EU law, and are triggered into existence by individual interests in the fulfilment of these obligations. Awareness of this relationship between rights, obligations and interests allows to think about rights in a flexible and coherent manner, which is essential in the increasingly complex field of EU migration law.

Libri

Matthew Scott, Climate Change, Disasters, and the Refugee Convention, Cambridge, 2020

Climate Change, Disasters and the Refugee Convention is concerned with refugee status determination (RSD) in the context of disasters and climate change. It demonstrates that the legal predicament of people who seek refugee status in this connection has been inconsistently addressed by judicial bodies in leading refugee law jurisdictions, and identifies epistemological as well as doctrinal impediments to a clear and principled application of international refugee law. Arguing that RSD cannot safely be performed without a clear understanding of the relationship between natural hazards and human agency, the book draws insights from disaster anthropology and political ecology that see discrimination as a contributory cause of people’s differential exposure and vulnerability to disaster-related harm. This theoretical framework, combined with insights derived from the review of existing doctrinal and judicial approaches, prompts a critical revision of the dominant human rights-based approach to the refugee definition.

 

 

Giovanni Carlo Bruno Fulvio Maria Palombino, Adriana Di Stefano (ed.), Migration Issues before International Courts and Tribunals, Roma, 2019

The volume is intended to analyze in detail the case law of international Courts and Tribunals on questions connected to migration and to migrants and to explore their contribution to the application and the development of legal rules on human migration. Its main goals include the dissemination of the relevant judicial practice; the investigation of the possibility for a wider application of international rules and standards on migration issues; the assessment of the extent to which international judges have played or could play a law-making role in the field of international migration law.

 

Articoli

 

Alessandro Zampone, Il c.d. «decreto sicurezza-bis»: profili di diritto della navigazione, in Diritto pubblico, 2019, n. 3

The first two articles of the d. lg. 14 June 2019 n. 53, converted with modifications with l. 8 August 2019 n. 77, c.d. «decreto sicurezza-bis», establish new provisions regarding the entry, transit or stop of ships in the territorial sea. These provisions, which became part of d. lg. 25th July 1998 n. 286 (Immigration Consolidated Law), introduce new enforcement powers by the Minister of the Interior directly affecting the masters of the ships and the shipowners. Therefore, questions arise concerning aspects of Navigation Law that this essay tries to highlight. Firstly, the exercise of the new functions on vessel traffic attributed to the Minister of the Interior by the new paragraph 1 ter of the art. 11 t.u.i. raises the issue of the compatibility with the art. 83 c. nav. and with the responsibilities of waterway police that the navigation code reserves to the Ministry of infrastructure and transport and to the Maritime Authority. Moreover, it emerges a troublesome relationship between the prohibitions on the masters of the ships as a consequence of the application of the new paragraph 1 ter of the art. 11 t.u.i. and the rules of international law of the sea. These, in fact, on the one hand, impose the masters of the ships to rescue people in distress at sea and to lead them to a safe place (and the States to make sure that this duty is effectively observed); on the other hand, these rules expressly establish as innocent the passage in the territorial water of the ship that intends to stop and anchor in the territorial sea in the event that this is functional to rescue operations (art. 18, par 2 of the UNCLOS).

 

Aldo Travi, Le nuove leggi sui migranti e l’”altro” diritto, in Diritto pubblico, 2019, n. 3

The author claims that the new immigration provisions recently introduced in Italy with the two security bills have confirmed the trend to reduce the fundamental rights of migrant people and to affirm a different right for them than that more general established for European citizens. The target is also to attribute a different value to constitutional principles when they are applied towards migrants, with relevant effects with respect to administrative law, whose principles are distorted.

 

Paolo Bonetti, L’insostenibilità costituzionale delle recenti norme sugli stranieri. I limiti all’ingresso e al soggiorno che violano i diritti fondamentali e il sistema delle fonti del diritto non assicurano sicurezza, né alcuna disciplina efficace dell’immigrazione, in Diritto pubblico, 2019, n. 3

The paper explains why the latest Italian provisions on foreigners are unconstitutional. The new entry and residence restrictions violate both fundamental rights and the system of law sources; on the other hand, they fail in guaranteeing security as well as in providing effective rules for immigration. Firstly, constitutional, international and European guarantees on the legal status of foreigners seem to be intrinsically weak in the short term. On one hand, excluding foreigners from the electorate stresses the democratic principle and may endanger also the personalist principle; that could foster the adoption of rules which restrict those guarantees, just aiming to reassure those voters who perceive immigration as a treat to their own security. On the other hand, according to the Constitutional Court security itself is a value that the legislator must take into account in regulating immigration outside the field of fundamental rights of foreigners, albeit with many limits, and such legislator’s choices on entry and residence must respect the only limit of not being manifestly unreasonable. However, the very meaning of the Law is at stake when unlawful, inconsistent or ineffective rules, adopted by an unconstitutional or exceptional use of certain sources of law, follow one another: those rules aim to regulate migration, even if migration is an ordinary phenomenon with objective characteristics that must be taken in account by lawmakers and that aren’t avoidable even if border controls and the right of asylum are both outsourced. The paper focuses on the inability of European countries to adopt in EU a common and effective regulation of migration: in the absence of such common regulation, each country responds with the illusion of restore his borders and his full sovereignty, to the extent of barring his ports, disposing refusals of entry and even at the point that Parliament legitimate illegal physical oppression of personal freedom made by government authorities. Another problem is the practice of avoiding parliamentary control on foreign policy regarding agreements on migration, including those with Libyan authorities. The paper also recalls that the recent repeal of the permit for humanitarian reasons isn’t retroactive and doesn’t erase in any way the need to guarantee full protection to the right of asylum on the basis of constitutional and international obligations. After recalling other recently introduced legislations which aim at narrowing further fundamental rights, it’s pointed out that it’s necessary to respect the Constitution again in order to shape a rational and forward-looking regulation of both immigration and the right of asylum.

 

Gaetano Azzariti, I problemi di costituzionalità dei decreti sicurezza e gli interventi del Presidente della Repubblica, in Diritto pubblico, 2019, n. 3

In this article the author analyses the more problematic aspects of the last two decrees on migration and security (decree law no. 113/2018; decree law no. 53/2019), in particular focusing on the statements of the President of the Italian Republic. The author underlines the problematic implications related to human rights and the fundamental principles of the Italian Constitution.

 

Riccardo Luporini, Liability for Crimes Against Humanity in the Offshore Detention of Asylum Seekers: Some Thoughts Regarding the So-called ‘Australian Model’ of Refugee Policy, in Diritti umani e diritto internazionale, 2019, n. 3

In February 2017 a group of legal experts gathered by the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic of the Stanford Law School and the Global Action Network submitted a Communi-qué with the aim of urging the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to launch an investigation into the possible perpetration of crimes against humanity in the de-tention of asylum seekers in Nauru and Manus Island. The living conditions in these offshore detention centres, whose management is entrusted to private companies, are extensively reported as inhumane. Along with raising an issue of State and corporate responsibility for the alleged infringement of a series of basic human rights recognised and protected by international human rights law, this case may pro-vide a legal and factual basis for the potential individual liability of government and corporate officials. After an illustration of the basic facts concerning Australian refugee policy and the offshore detention of asylum seekers, the article examines the Communiqué to the OTP, focusing on the alleged offences, the attribution of individual liability, and the jurisdiction of the ICC. Considering that a series of situ-ations – especially at the borders of Europe – is already revealing a striking similarity, the ultimate aim of the article is to shed light on the possible repercussions that may ensue from the emulation of the so-called ‘Australian model’ of refugee policy, not least at an individual level.

 

Andrea De Petris, Pursuing Public Insicurity? The New Italian Decree on “Immigration and Security”, in The Review of European Affairs, 2019, vol. 3, n. 1

In December 2018, the Italian Parliament definitely confirmed the so-called “Immigration and Security” Decree, which deeply reformed the regulation of Migration and Integration. The present work aims at summarizing the innovations introduced by the new Decree and confront them with the critical remarks and concerns of legal scholars and asylum experts, stressing its conceivable risks of unconstitutionality. Final goal of the article is to challenge what the real aim of the new Decree is: if it ends up increasing precarious and instable living conditions for migrants on Italian soil and therefore threatening social security, rather than improving public safety and protection for citizens and legal residents.

 

Vasile Cucerescu, The Eastern Borders of the European Union in the Field of Migration, in The Review of European Affairs, 2019, vol. 3, n. 1

The paper explores the characteristics and the significance of the European Union’s eastern border in regular and irregular migration processes considering that migration is on the top of the European Union’s agenda as well as of the United Nations. It focuses on problematic and positive aspects of migration issues at the eastern border of the European Union. The investigation pays attention to European acts on migration policy and law, eastern border countries and neighbours of the European Union; it analyses dimensions of the European Union’s eastern border, migration challenges of the eastern border route, enhancement of migration management at the eastern border through the use of diverse instruments such as the European neighbourhood policy, the Eastern Partnership, the European Union–Russia relations, the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy and the Eastern Borders’ Risk Analysis Network. Migration at the eastern border of the European Union is also marked by the concepts of “Schlechtegranzen” and “Rechtegrenzen”. The results and conclusions point out relevant issues that are peculiar to the eastern border of the European Union in terms of migration challenges and migration management.

 

Edina Lilla Mészáros, The Role of Romania in the Current European Union Refugee Crisis: is the Country Able to Integrate Asylum Seekers?, in The Review of European Affairs, 2019, vol. 3, n. 1

This research examines the role Romania played in the current refugee/migration crisis, and the measures that it has taken in order to integrate the incoming refugees. Quantitative analysis was used in order to reveal the perceptions of the citizens towards the third country nationals at the beginning and after the refugee crisis. We argue that Romania represents a paradox, as it is mostly a country of emigrants with millions of Romanian citizens living, studying or working abroad in other EU/non-EU states. Thus, the question is, will Romania be able to handle the increased number of asylum claims from third country nationals and their subsequent accommodation and integration, if it cannot stop its own citizens from going abroad and making a living there?

 

Alina Șorlei, The European Union–Turkey Statement on Refugees: a Deal on the Verge of Collapse?, in The Review of European Affairs, 2019, vol. 3, n. 1

The Syrian War has brought about one of the greatest refugee crises of our time. Turkey represents a country that many refugees pass through in order to reach Europe, where supposedly they can find a better life. In order to be able to cope with the thousands of refugees that cross the Turkish border, the EU and Turkey have agreed on the “EU–Turkey Statement on Refugees” that was implemented in order to lower the number of irregular migrants coming from the Middle Orient, as well as to reduce migrant deaths, smuggling and human rights violations. The purpose of the article is to shed light on the main reasons why Turkey lacks commitment to the Statement. The article is composed of four parts. The first section elaborates on the deal itself, the conditions of the statement and the action points that were established. The following part outlines the opinions of the countries involved and the perspectives of the refugees on the EU–Turkey Statement. The third section contains a quantitative analysis in order to evaluate the efficiency of the deal, while the last section focuses on the influences of the Turkish coup d’état on the deal and the reasons for Turkey’s lack of commitment to the Statement. The findings show that for the deal to be functional both parties have to prove commitment; in the case of Turkey, financial reasons, visa-free travel and reopening EU accession talks seem to be the key factors necessary for proper commitment.

 

Gabriella Carella, Inapplicabilità del regolamento Dublino III a talune fattispecie di migrazioni irregolari nel Mediterraneo, in Studi sull’integrazione europea, 2020, n. 1

 

Post

Giuseppe Campesi, L’approccio hotspot e il prezzo della coercizione, in rivistailmulino.it, 14 febbraio 2020

Nella quasi totale indifferenza della stampa nazionale, le migliaia di migranti confinati sull’isola di Lesbo hanno inscenato violente proteste per denunciare le pessime condizioni di accoglienza e la situazione di protratto confinamento sull’isola che sono costretti a subire a causa delle politiche adottate dal governo greco, in attuazione del cosiddetto «approccio hotspot».Nell’agenda europea sulle migrazioni, l’approccio hotspot è descritto come una delle azioni immediate a supporto di Grecia e Italia per «identificare, registrare e foto-segnalare rapidamente i migranti in ingresso». Stando alla descrizione offerta dalla Commissione, si tratta di una misura di supporto operativo attivata per aiutare i Paesi frontalieri che affrontano una «pressione migratoria sproporzionata» nello svolgere le procedure amministrative che seguono l’arrivo dei migranti via mare.

 

Stefano Gallo, Abrogazione della legge 1092/1939 contro l’urbanesimo, in rivistailmulino.it, 10 febbraio 2020

Il 10 febbraio 1961 venne abrogata una legge del 1939 intitolata “Provvedimenti contro l’urbanesimo” di contrasto all’immigrazione urbana. Con questa norma il fascismo aveva costruito intorno alle città italiane tante barriere burocratiche contro gli immigrati, ovviamente italiani: chi voleva iscriversi all’anagrafe municipale venendo da fuori – dalle campagne o da altre città – doveva dimostrare di avere un lavoro; per avere un lavoro era necessario registrarsi all’ufficio di collocamento, ma l’iscrizione era riservata ai soli residenti. I vantaggi che rispetto alle campagne potevano dare i contesti urbani (lavoro, servizi, sussidi) dovevano rimanere esclusivamente nelle mani degli abitanti “storici”, di chi vantava un maggior tempo di permanenza e quindi una certificazione nei registri di popolazione: sotto Mussolini non esistevano ancora gli slogan “Roma ai romani” o “Verona ai veronesi”, ma il criterio della restrizione dei diritti ai soli residenti e delle porte chiuse verso gli estranei – italianissimi – era stato tradotto in una normativa molto stringente.

 

Hein de Haas, Why development will not stop migration, in heindehaas.blogspot.com, 7 febbraio 2020

Among the many myths perpetuated about migration, one of the most common is that ‘South–North’ migration is essentially driven by poverty and underdevelopment. Consequently, it is often argued that stimulating economic development would reduce migration from developing countries to North America and Europe. However, this ignores evidence that most migration neither occurs from the poorest countries nor from the poorest segments of the population.

 

Hein de Haas, Climate refugees: The fabrication of a migration threat, in heindehaas.blogspot.com, 31 gennaio 2020

In recent years, it has become popular to argue that climate change will lead to massive North-South movements of ‘climate refugees’. Concerns about climate change-induced migration have emerged in the context of debates on global warming. Without any doubt, global warming is one of the most pressing issues facing humanity, and the lack of willingness of states and the international community to address it effectively – particularly through reducing of carbon emissions – is a valid source of major public concern and global protest.

 

Jefferi Hamzah Sendut, Climate Change as a Trigger of Non-Refoulement Obligations Under International Human Rights Law, in EJIL:Talk!, 6 febbraio 2020

The recently published decision of the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) pursuant to Individual Communication No. 2728/2016 (Teitiota v New Zealand) offers an insight into how the international legal system is coming to address climate change displacement. Teitiota is significant for its recognition that climate change impacts affecting migrants in their State of origin can trigger obligations of non-refoulement binding on the States they enter. The HRC expounded on the effect of climate change on migrants’ right to life under Article 6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and provided guidance on how the applicable test of a ‘real risk of irreparable harm’ is to be deployed in this novel context.

 

Catharina Ziebritzki, Refugee Camps at EU External Borders, the Question of the Union’s Responsibility, and the Potential of EU Public Liability Law, in verfassungsblog.de, 5 febbraio 2020

‘The EU hotspot approach as implemented in Greece is the single most worrying fundamental rights issue that we are confronting anywhere in the European Union’. This quote by the head of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) might sound drastic. Yet, it is not far-fetched. EU bodies, national institutions, international organisations including the Council of Europe, and NGOs, have, during the past four years, continuously documented that the asylum processing centres at the EU external borders lead to fundamental rights violations on a daily basis. The EU hotspot administration indeed jeopardises the respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law as enshrined in Article 2 TEU.

 

Carolyn Moser, A Very Short Introduction to Frontex— Unravelling the Trajectory of one of the EU’s Key Actors, in verfassungsblog.de, 3 febbraio 2020

We have gotten used to a European Union without borders—without internal borders. The memory of long waiting queues and passport controls at border crossing points is fading while we enjoy freely moving around between European nations. For a continent plagued for centuries by bloody wars over territory and boundaries, this is a remarkable development. The gradual abolition of checks at internal borders in Europe was an incremental process that started in the 1990s with the creation of the Schengen area. In 1997, the Treaty of Amsterdam incorporated the Schengen acquis into the EU framework. And ten years later, in 2007, the Lisbon Treaty elevated the existence of the area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers to one of the core aims of the Union (Article 3(2) TEU).

 

Samuel Hartwig, Quo Vadis Frontex: Crossing the Fine Line Between Prevention and Repression?, in verfassungsblog.de, 4 febbraio 2020

For many years, Frontex and border control were of little interest to the wider European public. This changed in the wake of the so-called ‘migrant crisis’ as the agency and its various activities were thrust into the limelight due to a steady stream of allegations of misconduct. What has so far received only limited attention, though, is an underlying change of direction as the agency increasingly moves from a preventive mindset to a more repressive one. This progressive slide from a mandate focussed on coordination and prevention to a far more robust mandate including executive functions following a repressive logic will constitute the core of this blogpost.

 

Elisabeth Badenhoop, Contextualising Frontex: A Long-Term Perspective on Database Monitoring of Migrants, in verfassungsblog.de, 4 febbraio 2020

Population monitoring through data collection has increased and become part of the everyday life in Western liberal states since the 1980s and 1990s. Whether we make a phone call, a bank transfer, log in to work, or visit the hospital, a variety of state and non-state actors gather and process our information to enable and constrain access to various goods. In what has been convincingly described as a ‘surveillance society’, migrants, especially non-EU citizens, are under particularly close scrutiny in Europe. In this light, the most recent reform that again expanded mandate of Frontex in the area of data analysis and exchange is perhaps not surprising. However, for the agency to carry out these new tasks of monitoring migratory flows and performing risk analyses, Frontex requires extensive, reliable data supply. This, in turn, revives the question of the role of databases in the monitoring of migration.

 

Florin Coman-Kund, The Territorial Expansion of Frontex Operations to Third Countries: On the Recently Concluded Status Agreements in the Western Balkans and Beyond…, in verfassungsblog.de, 6 febbraio 2020

Since its inception, Frontex has been at the forefront of the Union’s policy in the field of external border management. In the wake of the 2015 ‘migratory crisis’, Frontex underwent a swift and unprecedented upgrade of its powers, resources, and capacities. The 2016 and 2019 mandate revisions arguably mark a ‘quantum leap’ gradually transforming Frontex into a more integrated and hierarchical administrative body. One of the most spectacular developments introduced by the recent reforms concerns the territorial extension of the agency’s operations. Henceforth, Frontex is mandated to carry out operational activities, including executive powers, in third countries. This blog post first sketches out the agency’s successive mandate expansions allowing for a broader geographic theatre of operations. It then examines the law currently governing the extraterritorial activities of Frontex, in particular the recently concluded status agreements with Western Balkan countries.

 

Carolyn Moser, Rabia Ferahkaya, Lukas Märtin, Frontex goes Africa: On Pre-emptive Border Control and Migration Management, in verfassungsblog.de, 6 febbraio 2020

Where does the European polity end? This fundamental question has kept generations of European thinkers busy. Defining who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’ is indeed a tricky issue. Next to a multitude of political, legal, and also cultural factors, context matters a lot when (re)drawing European boundaries. The significant migratory increase Europe experienced in 2015 propelled the protection of the EU’s external borders to the top of the political agenda. Consequently, Frontex—the Union’s agency in charge of external border control—experienced an important upgrade in terms of competences and capabilities. The logic underpinning this move was that more power and resources would help to improve the control and management of the EU’s external borders in relation to migratory pressures, transboundary criminality, and other security threats.

 

Constantin Hruschka, Frontex and the Duty to Respect and Protect Human Rights, in verfassungsblog.de, 7 febbraio 2020

The discussion on human rights obligations and potential human rights violations has been part of the history of Frontex ever since the agency´s foundation in 2004. Yet, the focus of the human rights discourse on Frontex is on the protection against human rights violations ‘committed by Frontex’. Much less attention, though, is paid to the duty of Frontex to respect and protect human rights in its operations. The call for streamlining fundamental rights protection into all Frontex operations is, obviously, less likely to gain public attention than a law suit against an EU agency. Mindful of this important gap in the current human rights debate surrounding Frontex, this blogpost will look at both levels of human rights protection and suggest a way forward in light of the agency’s extended tasks and competencies.

 

Ruben Wissing, Push backs of “badly behaving” migrants at Spanish border are not collective expulsions (but might still be illegal refoulements), in strasbourgobservers.com, 25 febbraio 2019

On 13 February, the Grand Chamber rendered a long awaited judgment, meandering over more than one hundred pages, in the N.D. and N.T case on the push-back practices against migrants at the Moroccan-Spanish border fence surrounding the city of Melilla – the so-called devoluciones en caliente or ‘hot returns’ by the Spanish border police.  The Court did not qualify them as collective expulsions, thus acquitting Spain of having violated Art. 4 of Protocol No. 4. However, the specific circumstances of the case, as well as the absence of an examination of the principle of non-refoulement, have been ultimately decisive for the outcome of this case, thus restricting the extent to which the Court’s findings can be generalised to similar practices at the EU external borders.

 

Anna Lübbe, The Elephant in the Room. Effective Guarantee of Non-Refoulement after ECtHR N.D. and N.T.?, in verfassungsblog.de, 19 febbraio 2020

The ECtHR’s Grand Chamber judgement N.D. and N.T. v. Spain may be perceived as a referral of two migrants from illegal to legal pathways of entry, two migrants who were not in need of protection. Those celebrating the judgement for this outcome miss its unsettling implications for the effective guarantee of the principle of non-refoulement. There has been a basic legal consensus (e.g. M.S.S., Hirsi, Sharifi, Gnandi) that states, in order to comply with their duty not to bring deportation candidates into an inhuman or degrading situation, must give the opportunity to apply for protection and must assess an alleged risk before deportation. Art. 3 of the Convention is an absolute right and has to be guaranteed, as the Court stresses (para 171), in a practically effective manner. As per Art. 13 of the Convention an (at least preliminary) legal protection mechanism must be available and, if requested, be completed before removal. Otherwise protection may come too late, or rather will fail all together, because those removed are usually unable to actuate a complaint from abroad, especially when trapped in an inhuman situation. In short: Under returns without the above provisos (“hot returns”) Art. 3 of the Convention is not guaranteed in a practically effective manner.

 

Carlos Oviedo Moreno, A Painful Slap from the ECtHR and an Urgent Opportunity for Spain, in verfassungsblog.de, 14 febbraio 2020

“[…] the Court considers that it was in fact the applicants who placed themselves in jeopardy by participating in the storming of the Melilla border fences […]”.This is the conclusion of the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) in its judgement published on 13th February in the case N.D and N.T v. Spain. The Grand Chamber shockingly endorses a practice which opposes the core principles of International Law and the protection of fundamental rights. This decision repeals a previous ECtHR judgement of 2017 which had condemned push-backs and which Spain had asked to be referred to the Grand Chamber. But all hope is not lost: The Spanish Constitutional Court will rule on the “rejections at the border” provision in the near future and has the chance to uphold Spain’s international legal obligations.

 

Maximilian Pichl, Dana Schmalz, “Unlawful” may not mean rightless. The shocking ECtHR Grand Chamber judgment in case N.D. and N.T., in verfassungsblog.de, 14 febbraio 2020

Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is short. Its title reads “Prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens”, its text reads: “Collective expulsion of aliens is prohibited.” It comes as a historical disappointment that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in its decision in the case N.D. and N.T. v. Spain from 13 February 2020 distorts this clear guarantee to exclude apparently “unlawful” migrants from its protection. The decision is a shock for the effective protection of rights in Europe and at its external borders. Consequently the Guardian titled that the Court is “under fire“. Reading the majority opinion is at times a puzzling experience, to say the least.

 

Gaia Lott, Solidarity and Dublin I: a missed opportunity, in EUIdeas, 18 febbraio 2020

On 15 June 1990, eleven of the twelve Member States of the European Community signed the Dublin Convention, the first binding agreement on asylum between European governments (the twelfth, Denmark, signed it one year later). Dublin defined the criteria that determines responsibility for the examination of asylum applications. It put down in black and white, for the first-time, ideas and principles that are still at the core of the system for allocating asylum seekers in Europe. On the eve of the 30th anniversary of the Convention, the debate about the system is still open. Conditions have changed, however, with several countries facing crisis situations and demands for greater solidarity among member states ever more urgent.

 

Daniel Thym, A Restrictionist Revolution? A Counter-Intuitive Reading of the ECtHR’s N.D. & N.T.-Judgment on ‘Hot Expulsions’, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 17 febbraio 2020

In times of twitter and social media, we get used to quick reactions and clear-cut opinions that lend themselves to intuitive approval or rejection. Not surprisingly, the immediate response to the Grand Chamber’s N.D. & N.T. judgment rectifying the Spanish policy of ‘hot expulsions’ of irregular migrants was met with ‘shock’ – a ‘slap in the face’ of human rights law that “refutes the raison d’être” of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). These first analyses are correct insofar as they express the utter disappointment of the authors at the immediate outcome of the case and the initial conclusion that judges backtracked from an earlier dynamic interpretation of the prohibition of collective expulsion.

 

Jessica Schultz, The end of protection? Cessation and the ‘return turn’ in refugee law, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 31 gennaio 2020

With increasing enthusiasm, European states are reviving the Refugee Convention’s cessation provisions in service of their return-oriented refugee policies. This practice threatens the careful balance established by refugee law between the security of refugee status, on the one hand, and its impermanence on the other. This post reviews the legal requirements for cessation of refugee status as well as how the focus on return distorts their application. Through the lens of Norwegian practice, it is possible to see how reliance on an internal protection alternative (IPA) and non-state actors of protection dilute the requirement of durable protection, especially for women and children.

 

Matteo Villa, Migrazioni in Italia: tutti i numeri, in Ispionline.it, 31 gennaio 2020

In questa pagina raccogliamo una serie di grafici commentati, aggiornati periodicamente, che permettono di fare il punto sulla situazione delle migrazioni in Italia. Dalle richieste d’asilo all’accoglienza, dal numero stimato di stranieri irregolari presenti ai rimpatri.

 

Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza,

Fascicolo n. 1, marzo 2020

 

Editoriale

William Chiaromonte, A un anno dai decreti sicurezza: eppur (qualcosa) si muove?

 

Saggi

Tecla Mazzarese, Diritto di migrare e diritti dei migranti. Una sfida al costituzionalismo (inter)nazionale ancora da superare

Irini Papanicolopulu e Giulia Baj, Controllo delle frontiere statali e respingimenti nel diritto internazionale e nel diritto del mare

Alberto Pasquero, La comunicazione alla Corte Penale Internazionale sulle responsabilità dei leader europei per crimini contro l’umanità commessi nel Mediterraneo e in Libia. Una lettura critica

Alessandra Lang, La conservazione dei diritti di soggiorno in tempo di Brexit

Michela Castiglione, L’interesse superiore del minore al ricongiungimento familiare tra sovranità statale e regolamento Dublino III

Simona D’Antonio, L’accesso degli stranieri al lavoro nelle pubbliche amministrazioni

 

Commenti

Giandonato Caggiano, L’interoperabilità fra le banche-dati dell’Unione sui cittadini degli Stati terzi

Carol Ruggiero, Dalla criminalizzazione alla giustificazione delle attività di ricerca e soccorso in mare. Le tendenze interpretative più recenti alla luce dei casi Vos Thalassa e Racket

Giulia Mentasti, Campi di detenzione per migranti in Libia: il caso Matammud. Nota a sentenza Corte ass. app. Milano, Sezione I, n. 9/2019, ud. 20.03.2019

 

Accedi all’intero fascicolo

 

 

Libri

Mariagiulia Giuffrè, The Readmission of Asylum Seekers under International Law, Hart Publishing, 2020

This monograph could not be more timely, as discourses relating to refugees’ access to territory, rescue at sea, push-back, and push-back by proxy dominate political debate. Looking at the questions which lie at the junction of migration control and refugee law standards, it explores the extent to which readmission can hamper refugees’ access to protection. Though it draws mainly on European law, notably the European Convention on Human Rights, it also examines other international frameworks, including those employed by the United Nations and instruments such as the Refugee Convention. Therefore, this book is of importance to readers of international law, refugee law, human rights and migration studies at the global level. It offers an analysis of both the legal and policy questions at play, and engages fully with widely-disputed cases concerning readmission agreements, deportation with assurances and interception at sea. By so doing, this book seeks to clarify a complex field which has at times suffered from partiality in both its terminology and substance.

 

Víctor Luis Gutiérrez Castillo, Lina Pannella (et al.), Controllo e gestione dei flussi migratori nell’Europa del Sud. Studio comparato dell’esperienza spagnola e italiana, Supplemento 1/2020 – Ordine internazionale e diritti umani

Il volume è diviso in tre parti. Nella prima viene affrontato il problema dei controlli dei flussi migratori sia dal punto di vista del diritto internazionale che dal punto di vista del diritto interno italiano e spagnolo, mettendone in evidenza gli aspetti positivi, ma anche le carenze soprattutto dal punto di vista della protezione dei diritti umani. La seconda sessione è, invece, dedicata alla gestione della migrazione nei Paesi del Sud Europa ed agli strumenti che la Corte di Giustizia dell’Unione europea e la Corte europea di diritti dell’uomo da un lato, e le amministrazioni statali dall’altro hanno adottato in tale materia. Infine, nell’ultima parte, dal titolo “Immigrazione irregolare e criminalità organizzata. L’espulsione dei migranti irregolari”, il fenomeno migratorio viene studiato dal punto di vista del diritto penale, evidenziando come molto spesso il migrante venga considerato, anche dalle normative interne, il “nemico” da emarginare ed escludere, senza alcun riguardo per la tutela dei diritti fondamentali che gli spettano in quanto persona.

 

Justine N. Stefanelli, Judicial Review of Immigration Detention in the UK, US and EU. From Principles to Practice, Hart Publishing, 2020

Immigration detention is considered by many states to be a necessary tool in the execution of immigration policy. Despite the apparently key role it plays in immigration enforcement, the law on immigration detention is often vague, especially in relation to determining the circumstances under which prolonged detention remains lawful. As a result, the courts are frequently called upon to adjudicate these matters, with scant legal tools at their disposal. Though there have been some significant judgments on the legality of detention at the constitutional level, the extent to which these judgments have had an impact at the lower end of the judiciary is unclear. Indeed, it is the lower courts which are tasked with judging the legality of detention through habeas corpus or judicial review proceedings. This book examines the way this has occurred in the lower courts of two jurisdictions, the UK and the US, and contrasts this practice not only in those jurisdictions, but with judgments rendered by the Court of Justice of the European Union, a constitutional court at the other end of the judicial spectrum whose judgments are applied by courts and tribunals in the EU Member States. Although these three jurisdictions use similar tests to evaluate the legality of detention, case outcomes significantly differ. Many factors contribute to this divergence, but key among them is the role that fundamental rights protection plays in each jurisdiction. Through a forensic evaluation of 191 judgments, this book compares the laws on detention in the UK, US and EU, and makes recommendations to these jurisdictions for improvement.

 

Articoli

Hartmut Aden, Interoperability Between EU Policing and Migration Databases: Risks for Privacy, in European Public Law, 2020, vol. 26, n. 1

The interoperability initiative passed in May 2019 as Regulations (EU) 2019/817 and 818 seeks new strategies for identifying dangerous individuals who use false or multiple identities. The EU’s databases in the Area of Freedom Security and Justice (AFSJ) for policing and migration purposes will be interconnected. This constitutes a paradigm shift for purpose limitation as a core element of data protection. This article identifies regulatory patterns and shortcomings in the technical and legal data protection arrangements of the interoperability regulations. The legal framework for data protection in the EU has developed considerably with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2016/679 and with Directive 2016/680 for policing and criminal justice. The European Data Protection Board, a multilevel accountability forum in which European and national data protection authorities cooperate has been established. From a trans-disciplinary legal, public administration, and public policy perspective, this article analyses the regulatory patterns and institutional settings established for the upcoming interoperability of databases for policing and migration.

 

Ruth Brittle and Ellen Desmet, Thirty Years of Research on Children’s Rights in the Context of Migration. Towards Increased Visibility and Recognition of Some Children, But Not All?, in The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 2020, vol. 28, n. 1

This article presents a tentative analysis of 30 years of academic research in the field of children’s rights and migration (1989–2019). Much research has addressed the plight of unaccompanied, refugee and asylum-seeking children, trying better to link children’s rights considerations with international refugee law. Many publications address the best interests of the child principle and the right to be heard. Most research focuses on (migration towards) Europe. This has led to an increased visibility and recognition of children’s rights in the context of migration. However, there are still various blind spots in the research reviewed. Most research focuses on some children, but not all (e.g., accompanied children), on some rights, but not all (e.g., economic, social and cultural rights), and on some types of migration, but not all (e.g., economic migration). Moreover, refugee and migrant children tend to be studied as a group, which risks reducing attention for their internal diversity.

 

Evelien Brouwer, Large-Scale Databases and Interoperability in Migration and Border Policies: The Non- Discriminatory Approach of Data Protection, in European Public Law, 2020, vol. 26, n. 1

In the EU, different measures have been adopted with regard to the storage and exchange of personal data of third-country nationals for external border controls. Large-scale databases and risk assessment are used to facilitate the entry of those considered as ‘bona fide travelers’ and to identify those considered as a risk of irregular migration or security threat. The purposes of existing databases have been gradually extended, blurring the line between the objectives of immigration control and security and law enforcement. Emphasizing the non-discriminatory approach of data protection and applying criteria from the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), this contribution questions the legitimacy of these measures from the perspective of the principles of necessity and proportionality.

 

Nicola Canzian, La non retroattività dell’abrogazione della protezione umanitaria, in Osservatorio AIC, 2020, n. 2

Decree Law n. 113/2018 repealed the permit for humanitarian reasons, intending to lower the protection provided to foreigners. The paper focuses on the intertemporal law profiles: the new law does not provide transitional rules governing all the previous pending cases. Therefore, Courts had to rule if the new regulation is or is not retroactive. Finally, the Joint Chambers of the Supreme Court of Cassation ruled that the humanitarian protection is a fundamental human right; therefore, the repeal does not affect the rights already acquired by foreigners.

 

Omar Caramaschi, La dimensione regionale del fenomeno immigratorio tra interventi normativi, riparto di competenze e giurisprudenza costituzionale, in federalismi.it, 2020, n. 5

La sentenza n. 194 del 2018 – con cui la Corte costituzionale si occupa del c.d. “Decreto sicurezza” – consente di tornare a ragionare circa le competenze regionali in tema di immigrazione. Dopo un breve inquadramento delle materie coinvolte ex art. 117, secondo comma, Cost., viene affrontata, nell’ambito del fenomeno migratorio, la questione del riparto delle competenze tra Stato e Regioni, in particolare alla luce della giurisprudenza costituzionale. Nel solco di quest’ultima, la Corte arriva, in quest’ultima decisione, ad ampliare la “ridondanza” e gli ambiti di ricorso regionali, nonché, in modo particolare, a riconfermare il ruolo delle Regioni nell’ambito dell’immigrazione e della tutela dei diritti fondamentali. Pertanto viene ribadita la possibilità per le Regioni di occuparsi delle politiche sociali di inclusione e integrazione, potendo esse prevedere forme di assistenza in favore dei cittadini stranieri immigrati presenti sul territorio regionale, anche non (o non ancora) dotati di un regolare permesso di soggiorno. In conclusione, tale riaffermazione giurisprudenziale apre la possibilità di una più ampia ottimizzazione di tali ambiti di intervento regionale, la quale potrebbe essere perseguita sia attraverso l’attivazione di taluni dei meccanismi di coordinamento tra Stato e Regioni ex art. 118, terzo comma, Cost., sia – potenzialmente – attraverso una possibile declinazione del riconoscimento di «ulteriori forme e condizioni particolari di autonomia» di cui all’art. 116, terzo comma, Cost.

 

Gabriella Carella, Inapplicabilità del regolamento Dublino III a talune fattispecie di migrazioni irregolari nel Mediterraneo, in Studi sull’integrazione europea, 2020, n. 1

 

Laura Cleton, Reinhard Schweitzer, Using or Inducing Return Aspirations? On the role of return counsellors in the implementation of ‘assisted voluntary return’ policies in Austria and the Netherlands, in IMI Working Papers, 2020, vol. 162

In this paper, we investigate how state and non-state provides of return counselling try to influence aspirations for return among (rejected) asylum seekers. Existing literature has highlighted both the importance and malleability of migration aspirations in a wide range of migratory trajectories. Yet, it paid little attention to the situation of people who at some stage of their asylum procedure are confronted with the prospect of eventually having to return to their country of citizenship. This confrontation is institutionalised in the form of state or NGOled ‘return counselling’, which helps the returning state to uphold the fine line between forced and allegedly ‘voluntary’ returns. Building on Carling’s aspirations/ability model and using qualitative data from Austria and the Netherlands, we identify three ways in which return counsellors try to obtain the departure of (rejected) asylum seekers. Firstly, by identifying existing aspirations among potential returnees who for personal reasons decided to return but lack the ability to do so. Secondly, by merely obtaining informed consent to return ‘voluntarily’ in the absence of aspirations to return. And thirdly, by actively inducing the wish to return with the aim of aligning migrants’ own aspirations with the requirements of restrictive migration law. We argue that this distinction is important to better understand the critical role and everyday workings of ‘migration aspirations management’ (Carling and Collins 2018) within contemporary migration governance in Europe.

 

Gareth Davis, How Citizenship Divides: The New Legal Class of Transnational Europeans, in European Papers, in European Papers, 2019, n. 3

Union Citizenship is intended to bring Europeans together. This Article explores one of the ways in which it may divide them. It argues that Union Citizenship creates a new transnational class, and gives the members of that class a legal status with the following characteristics: they are legally separate, or differentiated, from other Europeans; they are privileged, and they are threatening, in the sense that their rights have the potential to disrupt or undermine institutions and laws in a way that is disadvantageous to non-members of that class, or at least likely to seem so. The members of that class share certain qualities: they are economically self-sufficient, they live lives in which their families or work or study are cross-border, and they are only partially allowed to share in the solidarity of static national majorities. On the other hand, their link with the EU is legally direct and important, and they often have more in common with each other than with locals: they form a European community. They could be described as economically successful, partially uprooted, truly European, cosmopolitan outsiders. It is almost as if EU law has set out to create a class whose role in Europe is an echo of that fulfilled by the Jews that the continent lost.

 

Iris Goldner Lang, No Solidarity without Loyalty: Why Do Member States Violate EU Migration and Asylum Law and What Can Be Done?, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2020, vol. 22, n. 1

The aim of this paper is twofold. First, it will display an ever-increasing phenomenon of Member States’ infringements of EU migration and asylum law as an instance of the violation of the principle of solidarity and discuss the reasons behind it. It will be suggested that EU inter-state solidarity is just as much about respecting EU law, as it is about helping each other, as the latter cannot subsist without the former. Second, the paper will consider whether the existing mechanisms of reducing the number of violations are sufficient and discuss the new mechanisms that are being developed—particularly the rule of law conditionality and other conditionality instruments. When addressing the reasons behind the frequent violations, the text will identify two groups of reasons, the first group being applicable to the whole of EU law, and the second one specifically to EU migration and asylum law. In this context, Member States’ violations will be construed as the process of political withdrawal or retrenchment from certain parts of the commonly adopted EU migration and asylum law. This will be explained by relying on the notion of “spillback” or disintegration (as opposed to further European integration based on the neofunctionalist concept of “spillover” effect into more policy areas) and on the concepts of “exit” and “voice” conceived by Albert Hirschman and developed further by Joseph Weiler in his seminal work “The Transformation of Europe”.

 

Luisa Marin, The Cooperation Between Frontex and Third Countries in Information Sharing: Practices, Law and Challenges in Externalizing Border Control Functions, in European Public Law, 2020, vol. 26, n. 1

The aim of this article is to investigate whether the cooperation of Frontex with third countries in information sharing is in compliance with EU’s constitutional normative rules and values. Since more than a decade, border control and surveillance have been developed as policies instrumental to migration control. The shift towards risk management in many areas of public governance has implied that EU’s action at the external borders is built upon a combination of policies of securitization of migration and externalization of border management. Against this theoretical background, the article focuses on the external competences or powers of Frontex, mapping in particular practices of information sharing with third country authorities, which are functional to risk analysis, one of the core tasks of Frontex. It analyses working arrangements, intelligence sharing communities and cooperation taking place within the context of technical assistance. The article further discusses the legal challenges these types of cooperation brings to the EU, as a governance system based on the rule of law. These are indicated in transparency and accountability, respect for fundamental rights and privacy challenges.

 

Luisa Marin, Waiting (and Paying) for Godot: Analyzing the Systemic Consequences of the Solidarity Crisis in EU Asylum Law, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2020, vol. 22, n. 1

What is left of the principle of solidarity in the context of EU asylum law? The aim of this article is to analyze the follow-up of the solidarity crisis the EU has experienced with the failure of relocation schemes. Relocation schemes have tried to alleviate the consequences of the so-called migration crisis of 2015–2016, but did not prove to be successful, because of the low relocation rates, in addition to open contestation by states of the Visegrad group. Against the background of the stalemate of the reform of the Dublin Regulation, the article analyzes ‘measures’ adopted after the failure of relocation schemes, focusing in particular on administrative arrangements to counter secondary movements and ‘ad hoc’ temporary disembarkation schemes. Both measures are aiming at fixing longstanding questions (e.g., limiting secondary movements, providing safe disembarkation for irregular migrants): in the first case, States proceed at bilateral level with arrangements creating fast-track returns and stopping secondary movements; in the second case, the EU is trying to support states’ arrangements for disembarkation of migrants after SAR operations. The article shows that, while reforms of legislative instruments are not progressing, Member States and, to some extent, also EU institutions are going down the lane of ‘operational and informal arrangements’, which are ‘bricolage solutions’ to counterbalance undesired effects of the status quo, while waiting for structural solutions that are necessary but not in sight. The article discusses the dangers of such a trend toward informal operational solutions, as a challenge to the EU as a system of governance based on the rule of law.

 

Luisa Marin, Simone Penasa, Graziella Romeo, Migration Crises and the Principle of Solidarity in Times of Sovereignism: Challenges for EU Law and Polity, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2020, vol. 22, n. 1

The Treaties expressly mention the pivotal role of the principle of solidarity in the EU integration process, as one finds in Articles 2 and 3 of the TEU, where solidarity is among the fundamental values of the EU. To be more precise, solidarity is also one of the founding principles of the internal market, which aims at achieving a social market economy, realizing solidarity between generations and among Member States. In the field of migration and asylum law, solidarity between Member States is a core element of the common policies on asylum, immigration and external border controls, together with fairness toward third-country nationals.4 For example, Article 80 TFEU mirrors the concern about solidarity by stating that migration policies shall be “governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility”.5 Moreover, in his Opinion in the case Slovakia and Hungary v. Council,6 Advocate General Bot stressed that “solidarity is among the cardinal values of the Union and is even among the foundations of the Union”. According to Bot, “solidarity is both a pillar and at the same time a guiding principle of the European Union’s policies on border checks, asylum and immigration”.

 

Sílvia Morgades-Gil, The “Internal” Dimension of the Safe Country Concept: the Interpretation of the Safe Third Country Concept in the Dublin System by International and Internal Courts, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2020, vol. 22, n. 1

The non-refoulement principle has been interpreted extensively as regards what kind of threats prevent removal to another country through the interpretation of the international instruments for the protection of human rights. Nevertheless, authors and institutions acknowledge that this principle does not prohibit the removal to a safe country and thus that a number of States participate in a system of shared responsibility, in which refugees and asylum seekers are transferred from one country to another in order to try to obtain (the Dublin EU system) or to benefit from international protection (resettlement). The academic literature has extensively addressed the meaning of the concept of the safe third country. This contribution is aimed at analyzing the application of this concept within a system where all States are supposed to be safe for all asylum seekers, and the principle of mutual trust and equivalence of protection applies. The paper reviews the safe country concept in the context of the Dublin system and examines when and why International, European and internal courts and other institutions have considered that one of the States participating in the system was not safe ad intra. Some final thoughts consider the impact that the analysis may have on the principle of mutual trust that is at the heart of the area of Freedom, Security and Justice.

 

Lea Müller-Funk, Sonja Fransen, Return aspirations and coerced return: A case study on Syrian refugees in Turkey and Lebanon, in IMI Working Papers, 2020, vol. 162

This paper studies return aspirations and current return movements of Syrian refugees residing in Turkey and Lebanon to understand who aspires to return after the end of the war, and why and when refugees return with the conflict still ongoing. To do so, we embed future return aspirations into refugees’ broader life aspirations and study how these interact with perceived opportunities (capabilities) in the home and host countries in shaping those aspirations to return. Drawing on 757 survey interviews we present, first, quantitative analyses of the factors underlying current return reflections and future return aspirations. They differ significantly across individuals, and more refugees residing in Lebanon consider to return currently and in the future. Second, we analyse information from 41 in-depth interviews and show how life aspirations (i) are a crucial element in shaping return aspirations and (ii) interact particularly with social, professional and political aspects in home and host countries in shaping return aspirations. The paper also highlights that while most refugees retain a profound belief in return, there is a strong mismatch between aspiring to return and realising it. While return after the war’s end is driven by a wish to realise broader life goals, current return migration is driven by legal, medical and financial vulnerability, family obligations and discrimination in the host country.

 

Simone Penasa, Graziella Romeo, Sovereignty-based Arguments and the European Asylum System: Searching for a European Constitutional Moment?, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2020, vol. 22, n. 1

The article expresses a twofold claim: a) sovereignty-based argument finds a fertile ground in EU’s weaknesses in terms of asylum strategy and b) sovereignty arguments in asylum issues can (and must) be confronted with the legal instruments afforded by the existing framework of EU law. To develop the argument, this article is divided into two parts. The first part addresses sovereignism in asylum law and policies, by exploring sovereignist claims and their translation into domestic legislation and policies, with specific reference to the Italian context. It then analyses the recent changes in asylum strategy, within the EU, to test to what extent arguments based on sovereignty stand as a bulwark against full cooperation among EU member states. In the second part, the article examines the legal instruments that EU institution can use and develop to implement solidarity and reduce the margin for the use of sovereignty-based arguments in asylum policies.

 

Valerio Piergigli, Lingue e minoranze: tra eguaglianza, identità e integrazione, in Rivista AIC, 2020, n. 1

Il contributo esamina, in chiave comparata, gli approcci giuridici che gli ordinamenti di democrazia pluralista, soprattutto quelli del continente europeo, riservano al tema delle relazioni tra “lingue e minoranze”. Gli obiettivi dell’indagine sono fondamentalmente i seguenti. In primo luogo, si intende rimarcare che la lingua della minoranza (autoctona o immigrata che sia), lungi dal costituire elemento di discriminazione ed emarginazione – il che non è affatto scontato neppure nell’epoca attuale – dovrebbe piuttosto fungere, mediante adeguate politiche pubbliche, da veicolo di trasmissione della cultura e della identità dell’altro, cultura e identità che vanno salvaguardate e valorizzate non nell’interesse esclusivo del gruppo che ne è portatore, bensì della società nel suo complesso. In secondo luogo, si intende evidenziare il fatto che la lingua della maggioranza non dovrebbe concretizzare, a sua volta, un fattore di discriminazione tale da impedire irragionevolmente l’integrazione nel paese di accoglienza dei singoli componenti della minoranza (autoctona o immigrata che sia), integrazione che, opportunamente regolata, gioverebbe alla coesione e allo sviluppo culturale, oltre che economico, dell’intera società. In sostanza, l’analisi evidenzia l’estrema attualità del tema della (non) discriminazione per ragioni di lingua e di appartenenza culturale/etnica, in modo particolare se si ha riguardo ad alcune tipologie minoritarie: certamente quelle “nuove”, ma anche quelle disperse sul territorio e dunque più difficili da tutelare o quelle verso le quali permangono tuttora stereotipi e pregiudizi da parte della società maggioritaria. The article aims at analyzing, in a comparative perspective, the legal approaches that the pluralist democratic States, especially those of the European continent, reserve to the relations between “languages and minorities”.

 

Teresa Quintel, Interoperable Data Exchanges Within Different Data Protection Regimes: The Case of Europol and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, in European Public Law, 2020, vol. 26, n. 1

In recent years, the discourse surrounding migration, asylum and related security concerns have, in most EU Member States, become deeply contentious. Following the 2015 migration crisis, the shortcomings of the EU asylum system became strikingly evident. The subsequent terrorist attacks inaugurated the beginning of a series of revisions to databases used for border control, the registration of asylum seekers and visa applicants, or for alerts regarding criminals. As a final step, the Commission issued two proposals to render all EU databases interoperable in order to provide authorities with better information to tackle identity fraud, prevent irregular migration and mitigate security risks. In May 2019, the Interoperability Regulations were adopted by the co-legislators. Europol and Frontex, two EU Agencies that have been actively engaged in a wide range of operational activities at the external Schengen borders, will be authorized to consult and may subsequently request full access to the interoperable system. This contribution will address some of the concerns that emerge with the connection of originally disconnected databases and seeks to analyse the discrepancies that may arise in the context of interoperability where systematic data exchanges take place between actors that apply different data protection regimes.

 

Carola Ricci, The Necessity for Alternative Legal Pathways: The Best Practice of Humanitarian Corridors Opened by Private Sponsors in Italy, in German Law Journal, 2020, vol. 21, n. 2

The scope of this Article is to understand to what extent a recent and fruitful private initiative sponsoring a safe alternative legal pathway spread from Italy, called “humanitarian corridors,” may in the future become a general and uniform alternative model for all the European Union States. Such a practice—which currently represents an exceptional route for vulnerable migrants to enter the country without harm after a security screening and to be materially supported by the same sponsors in the crucial initial phase of integration—is at present restricted to a relatively small number of beneficiaries, but it could potentially be extended to other States. In order to achieve this goal, it is argued that the present model should be slightly adjusted—especially with regard to the actual reference to Article 25 of the Visa Code as its legal basis. The latter seems difficult to be formally maintained after the much criticized 2017 judgment X and X v. Belgium, in which the Court of Justice of the European Union conferred to Member States a wide margin of discretion when requested to grant humanitarian visas by vulnerable people exposed to serious irreversible harm. Against this background, clear obligations to grant humanitarian visas to vulnerable people at risk already exist. This obligation stems from international law—both general and conventional—and constitutes the adequate legal basis both for States and civil society to act in a “multi-stakeholder alliance” to find solutions to the challenges and opportunities deriving from international migration, as indicated in the Global Compact for Migration.

 

Kerilyn Schewel, Sonja Fransen, Who aspires to stay? Immobility aspirations among youth in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam, IMI Working Papers, 2020, vol. 161

This article studies immobility aspirations – or aspirations to stay – among individuals with high migration propensities (aged 16 to 23) in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam. Assuming that aspirations to stay are not simply the absence of migration aspirations, we explore which individual and household factors determine who aspires to stay and why, using unique survey data collected for the Young Lives project. We find that the majority of young people surveyed – between 61 percent (Ethiopia) and 82 percent (Vietnam) – aspire to stay in their home country. Between 32 percent (Ethiopia) and 57 percent (Vietnam) of young people aspired to stay at their current location, meaning they aspired to move neither internally nor internationally. Across country contexts, aspirations to stay were most often highest among the poorest. Further, the desire to stay decreases with higher levels of education, which suggests that widening access to formal schooling is an important driver of internal and international migration aspirations. Finally, respondents most often mentioned family-related reasons as the main motivation to stay in place. These findings contribute to a broader debate about the relationship between development and migration by challenging the linear relationship between poverty levels and migration aspirations that conventional migration theories implicitly or explicitly assume. Moreover, our findings on family reasons driving the aspiration to stay highlight the importance of non-economic factors in migration decision-making.

 

Davide Strazzari, Resettlement, Populism and the Multiple Dimensions of Solidarity: Lessons from US and Canada, in European Journal of Migration and Law, 2020, vol. 22, n. 1

Resettlement is the selection and transfer of refugees from a State in which they have sought protection to a third State which has agreed, voluntarily, to admit them. Since resettlement is subject to State planning and control, it is usually immune from current populist narratives that depicts immigration as contrary to national interests. By looking at the experience of both US and Canada, the paper argues that this is not always the case.Resettlement involves not only an international dimension of solidarity, but also an intra-national one which, in turn, is both vertical and horizontal. The former refers to the role of the subnational units with regard to the selection and the distribution of refugees crossover the country, while the latter relates to the involvement of civil society in some elements of their identification or reception. A lack of coordination among these multiple dimensions of solidarity may result in local resistances that in the long run can influence the enforcement of national resettlement policy.

 

Marta Tomasi, Verso la definizione di uno statuto giuridico dei minori stranieri non accompagnati in europa? Modelli astratti e concreti di tutela della vulnerabilità, in Rivista AIC, 2020, n. 1

I minori stranieri non accompagnati sono una categoria particolare di migranti, la cui condizione di estrema vulnerabilità rappresenta una cartina al tornasole, utile a qualificare le regole e i sistemi dell’accoglienza e a svolgere una verifica, in punto di diritto costituzionale, di scelte fondamentali e intime effettuate dagli ordinamenti intorno alla tutela delle persone. Lo scopo del presente contributo è quello di analizzare criticamente e comparare soluzioni e approcci adottati, in alcuni specifici ambiti (quali l’identificazione e l’accertamento dell’età, la detenzione, le modalità della rappresentanza e la transizione verso la maggiore età), da alcuni Stati membri dell’Unione europea, che si sono di recente interrogati sui bilanciamenti che ruotano intorno alla tutela dei minori stranieri non accompagnati. L’analisi svolta mira a rilevare assonanze e distonie nel dare contenuto al generale criterio ordinatore dei best interests del minore, con lo scopo, da un lato, di apprezzare quale sia la collocazione del sistema di tutela italiano nel panorama disegnato e, dall’altro, di vagliare l’esistenza di linee di convergenza verso l’individuazione di uno statuto giuridico europeo del minore straniero non accompagnato. In conclusione, stante l’impossibilità di discernere un approccio uniforme, si propongono alcuni indici capaci di orientare l’impiego del paradigma dei best interests del minore nel senso della concretezza e dell’effettività.

 

Post

Fernando D’Aniello, Un conflitto che va spento, in Il Mulino, 5 marzo 2020

Per capire perché al confine tra Grecia e Turchia c’è nuovamente tensione – data dal tentativo dei profughi siriani di entrare in Europa e dalla contestuale chiusura dei confini da parte del governo greco, sostenuto dalla Commissione europea – occorre aver chiaro quanto sta avvenendo a Idleb, in Siria, in quelle che si spera siano le ultime fasi della guerra civile siriana. La Turchia, in due operazioni distinte (all’inizio del 2018 e nell’autunno del 2019), ha occupato i territori siriani a Ovest e poi a Est del fiume Eufrate, nella parte settentrionale della Siria, controllati sin dall’inizio della guerra civile dalle forze curde. Questa illegittima annessione è stata giustificata con la necessità di prevenire azioni terroriste curde, data la contiguità dei gruppi siriani con il Pkk. La motivazione è insufficiente, secondo il diritto internazionale: le operazioni antiterrorismo devono essere ispirate al principio della proporzionalità e avere una durata limitata, mentre l’obiettivo turco è alterare in modo significativo il delicato equilibrio demografico tra curdi e arabi “fedeli” al governo ad Ankara.

 

Giuseppe Campesi, Ordine ai confini, in Il Mulino, 5 marzo 2020

Qualcuno sostiene che la situazione al confine greco-turco fosse come una bomba ad orologeria pronta ad esplodere e che l’Unione europea abbia perso l’occasione, durante questi anni anni in cui il controverso accordo con la Turchia sembrava aver creato una vasta zona cuscinetto in cui tenere a distanza dal confine europeo la gran massa di profughi in fuga dal conflitto siriano, per trovare un accordo sulla riforma del sistema d’asilo. In particolare, si sia lasciata sfuggire l’opportunità per trovare un accordo su uno stabile meccanismo di distribuzione del cosiddetto “onere” dell’accoglienza, che necessariamente passa dalla riforma del regolamento di Dublino, su cui peraltro il Parlamento europeo aveva lavorato. Al contrario, si è puntato tutto sul rafforzamento di Frontex, sulla necessità di ripristinare “l’ordine ai confini”, come ha sottolineato la stessa presidente della Commissione europea Ursula von der Leyen nel corso della conferenza stampa congiunta di martedì 3 marzo.

 

Joanna Curtis, EU border transit zones and deprivation of liberty: Ilias v Hungary, in UK Human Rights Blog, 19 marzo 2020

Amid recent news reports of Turkey’s re-opening of migration routes to Europe, clashes at the Turkey-Greece border, and EU countries closing their borders due to Covid-19, this post looks back to a decision from the ECtHR Grand Chamber last November and the applicability of Article 5 ECHR in temporary border transit zones. Ilias v Hungary (Application no. 47287/15) was the first case in which the ECtHR considered a land border transit zone between two member states of the Council of Europe, where the host state, Hungary, was also a member of the EU and had applied the safe third country rule under the EU asylum regime. The Grand Chamber held that the applicants’ detention did not breach Article 5 (the right to liberty and security of the person).

 

Eleonora Frasca, Francesco Luigi Gatta, The Malta Declaration on search & rescue, disembarkation and relocation: Much Ado about Nothing, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 3 marzo 2020

On 23 September 2019 an informal “mini-summit” was held in Malta to find a solution to the long-standing controversy over Search and Rescue (SaR), disembarkation and relocation of migrants in the Mediterranean, which had become a burning political issue since the summer of 2018. It convened Interior Ministers of Italy and Malta, searching for solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing, Germany and France, seemingly willing to offer some support in this regard, representatives of the European Commission and Finland, holding the Presidency of the Council.

 

Zara Freudenberg, Karl Mauer, Florian Schöler, Marco Goldoni, The Island of Hope in a Sea of Misery. The Italian Court of Cassation’s Unequivocal Stance on the Right to Disembark, in verfassungsblog.de, 10 marzo 2020

On 17 January 2020, the Italian Court of Cassation (‘Court’) ruled that Carola Rackete, captain of the Sea-Watch 3, was not criminally liable for hitting an Italian Guardia di Finanza (GdF) vessel and allowing 40 shipwrecked to disembark in Lampedusa in July 2019. The recently released reasoning of the judgment is remarkable for three reasons: Firstly, the Court outright grants a right to disembarkation for shipwrecked (p. 11 et seq), something no other Court, or piece of binding legislation has declared in such an unambiguous and uncompromising manner. Secondly, the Court does so at the same moment as the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has failed its duty to uphold human rights at Europe’s borders in the face of mounting political pressure. Thirdly, the Court significantly reduces the leeway with which the Italian government (current or future) may circumvent the content of the decision using executive decrees.

 

Hanana Hakiki, N.D. and N.T. v. Spain: defining Strasbourg’s position on push backs at land borders?, in strasbourgobservers.com, 26 marzo 2020

On 13 February 2020, the Court published its long awaited Grand Chamber judgment in the case of N.D. and N.T. v. Spain, the first case addressing the Spanish policy of immediate expulsions at the Ceuta and Melilla enclaves. In a speech the Court’s president had announced that the judgment would be “instrumental to the issue of push backs” in Europe, the most “burning issue in European politics today” (M.A. v Lithuania; concurring opinion, §1).  Legally, the case of N.D. and N.T. addressed the applicability of the prohibition of collective expulsions to push backs at European land borders. The judgement has already been analysed in detail and widely criticised for its incompatibility with EU law, the principle of non-refoulement and Spain’s obligation to protect unaccompanied minors. Though the judgment brings in an entirely new approach, some have questioned the impact of the judgment on the Court’s approach to push backs more generally. This blogpost considers the application by the Court of its new approach in light of the factual evidence in the case, and whether this allows for any conclusions to be drawn as to  the broader impact of this judgment on the situation at European borders. Thus the blogpost will first assess the new legal test in light of the Court’s jurisprudence on the terms “genuine and effective.” and secondly how the new test was applied in this case. Third, the blogpost will look at how the Grand Chamber assessed evidence in this case. The final section explores the potential significance of this judgement.

 

Constantin Hruschka, Hot returns remain contrary to the ECHR: ND & NT before the ECHR, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 28 febbraio 2020

In its judgement N.D. and N.T. of 13 February 2020, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rejected the finding that Spain had violated the ban on collective expulsions enshrined in Article 4 Protocol No. 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). To conclude from this that the practice of so-called hot returns, i.e. the direct deportations without individual examination directly at the border, was approved by the ECHR, is understandable in view of the press statement of the ECHR but wrong. The practice of hot returns was and remains illegal. In the case before it, the ECtHR merely interpreted the wording of article 4 of Protocol 4 to the EHCR (“Collective expulsions of foreign persons are not permissible”) – in a legally questionable manner – by adding a (narrowly limited) exception in a case that resulted in the aftermath of “an attempt by a large number of migrants to cross that border in an unauthorised manner and en masse.” Consequently, the ECtHR did not find any violation in the specific individual cases. However, the Spanish border control measures (or even “Fortress Europe”) have thus neither been approved nor has the principle of non-refoulement or the question of access to an asylum procedure been made dependent on the person first trying to enter Europe legally. Rather, hot returns are still prohibited, not according to Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 to the ECHR, but according to Art. 3 ECHR prohibiting inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. One could also interpret the judgment as meaning that the ECHR did try to avoid a political statement on the issue before it.

 

Constantin Hruschka, The pandemic kills also the European solidarity, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 20 marzo 2020

In the fast-growing Corona crisis, governments in Europe are currently trying to find ways to contain the virus. Many measures seem at first sight to make sense (like school closures and other restrictions on public life) to slow down the spread of the virus, and to serve as symbolic measures to point out the seriousness of the situation. On top of that, many States in the Schengen area have decided to reintroduce internal border controls and absolute entry bans for persons from “risk areas”. This, too, allegedly serves to flatten out the growth in the rate of infections but shows a law-and-order understanding of virus control which largely lacks the necessary health policy component.

 

Francesco Maletto, Non-refoulement e cambiamento climatico: il caso Teitiota c. Nuova Zelanda, in SIDI Blog, 23 marzo 2020

Le considerazioni (Views) sul caso Teitiota c. Nuova Zelanda (comunicazione n. 2728/2016), adottate dal Comitato per i diritti umani delle Nazioni Unite (d’ora in avanti, “il Comitato”) nell’ambito della sessione tenutasi dal 14 ottobre all’8 novembre 2019, e pubblicate il 7 gennaio 2020, costituiscono una pronuncia di notevole importanza in materia di cambiamento climatico e dell’impatto di tale fenomeno sui diritti umani. In particolare, come si vedrà, nel quadro della decisione in oggetto, il Comitato ha – per la prima volta – avuto l’occasione di prospettare l’applicazione del divieto di refoulement in caso di rischio per la vita derivante da disastri ambientali legati a cambiamenti climatici.

 

Francesca Mussi, La sentenza N.D. e N.T. della Corte europea dei diritti umani: uno “schiaffo” ai diritti dei migranti alle frontiere terrestri?, in SIDI Blog, 19 marzo 2020

Con sentenza resa il 13 febbraio 2020 nel caso N.D. e N.T. c. Spagna, la Grande Camera della Corte europea dei diritti umani ha affrontato per la prima volta la questione dei respingimenti sommari di migranti alle frontiere terrestri che separano la città autonoma di Melilla, énclave spagnola di circa 12 km2 situata sulla costa nord-africana, dal Regno del Marocco. La pronuncia in esame rappresenta l’epilogo di una vicenda processuale iniziata il 12 febbraio 2015, con il deposito, da parte di due cittadini di nazionalità maliana e ivoriana, di due ricorsi volti ad accertare se la misura di rimpatrio immediato adottata nei loro confronti dalla Guardia civile spagnola di stanza a Melilla costituisse una violazione dell’obbligo di non respingimento, del diritto a non essere sottoposti a espulsioni collettive e del diritto a un ricorso effettivo, come affermati, rispettivamente, nell’art. 3, nell’art. 4 del IV Protocollo e nell’art. 13 CEDU.

 

Cecilia Sanna, Il COVID-19 ferma i trasferimenti Dublino da e per l’Italia, in Eurojus.it, 2 marzo 2020

Il Ministero dell’interno italiano ha deciso di sospendere sino a fine marzo 2020 i trasferimenti dei richiedenti asilo nel quadro del sistema Dublino da e per l’Italia al fine di consentire alle autorità di predisporre misure sanitarie atte a fronteggiare l’emergenza sanitaria riconducibile al Covid-19. Lo annuncia con un comunicato del 26 febbraio 2020 la Segreteria di Stato per la migrazione svizzera (SEM), nonché secondo quanto riportato da alcune testate giornalistiche italiane, l’Ufficio federale per la migrazione e i rifugiati tedesco (BAMF). Il Ministero dell’Interno non ha dato direttamente notizia del provvedimento, ma la decisione risulta essere stata “veicolata” alle Unità Dublino con una lettera e una successiva circolare. Nessun atto normativo è stato adottato.

 

Andrea Spagnolo, Un gioco delle parti sulla pelle delle persone. L’insostenibilità delle ragioni greche, turche ed europee nella crisi migratoria in corso, in SIDI Blog, 14 marzo 2020

L’epidemia da Coronavirus ha giustamente catalizzato tutta l’attenzione mediatica delle ultime settimane, impedendo agli organi di stampa di dedicare spazi adeguati alla nuova ‘crisi dei migranti’ in corso al confine greco-turco. Cionondimeno, la vicenda, per sommi capi, può essere così riassunta. L’intervento militare turco nel nord della Siria, che, iniziato a gennaio, ha raggiunto il suo culmine a inizio marzo 2020, secondo l’OCHA, avrebbe causato, dal suo inizio, circa novecentomila sfollati, che sono andati ad aggiungersi ai circa quattro milioni di rifugiati siriani presenti in Turchia. Il Governo turco ha fatto transitare i potenziali richiedenti asilo (stimati in centomila dal Ministro degli Interni) per il proprio Paese, permettendo loro di giungere al confine (anzi: ai confini) con la Grecia. Quest’ultima ha deciso di ‘militarizzare’ le aree di confine, dichiarando di non accettare ulteriori richieste di asilo, respingendo potenziali richiedenti con ogni mezzo, e invocando l’art. 78, comma 3, del TFUE, il quale stabilisce che il Consiglio può adottare misure temporanee a beneficio di uno Stato membro dell’Unione che affronti una situazione di emergenza. Nel frattempo, gli individui che hanno tentato di attraversare il confine greco-turco sono stati oggetto di violenze inaccettabili e – notizia di tre giorni fa – trattenuti in località segrete e sottoposti a trattamenti inumani e degradanti.

 

Daniel Thym, Travel Bans in Europe: A Legal Appraisal, 18 marzo 2020, in eumigrationlawblog.eu, 18 marzo (Parte I) e 19 marzo (Parte II) 2020

In a joint statement of 12 March 2020, President von der Leyen and President Michel ‘disapproved’ the decision of the Trump administration to impose a travel ban on persons coming from much of Europe. Less than a week later, the European Council unanimously agreed on sweeping restrictions on travel to the Schengen area. Any ‘non-essential’ movements across the external Schengen borders are suspended. This astonishing about-turn followed a week of political activism across Europe to fight the epidemic, including temporary border controls and far-reaching travel restrictions at the internal borders between several Member States. It is no coincidence that borders play a prominent role in the fight against the coronavirus, since they can fulfill important symbolic functions transcending the practical effects of more police checks. Donald Trump has always been good at exploiting the discursive and symbolic potential of borders to convey a message of political power and to bolster a national sense of belonging, which can be enhanced in times of crisis, when the population feels insecure and threatened. Similar dynamics are at play when Member States reintroduce border controls in the Schengen area. The staggeringly strict new border regimes reinforce that trend.

 

Daniel Thym, Travel Bans in Europe: A Legal Appraisal, in verfassungsblog.de, 19 marzo 2020

In a joint statement of 12 March 2020, President von der Leyen and President Michel ‘disapproved’ of the decision of the Trump administration to impose a travel ban on persons coming from much of Europe. Less than a week later, the European Council unanimously agreed on sweeping restrictions on travel to the Schengen area. Any ‘non-essential’ movements across the external Schengen borders are suspended. This astonishing about-turn followed a week of political activism across Europe to fight the epidemic, including temporary border controls and far-reaching travel restrictions at the internal borders between several Member States. It is no coincidence that borders play a prominent role in the fight against the coronavirus, since they can fulfil important symbolic functions transcending the practical effects of more police checks. Donald Trump had always been good at exploiting the discursive and symbolic potential of borders to convey a message of political power and to bolster a national sense of belonging, which can be enhanced in times of crisis, when the population feels insecure and threatened. Similar dynamics are at play when Member States reintroduce border controls in the Schengen area. The staggeringly strict new border regimes reinforce that trend.

RASSEGNA RAPPORTI E STATISTICHE ADiM

Consulta la rassegna dati e rapporti mensile dell'Accademia Diritto e Migrazione - ADiM

RASSEGNA NORMATIVA ADiM

Consulta la rassegna normativa dell'Accademia Diritto e Migrazione - ADiM

Europea

 

Nazionale

Nazionale

 

 

Internazionale

 

Europea 

 

Nazionale

RASSEGNE DELLA GIURISPRUDENZA - ADiM

Consulta la rassegna scientifica mensile dell'Accademia Diritto e Migrazione - ADiM

  • Tribunale di Catania, Sez. Reati Ministeriali, Relazione sugli atti del procedimento a carico del Ministro dell’Interno Matteo Salvini
  • Il Tribunale dei Ministri, visto l’art.8, comma 1, Legge Costituzionale n.1/89, dispone la trasmissione degli atti e del presente provvedimento al Procuratore della Repubblica di Catania affinché ne curi l’immediata rimessione al Presidente del Senato per l’avvio della procedura prevista dall’art.9 Legge Cost. citata per il rilascio dell’autorizzazione a procedere nei confronti del Senatore Matteo Salvini in ordine al reato di sequestro di persona aggravato p. e p. dall’art. 605, comma I, II n.2 e III, c.p., “per avere, nella sua qualità di Ministro dell’Interno, abusando dei suoi poteri, privato della libertà personale 177 migranti di varie nazionalità giunti al porto di Catania a bordo dell’unità navale di soccorso “U. Diciotti” della Guardia Costiera italiana alle ore 23:49 del 20 agosto 2018.
  • Link a file PDF (Tribunale di Catania)

 

 

  • Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. IV, M.A. e altri c. Lituania, sentenza dell’11 dicembre 2018, causa n. 59793/17.
    In order to remain the “conscience of Europe”, the Court must ensure the effective protection of migrants and especially of asylum-seekers, which requires scrutiny of States’ actions at their land borders and, more specifically, the guarantee of a right of access to international protection procedure. Land borders are not zones of exclusion or exception from States’ human-rights obligations, and this observation also applies to the intermediate zones between border fences and to transit zones. Jurisdiction under both refugee and human-rights law is presumed to be exercised within a State’s territory, including its land borders, international zones, transit zones or areas that are otherwise excised for immigration purposes.

 

  • Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. V, Cabucak c. Germania, sentenza del 20 dicembre 2018, causa n. 18706/16.
  • The Court recognises that the domestic courts carefully balanced the competing interests and explicitly took into account the criteria set out in the Court’s case-law. Moreover, having regard to the gravity of the drug-related criminal offences committed by the applicant, and considering the sovereignty of member States to control and regulate the residence of aliens on their territory, the Court finds that the interference was supported by relevant and sufficient reasons, and was proportionate in that a fair balance was struck between the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life, on the one hand, and the prevention of disorder or crime, on the other hand. In these circumstances the Court concludes that the interference with the applicant’s right to private and family life as protected under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention was justified under Article 8 § 2 of the Convention.

 

 

  • Consiglio di Stato, sez. II, sentenza n. 00494 del 21 gennaio 2019
  • La presenza della moglie italiana non costituisce motivo idoneo a superare la valutazione di pericolosità sociale, tenuto conto del preminente interesse pubblico alla sicurezza tale da far recedere quello alla vita familiare del cittadino straniero macchiatosi di un reato che denota particolare allarme sociale, tenuto conto delle specifiche modalità della condotta penalmente rilevante.

 

  • Corte d’Appello di Brescia, sentenza del 18 gennaio 2019 – (Sentenza pubblicata da ASGI)
  • Costituisce molestia razziale ex art. 2 co. 3 D.Lgs. 215/2003 attribuire un fine lucrativo agli enti impegnati nell’accoglienza e definire i richiedenti asilo clandestini, in quanto tali condotte sono idonee a creare un “clima intimidatorio” e “ostile” nei confronti delle associazioni, clima che può avere senz’altro ripercussioni dirette sui servizi resi ai richiedenti asilo. Quale rimedio a tale discriminazione le associazioni hanno diritto al risarcimento del danno (che nella specie è stato quantificato in 3340 euro).

 

 

 

 

  • D.l. sicurezza Corte Suprema di Cassazione, Sez. I – Civile, sentenza n. 4890 del 19 febbraio 2019.
  • La normativa introdotta con il d.l. n. 113 del 2018 (c.d. sicurezza), convertito nella l. n. 132 del 2018, nella parte in cui ha modificato la preesistente disciplina del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari dettata dall’art. 5, c. 6, del d.lgs. n. 286 del 1998 e dalle altre disposizioni consequenziali, sostituendola con la previsione di casi speciali di permessi di soggiorno, non trova applicazione in relazione alle domande di riconoscimento di un permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari proposte prima dell’entrata in vigore (5/10/2018) della nuova legge, le quali devono essere pertanto scrutinate sulla base della normativa esistente al momento della loro presentazione.
  • Leggi la sentenza

 

 

  • Pericolosità sociale dello stranieroConsiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza n. 1197 del 20 febbraio 2019.
  • Il diniego di rilascio del permesso per soggiornanti di lungo periodo deve essere sorretto da un giudizio di pericolosità sociale dello straniero, con una motivazione fondata anche sulla durata del soggiorno nel territorio nazionale e sull’inserimento sociale, familiare e lavorativo dell’interessato, escludendo l’operatività di ogni automatismo in conseguenza di condanne penali riportate.
  • Leggi la sentenza

 

  • Finanziamento alle autorità libicheTAR Roma, sez. III-ter, sentenza n. 176 del 7 gennaio 2019.
  • Non può ritenersi che l’impiego del Fondo Africa da parte del Ministero dell’interno per finanziare la Libia nella lotta al traffico dei migranti vada ad alimentare o sostenere pratiche contrarie al diritto internazionale, posto che l’intervento dello Stato italiano mira proprio ad evitare il consolidamento o la diffusione di tali pratiche e la repressione dei traffici criminali, traffici che non possono che prosperare in mancanza di controllo da parte dell’autorità pubblica, libica o italiana, ciascuna necessariamente operante nell’ambito della propria sovranità.

 

 

 

  • Revoca della protezione sussidiariaTribunale di Catania, Ordinanza del 15 febbraio 2019.
    La revoca della protezione sussidiaria impone che, verificata la commissione di uno dei reati di cui all’art. 407, comma 2, lett. a) c.p.p., il Giudice compia una valutazione individuale e del singolo caso specifico per stabilire se il richiedente abbia tenuto o abbia condotta di vita che costituisce un pericolo per la sicurezza dello Stato ovvero per l’ordine pubblico e la sicurezza pubblica. In altre parole, verificata la sussistenza di una sentenza passata in giudicato, occorre valutare quale sia stata la condotta di vita antecedente e successiva alla commissione del reato.
    Notizia pubblicata su Iura Migrantium – Diritto e Diritti delle Migrazioni
  • Trasferimento del richiedente protezione internazionaleCorte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, sentenza del 19 marzo 2019, Abubacarr Jawo c. Bundesrepublik Deutschland, C‑163/17.
    Un richiedente asilo può essere trasferito verso lo Stato membro che sarebbe di regola competente per il trattamento della sua domanda o che gli ha già concesso una protezione sussidiaria, salvo che risulti che le prevedibili condizioni di vita dei beneficiari di protezione internazionale lo esporrebbero a una situazione di estrema deprivazione materiale, contraria al divieto di trattamenti inumani o degradanti.

 

 

  • Controlli alle frontiereCorte di giustizia europea, sentenza del 19 marzo 2019, Préfet des Pyrénées-Orientales c. Abdelaziz Arib, C‑444/17.
    La frontiera interna di uno Stato membro sulla quale sono stati ripristinati i controlli di frontiera non può essere equiparata ad una frontiera esterna ai sensi della direttiva rimpatri. L’articolo 2, paragrafo 2, lettera a), della direttiva 2008/115/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 16 dicembre 2008, recante norme e procedure comuni applicabili negli Stati membri al rimpatrio di cittadini di paesi terzi il cui soggiorno è irregolare, in combinato disposto con l’articolo 32 del regolamento (UE) 2016/399 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 9 marzo 2016, che istituisce un codice unionale relativo al regime di attraversamento delle frontiere da parte delle persone (codice frontiere Schengen), deve essere interpretato nel senso che non si applica al caso di un cittadino di un paese terzo, fermato nelle immediate vicinanze di una frontiera interna e il cui soggiorno nel territorio di uno Stato membro è irregolare, anche qualora tale Stato membro abbia ripristinato, ai sensi dell’articolo 25 di tale regolamento, il controllo a tale frontiera, in ragione di una minaccia grave per l’ordine pubblico o la sicurezza interna di detto Stato membro.

 

  • Minori stranieri non accompagnatiCorte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. V, sentenza del 28 febbraio 2019, Khan c. France, causa n. 12267/16.
    Dans les affaires relatives à l’accueil d’étrangers mineurs, accompagnés ou non accompagnés, il convient de garder à l’esprit que la situation d’extrême vulnérabilité de l’enfant est déterminante et prédomine sur la qualité d’étranger en séjour illégal. La Cour a ainsi souligné qu’en tant que mineur étranger non accompagné en situation irrégulière, le requérant relevait de la «catégorie des personnes les plus vulnérables de la société», et qu’il appartenait à l’État grec de le protéger et de le prendre en charge par l’adoption de mesures adéquates au titre des obligations positives découlant de l’article 3.

 

  • Non discriminazioneCorte Costituzionale, sentenza del 15 marzo 2019, n. 50.
    L’assegno sociale non è equiparabile alle prestazioni destinate al soddisfacimento di bisogni primari e volte alla garanzia per la stessa sopravvivenza del soggetto o comunque destinate alla tutela della salute e al sostentamento connesso all’invalidità, con riguardo alle quali l’elemento di discrimine basato sulla cittadinanza deve essere ritenuto in contrasto con l’art. 3 Cost. e con lo stesso divieto di discriminazione formulato dall’art. 14 CEDU.

 

  • CittadinanzaConsiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 20 marzo 2019, n. 1837.
    L’amministrazione, nel riconoscere la cittadinanza ai sensi dell’art. 9 della l. n. 91 del 1992, è chiamata ad effettuare una delicata valutazione in ordine alla effettiva e complessiva integrazione dello straniero nella società, ma non può limitarsi, pur nel suo ampio apprezzamento discrezionale, ad un giudizio sommario, superficiale ed incompleto, ristretto alla mera considerazione di un fatto risalente, per quanto sanzionato penalmente, senza contestualizzarlo all’interno di una più ampia e bilanciata disamina che tenga conto dei suoi legami familiari, della sua attività lavorativa, del suo reale radicamento al territorio, della sua complessiva condotta che, per quanto non totalmente irreprensibile sul piano morale, deve comunque mostrare, perlomeno e indefettibilmente, una convinta adesione ai valori fondamentali dell’ordinamento, di cui egli chiede di far parte con il riconoscimento della cittadinanza.

 

  • Permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitariTAR Molise, sez. I, sentenza del 21 febbraio 2019, n. 65.
    Non è configurabile irragionevole disparità nel trattamento differenziato previsto dall’art. 24, d.lgs. n. 251 del 2007, laddove riconosce il titolo di viaggio soltanto ai rifugiati e ai beneficiari della protezione sussidiaria, e ciò soprattutto in considerazione del carattere temporaneo e minimale del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari, non del tutto compatibile con il diritto di circolazione ed espatrio che il titolo di viaggio rilasciato dalla Questura sembrerebbe implicare.

 

  • Domanda di protezione internazionale – Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Grande sezione, sentenza del 2 aprile 2019, Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie contro H. e R., C-582/17 e C-583/17.
    Il regolamento (UE) n. 604/2013 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 26 giugno 2013, che stabilisce i criteri e i meccanismi di determinazione dello Stato membro competente per l’esame di una domanda di protezione internazionale presentata in uno degli Stati membri da un cittadino di un paese terzo o da un apolide, deve essere interpretato nel senso che un cittadino di un paese terzo che abbia presentato una domanda di protezione internazionale in un primo Stato membro, abbia poi lasciato tale Stato membro e abbia successivamente presentato una nuova domanda di protezione internazionale in un secondo Stato membro non può, in linea di principio, invocare, nell’ambito di un ricorso proposto, ai sensi dell’articolo 27, paragrafo 1, di tale regolamento, in detto secondo Stato membro avverso la decisione di trasferimento adottata nei suoi confronti, il criterio di competenza enunciato all’articolo 9 di detto regolamento; può, in via eccezionale, invocare, nell’ambito di un simile ricorso, il succitato criterio di competenza, in una situazione coperta dall’articolo 20, paragrafo 5, del medesimo regolamento, laddove il suddetto cittadino di un paese terzo abbia trasmesso all’autorità competente dello Stato membro richiedente elementi che dimostrino in modo manifesto che quest’ultimo dovrebbe essere considerato lo Stato membro competente per l’esame della domanda in applicazione di detto criterio di competenza.

 

  • Diritto alla libertà e sicurezzaCorte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. I, sentenza del 25 aprile 2019, M. v. The United Kingdom (no. 2), causa n. 62824/16.
    Article 5 of the Convention enshrines a fundamental human right, namely the protection of the individual against arbitrary interference by the State with his or her right to liberty. Sub-paragraphs (a) to (f) of Article 5 § 1 contain an exhaustive list of permissible grounds on which persons may be deprived of their liberty. One of the exceptions, contained in sub-paragraph (f), permits the State to control the liberty of aliens in the immigration context.  It is well established in the Court’s case‑law under the sub‑paragraphs of Article 5 § 1 that any deprivation of liberty must, in addition to falling within one of the exceptions set out in sub‑paragraphs (a) to (f), conform to the substantive and procedural rules of domestic law. In addition to the requirement of “lawfulness”, Article 5 § 1 also requires that any deprivation of liberty should be in keeping with the purpose of protection the individual from arbitrariness. Some delay in implementing a decision to release a detainee is understandable, and often inevitable, in view of practical considerations relating to the running of the courts and the observance of particular formalities. However, the national authorities must attempt to keep this to a minimum. It is for the Contracting States to organise their systems in such a way that their authorities can meet the obligation to avoid unjustified deprivation of liberty.

 

  • Soggiorno illegale dello straniero nel territorio dello Stato Corte Costituzionale, ordinanza del 21 marzo 2019, 64.
    Va dichiarata la manifesta inammissibilità della questione di legittimità costituzionale dell’art. 1, comma 4, d.lgs. 15 gennaio 2016, n. 8 nella parte in cui la previsione secondo la quale non costituiscono reato e sono soggette alla sanzione amministrativa del pagamento di una somma di denaro tutte le violazioni per le quali è prevista la sola pena della multa o dell’ammenda non si applica ai reati di cui al d.lgs. n. 286/1998 (Testo unico sull’immigrazione), così escludendo dalla depenalizzazione anche la contravvenzione di ingresso e soggiorno illegale dello straniero nel territorio dello Stato. L’omessa o insufficiente descrizione della fattispecie oggetto del giudizio a quo determina l’inammissibilità della questione di legittimità costituzionale, in quanto impedisce di verificare la sua effettiva rilevanza.

 

  • Domanda di protezione internazionale Corte di Cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenze del 10 aprile 2019, n. 10108
    A seguito dell’impugnazione del decreto che ha rigettato la domanda di protezione internazionale dinanzi la Corte di cassazione, il ricorrente è soggetto al versamento di un ulteriore importo a titolo di contributo unificato. Tale versamento costituisce un’obbligazione che sorge ex lege per effetto del rigetto dell’impugnazione, della dichiarazione di improcedibilità o di inammissibilità della stessa, anche se il ricorrente sia stato ammesso al patrocinio a spese dello Stato.

 

  • Domanda di protezione internazionale Corte di Cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenza del 9 aprile 2019, n. 9844.
    L’art. 19, comma 4, del d.lgs. n. 150 del 2011, sino alla sua abrogazione ad opera del l. n. 46/2017, prevedeva, in caso di reclamo, la sospensione ex lege del provvedimento di diniego della protezione internazionale sino al termine del giudizio e, dunque, al momento del passaggio in giudicato mentre, con l’entrata in vigore dell’art. 35-bis, comma 13, del d.lgs. n. 25 del 2008, come introdotto dall’art. 6, comma 1, lett. g), del d.l. n. 13 del 2017, la cessazione dell’effetto sospensivo si verifica sempre in caso di rigetto del ricorso con decreto del tribunale anche non definitivo.

 

  • Rinnovo permesso di soggiorno per motivi familiariCassazione civile, sez. I, sentenza del 18 aprile 2019, n. 10925.
    Il rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno per motivi familiari in favore di un cittadino extracomunitario, coniuge di un cittadino italiano, non richiede né il requisito oggettivo della “convivenza” tra il cittadino italiano e il richiedente – salve le conseguenze dell’accertamento di un matrimonio fittizio o di convenienza, ai sensi dell’art. 35 della direttiva 2004/38/Ce del 29 aprile 2004 e dunque, dell’art. 30, comma 1 bis, d.lg. 25 luglio 1998, n. 286 – né quello del pregresso regolare soggiorno del richiedente.

 

  • Protezione internazionale degli omosessuali Corte di cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenza del 23 aprile 2019, n. 11176.
    Hanno diritto alla protezione internazionale le persone omosessuali il cui Paese di provenienza non offra adeguata protezione a fronte di gravissime minacce provenienti da soggetti privati.

 

  • Condanne ostative al rilascio di permesso di soggiorno Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 28 marzo 2019, n. 2683.
    Ai sensi dell’art. 4, comma 3, d. lgs. n. 286 cit., non è ammesso in Italia lo straniero che risulti condannato, tra l’altro, per i reati previsti dall’art. 380, commi 1 e 2, ovvero per reati inerenti gli stupefacenti. Poiché la norma non pone alcuna distinzione rispetto alla gravità della fattispecie di reato, la tesi interpretativa che va nel senso della differenziazione, ai fini ostativi, della fattispecie caratterizzata dalla “lieve entità”, ex art. 73, comma 5, d.P.R. n. 309/1990 rispetto a quella “ordinaria” non può essere accolta (vedi anche, di recente, Consiglio di Stato, Sez. III, n. 4908 del 10 agosto 2018).

 

  • Diniego visto d’ingressoTAR Lazio, sez. III-ter, sentenza del 12 aprile 2019, n. 4819.
    Il diniego del visto d’ingresso turistico a due cittadini iraniani presso l’Ambasciata italiana ad Astana è legittimato dal riscontro dell’incongruenza temporale tra la data di scadenza del permesso di soggiorno in Kazakhistan e quella in cui dichiaravano di volervi fare rientro, data che oltrepassava il termine di residenza legale nel Paese. Tale incongruenza giustifica i dubbi dell’autorità consolare circa la reale intenzione dei due richiedenti di lasciare il territorio dell’Italia (o degli altri Paesi membri UE) al termine del loro viaggio turistico, con conseguente diniego dei visti.

 

  • Diritto alla libertà e sicurezzaCorte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. V, sentenza del 2 aprile 2019 Aboya Boa Jean v. Malta, causa n. 62676/16.
    While under Article 5 § 1 detention which is not compliant with domestic law induces a violation of that provision, a breach of time-limits for automatic reviews established in law did not necessarily amount to a violation of Article 5 § 4, if the proceedings by which the lawfulness of an applicant’s detention are examined have nonetheless been decided speedily. Indeed, the forms of judicial review satisfying the requirements of Article 5 § 4 might vary from one domain to another and would depend on the type of deprivation of liberty in issue. In particular, in the context of detention pending deportation or extradition, the factors affecting the lawfulness of detention might change over the course of time. Therefore, short intervals between reviews could be necessary for detention pending deportation or extradition as compared to detention after conviction by a competent court. In the applicant’s case, despite certain irregularities the time which had elapsed until his first review could not be considered unreasonable.

 

  • Cittadinanza UE – Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Grande sezione, sentenza del 12 marzo 2019, M.G. Tjebbes e a. c. Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken, C-221/17.
    L’articolo 20 TFUE, letto alla luce degli articoli 7 e 24 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea, deve essere interpretato nel senso che esso non osta a una normativa di uno Stato membro che preveda, a determinate condizioni, la perdita ipso iure della cittadinanza di tale Stato membro, comportando, nel caso di persone che non sono in possesso anche della cittadinanza di un altro Stato membro, la perdita del loro status di cittadino dell’Unione europea e dei diritti ad esso correlati. Questo però a condizione che le autorità nazionali competenti, inclusi gli organi giurisdizionali, possano verificare, anche in via incidentale, che la perdita della cittadinanza dello Stato membro interessato (che comporta anche la perdita dello status di cittadino dell’Unione) rispetti il principio di proporzionalità con riferimento alle conseguenze che essa determina sulla situazione di ogni interessato e dei suoi familiari e, se del caso, far riacquistare ex tunc la cittadinanza agli interessati.

 

  • Trasferimento del richiedente protezione internazionaleCorte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Grande Sezione, sentenza del 19 marzo 2019, Bashar Ibrahim e a. c. Bundesrepublik Deutschland e Bundesrepublik Deutschland c. Taus Magamadov, C-297/17, C-318/17, C-319/17 e C-438/17.
    A
    i sensi del regolamento n. 604/2013/UE (c.d. regolamento “Dublino”)un richiedente protezione internazionale si considera “fuggito” qualora si sia sottratto deliberatamente alle autorità nazionali competenti al fine di scongiurare l’esecuzione di un trasferimento. Salvo dimostrazione contraria, una simile situazione si considera sussistente in via presuntiva quando si verifichi che un trasferimento non possa essere eseguito a causa del fatto che il richiedente ha lasciato il luogo di residenza assegnatogli senza averne informato le autorità nazionali competenti, a condizione che egli sia stato informato dei suoi obblighi al riguardo. A tal proposito, si ritiene che l’articolo 29, par. 2, del regolamento Dublino vada interpretato nel senso che, al fine di prorogare il termine di trasferimento a un massimo di diciotto mesi, è sufficiente che lo Stato membro richiedente informi, prima della scadenza del termine di sei mesi, lo Stato membro competente del fatto che l’interessato è fuggito, contestualmente indicando il nuovo termine di trasferimento. Infine, l’articolo 4 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali non osta a un trasferimento del richiedente protezione internazionale, a meno che il giudice investito del ricorso avverso la decisione di trasferimento non constati, sulla base di elementi oggettivi, attendibili, precisi e opportunamente aggiornati e in considerazione del livello di tutela dei diritti fondamentali garantito dal diritto dell’Unione, l’esistenza di grave rischio di subire un trattamento inumano o degradante per il richiedente a causa del fatto che, in caso di trasferimento, quest’ultimo si verrebbe a trovare, indipendentemente dalla sua volontà e dalle sue scelte personali, in una situazione di estrema deprivazione materiale.

 

 

  • Parità di trattamentoCorte Costituzionale, ordinanza del 15 marzo 2019, n. 52.
    La normativa italiana che regola il diritto al godimento dell’assegno di maternità e dell’assegno per nuclei familiari con almeno tre figli minori per i soggiornanti di lungo periodo deve essere letta alla luce della direttiva 2011/98/UE relativa alla procedura di domanda per il rilascio del permesso unico di soggiorno e lavoro, laddove tale direttiva riconosce (vedi in particolare artt. 3, par. 1, lett. b e art. 12) a tutti i cittadini di paesi terzi in possesso di un permesso di soggiorno, e a cui è consentito lavorare in uno Stato membro, il diritto alla parità di trattamento con i cittadini di quello Stato per quanto concerne i settori della sicurezza sociale. Di conseguenza, anche un permesso di soggiorno per motivi familiari, in quanto non preclude al cittadino di un paese terzo di lavorare in Italia, è titolo che consente di valutare l’accesso alle prestazioni assistenziali.

 

  • Assegno per il nucleo familiare – Corte di Cassazione, sez. lav., ordinanza interlocutoria del 1 aprile 2019, nn. 2021.
    La Sezione Lavoro della Corte di Cassazione ha sollevato questione pregiudiziale diretta ad accertare se l’art. 11, par. 1, lett. d), della direttiva 2003/109/CE, del 25 novembre 2003, nonché il principio di parità di trattamento tra soggiornanti di lungo periodo e cittadini nazionali, ostino ad una legislazione nazionale in base alla quale, al fine del calcolo dell’assegno per il nucleo familiare, nel computo degli appartenenti al nucleo familiare vanno esclusi i familiari del lavoratore di Stato terzo soggiornante di lungo periodo, qualora gli stessi risiedano presso il paese d’origine, al contrario di quanto previsto per i cittadini dello Stato membro.

 

  • Assegno per il nucleo familiare – Corte di Cassazione, sez. lav., ordinanza interlocutoria del 1 aprile 2019, nn. 2022.
    La Sezione Lavoro della Corte di Cassazione ha sollevato questione pregiudiziale diretta ad accertare se l’art. 12, par. 1, lett. e), della direttiva 2011/98/UE, del 13 dicembre 2011, nonché il principio di parità di trattamento tra titolari del permesso unico di soggiorno e di lavoro e cittadini nazionali, ostino ad una legislazione nazionale in base alla quale, al fine del calcolo dell’assegno per il nucleo familiare, nel computo degli appartenenti al nucleo familiare vanno esclusi i familiari del lavoratore di Stato terzo titolare del permesso unico, qualora gli stessi risiedano presso il paese d’origine, al contrario di quanto previsto per i cittadini dello Stato membro.

 

  • Revoca de permesso di soggiorno – Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 14 febbraio 2019, n. 2056.
    Al fine del giudizio per la revoca del permesso di soggiorno di lungo periodo, non è rilevante che le eventuali sentenze penali di condanna siano passate in giudicato, poiché l’art. 9, comma 4, del d.lgs. 286/98 espressamente prevede che «Nel valutare la pericolosità si tiene conto anche … di eventuali condanne anche non definitive». Inoltre, come stabilito dalla Corte costituzionale (vedi Corte Cost. n. 148 del 2008), i criteri sulla cui base è condotta la prognosi favorevole sull’astensione del condannato dalla commissione di ulteriori reati, ai fini della sospensione condizionale, sono diversi rispetto a quelli criteri che presiedono al giudizio di indesiderabilità dello straniero nel territorio italiano.

 

  • Revoca delle misure d’accoglienza – Consiglio di Stato, III, sentenza del 21 marzo 2019, n. 2136.
    In tema di revoca delle misure di accoglienza di fronte ad episodi di violenza, il carattere indifferibile del provvedimento fa sì che il Prefetto dispone con urgenza la revoca delle suddette misure senza l’obbligo di procedere alla comunicazione di avvio del procedimento amministrativo. Tuttavia, perché tali iniziative si concilino con le generali garanzie procedimentali occorre che le contingenze che impongono di sacrificare all’urgenza il diritto di partecipazione dei diretti destinatari della misura di revoca emergano compiutamente dal provvedimento amministrativo e inoltre che le stesse ragioni di urgenza vengano qualificate e valutate, di volta in volta, in relazione alle circostanze del caso concreto ed alla sussistenza di fatti di gravità ed evidenza tali da non consentire di procrastinare ulteriormente l’adozione del provvedimento.

 

  • Conversione permesso di soggiorno per minori non accompagnati – Consiglio di Stato, III, sentenza del 28 marzo 2019, n. 2184.
    Nell’ambito del procedimento di conversione del permesso di soggiorno al compimento della maggiore età per i minori affidati o sottoposti a tutela, la natura non vincolante del parere reso dalla Direzione Centrale dell’Immigrazione e delle Politiche di Integrazione non impone un supplemento di istruttoria in capo alla Questura, la quale può decidere discrezionalmente – se ne ricorrono i presupposti – di svolgere ulteriori approfondimenti e successive valutazioni, oppure di recepire, condividendolo, il parere dell’organo consultivo. Il supplemento istruttorio, infatti, presuppone l’emersione di ulteriori elementi idonei a porlo in discussione.
In particolare, se il giudizio negativo è derivato dall’insufficienza di elementi dai quali desumere la sufficiente integrazione civile e sociale del cittadino straniero, è preciso onere dell’interessato partecipare al procedimento allegando ulteriori elementi sulla base di quali la Questura possa superare la criticità derivante dal parere negativo, pervenendo ad una valutazione favorevole della sua istanza di conversione del titolo di soggiorno. Solo in questo caso la Questura è onerata dall’obbligo di eseguire approfondimenti istruttori, dovendo valutare se gli elementi ritenuti carenti dall’organo consultivo possano essere integrati nell’ambito del procedimento amministrativo.

 

  • Rinnovo permesso di soggiorno – TAR Emilia-Romagna, sez. II, sentenza del 2 aprile 2019, n. 318.
    Non può trovare accoglimento la domanda di rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno per residenza elettiva qualora lo straniero ometta di indicare, in sede di richiesta del titolo di soggiorno, il luogo in cui intende dimorare in quanto la disponibilità di alloggio nel territorio nazionale costituisce presupposto non eludibile per il rilascio del permesso di soggiorno a qualsiasi titolo. Irrilevante è la documentazione depositata in mera copia semplice non autenticata nelle forme di legge, a tutela dell’effettiva genuinità della medesima.

 

  • Rifiuto o revoca dello status di rifugiato per motivi di sicurezza – Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Grande sezione, sentenza del 14 maggio 2019, cause riunite C‑391/16, C‑77/17 e C‑78/17.
    Con riferimento alle persone che rappresentano una minaccia per la sicurezza della comunità (anche in ragione di una condanna per un reato particolarmente grave), l’articolo 14, paragrafi 4 e 5, della direttiva 2011/95/UE prevede la possibilità per gli Stati membri di revocare o negare il riconoscimento dello status di rifugiato. A sua volta, l’articolo 33, paragrafo 2, della Convenzione di Ginevra, pur senza imporre che siano formalmente private di detto status, consente il respingimento delle stesse persone verso un paese in cui la loro vita o libertà sia minacciata. Tuttavia, in virtù degli articoli 4 e 19, paragrafo 2, della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea, il diritto dell’Unione prevede una protezione internazionale più ampia di quella assicurata dalla Convenzione di Ginevra, vietando in termini perentori l’allontanamento verso uno Stato in cui esista un rischio serio di essere sottoposto a trattamenti inumani e degradanti. Dovendo la direttiva in parola essere interpretata e applicata alla luce dei diritti garantiti dalla Carta, in presenza di un simile rischio gli Stati membri non potranno procedere all’allontanamento, espulsione o estradizione dello straniero, pur formalmente privato dello status formale (ma non della qualità) di rifugiato per motivi di sicurezza interna.

 

  • Permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari – Corte di Cassazione, sez. I civile, ordinanza interlocutoria del 3 maggio 2019, n. 1749.
    La prima sezione civile della Corte di Cassazione ha rimesso al Primo Presidente, per l’eventuale assegnazione alle Sezioni Unite ai sensi dell’articolo 374, comma 2, c.p.c., le seguenti questioni in tema di protezione internazionale e di immigrazione: a) se la normativa introdotta con il decreto legge n. 113/2018, convertito nella legge n. 132/2018, nella parte in cui ha modificato la preesistente disciplina del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari di cui all’articolo 5, comma 6, del d.lgs. n. 286/1998 e delle altre disposizioni consequenziali, sostituendola con la previsione di casi speciali di permessi di soggiorno, trovi applicazione in relazione a domande di riconoscimento del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari proposte prima dell’entrata in vigore (5 ottobre 2018) della nuova legge o se, per converso (come ritenuto da Sez. I, ord. 19 gennaio 2019, n. 4890) le domande in parola debbano essere scrutinate sulla base della normativa esistente al momento della loro presentazione; b) se il riconoscimento del diritto al permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari, di cui al su richiamato articolo 5, comma 6, del d.lgs. n. 286/1998, al cittadino straniero che abbia realizzato un grado adeguato di integrazione sociale in Italia, debba o meno fondarsi (come ritenuto da Sez. I, ord. 23 febbraio 2018, n. 4455) su una effettiva valutazione comparativa della situazione soggettiva ed oggettiva del richiedente con riferimento al Paese d’origine, al fine di verificare se il rimpatrio possa determinare la privazione della titolarità e dell’esercizio dei diritti umani, al di sotto del nucleo ineliminabile costitutivo dello statuto della dignità personale, in correlazione con la situazione d’integrazione raggiunta nel Paese d’accoglienza.

 

 

  • Iscrizione anagrafica dei richiedenti protezione internazionale – Tribunale di Bologna, sez. protezione internazionale civile, ordinanza del 2 maggio 2019, RG n. 4747/2019.
    L’articolo 4, comma 1-bis, del decreto legislativo n. 142/2015, come modificato dall’articolo 13 del decreto legge n. 113/2018 (c.d. “Decreto sicurezza”), secondo cui il permesso di soggiorno per richiesta d’asilo «non costituisce titolo per l’iscrizione anagrafica», in una lettura giurisprudenziale costituzionalmente orientata e coerente con il quadro normativo eurounitario, non enuclea alcun divieto di iscrizione all’anagrafe per lo straniero. Esso chiarisce soltanto che tale permesso di soggiorno, pur costituendo documento d’identità, non consente di dare luogo a nessun automatismo per l’iscrizione, restando il richiedente asilo soggetto all’ordinario procedimento amministrativo disciplinato dal DPR n. 223/1989. In altre parole, l’articolo 4, comma 1-bis citato abroga la modalità semplificata di iscrizione anagrafica per richiedenti asilo basata sulla sola domanda di protezione ed inserimento nella struttura di accoglienza (prevista dall’articolo 5-bis del medesimo decreto legislativo, come introdotto dalla legge n. 46/2017), senza per questo costituire titolo ostativo all’ottenimento dell’iscrizione.

 

  • Divieto di reingresso Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza 8 maggio 2019, n. 2992.
    Prima che sia decorso il termine di cinque anni, di fronte al divieto di reingresso di cittadini extracomunitari destinatari di un decreto di espulsione (articolo 4, comma 6, d.lgs. n. 286/1998) ed in assenza dell’autorizzazione in deroga rilasciata dal Ministero dell’Interno (articolo 13, comma 13, d.lgs. n. 286 del 1998), nessuna rilevanza possono assumere, ai fini dell’ottenimento del permesso di soggiorno, il nulla osta al lavoro subordinato rilasciato del Sportello Unico per l’Immigrazione e il visto di ingresso rilasciato dall’Ambasciata italiana nel paese di provenienza. Ciò non toglie che l’interessato, una volta decorso il termine impeditivo scaturente dal decreto di espulsione, possa nuovamente richiedere, se ne ricorrano i presupposti, il rilascio del permesso di soggiorno per lavoro subordinato.

 

 

  • Divieto di automatismo espulsivo Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 30 aprile 2019, n. 2807.
    Quando fra la condanna penale e il diniego del rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno sia intercorso un lungo intervallo di tempo durante il quale il richiedente abbia radicato la propria vita sul territorio dello Stato e nel relativo contesto culturale, occorre rivalutare, nel suo complesso, la sua situazione personale, economica e sociale dello stesso. Negare il permesso di soggiorno in una situazione di comprovato radicamento significherebbe, infatti, produrre effetti gravosi e controproducenti in capo al richiedente, avendo egli perduto ogni legame con il Paese d’origine. Ciò impone di superare l’automatismo della preclusione legislativa di cui all’articolo 4, comma 3, del d.lgs. n. 286/1998, fatto salvo il potere dell’Amministrazione di negare comunque il titolo di soggiorno, sulla base di una valutazione motivata che tenga conto di tutti i fattori del caso di specie.

 

  • Rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno – Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 30 aprile 2019, n. 2800.
    La possibilità di dare rilievo ai “nuovi elementi” sopravvenuti alla presentazione della domanda di rinnovo cui fa riferimento l’articolo 5, comma 5, del d.lgs. n. 286/1998, consegue alla rappresentazione degli stessi all’Amministrazione prima dell’adozione del provvedimento negativo impugnato, la legittimità del quale non può che essere valutata allo stato di fatto e di diritto esistente alla data dell’adozione. È infatti onere dell’interessato dimostrare l’esistenza dei presupposti per l’ottenimento del provvedimento a sé favorevole, anche se sopravvenuti rispetto alla domanda originaria, senza che sia possibile ipotizzare alcun obbligo istruttorio a carico dell’Amministrazione. Diversamente opinando, si darebbe rilievo in giudizio a fatti e circostanze non portate a conoscenza dell’Amministrazione con la dovuta diligenza, lasciando spazio alla indebita sostituzione del Giudice all’Autorità Amministrativa nell’effettuazione di valutazioni che a questa competono.

 

  • Reati ostativi al rilascio del permesso di soggiorno – Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 29 aprile 2019, n. 2083.
    Ai sensi dell’articolo 4, comma 3, d.lgs. n. 286/1998, la condanna per reato in materia di stupefacenti, in mancanza di legami familiari che impongano la valutazione discrezionale comparativa di cui all’articolo 5, comma 5, ultimo periodo del d.lgs. n. 286/1998 (cfr. da ultimo, Cons. Stato, III, 20 febbraio 2019, n. 1174), è ostativa al rilascio o al rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno ordinario secondo un automatismo preclusivo indenne da rilievi di costituzionalità (cfr. Corte Cost. n. 148 del 2008). Deve comunque considerarsi legittimo il provvedimento di diniego del Questore che, in presenza di condanne per reati di particolare gravità, si sia limitato a sottolineare, ai fini del diniego, la particolare gravità dei reati, senza spiegare perché gli interessi familiari siano da considerarsi soggiacenti rispetto alla sicurezza dello Stato. Sussiste infatti una soglia di gravità oltre la quale il comportamento criminale non può bilanciarsi con quello privato alla vita familiare (Cons. Stato Sez. III, 19 febbraio 2019, n. 1161).

 

  • Applicazione nel tempo del decreto sicurezza TAR Lombardia, sez. II, sentenza del 29 aprile 2019, n. 407.
    Se, in virtù del principio di cui all’articolo 11 delle Preleggi, la disciplina di cui al decreto legge n. 113/2018 non trova applicazione ai procedimenti per il riconoscimento del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari che sono già stati avviati (e non ancora conclusi), tanto meno essa potrà avere rilievo con riferimento ad un’ipotesi in cui la protezione umanitaria sia già stata riconosciuta al richiedente, al fine di elidere un beneficio – l’erogazione delle misure di accoglienza – collegato a detto riconoscimento.

 

  • Requisito reddituale per il rilascio del permesso di soggiorno TAR Lazio, sez. I-ter, sentenza del 26 aprile 2019, n. 5310.
    Ai fini del rilascio del permesso di soggiorno, il possesso del requisito reddituale deve essere valutato in una prospettiva dinamica. Dagli interventi della giurisprudenza amministrativa su tale questione si ricava che: a) ai fini del rilascio e del rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno, costituisce condizione soggettiva non eludibile il possesso di un reddito minimo; b) tuttavia, ai fini del rinnovo, la sussistenza o meno del requisito reddituale deve risultare da una valutazione non limitata al conseguimento di redditi, ma comprensiva della capacità reddituale futura desumibile da nuove opportunità di lavoro, se formalmente e tempestivamente documentate; c) non è necessaria la dimostrazione del possesso, in modo assoluto ed ininterrotto, del predetto livello di reddito ai fini del rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno, potendo esservi periodi nei quali tali requisiti possono in tutto o in parte mancare, purché siano limitati nel tempo e non determinino una definitiva perdita della capacità di produrre reddito; d) anche i redditi percepiti in modo irregolare possono essere valutati ai fini della sussistenza del requisito reddituale di cui all’articolo 29, comma 3, lett. b), d.lgs. n. 286/1998.

 

  • Evasione fiscale e diniego del permesso di soggiornoTAR Emilia Romagna, sez. I, sentenza del 23 aprile 2019, n. 358.
    L’evasione fiscale e contributiva, in conformità con il principio di legalità, non può essere una ragione, neanche indiretta, di diniego del rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno, non avendola il legislatore prevista come causa ostativa. Diversamente, tali irregolarità rilevano per la concessione di un permesso per soggiornante di lungo periodo, dal momento che nella direttiva 2003/109/CE, al punto 7 della premessa, si afferma che «gli Stati membri, al momento di valutare la disponibilità di un reddito stabile e regolare, possono tener conto di fattori quali i contributi al regime pensionistico e l’adempimento degli obblighi fiscali». In questo secondo caso, quando il ricorrente mostrerà di aver interrotto le condotte evasive, avendo inoltre posto rimedio a quelle passate, potrà senz’altro ottenere il permesso richiesto laddove permangano gli altri requisiti necessari a tal fine.

 

  • Dovere di cooperazione del giudice Corte di Cassazione, sezione VI civile, ordinanza del 26 aprile 2019, n. 11312.
    Ai fini dell’accertamento della fondatezza o meno di una domanda di protezione internazionale, fondata sulla condizione di pericolo di danno di cui all’art. 14, lett. c), d.lgs. n. 251/2007 (violenza indiscriminata in situazioni di conflitto armato determinativa di minaccia grave alla vita o alla persona), il giudice del merito è tenuto, ai sensi dell’art. 8, comma 3, del d.lgs. n. 25/2008, a un dovere di cooperazione che gli impone di accertare la situazione reale del paese di provenienza mediante l’esercizio di poteri-doveri officiosi di indagine e di acquisizione documentale, in modo che ciascuna domanda venga esaminata alla luce di informazioni aggiornate sul paese del richiedente. Il dovere di cooperazione non può dirsi adempiuto se il giudice, ricorrendo a formule generiche e stereotipate, non abbia specificato le fonti sulla scorta delle quali ha provveduto a svolgere l’accertamento richiesto. Non sarà peraltro sufficiente motivare in base a fonti internazionali, non meglio particolareggiate, che attesterebbero l’assenza di conflitti o di situazioni ostative al rimpatrio nei paesi di provenienza dei migranti richiedenti la protezione internazionale.

 

  • Illegittimità del decreto espulsivo del prefettoCorte di Cassazione, sezione VI civile, ordinanza del 26 aprile 2019, n. 11309.
    In costanza della rituale proposizione di una domanda di protezione internazionale sussiste il divieto di espulsione, avendo il richiedente il diritto di rimanere sul territorio dello Stato durante l’esame della domanda medesima, fino alla decisione della commissione territoriale per il riconoscimento della protezione internazionale (con la sola salvezza delle ipotesi di cui al comma 2 dell’art. 7 d.lgs. n. 25/2008). Poiché soltanto tale commissione è soggetto legittimato ad esaminare la domanda, deve ritenersi illegittimo il decreto espulsivo del prefetto, emesso in seguito a trasmissione degli atti da parte del questore che, sulla base delle motivazioni apposte sul foglio notizie, abbia ritenuto insussistenti le condizioni per la concessione della protezione internazionale.

 

  • Revoca del progetto SPRAR del comune di Riace – TAR Calabria, Sezione staccata di Reggio Calabria, sentenza del 21 maggio 2019, n. 356.
    Disposizioni come l’art. 27 del D.M. 10.8.2016 rafforzano gli strumenti di partecipazione procedimentale previsti in generale dagli articoli 7 e seguenti della l. 7 agosto 1990, n. 241, ed ostano alla prassi, seguita nel caso di specie dall’amministrazione resistente, di richiamare atti precedenti, senza precisare né le contestazioni che avrebbero potuto portare alla decurtazione del punteggio, né la consistenza delle decurtazioni ipotizzate e neppure il termine entro il quale porre rimedio alle inosservanze rilevate.
  • Detenzione amministrativa – Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. III, sentenza del 21 maggio 2019 A.S. v. Russia, causa n. 17833/16.
    Any deprivation of liberty under the second limb of Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention will only be justified for as long as deportation or extradition proceedings are in progress. If such proceedings are not carried out promptly, the detention will cease to be permissible under Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention. To avoid being branded as arbitrary, detention under Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention must be carried out in good faith; it must be closely connected to the grounds for detention relied on by the Government, the place and conditions of detention must be appropriate, and the length of the detention must not exceed that reasonably required for the purpose pursued.

 

  • Divieto di sottoposizione a trattamenti degradanti  – Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. I, sentenza del 13 giugno 2019 Affaire Sh.D. et autres C. Grèce, Autriche, Croatie, Hongrie, Macédoine Du Nord, Serbie Et Slovéni, causa n. 14165/16.
    Les postes de police présentent des caractéristiques pouvant faire naître chez le détenu un sentiment de solitude (absence d’enceinte extérieure pour se promener ou faire de l’exercice physique, de structures de restauration interne, de postes de radio ou de télévision permettant d’avoir un contact avec le monde extérieur) et ne sont pas adaptés aux besoins d’une incarcération prolongée, finalisée. Ainsi, la détention dans ces lieux pourrait faire naître chez les intéressés des sentiments d’isolement du monde extérieur, avec des conséquences potentiellement négatives sur leur bien-être physique et moral. Par conséquent, la pratique qui consistait à placer en détention dans des postes de police, dans un but « protecteur », pendant plusieurs jours, voire des semaines, les mineurs non accompagnés ou séparés sans aucune assistance ou soutien psychologique et social est inacceptable et peut integrer un traitement dégradant, en violation de l’article 3 de la Convention.

 

  •  Sicurezza sociale Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, sez. VI, sentenza del 6 giugno 2019, causa C-33/18.
    L’articolo 87, paragrafo 8, del Regolamento n. 883/2004/CE, relativo al coordinamento dei sistemi di sicurezza sociale, come modificato dal Regolamento n. 988/2009/CE, deve essere interpretato nel senso che una persona la quale, alla data di applicazione del Regolamento n. 883/2004/CE, esercitasse un’attività subordinata in uno Stato membro e un’attività autonoma in un altro Stato membro, essendo quindi simultaneamente assoggettata alle legislazioni applicabili in materia di sicurezza sociale di tali due Stati membri, non doveva, per essere soggetta alla legislazione applicabile in forza del Regolamento n. 883/2004/CE, quale modificato dal regolamento n. 988/2009/CE, presentare una domanda espressa in tal senso.

 

  • Parità di trattamento Corte Costituzionale, sentenza 8 maggio 2019, n. 149.
    La Corte Costituzionale ha dichiarato l’inammissibilità delle questioni di legittimità costituzionale dell’art. 1 della l. n. 379/2000 («Disposizioni per il riconoscimento della cittadinanza italiana alle persone nate e già residenti nei territori appartenuti all’Impero austro-ungarico e ai loro discendenti») e dell’art. 6, d.lgs. n. 286/1998 («Testo unico delle disposizioni concernenti la disciplina dell’immigrazione e norme sulla condizione dello straniero») nella parte in cui non prevedono l’utilizzazione dello speciale permesso per attesa di cittadinanza ai fini dello svolgimento di attività lavorativa, in relazione all’art. 3 della Costituzione, sia sotto il profilo della lesione del principio di pari trattamento, sia sotto il profilo della ragionevolezza.

 

  • Inosservanza dell’ordine del questore di lasciare il territorio dello stato Corte di Cassazione, sez. V penale, sentenza del 10 giugno 2019, n. 25598.
    In tema di immigrazione, ai fini della sussistenza del giustificato motivo, idoneo ad escludere la configurabilità del reato di inosservanza dell’ordine del questore di lasciare il territorio dello Stato, pur avendo lo straniero l’onere di allegare i motivi non conosciuti né conoscibili da parte del giudice, ciò non implica alcuna inversione dell’onere della prova in capo all’imputato, in quanto resta fermo per il giudice il potere di rilevare direttamente, quando possibile, l’esistenza di ragioni legittimanti l’inosservanza del precetto penale, sicché tutte le situazioni integrative del giustificato motivo si traducono in altrettanti temi di prova per le parti e per i poteri officiosi del giudice. Può costituire giustificato motivo lo stato di indigenza dell’imputato, dedotto come impeditivo dell’allontanamento (in caso di impossibilità a pagarsi il biglietto aereo). 

 

 

  • Favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione clandestina e legittima difesaTribunale di Trapani, Ufficio del giudice per le indagini preliminari, 3 giugno 2019.
    È stata riconosciuta la scriminante della legittima difesa nei confronti di un gruppo di migranti – imputati per i delitti di cui agli artt. 336 e 337 nonché per favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione clandestina (art. 12, d.lgs. n. 286/1988, commi 3, lett. a) e b), e 3-bis) – che, durante un’operazione di soccorso in mare, per tutelare il loro diritto alla vita, all’integrità fisica e sessuale e a sbarcare in un porto sicuro avevano impedito, con minacce e violenza, all’equipaggio di nave battente bandiera italiana (Vos Thalassa) di eseguire l’ordine ricevuto dalla Guardia costiera libica di riportare i migranti sulle coste libiche.

 

  • Minori stranieri non accompagnatiCorte di cassazione, Sez. Unite civili, sentenza del 12 giugno 2019, n. 15750.
    In tema di autorizzazione all’ingresso o alla permanenza in Italia del familiare di minore straniero che si trova nel territorio italiano, ai sensi dell’art. 31, comma 3, T.U. immigrazione, approvato con il d.lgs. n. 286/1998, il diniego non può essere fatto derivare automaticamente dalla pronuncia di condanna per uno dei reati che lo stesso testo unico considera ostativi all’ingresso o al soggiorno dello straniero; nondimeno la detta condanna è destinata a rilevare, al pari delle attività incompatibili con la permanenza in Italia, in quanto suscettibile di costituire una minaccia concreta e attuale per l’ordine pubblico o la sicurezza nazionale, e può condurre al rigetto dell’istanza di autorizzazione all’esito di un esame circostanziato del caso e di un bilanciamento con l’interesse del minore, al quale la detta norma, in presenza di gravi motivi connessi con il suo sviluppo psicofisico, attribuisce valore prioritario, ma non assoluto.

 

  • Parità di trattamento – Corte di Cassazione, sez. lavoro, ordinanza interlocutoria del 17 giugno 2019, n. 16164.
    La Sez. Lavoro della Corte di Cassazione ha sollevato questione di legittimità costituzionale dell’art. 1, comma 125, della l. n. 190 del 2014, nella parte in cui richiede ai cittadini extracomunitari, ai fini dell’erogazione dell’assegno di natalità, anche la titolarità del permesso unico di soggiorno, anziché la titolarità del permesso di soggiorno e di lavoro per almeno un anno, ai sensi dell’art. 41 del d.lgs. n. 286/1998, con riferimento ai parametri di cui agli artt. 3, 31 e 117, comma 1, Cost. in relazione agli artt. 20, 21, 24, 31 e 34 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea.

 

  • Iscrizione anagrafica e rilascio dell’assegno sociale – Corte di Cassazione, sez. lavoro, ordinanza del 4 giugno 2019, n. 15170.
    L’iscrizione anagrafica del cittadino straniero titolare della carta di soggiorno non è richiesta, neppure implicitamente, dall’art. 80, comma 19 l. n. 388/2000 per il rilascio dell’assegno sociale. La carta di soggiorno è infatti ritenuta sufficiente a indicare il requisito del radicamento sul territorio da parte dello straniero e a renderlo meritevole dell’emolumento solidaristico corrisposto in ragione del contributo alla società di quei soggetti che, arrivati ai 65 anni d’età, non percepiscono un reddito o una pensione adeguata e che non sono più idonei alla ricerca di un’attività lavorativa.

 

  • Parità di trattamentoCorte di Cassazione, sez. lavoro, sentenza del 24 maggio 2019, n. 14261.
    Ai fini del riconoscimento di prestazioni sociali volte a rispondere ai bisogni primari della persona, nel nostro ordinamento non è consentita, ex artt. 2 e 3 Cost., alcuna differenziazione tra cittadini italiani e stranieri che hanno titolo al soggiorno nel territorio dello Stato italiano laddove il carattere non episodico e di non breve durata della detta permanenza non siano in discussione (fattispecie relativa al riconoscimento della pensione di inabilità).

 

  • Sottrazione internazionale del minore – Corte di Cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenza del 7 giugno 2019, n. 15254.
    In materia di sottrazione internazionale di minore, l’ascolto del minore costituisce adempimento necessario ai fini della legittimità del decreto di rimpatrio ai sensi degli artt. 3 e 6 della convenzione di Strasburgo del 25 gennaio 1996 (ratificata con l. n. 77/2003 ), essendo finalizzato, ex art. 13, comma 2, della convenzione de L’Aja del 25 ottobre 1980, anche alla valutazione della sua eventuale opposizione al rimpatrio nella valutazione della integrazione del minore stesso nel suo nuovo ambiente, estremo ostativo all’accoglimento della domanda di rimpatrio che risulti esercitata, ex art. 12, comma 2, della medesima convenzione, oltre l’anno.

 

  • Cittadinanza italiana – Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 5 giugno 2019, n. 3791.
    La prestazione del giuramento dopo la notifica del decreto di concessione della cittadinanza italiana può intervenire anche all’estero dinanzi a un’autorità diplomatica o consolare. La previgente disciplina che richiedeva il requisito della residenza in Italia fino al giuramento è stata infatti tacitamente abrogata dall’art. 8 del d.P.R. n. 362/1994, che espressamente prevede che il giuramento possa essere anche reso «davanti all’autorità diplomatica o consolare del luogo di residenza» se la residenza è all’estero. La disposizione palesa una portata generale che consente l’ipotesi di residenza all’estero al momento del giuramento, e nulla sembra giustificare la sua limitazione al solo caso di acquisto di cittadinanza da parte del coniuge del cittadino.

 

  • Diniego di permesso di soggiorno per condotta fraudolenta Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 5 giugno 2019, 3779.
    Premesso che la falsità dei documenti prodotti ai fini del rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno per lavoro o di rilascio di titolo per attesa occupazione costituisce da sola causa sufficiente del diniego, la presenza di una condotta fraudolenta in sede processuale inficia in radice l’attendibilità di qualunque prospettiva lavorativa successivamente documentata. Tuttavia, la mancanza di un titolo di soggiorno, in pendenza del procedimento di rinnovo, non consente di sostenere che allo straniero sia precluso in radice di procacciare una nuova situazione lavorativa, sì che il periodo trascorso successivamente alla presentazione dell’istanza di rinnovo e prima della conclusione del relativo procedimento sarebbe del tutto irrilevante al fine di verificare la sussistenza dei presupposti per il rilascio del permesso di soggiorno (anche per attesa occupazione): la situazione dello straniero, nel suddetto periodo, non può infatti essere assimilata tout court a quella di uno straniero irregolare, in particolare qualora lo stesso appellante abbia allegato di aver conseguito nel suddetto periodo, quantomeno, una proposta di assunzione (pur solo nella fase terminale del procedimento, e dopo aver tenuto, in costanza dello stesso, un riprovevole comportamento falsificatorio).

 

  • Diniego di permesso di soggiorno e garanzie proceduraliTAR Lombardia, sez. staccata di Brescia, sentenza del sez. I, 7 giugno 2019, n. 551.
    L’omissione della comunicazione di avvio del procedimento e del preavviso di rigetto, ai sensi degli artt. 7 e 8 e dell’art. 10-bis della l. n. 241/1990, non può determinare ex se la caducazione del diniego di permesso di soggiorno, senza che il ricorrente abbia evidenziato in giudizio gli elementi che avrebbero, anche solo ipoteticamente, potuto determinare un diverso contenuto del provvedimento, qualora fosse stato messo in condizioni di rappresentarli nel corso del procedimento.

 

  • Revoca misure di accoglienza – TAR Basilicata, sez. I, sentenza del 4 giugno 2019, n. 486.
    Affinché possa disporsi la revoca delle misure di accoglienza al richiedente la protezione internazionale, nel caso di accertamento della disponibilità da parte dello straniero di mezzi economici sufficienti, occorre dimostrare che il richiedente nell’arco temporale di un anno ha percepito compensi stabili e duraturi non inferiori all’importo dell’assegno sociale.

 

  • Minori stranieri non accompagnatiComitato europeo per i diritti sociali, Decisione sull’ammissibilità e sull’adozione di misure cautelari del 23 maggio 2019, causa n. 173/2018.
    The European Committee of Social Rights requested the Greek Government: to ensure the appointment of a guardian at the time that a separated or unaccompanied child in need of international protection is identified as well as the effective functioning of the guardianship system; to ensure the use of alternatives to detention of migrant children, and to ensure in particular that unaccompanied children in police stations, pre-removal centres and Reception and Identification Centres are provided with immediate access to age-appropriate shelters; to ensure access to food, water, education, and appropriate shelter; to ensure access to health care and medical assistance, in particular by ensuring the presence of an adequate number of medical professionals to meet the needs of the children whose rights are the subject of this complaint; and to ensure that all the relevant public authorities are made aware of this decision.

 

Comunicati stampa

 

 

 

  • Diritto alla libertà e sicurezzaCorte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. V, sentenza del 25 giugno 2019, Al Husin v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (no. 2), causa n. 10112/16 (press release).
    The case of Al Husin v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (no. 2) concerned a man who was held in detention pending possible deportation for extended periods while the authorities sought a safe third country to remove him to. This case concerned his detention from July 2012. The Court found in particular that from August 2014 it should have been obvious to the authorities that no country was willing to admit the applicant, who had been classed as a national security risk. He had not been released until February 2016 as the search for a country to accept him had continued, however, that period of detention had led to a violation of his rights as the grounds to justify it had no longer been valid. The European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) of the European Convention on Human Rights as regards the applicant’s detention from August 2014 to February 2016.

 

  • Ordine di allontanamento dal territorio dello statoCorte di cassazione, sez. I penale, sentenza del 5 luglio 2019, n. 29465.
    Prima dell’entrata in vigore del d.l. n. 13/2017, conv. dalla l. n. 46/2017, la proposizione del ricorso del richiedente asilo avverso il diniego della protezione internazionale sospendeva l’efficacia esecutiva di tale provvedimento, con la conseguenza che – in linea con l’indirizzo ermeneutico esposto dalla Corte di Giustizia in ordine all’art. 2, par. 1, della Direttiva 2006/115/CE – non scattava l’obbligo per il richiedente di lasciare il territorio nazionale, potendo egli soggiornare legalmente sul territorio nazionale fino all’esito della decisione sul ricorso. Di conseguenza, nel quadro normativo delineato, il decreto prefettizio di espulsione e il susseguente ordine di allontanamento, carenti del presupposto della definitività del rigetto della domanda di protezione internazionale proposta dal cittadino extracomunitario, sono da considerarsi illegittimi, non potendo perciò costituire il presupposto del reato di cui all’art. 14, co. 5-ter, d.lgs. n. 286/1998 (violazione dell’ordine di allontanamento dal territorio dello stato). Ne deriva che il giudice del merito, nella verifica della contestazione dell’ingiustificata inosservanza dell’ordine di allontanamento emesso dal questore da parte dello straniero espulso, debba disapplicare il provvedimento amministrativo e quindi riconoscere l’insussistenza del reato di cui tale provvedimento è presupposto.

 

 

  • Apolidia di fattoCorte di cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenza del 21 giugno 2019, n. 16489.
    L’art. 31 della Convenzione di New York, che prevede la non espellibilità di un apolide se non nei casi di documentata sussistenza dei motivi di sicurezza nazionale e di ordine pubblico, si estende in via analogica anche alle situazioni di apolidia di fatto e/o nelle more del procedimento per accertare lo stato di apolidia, quando la situazione del soggetto emerge chiaramente dalle informazioni o dalla documentazione delle autorità pubbliche competenti dello Stato italiano, di quello di origine o di quello verso il quale può ravvisarsi un collegamento significativo con il soggetto interessato.

 

  • Traduzione del decreto di espulsioneCorte di cassazione, sez. VI civile, sentenza del 5 luglio 2019, n. 18210.
    La mancata traduzione del decreto di espulsione nella lingua propria del destinatario determina la violazione dell’art. 13, comma 7, TUI, con conseguente nullità non sanabile del provvedimento, anche in presenza dell’attestazione di indisponibilità del traduttore, qualora la stessa sia motivata, con l’impossibilità di reperire un interprete di lingua madre, dovendo, a monte, l’Amministrazione addurre e il giudice ritenere verosimili le ragioni a sostegno della indisponibilità di un testo predisposto nella lingua dell’espellendo ovvero dell’inidoneità nel concreto di tale testo.

 

  • Violazione del diritto di difesa Corte di cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenza del 27 giugno 2019, n. 17305.
    L’art. 12, comma 1 bis d.lgs. n. 25/2008, prevede la possibilità, non già l’obbligo per il richiedente protezione internazionale di essere ascoltato, su sua richiesta, dinanzi all’intera commissione territoriale. Stante la natura di tale facoltà, non si può dedurre una violazione del diritto di difesa del ricorrente che sia stato ascoltato da un solo membro anziché dall’intero collegio componente la Commissione territoriale. L’omissione dell’avvertenza allo straniero che egli può essere sentito anche dall’organo collegiale, anziché da un singolo componente, non dà luogo alla nullità dell’audizione, a meno che il difetto dell’avvertenza di legge abbia cagionato al richiedente asilo una specifica e sicura lesione dei suoi diritti fondamentali, circostanza che dev’essere allegata in modo circostanziato e denunciata in sede di prima impugnazione giurisdizionale.

 

  • Revoca delle condizioni di accoglienza – Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 19 luglio 2019, n. 5091.
    In materia di revoca delle condizioni di accoglienza in violazione grave o ripetuta delle regole delle strutture in cui è accolto da parte del richiedente asilo, compreso il danneggiamento doloso di beni mobili o immobili, ovvero comportamenti gravemente violenti, il riferimento dell’art. 23, comma 1, del d.lgs. 142/2015 (versione antecedente alla modifica operata dal d.l. n. 113/2018) all’art. 14 della medesima fonte, deve leggersi quale riferito all’intero sistema dell’accoglienza e dunque anche all’ospitalità fornita presso i Centri straordinari (CAS) in aggiunta ai Centri governativi saturi. Se è vero che la funzione dei due tipi di strutture è la medesima, non vi sono ragioni per differenziare il regime sanzionatorio dei comportamenti serbati da coloro che ivi sono ospitati. Limitando l’applicazione dell’articolo 23 comma 1, lett e) ai soli sistemi di accoglienza “ordinaria”, si avrebbe un’inevitabile disparità di trattamento dei cittadini richiedenti protezione internazionale in ragione della – non programmabile – collocazione nelle diverse strutture di accoglienza.

 

  • Resistenza a pubblico ufficiale e adempimento di un dovere Tribunale di Agrigento, Ufficio GIP, ordinanza sulla richiesta di convalida di arresto e di applicazione della misura cautelare del 2 luglio 2019.
    Il Giudice per le Indagini Preliminari del Tribunale di Agrigento ha rifiutato la richiesta di convalida dell’arresto e rigettato la contestuale richiesta applicazione di misura cautelare nei confronti di Carola Rackete, comandante della motonave Sea Watch 3, come avanzate dalla Procura di Agrigento per la violazione delle fattispecie di cui all’art. 1100 del Codice della Navigazione (resistenza o violenza contro nave da guerra) e art. 337 c.p. (resistenza a pubblico ufficiale). In particolare, sulla base della considerazione che «le unità navali della Guardia di Finanza sono considerate navi da guerra solo quando operano fuori dalle acque territoriali ovvero in porti esteri ove non vi sia una autorità consolare, mentre in questo caso la nave della Guardia di Finanza operava in acque territoriali, all’interno del Porto di Lampedusa», il Giudice ha escluso la sussistenza della prima fattispecie di reato. Rispetto al reato di resistenza a pubblico ufficiale, il Giudice ha invece riconosciuto l’operatività della scriminante dell’esercizio di un dovere (art. 51 c.p.), avendo la Rackete, in qualità di capitano della nave Sea Watch, adempiuto al dovere di soccorso – derivante in particolare dalla Convenzione sul diritto del mare Montego Bay, dalla Convenzione cd. SOLAS del 1974, dalla convenzione SAR di Amburgo del 1979, nonché dagli artt. 490 e 1158 Codice della navigazione – incombente sul comandante di una nave che si trovi davanti all’imminenza di un pericolo per vite umane; dovere che non si esaurisce nella mera presa a bordo dei naufraghi, ma nella loro conduzione fino ad un porto sicuro.
  • Accesso civico alle informazioni relative alle operazioni di soccorso dei migranti in mareTAR Lazio, sez. III, sentenza del 1° agosto 2019, n. 10202.
    Pronunciandosi in ordine al rigetto del Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti alla richiesta di accesso alle informazioni relative alle operazioni di soccorso intervenute nel Mar Mediterraneo avanzata dall’Associazione per gli Studi Giuridici sull’Immigrazione (ASGI), il Tar Lazio ha condannato il Ministero all’esibizione dei documenti richiesti,  con possibilità di criptare le sole parti che possano recare un pregiudizio concreto all’interesse pubblico, alla difesa militare o alla repressione di reati. Il Tar ha infatti escluso la ricostruzione del Ministero secondo cui le operazioni di ricerca e soccorso, qualificate come attività militari o attività NATO, rientrerebbero tra le eccezioni assolute all’accesso previste dall’art. 1048 comma 1 lett. q) del D.P.R. 15 marzo 2010 n. 90. Al contrario di quanto prospettato dal Ministero, la mera e occasionale possibilità che nelle operazioni di search and rescue siano impiegati dei natanti militari non giustifica in alcun modo l’assimilazione delle operazioni di salvataggio – le quali riguardano l’attuazione della Convenzione sulla ricerca ed il salvataggio in mare, che sancisce l’obbligo di prestare assistenza in mare a persone in pericolo in capo a chiunque possa intervenire – ad attività militari. Il TAR rileva inoltre l’evidente interesse pubblico alla conoscenza dei dettagli delle operazioni di soccorso, rientrando le stesse in un settore di indubbio rilievo civico che ha ampio risalto anche nei mass-media. L’importanza e la frequenza delle operazioni di cui trattasi, nonché la natura dei diritti fondamentali coinvolti, non possono dunque risultare esclusi dall’attuazione del principio di trasparenza.

 

  • Diritto a un ricorso effettivo – Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Grande sezione, sentenza del 29 luglio 2019 Alekszij Torubarov contro Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal, causa C-556/17.
    L’articolo 46, paragrafo 3, della direttiva 2013/32/UE del 26 giugno 2013 recante procedure comuni ai fini del riconoscimento e della revoca dello status di protezione internazionale, letto alla luce dell’articolo 47 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea, deve essere interpretato nel senso che in circostanze in cui un giudice di primo grado – dopo aver effettuato un esame completo ed ex nunc di tutti gli elementi di fatto e di diritto pertinenti presentati dal richiedente protezione internazionale – abbia riconosciuto protezione internazionale, in applicazione dei criteri previsti dalla direttiva 2011/95/UE del 13 dicembre 2011, ad un soggetto richiedente ed un organo amministrativo o quasi giurisdizionale adotti in seguito una decisione in senso contrario, senza dimostrare a tal fine la sopravvenienza di nuovi elementi che giustifichino una nuova valutazione delle esigenze di protezione internazionale, il suddetto giudice deve riformare la decisione non conforme alla propria precedente sentenza e sostituirla con la propria. Egli dovrà inoltre disapplicare, se necessario, la normativa nazionale che gli vieti di procedere in tal senso.

 

 

  • Sospensione del divieto d’ingresso nel mare territoriale –– TAR Lazio, sez. I ter, decreto del 14 agosto 2019, n. 10780.
    Il Tar Lazio accoglie l’istanza di applicazione di misure cautelari monocratiche urgenti ai sensi dell’art. 56 cod. proc. amm. proposta da Foundacion Proa (Pro Activa Open Arms) e avente ad oggetto la sospensione dell’efficacia del provvedimento reso il 1 agosto 2019 dal Ministro dell’Interno, di concerto con il Ministro della Difesa e con il Ministro delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, con cui si dispone il divieto di ingresso, transito e sosta della nave Open Arms nel mare territoriale nazionale. Quanto al fumus per l’applicazione della misura cautelare, il Presidente del Tar Lazio riconosce che il ricorso non appare del tutto sfornito di fondamento giuridico in relazione al dedotto vizio di eccesso di potere per travisamento dei fatti e di violazione delle norme di diritto internazionale del mare in materia di soccorso; del resto, la stessa amministrazione intimata aveva riconosciuto, nelle premesse del provvedimento impugnato, che il natante soccorso da Open Arms in area SAR libica – quanto meno per l’ingente numero di persone a bordo – si trovava in “distress”, ossia in una situazione di evidente difficoltà. Tale considerazione rende contraddittoria la valutazione, effettuata nel medesimo provvedimento, circa l’esistenza della peculiare ipotesi di “passaggio non inoffensivo” di cui all’art. 19, comma 1 [recte, comma 2], lett. g), della l. n. 689/1994. Anche il periculum in mora deve ritenersi sussistente alla luce della documentazione prodotta (medical report, relazione psicologica, dichiarazione capo missione). La prospettata situazione di eccezionale gravità ed urgenza appare dunque tale da giustificare la concessione – nelle more della trattazione dell’istanza cautelare nei modi ordinari – della richiesta di tutela cautelare monocratica, al fine di consentire l’ingresso della nave Open Arms in acque territoriali italiane, con il conseguente obbligo di prestare immediata assistenza alle persone soccorse maggiormente bisognevoli.

 

  • Inottemperanza all’ordine di lasciare il territorio dello Stato Corte di cassazione, sez. I penale, sentenza del 16 luglio 2019, n. 31256.
    Nell’interpretazione offerta dalla giurisprudenza di legittimità e da quella costituzionale, la norma incriminatrice contenuta nell’art. 14, comma 5-ter pretende il requisito della insussistenza di un “giustificato motivo” per l’inottemperanza dell’ordine del questore di lasciare il territorio dello stato, requisito che concorre a delineare il fatto tipico. A fronte di una formulazione che rifugge dalla tassativa elencazione delle situazioni concrete idonee a dar conto dell’inosservanza del precetto, nella giustificazione della condotta non rientrano soltanto le cause di giustificazione in senso tecnico, ma anche tutte le condizioni di particolare pregnanza che rendono impossibile all’agente rispettare l’ordine di allontanamento (così già Corte Cost., n. 5/2004). Senza imporre un’inversione dell’onere della prova, la norma assegna al giudice il potere-dovere di rilevare direttamente l’esistenza di ragioni legittimanti l’inosservanza del precetto penale, facendo riferimento al caso concreto e alla condizione personale, sociale e patrimoniale del cittadino extracomunitario, da apprezzarsi in tutti i profili idonei a rendere inesigibile, anche soggettivamente, il comportamento preteso.

 

  • Riconoscimento della protezione internazionaleCorte di cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenza del 17 luglio 2019, n. 19147.
    L’impugnazione dei capi della sentenza di primo grado che respingono il riconoscimento dello status di rifugiato e della protezione sussidiaria non investono la Corte di appello anche della valutazione sui presupposti per il riconoscimento della protezione umanitaria. Il riconoscimento del diritto al permesso di soggiorno per ragioni umanitarie da parte del giudice di merito deve essere frutto di valutazione autonoma, mediante uno scrutinio avente ad oggetto l’esistenza delle condizioni di vulnerabilità che ne integrano i requisiti, non potendo conseguire automaticamente dalla valutazione delle altre domande di protezione internazionale.

 

  • Permesso soggiorno per motivi familiari – Corte di cassazione, sez. VI civile, sentenza del 23 luglio 2019, n. 19930
    La Corte di Cassazione ha ritenuto di rimettere in pubblica udienza la questione relativa alla necessità del requisito della convivenza effettiva per il riconoscimento del diritto al soggiorno per motivi di coesione familiare anche in sede di rinnovo. Le criticità interpretative sorgono per la coesistenza nel sistema legislativo, da un lato, dell’art. 19, c. 2, lett. c), TUI e dell’art. 28 del d.P.R. 394/99, i quali prescrivono il requisito della convivenza, e, dall’altro lato, del d.lgs. n. 30 del 2007, dove invece non è fatta menzione del requisito in parola. Tale difficoltà di coordinamento ha determinato orientamenti divergenti in giurisprudenza, dando così luogo all’esigenza di definire con esattezza il rapporto (di specialità o di coesistenza, ma con precisazione delle diverse situazioni regolate dall’uno o dall’altro) tra i due sistemi legislativi che disciplinano situazioni e domande di tutela relative al rapporto di familiarità qualificata tra cittadino straniero e cittadino italiano.

 

  • Iscrizione anagrafica del richiedente asilo – Tribunale ordinario di Ancona, sez. I civile, ordinanza del 29 luglio 2019.
    Il Tribunale ordinario di Ancona solleva questione di legittimità costituzionale in riferimento all’art. 13 comma 1 lett. a) n. 2) d.l. 113/2018 convertito in legge n. 132/2018 – il quale esclude per tabulas la possibilità per il richiedente protezione di ottenere l’iscrizione anagrafica nel comune ove è di fatto residente – per contrasto con gli agli  artt.  2  Cost.,  3  Cost.,  117 Cost. in riferimento all’art. 2 protocollo addizionale alla CEDU n. 4, 117 Cost. in riferimento all’art. 12 del Patto internazionale sui diritti civili e politici. Sebbene la relazione illustrativa al decreto legge 113/2018 giustifichi la preclusione all’iscrizione anagrafica dello straniero titolare del permesso di soggiorno per richiesta di asilo con la precarietà del soggiorno del migrante e con la necessità di definire in via prioritaria la sua condizione giuridica, il soggiorno dello straniero richiedente asilo, legittimato dal rilascio del relativo permesso, sarebbe in realtà non di breve durata. I tempi di accertamento delle condizioni che costituiscono presupposto del riconoscimento della protezione internazionale – i quali includono il procedimento dinanzi alle commissioni territoriali, l’eventuale impugnativa dinanzi al Tribunale e poi in Cassazione – sono infatti di gran lunga superiori al tempo minimo necessario per poter definire il luogo in cui lo straniero ha fissato la propria dimora come abituale, tempo minimo fissato in tre mesi dall’art. 6 T.U. immigrazione. Di conseguenza, se da una parte è vero che la condizione del richiedente asilo è precaria, dall’altra è parimenti vero che il suo soggiorno si protrae legittimamente sul territorio per tempi che superano sempre almeno la durata annuale, tempi nei quali viene impedita la pubblicizzazione e la prova di una residenza che, di fatto, viene acquisita. La Corte Costituzionale ha del resto riconosciuto che il legislatore, nell’ambito del suo potere di regolare l’ingresso e la permanenza dei cittadini extracomunitari nel territorio dello Stato, possa escludere l’erogazione di determinate prestazioni solo per stranieri soggiornanti con un titolo episodico e di breve durata (Corte cost., n. 306/2008). L’impossibilità per lo straniero richiedente asilo di ottenere la certificazione anagrafica in ordine alla sua dimora abituale comporta una condizione di minorazione generale della sua persona, con preclusione all’accesso a tutti quei diritti, facoltà e servizi che elevano tale certificazione a requisito costitutivo. Il provvedimento interpone quindi seri ostacoli allo sviluppo della persona come singolo e nelle formazioni sociali, comportando inoltre un trattamento deteriore dello straniero soggiornante con un titolo che, a ben vedere, non è né episodico né di breve durata rispetto a stranieri soggiornanti ad altro titolo.
  • Tribunale di Catania, Sez. Reati Ministeriali, Relazione sugli atti del procedimento a carico del Ministro dell’Interno Matteo Salvini
    Il Tribunale dei Ministri, visto l’art.8, comma 1, Legge Costituzionale n.1/89, dispone la trasmissione degli atti e del presente provvedimento al Procuratore della Repubblica di Catania affinché ne curi l’immediata rimessione al Presidente del Senato per l’avvio della procedura prevista dall’art.9 Legge Cost. citata per il rilascio dell’autorizzazione a procedere nei confronti del Senatore Matteo Salvini in ordine al reato di sequestro di persona aggravato p. e p. dall’art. 605, comma I, II n.2 e III, c.p., “per avere, nella sua qualità di Ministro dell’Interno, abusando dei suoi poteri, privato della libertà personale 177 migranti di varie nazionalità giunti al porto di Catania a bordo dell’unità navale di soccorso “U. Diciotti” della Guardia Costiera italiana alle ore 23:49 del 20 agosto 2018.

 

 

  • Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. IV, M.A. e altri c. Lituania, sentenza dell’11 dicembre 2018, causa n. 59793/17.
    In order to remain the “conscience of Europe”, the Court must ensure the effective protection of migrants and especially of asylum-seekers, which requires scrutiny of States’ actions at their land borders and, more specifically, the guarantee of a right of access to international protection procedure. Land borders are not zones of exclusion or exception from States’ human-rights obligations, and this observation also applies to the intermediate zones between border fences and to transit zones. Jurisdiction under both refugee and human-rights law is presumed to be exercised within a State’s territory, including its land borders, international zones, transit zones or areas that are otherwise excised for immigration purposes.

 

  • Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. V, Cabucak c. Germania, sentenza del 20 dicembre 2018, causa n. 18706/16.
    The Court recognises that the domestic courts carefully balanced the competing interests and explicitly took into account the criteria set out in the Court’s case-law. Moreover, having regard to the gravity of the drug-related criminal offences committed by the applicant, and considering the sovereignty of member States to control and regulate the residence of aliens on their territory, the Court finds that the interference was supported by relevant and sufficient reasons, and was proportionate in that a fair balance was struck between the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life, on the one hand, and the prevention of disorder or crime, on the other hand. In these circumstances the Court concludes that the interference with the applicant’s right to private and family life as protected under Article 8 § 1 of the Convention was justified under Article 8 § 2 of the Convention.

 

 

  • Consiglio di Stato, sez. II, sentenza n. 00494 del 21 gennaio 2019
    La presenza della moglie italiana non costituisce motivo idoneo a superare la valutazione di pericolosità sociale, tenuto conto del preminente interesse pubblico alla sicurezza tale da far recedere quello alla vita familiare del cittadino straniero macchiatosi di un reato che denota particolare allarme sociale, tenuto conto delle specifiche modalità della condotta penalmente rilevante.

 

  • Corte d’Appello di Brescia, sentenza del 18 gennaio 2019 – (Sentenza pubblicata da ASGI)
    Costituisce molestia razziale ex art. 2 co. 3 D.Lgs. 215/2003 attribuire un fine lucrativo agli enti impegnati nell’accoglienza e definire i richiedenti asilo clandestini, in quanto tali condotte sono idonee a creare un “clima intimidatorio” e “ostile” nei confronti delle associazioni, clima che può avere senz’altro ripercussioni dirette sui servizi resi ai richiedenti asilo. Quale rimedio a tale discriminazione le associazioni hanno diritto al risarcimento del danno (che nella specie è stato quantificato in 3340 euro).
  • Diritto a un ricorso effettivoCorte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. V, sentenza del 10 ottobre 2019, O.D. v. Bulgaria, causa n. 34016/18.
    The decision O.D. v. Bulgaria concerns an order for the expulsion of a Syrian national, arrived in Bulgaria from Turkey in 2013. While in Syria, the applicant was a member of the national army before he deserted and joined the Free Syrian army. The expulsion order was motivated on the basis that the applicant posed a threat to the national security of Bulgaria. After considering the substantial evidence of executions, arbitrary detention, and ill-treatment of individuals who have deserted the Syrian national army, the Court held that the applicant’s return in Turkey, if carried out, would amount to a violation of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention due to the real risk of death or ill-treatment in Syria. In refusing to grant the status requested, the Supreme Administrative Court of Bulgaria, while noting the existence of a serious and widespread situation in Syria, had given precedence to considerations relating to the threat to national security over an evaluation of the risk in the destination country. Moreover, the Government had not referred to any other remedies available in Bulgarian law for that purpose. Hence, under the legislation as it currently stood, the applicant would have had no other means of obtaining effective scrutiny of his complaints under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. The Court found that a violation of Article 13 had occurred and stated that it would continue to apply Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court requesting interim measures to prevent the applicant’s expulsion.

 

  • Detenzione illegale del richiedente asilo Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. III, sentenza 8 ottobre 2019, R. K. v. Russia, causa n. 30261/17.
    The case R. K. v. Russia regards the lawfulness of detention pending return to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
The applicant arrived in Russia from the DRC in October 2015 on a short term student visa. On 10 March 2016, he requested temporary asylum status on the basis that he had previously participated in political protests while living in the DRC and would face a real risk of ill-treatment should he be returned. All appeals were dismissed and a removal order was issued following the applicant’s arrest on 6 March 2017 for violating migration regulations. The applicant complained under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention that his return to the DRC would pose a real risk of death or ill-treatment as a result of his participation in political protests. He also complained that his detention pending removal was unlawful and contrary to Articles 5 § 1 (f) and 4 of the Convention. No violation was found in relation to the complaints made under Articles 2 and 3.
 The Court held that the applicant’s detention was unlawful and that no procedures for review had been made available to challenge the detention. The Court therefore found a violation of Articles 5 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

 

  • Espulsione di persona bisognosa di cure psichiatriche Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sez. IV, sentenza 1 ottobre 2019, Savran v. Denmark, causa n. 57467/15.
    The case Savran v. Denmark involves the deportation of a Turkish man with a severe psychiatric condition from Denmark to Turkey. The applicant complained that if returned to Turkey his rights would be violated, considering the unavailability of proper medical treatment in that country. The Court found in particular that psychiatrists had recommended that the applicant receive close monitoring and follow-up in order to make his treatment effective and allow for his reintegration into society after committing a serious offence. The Court had doubts about the applicant receiving such care in Turkey, where moreover he had no family network and would need a regular and personal contact person to help him. Given such doubts, the Danish authorities needed to obtain sufficient and individual assurances on his care, otherwise removing him would violate Article 3.

 

 

  • Diritto di circolazione e soggiorno per cittadini dell’Unione e loro familiari – Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Sez. I, sentenza del 2 ottobre 2019, causa n. 93/18.
    L’articolo 7, paragrafo 1, lettera b), della direttiva 2004/38/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 29 aprile 2004, relativa al diritto dei cittadini dell’Unione e dei loro familiari di circolare e di soggiornare liberamente nel territorio degli Stati membri, che modifica il regolamento (CEE) n. 1612/68 ed abroga le direttive 64/221/CEE, 68/360/CEE, 72/194/CEE, 73/148/CEE, 75/34/CEE, 75/35/CEE, 90/364/CEE, 90/365/CEE e 93/96/CEE, deve essere interpretato nel senso che un cittadino dell’Unione minorenne dispone di risorse economiche sufficienti affinché non divenga un onere eccessivo per il sistema di assistenza sociale dello Stato membro ospitante durante il periodo di soggiorno anche quando tali risorse provengono dai redditi derivanti dall’attività lavorativa svolta illegalmente da suo padre, cittadino di uno Stato terzo che non dispone di un titolo di soggiorno e di un permesso di lavoro in tale Stato membro.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno per il lungo soggiornante “di fatto” pericolosoConsiglio di Stato, sez. II, sentenza del 1 ottobre 2019, n. 6554.
    Secondo il consolidato orientamento del Consiglio di Stato, è possibile escludere l’operatività dell’automatismo delle condanne penali e valutare la pericolosità sociale dello straniero anche alla luce della durata del soggiorno nel territorio nazionale e dell’inserimento sociale, familiare e lavorativo, solamente in sede di rinnovo/rilascio del permesso di soggiorno di lungo periodo. Tale tipo di permesso richiede infatti non solo una prolungata e regolare presenza sul territorio nazionale ma, tra gli altri requisiti, anche una specifica valutazione di integrazione dello straniero soggiornante. Non può, pertanto, beneficiare automaticamente della stessa disciplina chi vanti soltanto un soggiorno “di fatto”, ancorché continuativo e legale, per cinque anni nel territorio dello Stato, occorrendo l’apprezzamento discrezionale di ulteriori circostanze oggettive e soggettive, che dovranno essere tutte adeguatamente documentate nel corso del procedimento.

 

  • Principio di fraternità e reato di aiuto al soggiorno irregolare – Conseil Constitutionnel, sentenza del 6 luglio 2018, n. 717.
    Riconoscendo al terzo elemento del motto della Repubblica francese – Liberté, égalité, fraternité – pieno rango costituzionale, il Conseil constitutionnel ha parzialmente censurato le disposizioni in materia di “aiuto all’ingresso, alla circolazione e al soggiorno irregolari di uno straniero in Francia”, affermando che un atto umanitario nei confronti dello straniero irregolarmente presente nel territorio non può costituire reato. In particolare, il Conseil Constitutionnel ha anzitutto dichiarato l’incostituzionalità parziale degli articoli L. 622-1 e L. 622-4 del CESEDA – che configurano rispettivamente il reato di aiuto all’ingresso, alla circolazione e al soggiorno irregolari e le ipotesi di esclusione dello stesso (c.d. clausola umanitaria) – nella parte in cui non estendono all’aiuto alla circolazione la clausola umanitaria prevista per l’aiuto al soggiorno. Se infatti il divieto di aiutare il prossimo in nome della lotta all’immigrazione irregolare appare giustificato con riferimento agli atti di favoreggiamento dell’ingresso irregolare di stranieri, la repressione dell’aiuto alla circolazione dello straniero già presente sul territorio – atto che «non ha necessariamente come conseguenza, alla differenza dell’aiuto all’ingresso, di far nascere una situazione illecita» – appare in contrasto con i principi costituzionali. Inoltre, i giudici costituzionali – attraverso una “riserva di interpretazione”, secondo il modello della pronuncia manipolativa di rigetto – hanno esteso il valore della clausola umanitaria vigente, la quale esclude, in caso di aiuto offerto da una persona diversa dai familiari, la punibilità di atti che non abbiano dato «luogo ad alcun corrispettivo diretto o indiretto» e purché si tratti «di consulenze giuridiche o di prestazioni di ristoro, alloggio o di cure mediche destinate a garantire allo straniero delle condizioni di vita dignitose e decenti, o di qualunque altro aiuto atto a preservare la dignità o l’integrità fisica dello stesso». Al paragrafo 14 della decisione si legge che la lista delle ipotesi di esclusione della fattispecie delittuosa di cui all’art. L. 622-4, per essere conforme al principio di fraternità, dovrà essere interpretata in maniera tale da includere «ogni altro atto di aiuto apportato ad uno scopo umanitario».

 

  •  Accertamento giudiziario della richiesta di protezione internazionale – Corte di cassazione, sez. I civile, sentenza del 30 settembre 2019, n. 24388.
    Quando il cittadino straniero che richieda il riconoscimento della protezione internazionale abbia adempiuto all’onere di allegare i fatti costitutivi del suo diritto, sorge il potere-dovere del giudice di accertare anche d’ufficio se, ed in quali limiti, nel paese straniero di origine dell’istante si registrino fenomeni di violenza indiscriminata, in situazioni di conflitto armato interno o internazionale, che espongano i civili a minaccia grave e individuale alla vita o alla persona, ai sensi dell’art. 14, lett. c), d.lgs. n. 251/2007. L’effettuazione di tale accertamento, in quanto imposto dalla legge, deve essere poi obiettivamente verificabile (dal richiedente, dall’Amministrazione e dallo stesso giudice dell’impugnazione); e ciò implica che il provvedimento reso debba quantomeno dar conto delle fonti informative consultate: indicazione, questa, tanto più necessaria, in quanto consente di affermare (o negare) che l’attività di indagine sia stata condotta sulla base di notizie aggiornate, come il richiamato art. 8, comma 3 richiede.
  • Divieto di trattamenti inumani e degradanti Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, Grande Camera, sentenza del 21 novembre 2019, Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, causa n. 47287/15
    The case concerned two Bangladeshi nationals who transited through Greece, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia before reaching Hungary, where they applied for asylum. They were subsequently held in a transit zone for 23 days before they were returned to Serbia. The Court ruled that the Hungarian authorities did not act in compliance with their duty to rigorously assess the applicants’ risk of inhuman and degrading treatment in the event of return to Serbia, or by further refoulement to Greece. In particular, the Court found that when an application is not examined on its merits, it cannot be known whether an Article 3 risk exists unless a thorough and comprehensive legal procedure to assess the existence of such risks takes place. Indeed, the Hungarian authorities did not take into account available and reliable information regarding the risk of refoulement from Serbia, administrative deficiencies to assess asylum claims, or denials of the right to apply for asylum for readmitted persons. The Court therefore found that Hungary had acted contrary to Article 3 ECHR. Notwithstanding this, the Court found that the material detention conditions in the transit zone as well as the length of detention did not reach the threshold of severity to find a violation under Article 3. Although applicants of international protection are considered to be a vulnerable group due to their past experiences, it was deemed that there was no evidence to support that the applicants were more vulnerable than any other adult detained in the transit zone. Furthermore, the Grand Chamber’s majority declared inadmissible the applicants’ complaints under Articles 5 § 1 and 5 § 4. It noted that while the applicants’ freedom of movement had been significantly restricted, it was deemed to be necessary in relation to their asylum procedures.

 

  • Zone di transito Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, Grande Camera, sentenza del 21 novembre 2019, Z. A and Others v Russia, cause riunite nn. 61411/15, 61420/15, 61427/15 e 3028/16
    The case concerned the lengthy confinement of four men in the transit zone of the Sheremetyevo airport, Moscow. Upon their respective arrivals, the applicants were refused entry at the Russian border, their passports were seized and they were subsequently detained in the airport transit zone pending the examination of their asylum applications. The applicants complained under Article 5 § 1 ECHR that they had been detained unlawfully while their applications were processed and that the material conditions of detention were contrary to Article 3 ECHR. In respect of the lawfulness of detention, the applicants primarily argued that their detention had been ordered in the absence of an official legal decision and was for an unforeseeable length of time. The Grand Chamber noted that the Russian authorities leaved the applicants in a state of “legal limbo” and that the detention had been impacted by significant delays and inaction. Moreover, the Court observed that the deprivation of liberty in the transit zone was significant: the area was under permanent control and there existed no practical possibility for the men to leave the area of detention. In concluding, the Court held there was no statutory basis justifying detention, resulting in the finding of a violation of Article 5 § 1. Regarding the complaints under Article 3, the applicants submitted that while detained that they were forced to sleep on a mattress on the floor in a permanently lit room, and had restricted access to health care, legal services and hygiene facilities. The Court noted that such conditions were clearly unsuitable for long term detention, holding that the appalling detention conditions and the failure of authorities to care for the applicants amounted to a violation under Article 3 ECHR.

 

  • Pericolo di vita connesso all’espulsione Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, Sez. I, sentenza del 14 novembre 2019, N. A. v. Finland, causa n. 25244/18
    The case concerned the decision to return an Iraqi national to his country of origin, where he was subsequently killed. The applicant’s father was a Sunni Muslim Arab from Baghdad who had previously worked in the national army under former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s regime and as a leading officer for the Iraqi Office of the Inspector General. After two separate attempts were made to kill the applicant’s father, the family went into hiding. In September 2015, the family arrived in Finland where their application for international protection was rejected. The applicant’s father applied for assisted voluntary return and left Finland in November 2017. In December 2017, the applicant learned that her father had been shot and killed in Baghdad. The applicant further argued that her father had left as a result of an enforceable expulsion order rather than by his free will. As well as emphasising the absolute nature of Article 3 ECHR rights, the Court noted, inter alia, that the applicant’s father did not have a genuine free choice in the matter of his return, meaning that his removal must be considered a forced return, and that the Finnish authorities had failed to consider whether the individual circumstances of the applicant’s father placed him at an increased risk of ill treatment. Moreover, the Finnish authorities had failed to consider the cumulative nature of this evidence in the context of general violence and heightened security in Iraq. The Court also emphasised that domestic authorities had insufficiently considered the past ill treatment of the applicant’s father when assessing the future risk of ill treatment and failed to take into consideration the targeted nature of the attacks. The Court concluded that, since the domestic authorities were aware or ought to have been aware of the danger to life or risk of ill treatment the applicant’s father would be exposed to upon return, the expulsion amounted to a violation of Articles 2 and 3 ECHR.

 

  • Pericolo di persecuzione religiosa Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, sentenza del 5 novembre 2019, A.A. c. Svizzera, causa n. 32218/17
    The case concerned the removal from Switzerland to Afghanistan of an Afghan national of Hazara ethnicity who was a Muslim convert to Christianity. The Court noted that according to many international documents on the situation in Afghanistan, Afghans who had become Christians or who were suspected of conversion would be exposed to a risk of persecution by various groups. It could take the form of State persecution and result in the death penalty. The Court noted that, while the authenticity of the applicant’s conversion in Switzerland had been accepted by the Federal Administrative Court, it had not carried out a sufficient assessment of the risks that could be personally faced by the applicant if he were returned to Afghanistan. The Court found in particular that there was no evidence that the applicant had been questioned about the everyday practice of his Christian faith since his baptism in Switzerland and how he could, if returned, continue to practise it in Afghanistan, in particular in Kabul, where he had never lived and where he said that he would be unable to rebuild his future life. Therefore, the Court held that a violation of Article 3 ECHR in the event of the applicant’s return to Afghanistan had occurred.

 

  • Violazioni delle regole di accoglienza – Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Grande sezione, sentenza del 12 novembre 2019, causa C-233/18
    Le sanzioni che gli Stati possono adottare nei confronti del richiedente protezione in caso di gravi violazioni delle regole dei centri di accoglienza, nonché di comportamenti gravemente violenti ex art. 20, par. 4, della direttiva 2013/33/UE, possono concernere anche la riduzione delle condizioni materiali di accoglienza, compresa la revoca o la riduzione del sussidio per le spese giornaliere, purché non sia violato il principio di proporzionalità e siano assicurate le garanzie previste dall’art. 20, par. 5, della medesima direttiva. Dette disposizioni, lette alla luce dell’art. 1 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali, implicano che tali sanzioni non possano mai privare il richiedente della possibilità di provvedere ai suoi bisogni più elementari o importare altre misure lesive della sua dignità personale.

 

  • Ricongiungimento familiare – Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea, Sez. VI, sentenza del 20 novembre 2019, causa n. 706/18
    Una normativa nazionale in forza della quale, in assenza dell’adozione di una decisione alla scadenza di un termine di sei mesi decorrente dalla data di deposito della domanda di ricongiungimento familiare, le autorità nazionali competenti devono rilasciare d’ufficio un permesso di soggiorno al richiedente, sarebbe contraria alla direttiva 2003/86/CE del Consiglio, del 22 settembre 2003. Tale direttiva impone infatti in capo agli Stati l’obbligo di verificare sempre se l’interessato soddisfi effettivamente le condizioni per soggiornare nello Stato membro ospitante conformemente al diritto dell’Unione, verificando l’esistenza di legami familiari pertinenti tra il soggiornante e il cittadino del paese terzo a favore del quale è stata presentata la domanda.

 

  • Protezione umanitaria e successione delle leggi nel tempo  Cassazione civile, Sezioni Unite, sentenza del 13 novembre 2019, n. 29459
    In tema di successione di leggi nel tempo in materia di protezione umanitaria, il diritto alla protezione, espressione di quello costituzionale di asilo, sorge in capo allo straniero al momento del suo ingresso in Italia in condizioni di vulnerabilità legate al rischio di compromissione dei diritti umani fondamentali. Ne consegue che la normativa introdotta con il d.l. n. 113 del 2018 (c.d. “decreto sicurezza”), convertito con l. n. 132/2018, nella parte in cui ha modificato la preesistente disciplina contemplata dall’art. 5, comma 6, del d.lgs. n. 286/1998 e dalle altre disposizioni consequenziali, non trova applicazione in relazione a domande di riconoscimento del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari proposte prima dell’entrata in vigore (5 ottobre 2018) della nuova normativa. Tali domande saranno pertanto scrutinate sulla base della normativa esistente al momento della loro presentazione. Tuttavia, l’accertamento della sussistenza dei presupposti per il riconoscimento del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari sulla base delle norme esistenti prima dell’entrata in vigore del d.l. n. 113/2018 comporterà il rilascio del permesso di soggiorno per “casi speciali”, come previsto dall’art. 1, comma 9, del suddetto decreto legge. Sempre in tema di protezione umanitaria, alla luce dell’orizzontalità dei diritti umani fondamentali, si precisa che nel rilascio dei permessi vada assegnato rilievo centrale alla valutazione comparativa tra il grado d’integrazione effettiva nel nostro paese e la situazione soggettiva e oggettiva del richiedente nel paese di origine, al fine di verificare se il rimpatrio possa determinare la privazione della titolarità dell’esercizio dei diritti umani, al di sotto del nucleo ineliminabile e costitutivo della dignità personale.

 

  • Accertamento della condizione di vulnerabilità del richiedente protezione internazionaleCassazione civile, sez. I, ordinanza del 14 novembre 2019, n. 29603
    L’allegazione da parte del richiedente la protezione internazionale che in un Paese di transito (nella specie la Libia) si consumi un’ampia violazione dei diritti umani – anche senza evidenziare quale connessione vi sia tra il transito attraverso quel Paese e il contenuto della domanda di protezione –costituisce in ogni caso circostanza rilevante ai fini della ricostruzione della vicenda individuale e, di conseguenza, della credibilità del dichiarante e della sua condizione di fragilità. La violenza subita nel paese di transito (Libia) è circostanza potenzialmente idonea a ingenerare un forte grado di traumaticità e ad inverare una condizione di vulnerabilità e fragilità, a maggior ragione quando siano state evidenziate violenze (in particolare sessuali) subite in tale Paese. In simili casi l’accertamento della situazione di disagio psico-fisico del richiedente e di vulnerabilità potrà essere presa in considerazione quantomeno ai fini della protezione umanitaria, che nella configurazione di cui all’art. 5, comma 6, del d.lgs. n. 286/1998 – applicabile ratione temporis – è una misura atipica e residuale, destinata a coprire situazioni in cui, pur non sussistendo i presupposti per il riconoscimento della tutela tipica (status di rifugiato o protezione sussidiaria), tuttavia non possa disporsi il rimpatrio e debba provvedersi all’accoglienza del richiedente che si trovi in situazione di vulnerabilità. È dunque dovere del giudice attivare i poteri officiosi sul particolare profilo di vulnerabilità oggetto della domanda di protezione, acquisendo informazioni aventi per specifico oggetto la situazione del richiedente per stabilire se questi sia meritevole di una forma di protezione internazionale ovvero della protezione umanitaria, quale prevista dall’art. 5, comma 6, del TUI (non essendo applicabile qui ratione temporis il d.l. n. 113/2018).

 

  • Espulsione dello straniero e detenzione domiciliareCassazione penale, sez. I, sentenza del 28 ottobre 2019, n. 43855
    Secondo l’orientamento costante della giurisprudenza di legittimità, l’espulsione dello straniero ex art. 16, co. 5, d.lgs. 286/98, costituisce una misura alternativa alla detenzione a fini di deflazione carceraria, esigenza quest’ultima che dovrà considerarsi cedevole rispetto alle prevalenti finalità di rieducazione e reinserimento sociale del condannato (art. 27 Cost.), cui non sono certo estranei i cittadini extracomunitari che siano entrati illegalmente nel territorio dello Stato e siano privi del permesso di soggiorno. Da quanto affermato discende l’inapplicabilità dell’espulsione allo straniero che sia sottoposto a una misura alternativa alla detenzione. L’ammissione alla detenzione domiciliare successiva al decreto di espulsione determina pertanto la sopravvenuta impossibilità giuridica di far luogo all’espulsione, con conseguente obbligo del giudice di sorveglianza di revocarla.

 

 

  • Permesso di soggiorno per attesa occupazioneConsiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 12 novembre 2019, n. 7742
    In materia di presupposti per il rilascio o il rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno, l’impugnazione del licenziamento che sia tempestiva e di cui non sia accertato il carattere abusivo costituisce un principio di prova dell’intercorso rapporto di lavoro a favore del richiedente, non potendo peraltro riverberare sulla posizione di quest’ultimo le conseguenze di condotte addebitabili a terzi (segnatamente, la scelta del datore di lavoro di non regolarizzare la sua posizione contributiva). Tali circostanze, davanti a un soggetto che abbia dimostrato un buon inserimento socio-economico e culturale, valgono almeno a fondare l’obbligo dell’Autorità competente di valutare la sussistenza dei requisiti per il rilascio di un permesso “per attesa occupazione”.

 

  • Permesso di soggiorno e requisito reddituale – Consiglio di Stato, sez. III, sentenza del 7 novembre 2019, n. 7606
    Nell’ambito della valutazione della condizione reddituale per il rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno, in deroga alla regola generale dell’irrilevanza degli elementi sopravvenuti all’emissione del provvedimento di diniego, devono essere valutati ex art. 5, co. 5, TUI gli elementi nuovi sorti durante il periodo concesso da un provvedimento del giudice per l’integrazione del requisito, in considerazione dell’affidamento che tale decisione ha ingenerato nel richiedente (nella fattispecie, il giudice di prime cure aveva disposto in via cautelare la concessione al ricorrente del permesso per lavoro subordinato).

 

  • Provvedimento d’urgenza contro la Questura che rifiuta di ricevere una domanda reiterata di protezione internazionale fondata su nuovi elementi – Tribunale ordinario di Roma, Sez. Diritti della persona e immigrazione civile, decreto del 25 novembre 2019.
    Su ricorso d’urgenza ex art. 700 c.p.c., il Tribunale di Roma ha emesso un provvedimento cautelare inaudita altera parte con cui ha dichiarato illegittimo il rifiuto della Questura di ricevere, da parte di una cittadina nigeriana, una domanda reiterata di protezione internazionale fondata su nuovi elementi (segnatamente, la sottoposizione della donna a mutilazione genitale). Con lo stesso provvedimento, il Tribunale ha dichiarato illegittimo anche il conseguente ordine di trattenimento, associato a un decreto espulsivo, emesso dalla Questura e convalidato dal giudice di pace senza investire il Tribunale ai sensi dell’art. 6, comma 5, del d.lgs. 142/2015. Ritenuti fondati i motivi relativi alla violazione degli artt. 3 d.p.r. n. 21/2015, 26 e 29-bis del d.lgs. 25/2008, 6 del d.lgs 142/2015, nonché dell’art. 13 della Costituzione, il Tribunale ha riconosciuto infatti la sussistenza del fumus bonis iuris; ha inoltre riconosciuto la sussistenza del periculum in mora, individuato nel protrarsi dell’illegittima privazione della libertà personale e nel pericolo che l’eventuale rimpatrio potesse vanificare il diritto della ricorrente a formalizzare una nuova domanda di protezione, meritevole – alla luce dei nuovi elementi emersi – di essere portata all’attenzione della Commissione territoriale. Il Tribunale ha quindi ordinato l’immediata cessazione della misura limitativa della libertà personale, ordinando inoltre alla Questura di ricevere la domanda di asilo.
  • Espulsione e divieto di tortura ECHR, Grand Chamber, Judgment 3 Dicember 2019, N.M. v. Russia, Application no. 29343/18
    The applicant, a Kazakhstan national, was charged with religious extremist crimes in Uzebkistan in May 2015. After an international search warrant was issued, the applicant was arrested in August 2016 and detained pending extradition in Russia. The applicant complained that he would be subject to ill treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR in the event of return to Uzbekistan as a result of his criminal charges. The Court noted that the applicant had consistently argued that he had been prosecuted for religious extremism and faced a risk of ill treatment if returned to Uzbekistan. Indeed, Uzbek authorities had directly identified the applicant with a group previously found by the Court to be at risk of ill treatment. It therefore held that Russian authorities had substantial grounds for believing the applicant would face ill treatment upon return. The Court found that the domestic authorities had failed to carry out a rigorous scrutiny of the risk of ill treatment. Indeed, the authorities’ assessment largely presented simplistic reasoning for the rejections of the applicant’s arguments and demonstrated a reliance on assurances of safety by Uzbek authorities. For these reasons, the Court found that Russian authorities had failed to adequately assess the risk of ill treatment in the event of extradition and, in its own assessment, concluded that the applicant would be exposed to a risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 in the event of return to Uzbekistan. The Court therefore held that there would be a violation of Article 3 ECHR if the applicant were extradited to Uzbekistan.

 

  • Ricongiungimento familiare CGUE, sentenza del 12 dicembre 2019, TB contro Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal, C‑519/18
    L’articolo 10, paragrafo 2, della direttiva 2003/86/CE del Consiglio, del 22 settembre 2003, relativa al diritto al ricongiungimento familiare, deve essere interpretato nel senso che esso non osta a che uno Stato membro autorizzi il ricongiungimento familiare della sorella di un rifugiato dal momento in cui quest’ultima, a causa del suo stato di salute, non sia in grado di sovvenire alle proprie necessità. Questo alla condizione che, da un lato, tale incapacità sia valutata in base alla situazione particolare in cui si trovano i rifugiati, dopo un esame individualizzato che tenga conto di tutti gli elementi pertinenti; dall’altro, sia possibile stabilire che il sostegno materiale della persona interessata è effettivamente garantito dal rifugiato o che il rifugiato sembra essere il familiare più idoneo a fornire il sostegno materiale necessario.

 

  • Rischio di persecuzione nel paese di transito  Cass. civ., sez. I, sentenza del 21 novembre 2019, n. 30403
    Con riguardo alle violenze subite nel Paese di transito prima dell’arrivo in Italia (nel caso specifico la Libia) l’allegazione nella domanda di protezione internazionale che ivi si consuma un’ampia violazione dei diritti umani, senza evidenziare quale connessione vi sia tra il transito attraverso quel Paese ed il contenuto della domanda, costituisce circostanza irrilevante ai fini della decisione. L’indagine del rischio persecutorio o del danno grave in caso di rimpatrio va infatti effettuata con riferimento al Paese di origine del richiedente (o alla dimora abituale di questi, ove si tratti di un apolide). Il Paese di transito potrà tuttavia rilevare (v. direttiva n. 115/2008/UE) nel caso di accordi comunitari o bilaterali di riammissione, o altra intesa, che prevedano il ritorno del richiedente in tale Paese.

 

  • Obiezione di coscienza e protezione internazionale  –  Cass. civ., sez. I, ordinanza del 19 novembre 2019, n. 30031
    L’obiezione di coscienza è un diritto fondamentale garantito nell’ordinamento italiano da fonti nazionali e internazionali. Va pertanto riconosciuto lo status di rifugiato allo straniero che fugge dal Paese d’origine per evitare l’arruolamento, quando sussiste la ragionevole e concreta possibilità che il richiedente venga inviato a prestare servizio militare, potendo così essere coinvolto, anche solo indirettamente, nella commissione di crimini di guerra e rischiando, in caso di obiezione, di essere sottoposto a sanzione penale, a prescindere dall’entità o dal carattere sproporzionato della stessa.

 

  • Espulsione  –  Cass. pen., sez. I, sentenza del 13 novembre 2019, n. 45972
    In materia di espulsione a titolo di misura alternativa alla detenzione, il giudice deve valutare l’esistenza di concreti legami affettivi con persone conviventi e regolarmente residenti in Italia ex art. 13, co. 2-bis, d.lgs. n. 286/1998 (TUI). Non è censurabile tuttavia il provvedimento che dispone l’espulsione dello straniero coniugato con una cittadina extra-UE regolarmente soggiornante in Italia se non risulta comprovato il requisito della convivenza. Inoltre, la condizione di oppositore al regime politico di uno Stato non osta all’espulsione verso detto Paese se è invocata dallo straniero solo genericamente, ossia senza l’indicazione di elementi concreti da cui sia possibile apprezzare che tale condizione si sia effettivamente in qualche modo estrinsecata.

 

  • Mandato d’arresto europeo  Cass. pen., sez. VI, sentenza del 6 novembre 2019, n. 45190
    La condizione del radicamento in Italia del ricercato ai fini del rifiuto dell’esecuzione del MAE, emesso ai fini dell’espiazione della pena, rileva esclusivamente in quanto strettamente connessa ai diritti e alle libertà assicurate dal diritto dell’Unione europea ai cittadini degli Stati membri. Ne consegue che il motivo di rifiuto di cui all’art. 18, lett. r), l. 69/2005 è invocabile solo dai cittadini italiani e dai cittadini europei. Non dà dunque luogo a censure di legittimità la decisione sulla consegna che non abbia esaminato la documentazione proposta a fondamento e supporto del radicamento in Italia del ricorrente cittadino extracomunitario.

 

  • Non luogo a procedere per avvenuta espulsione Corte Cost., sentenza del 13 dicembre 2019, n. 270
    È incostituzionale l’art. 13, comma 3-quater, del d.lgs. n. 286/1998 (TUI), nella parte in cui non prevede che, nei casi di decreto di citazione diretta a giudizio ai sensi dell’art. 550 del codice di procedura penale, il giudice possa rilevare, anche d’ufficio, che l’espulsione dell’imputato straniero è stata eseguita prima che sia stato emesso il provvedimento che dispone il giudizio e che ricorrono tutte le condizioni per pronunciare sentenza di non luogo a procedere.

 

  • Respingimenti e domanda d’asiloTrib. Roma, sez. I civile, sentenza del 28 novembre 2019, n. 22917
    A seguito di un respingimento collettivo operato dalla Marina militare italiana nel 2009 ai danni di un gruppo di cittadini eritrei, poi ricondotto nelle carceri libiche, il Tribunale di Roma ha accertato il diritto dei ricorrenti a fare ingresso in Italia per formalizzare la propria domanda di asilo, oltre a riconoscere a ciascuno di loro un risarcimento di 15.000 euro. Più nel dettaglio, dopo un’approfondita ricostruzione dei principi di protezione di cui all’art 10 Cost. e attraverso un richiamo alla giurisprudenza più rilevante della Cassazione (tra cui Cass. civ., Sez. Un., 24  settembre 2019, n. 29460), il Giudice ha affermato che, qualora il richiedente protezione internazionale non possa presentare la relativa domanda in quanto non presente sul territorio italiano, per circostanze allo stesso non imputabili ed anzi riconducibili ad un fatto illecito commesso dalle autorità italiane, sussiste il diritto all’ingresso in Italia finalizzato a richiedere l’asilo in diretta applicazione dell’art. 10, comma 3, Cost.. In caso contrario, secondo il Tribunale, si determinerebbe un vuoto di tutela inammissibile in un sistema che a più livelli riconosce e garantisce il diritto di asilo nelle sue diverse declinazioni. Al fine di consentire l’esercizio di tale diritto, la pubblica amministrazione è stata condannata a permettere l’ingresso in Italia ai ricorrenti, con le forme che saranno ritenute più idonee.
  • Rimpatrio per sospetta commissione di reatoCGUE, sentenza 12 dicembre 2019, Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid contro E.P., C-380/18
    La nozione di “minaccia per l’ordine pubblico” di cui all’articolo 6, par. 1, lett. e) del regolamento 2016/399/UE che istituisce un codice unionale relativo al regime di attraversamento delle frontiere (codice frontiere Schengen) non si riferisce esclusivamente a un comportamento individuale che rappresenta una minaccia reale, attuale e sufficientemente grave per un interesse fondamentale della società dello Stato membro interessato. Detta disposizione pertanto non osta a una prassi nazionale in forza della quale le autorità competenti possono adottare una decisione di rimpatrio nei confronti di uno straniero non soggetto all’obbligo di visto presente sul territorio per un soggiorno di breve durata in quanto sospettato di aver commesso un reato. Questo purché, da un lato, il reato in questione presenti una gravità sufficiente, alla luce della sua natura e della pena prevista, a giustificare la cessazione immediata del soggiorno del medesimo cittadino nel territorio degli Stati membri e, dall’altro, le autorità dispongano di elementi concordanti, obiettivi e precisi per corroborare i loro sospetti, circostanza che è compito del giudice del rinvio verificare.

 

  • Rifiuto o revoca di permesso per ragioni di ordine pubblico – CGUE, sentenza del 12 dicembre 2019, G.S. e V.G. contro Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid, cause riunite  C‑381/18 e C‑382/18
    Non rientra nell’ambito d’applicazione della direttiva 2003/86/CE la domanda di ingresso e di soggiorno del familiare di un cittadino dell’Unione che non ha esercitato il proprio diritto di libera circolazione. La Corte di giustizia è nondimeno competente a pronunciarsi in via pregiudiziale sull’interpretazione dell’art. 6 della direttiva in detta situazione se tale disposizione è resa applicabile in modo diretto e incondizionato dal diritto nazionale. In virtù di tale interpretazione, l’articolo 6, paragrafi 1 e 2, della direttiva 2003/86/CE non osta a una prassi nazionale in forza della quale le autorità competenti possono, per ragioni di ordine pubblico, sia respingere una domanda di ingresso e soggiorno fondata sulla suddetta direttiva sulla base di una condanna penale avvenuta durante un precedente soggiorno nel territorio dello Stato membro interessato, sia revocare un permesso di soggiorno fondato sulla medesima direttiva o rifiutare il suo rinnovo qualora sia stata applicata al richiedente una pena sufficientemente elevata rispetto alla durata del soggiorno. Tale prassi può tuttavia ritenersi legittima fintantoché il reato oggetto della condanna penale in questione presenti una gravità tale da poter stabilire che è necessaria l’esclusione del soggiorno del richiedente di cui trattasi e le autorità effettuino la valutazione individuale di cui all’articolo 17 della direttiva in parola, circostanza che è compito del giudice del rinvio verificare.

The case concerns the expulsion to Iraq of an Iraqui national, residing in Romania. In 2007 several criminal investigations were launched against the applicant, including charges of facilitating the entry of Iraqi nationals who had allegedly supported or committed terrorist acts. He was sentenced in relation to these charges and was also given a five year ban on the right to remain in Romania. On appeal, the High Court rejected the applicant’s argument that he would be exposed to a risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR and would violate his right to family life guaranteed by Article 8 ECHR. In 2017, after the applicant’s release from prison, he was placed in administrative detention pending expulsion. In the meantime, his application for asylum was rejected. The applicant complained, inter alia, that his return to Iraq would expose him to a risk of death or ill treatment contrary to Articles 2 and 3 ECHR respectively. The Court observed that evidence presented to show a risk of death or ill treatment was general and, as such, did not show evidence of a personal risk to the applicant. Moreover, it held that applicant had a normal relationship with Iraqi authorities. The Court therefore concluded that there were no serious or substantiated grounds for believing that he would be subject to a real risk of death or ill treatment contrary to Articles 2 and 3 ECHR. However, the applicant also complained that he did not have access to an effective remedy to challenge the findings of the national courts, contrary to Article 13 ECHR in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3. The Court noted that Article 13 ECHR requires the existence of domestic law or remedy capable of providing appropriate redress. This obligation must be such that the remedy available is effective. Indeed, the applicant’s complaint that his expulsion will have consequences contrary to Articles 2 and 3 must be made subject to careful scrutiny and access to an appeal with suspensive effect. It observed that while the applicant was able to challenge the enforcement of the sentence imposed and make an application for asylum, the available appeals did not have a suspensive effect. As such, the Court found a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 2 and 3 ECHR.

 

L’affaire concernait la contestation par M. Sami Jeddi, est un ressortissant tunisien, de son placement dans le Centre d’Identification et d’Expulsion de Milan en vue de son éloignement. En avril 2011, M. Jeddi fut appréhendé par la police italienne sur l’île de Lampedusa où il avait débarqué illégalement et sans papiers d’identité. Le 21 avril 2011, les autorités de police lui signifièrent une mesure d’expulsion et, dans l’attente, il fut placé dans le Centre d’Identification et d’Expulsion (C.I.E.) de Santa Maria Capua Vetere ; il y présenta une demande de protection internationale. Le 31 mai 2011, la Commission territoriale pour a reconnaissance de la protection internationale rejeta sa demande. M. Jeddi attaqua cette décision devant le tribunal de Naples. Par un jugement du 16 novembre 2011, le tribunal considéra que les motifs allégués pour demander l’asile ou une protection subsidiaire n’étaient pas suffisants. Toutefois, le tribunal considéra – sur la base d’un décret du Président du Conseil des Ministres du 6 octobre 2011 – que le requérant pouvait bénéficier d’un permis de séjour humanitaire jusqu’à la date du 31 décembre 2012. Le 24 décembre 2011, M. Jeddi arriva en Suisse où il introduisit une demande d’asile. Le 19 octobre 2012, les autorités suisses le renvoyèrent en Italie en application du « règlement Dublin ». A son arrivé à l’aéroport de Milan, il fut emmené dans les locaux de la police des frontières et le même jour le préfet de Varese lui notifia un décret d’expulsion. En application de ce décret, il fut conduit au C.I.E. de Milan aux fins de son éloignement. Le 22 octobre 2012, le juge de paix de Milan, après avoir entendu le requérant, assisté par un interprète et par un avocat commis d’office, valida la mesure de rétention. Le 2 novembre 2012, après que son avocat eut transmis le jugement du tribunal de Naples du 21 novembre 2011 aux autorités de police de Milan, le requérant fut libéré. Saisi par le requérant, le juge de paix de Varese annula l’arrêté d’expulsion et considéra que M. Jeddi était autorisé à rester en Italie jusqu’au 31 décembre 2012, date d’échéance du permis de séjour humanitaire. Le requérant introduisit alors un pourvoi en cassation contre le décret du juge de paix de Milan qui avait validé son placement au sein du C.I.E. de Milan. La Cour de cassation rejeta le pourvoi. Invoquant en particulier l’article 5 § 1 (droit à la liberté et à la sûreté) de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme, le requérant soutenait que son placement au C.I.E. de Milan pendant 14 jours, malgré le titre de séjour humanitaire, n’avait pas répondu aux exigences de la Convention. La Cour considère que la privation de liberté subie par le requérant a eu lieu dans le respect des voies légales et dans le cadre d’une procédure ne relevant aucune trace d’arbitraire. Pour ces raisons, la Cour conclut qu’il n’y a pas eu violation de l’article 5 § 1 de la Convention.

 

Sono infondate le questioni di legittimità costituzionale dell’art. 14, co. 1-bis, lett. c) TUI, con riferimento agli artt. 13 e 24, co. 2 Cost., sollevate dalla Cassazione relativamente alla mancata previsione che il giudizio di convalida delle misure alternative al trattenimento in un centro di permanenza per i rimpatri (consegna del passaporto, con obbligo di firma due giorni alla settimana presso un ufficio di polizia) si svolga in udienza con partecipazione necessaria del difensore dello straniero. Questo anzitutto perché l’obbligo di presentazione presso il competente ufficio della forza pubblica in giorni e orari stabiliti, pur essendo finalizzato all’espulsione dello straniero, incide sulla libertà personale di quest’ultimo in misura limitata; inoltre perché l’oggetto del giudizio di convalida da parte del giudice di pace è limitato alla sussistenza dei presupposti di adozione della misura e all’esistenza di un provvedimento di espulsione dotato di efficacia esecutiva. Si deve inoltre considerare come il legislatore non abbia trascurato di considerare le difficoltà linguistiche, sociali e culturali che possano ostacolare le capacità di difesa del cittadino straniero, prescrivendo in particolare che il provvedimento di applicazione della misura dell’obbligo di presentazione sia notificato all’interessato unitamente alla traduzione di una sintesi del suo contenuto in una lingua a lui nota; che lo straniero sia informato del diritto di essere assistito da un difensore di fiducia o, in mancanza, d’ufficio, con informazioni relative all’accesso al patrocinio a spese dello Stato. Di conseguenza, la previsione di un contraddittorio meramente eventuale e cartolare dovrà ritenersi sufficiente.

 

In materia di protezione internazionale, l’articolo 3, comma 5, del d.lgs. n. 251 del 2007 , obbliga il giudice a sottoporre le dichiarazioni del richiedente sulla concreta vicenda narrata a fondamento della domanda, ove non suffragate da prove, a una verifica di credibilità razionale. Detta verifica include, oltre ad un duplice controllo di coerenza (la coerenza intrinseca del racconto e quella estrinseca basata sulle informazioni generali e specifiche di cui si dispone), anche un pari-ordinato controllo di plausibilità. Il giudizio di plausibilità, direttamente riferito alle dichiarazioni, si risolve nel complessivo scrutinio di attendibilità del richiedente, da compiersi a mezzo di “riscontri”  esterni, ove disponibili, ma anche nella verifica di logicità del racconto. Questo controllo di logicità appare essere ormai la principale, se non la sola difesa dell’ordinamento avverso narrazioni sovente stereotipate e tessute intorno a canovacci standardizzati, quali quelli che ricorrono nella gran parte dei ricorsi in tema di protezione internazionale che arrivano in Cassazione. Ad ogni modo, tale verifica è sottratta al controllo di legittimità al di fuori dei limiti di cui all’art. 360, comma 1, n. 5, c.p.c.

 

Le disposizioni in materia di ricorso avverso il provvedimento di allontanamento adottato contro cittadini dell’Unione europea o i loro familiari (art. 22 d.lgs. n. 30/2007 e art. 17 d.lgs. n. 150/2011) non prevedono una speciale legittimazione passiva del Prefetto, né questa può essere ricavata per analogia dalla previsione, di natura eccezionale, contenuta nell’art. 18 d.lgs. n. 150/2011 in relazione al procedimento di opposizione all’espulsione dei cittadini extra-UE. Conseguentemente, tale ricorso va proposto contro il Ministero dell’Interno in persona del Ministro, unico legittimato passivo, cui l’atto introduttivo deve essere notificato presso l’Avvocatura dello Stato nel cui distretto ha sede il tribunale innanzi al quale è portata la causa.

 

L’ipotesi che legittima l’espulsione dello straniero ai sensi dell’art. 13, co. 2, lett. b), TUI, consiste nell’essersi lo stesso trattenuto nel territorio dello Stato senza aver chiesto il permesso di soggiorno nel termine prescritto: comportamento, questo, che presuppone un atto volontario del soggetto interessato, il quale, pur conscio dei suoi doveri, rimane sul territorio nazionale senza formulare tempestiva richiesta di permesso di soggiorno. L’esistenza di un tale atto volontario di trattenimento in Italia è tuttavia da escludere se lo straniero vi si sia forzosamente trattenuto a seguito di provvedimenti restrittivi emessi nei suoi confronti. È pertanto illegittima l’espulsione disposta nello stesso giorno dell’avvenuta scarcerazione dello straniero che si trovai sul territorio dello Stato.

 

In materia di espulsione amministrativa, è illegittima – e va pertanto cassata – la decisione con cui il giudice di merito confermi la bontà del provvedimento espulsivo tradotto in lingua veicolare (art. 13, co. 7, TUI) senza motivare sull’impossibilità, ove dedotta dall’amministrazione, di predisporre un testo nella lingua conosciuta dallo straniero per la sua rarità, ovvero sull’inidoneità di tale testo alla comunicazione della decisione in concreto assunta; nonché senza accertare se, in concreto, la lingua italiana o quella veicolare sono conosciute dallo straniero.

 

Il fatto che l’omosessualità sia considerata reato nell’ordinamento giuridico del Paese di provenienza del richiedente asilo costituisce, di per sé , una grave ingerenza nella vita privata dei cittadini omosessuali, ponendoli in una situazione oggettiva di pericolo, tale da giustificare la concessione della protezione internazionale. Ne consegue che il giudice di merito deve fare oggetto di approfondimento istruttorio, cui si correla l’obbligo di motivazione, le circostanze relative alla dichiarata omosessualità del richiedente, la condizione dei cittadini omosessuali nella società del Paese di provenienza e lo stato di relativa legislazione, nel rispetto del criterio direttivo della normativa comunitaria ed italiana in materia di istruzione ed esame delle domande di protezione internazionale.

 

L’elemento soggettivo del reato di cui all’art. 14, co. 5-quater, TUI è costituito dal dolo generico e si sostanzia nella consapevolezza dell’interessato di essere destinatario dell’ordine di allontanamento (a lui consegnato in copia) e di trattenersi sul territorio dello Stato dopo la scadenza del termine per la partenza volontaria, senza giustificati motivi. Detti motivi si riferiscono a situazioni ostative che incidono – escludendola o rendendola difficoltosa – sulla possibilità oggettiva o soggettiva di ottemperare all’ordine di allontanamento e non possono riferirsi ad esigenze che riflettono la condizione tipica dei migranti irregolari, come la mancanza di un lavoro regolare ovvero la provenienza di mezzi economici da attività non regolari o non stabili.

 

Il Tribunale di Trieste non ha convalidato la richiesta di proroga del trattenimento di un richiedente asilo trattenuto al Centro per Rimpatri di Gradisca d’Isonzo, rilevando che i termini per l’esame della domanda di protezione internazionale (procedura accelerata visto il trattenimento) non fossero stati rispettati. Inoltre il Tribunale ha osservato che, in pendenza della fase amministrativa, la proroga debba essere “disposta” dal Questore e “convalidata” dal Tribunale mentre nel caso di specie la questura aveva meramente richiesto al Tribunale di disporre la proroga del trattenimento.

 

L’art. 26, co. 7 bis, TUI riguarda esclusivamente il permesso per lavoro autonomo. Ne segue che la condanna irrevocabile per i delitti ivi previsti non osta direttamente e automaticamente al rilascio del permesso UE per lungo soggiornanti ma soltanto in quanto abbia già determinato la revoca del titolo pregresso e, quindi, il venir meno del requisito di cui all’art. 9, co. 1, TUI. Inoltre, detta condanna può rilevare nell’ambito della valutazione sulla pericolosità sociale dell’interessato ex art. 9, co. 4, TUI, purché il diniego sia adeguatamente motivato in considerazione della natura del reato.

 

In materia di permesso di soggiorno per motivi di studio, la PA gode di un potere tecnico-discrezionale circa la valutazione delle ipotesi eccezionali che consentono di derogare al requisito del superamento del numero minimo di verifiche di profitto richieste ai fini del rinnovo del titolo (dall’art. 46, co. 4, secondo periodo, del d.P.R. 349/99). Nella fattispecie è pertanto annullata la sentenza di prime cure che respinge il ricorso avverso il rigetto dell’istanza di rinnovo del permesso per motivi di studio perché siano adeguatamente valutate le circostanze di forza maggiore allegate dal ricorrente, che gli avrebbe impedito il sostenimento e il superamento degli esami minimi previsti.

 

Ai fini del diniego della cittadinanza italiana, le condotte penalmente rilevanti dei familiari di primo grado dell’interessato possono venire in considerazione sia per quanto concerne la valutazione in ordine all’integrazione dello straniero nel tessuto sociale italiano sia per le possibili implicazioni in materia di ricongiungimento familiare. È pertanto legittima la decisione che rigetta l’istanza di concessione della cittadinanza italiana (ex art. 9, co. 1, lett. f), l. 91/92) motivando – inter alia – in relazione ai precedenti penali dei figli dello straniero. Con riferimento alla dedotta riabilitazione del diretto interessato in relazione a un precedente penale per abuso dei mezzi di correzione o di disciplina con lesioni, deve osservarsi, altresì, che l’Amministrazione procedente a fronte della pronuncia del giudice penale conserva integre le sue facoltà discrezionali di valutazione in ambito amministrativo, ai fini della concessione della cittadinanza, della condotta e dell’inserimento sociale dell’interessato. Le valutazioni volte all’accertamento di una responsabilità penale si pongono infatti su di un piano assolutamente differente e autonomo rispetto alla valutazione del medesimo fatto ai fini dell’adozione di un provvedimento amministrativo, con la possibilità che le risultanze fattuali oggetto della vicenda penale possano valutarsi negativamente, sul piano amministrativo, anche a prescindere dagli esiti processuali penali.

Espulsione – ECtHR,Judgment 18 February 2020, Makdoudi c. Belgium,Application no. 12848/15

The applicant, a Tunisian national who arrived in Belgium in 2008, was arrested in 2009 for various offences and sentenced to 42 months imprisonment. In 2011, he informed Belgian authorities that he was the father of a child with Belgian nationality. A deportation order was issued in 2011 and the applicant returned to Tunisia in July 2016 with a prohibition on re-entry. He complained that the available domestic remedies to challenge the lawfulness of his detention had prevented domestic courts from issuing a final decision on his detention contrary to Article 5(4). He also complained that his removal and ban on re-entry without consideration of his paternity status violated his right to family life under Article 8 ECHR. The Court noted, inter alia, that no final decision on the lawfulness of his detention was taken into account before his release in September 2014. The applicant’s inability to obtain a prompt decision on the lawfulness of his detention therefore amounted to a violation of Article 5(4). On the applicant’s complaint under Article 8, the Court noted, inter alia, that the existence of family life must be assessed in light of the situation at the time the removal order was issued. As such, the removal order did amount to an interference with the applicant’s right to family life. It added that the authorities had failed to provide relevant and sufficient reasons for its decisions. In this case, the authorities had failed to show that the removal of the applicant corresponded with a pressing social need or was proportionate to the aims pursued.

 

Espulsione ECtHR,Judgment 20 February 2020, M.A. and others v. Bulgaria, Application no. 5115/18

The applicants, who are Uighur Muslims, fled to Turkey from China due to various threats of violence. They arrived in Bulgaria in 2017 after discovering that Turkish authorities had started proceedings to deport Uighurs residing in Turkey to China. Their applications for asylum and subsequent appeals were rejected and the Head of State for National Security ordered their expulsion, although it is noted that no destination country was explicitly stated. In particular, the second, third and fourth applicants were seen to pose a threat to national security due to links with the East Turkistan Islamic Movement. The first and fifth applicants had since left Bulgaria and abandoned proceedings before the Court. The applicants complained that their removal to China would violate their rights under Articles 2 and 3 ECHR respectively.The Court noted, inter alia, the clear evidence of arbitrary detention, torture and executions for Uighurs returning to China, as well as the use of ‘re-education’ camps, where long term detention without due process was common. The Court was therefore satisfied that there were substantial grounds for believing that the applicants would face a real risk of treatment contrary to Articles 2 and 3 ECHR. It highlighted that the Bulgarian authorities had not provided effective guarantees that, in the process of the implementation of the repatriation or the expulsion decisions, the applicants would not be removed to China. The Court therefore concluded that, if implemented, the removal of the applicants would amount to a violation of Articles 2 and 3 ECHR.

 

Divieto di espulsioni collettive ECtHR,Judgment 13 February 2020, N.D. and N.T. v. Spain, Applications nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15

The case concerned the immediate return to Morocco of two nationals of Mali and Côte d’Ivoire who on 13 August 2014 attempted to enter Spanish territory in an unauthorised manner by climbing the fences surrounding the Spanish enclave of Melilla on the North African coast. The Court considered that the applicants had in fact placed themselves in an unlawful situation when they had deliberately attempted to enter Spain on 13 August 2014 by crossing the Melilla border protection structures as part of a large group and at an unauthorised location, taking advantage of the group’s large numbers and using force. They had thus chosen not to use the legal procedures which existed in order to enter Spanish territory lawfully. Consequently, the Court considered that the lack of individual removal decisions could be attributed to the fact that the applicants – assuming that they had wished to assert rights under the Convention – had not made use of the official entry procedures existing for that purpose, and that it had thus been a consequence of their own conduct. In so far as it had found that the lack of an individualised procedure for their removal had been the consequence of the applicants’ own conduct, the Court could not hold the respondent State responsible for the lack of a legal remedy in Melilla enabling them to challenge that removal. Accordingly, the Court stated that had been no violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, neither of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4, nor of Article 13 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 4 of Protocol No. 4.

 

Soggiorno permanente CGUE, sentenza del 22 gennaio 2020, AT c. Pensionsversicherungsanstalt, C‑32/19

L’articolo 17, par. 1, lett. a), della Direttiva 2004/38 deve essere interpretato nel senso che, ai fini dell’ottenimento di un diritto di soggiorno permanente nello Stato membro ospitante prima del decorso di un periodo ininterrotto di cinque anni di soggiorno, le condizioni relative al fatto di avervi svolto la propria attività almeno negli ultimi dodici mesi e di avervi soggiornato in via continuativa per oltre tre anni si applicano a un lavoratore che, al momento in cui cessa la sua attività, ha raggiunto l’età prevista dalla legislazione di tale Stato membro per far valere i suoi diritti a una pensione di vecchiaia.

 

Frontiere dello spazio Schengen CGUE, sentenza del 5 febbraio 2020,Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheidc. J. e A., C‑341/18

Il codice frontiere Schengen (CFS) si fonda sulla premessa per cui il controllo di cittadini di Paesi terzi a un valico di frontiera sia seguito a breve termine dall’effettivo attraversamento della frontiera esterna dello spazio Schengen, anche qualora il soggetto rimanga momentaneamente sul territorio dello Stato membro interessato. Nel caso di un marittimo, cittadino di un Paese terzo che s’imbarca per lavoro su una nave ormeggiata da lungo tempo in un porto di uno Stato membro per poi abbandonare il porto su detta nave, l’art. 11, par. 1, CFS deve essere interpretato nel senso che, prima di abbandonare tale porto, un timbro di uscita dev’essere apposto sui documenti di viaggio di questo marittimo, quando la sua apposizione è prevista dal citato codice, non al momento dell’imbarco del medesimo, bensì quando il capitano della nave in questione informa le competenti autorità nazionali della partenza imminente di detta nave. 

 

Espulsione dello stranieroCass. pen., sez. I, sentenza del 16 gennaio 2020, n. 1630

La situazione in cui si trova lo straniero che, avendo richiesto alla scadenza il rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno se lo sia visto rifiutare, non rientra tra le ipotesi di espulsione amministrativa di cui all’art. 13, co. 2, TUI. Ne consegue che non debba ritenersi integrata la fattispecie incriminatrice di cui all’art. 14, comma 5-ter, TUI, né possa essere disposta l’espulsione quale sanzione alternativa alla detenzione (che dell’espulsione amministrativa condivide i presupposti).

 

Status di rifugiato Cass. civ., sez. VI, ordinanza del 4 febbraio 2020, n. 2458

Per l’integrazione dei motivi di persecuzione rilevanti ai fini del riconoscimento della protezione internazionale ai sensi dell’art. 7 del d.lgs. n. 251/2007, risulta decisivo non già l’orientamento sessuale proprio del richiedente in sé e per sé considerato, ma il “riflesso sociale” che identifica il singolo nell’ambito di un gruppo connotato da un determinato orientamento sessuale. Ciò è confermato dallo stesso d.lgs. 251/2007, dove, all’art. 8, co. 2, si specifica che è «irrilevante che il richiedente possegga effettivamente le caratteristiche razziali, religiose, nazionali, sociali o politiche che provocano gli atti di persecuzione, purché una siffatta caratteristica gli venga attribuita dall’autore delle persecuzioni». Di conseguenza, deve essere cassata con rinvio la decisione che nega la protezione qualificando come “vicenda privata” la situazione del singolo che allega “frequentazioni” o “amicizie” con individui omosessuali.

 

Protezione sussidiariaCass. civ., sez. I, ordinanza del 22 gennaio 2020, n. 1343

Ai fini del riconoscimento della protezione sussidiaria, gli atti di vendetta e ritorsione minacciati o posti in essere da membri di un gruppo familiare che si ritiene leso nel proprio onore a causa di una relazione esistente o esistita con un componente della famiglia rientrano nell’alveo dei trattamenti inumani e degradanti di cui all’art. 14, lett. b), d.lgs. n. 251/2007, in quanto lesivi dei diritti fondamentali garantiti dagli artt. 2, 3 e 29 Cost. e 8 CEDU. È pertanto onere del giudice verificare se, in presenza di minaccia di danno grave ad opera di un “soggetto non statuale”, lo Stato di origine sia in grado di offrire alla persona minacciata adeguata protezione.

 

Protezione umanitaria Cass. civ., sez. I, ordinanza del 20 gennaio 2020, n. 1104

La condizione emotiva, ancor prima che fisica, di una giovane donna ripetutamente sottoposta a violenze sessuali ed avviato al meretricio, indipendentemente dal luogo in cui tale drammatica vicenda si sia consumata, integra gli estremi di una vulnerabilità che si sostanzia e viene vissuta nella più elevata e dolorosa di tutte le sue possibili forme. Ai fini della concessione della protezione umanitaria, è compito del giudice, una volta accertata la credibilità del narrato e del vissuto con apprezzamento di fatto, interrogarsi – oltre che sul profilo topico-comparativo delle possibili situazioni di vita futura – sulla residua capacità di una donna assoggettata a tali esperienze di essere sottoposta, e di poter ancora accettare, sopportare e subire una qualsiasi ulteriore forma di violenza – benché di tipo e di intensità sicuramente diversa – quale, indubitabilmente, quella che la costringa, ancora una volta contro la sua volontà, ad abbandonare il paese di accoglienza ed essere obbligata a far ritorno a quello di origine. Una particolare situazione di vulnerabilità impone infatti una valutazione di comparazione “attenuata”,  concettualmente caratterizzata da una relazione di proporzionalità inversa tra fatti giuridicamente rilevanti, che impone un peculiare bilanciamento tra condizione soggettiva del richiedente asilo e situazione oggettiva del Paese di eventuale rimpatrio.

 

Estradizione Cass. pen., sez. II, sentenza del 13 febbraio 2020, n. 5757

In tema di estradizione per l’estero, non può procedersi alla consegna qualora il fatto del quale l’estradando è chiamato a rispondere è sanzionato nella legislazione dello Stato richiedente con la pena dei lavori forzati, considerato che tale previsione contrasta con la Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo e con la Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea – in base alle quali nessuno può essere costretto a compiere un lavoro forzato od obbligatorio – nonché con il rispetto dei diritti fondamentali. Inoltre l’autorità giudiziaria italiana, anche qualora la Convenzione applicabile non preveda la valutazione da parte dello Stato richiesto dei gravi indizi di colpevolezza, non può limitarsi a un controllo meramente formale della documentazione allegata, ma deve compiere una sommaria delibazione diretta a verificare, sulla base degli atti prodotti, l’esistenza di elementi a carico dell’estradando, nella prospettiva del sistema processuale dello Stato richiedente.

 

Obbligo di soccorso in mareCass. pen., sez. III, sentenza del 20 febbraio 2020, n. 112

La Corte di Cassazione ha rigettato il ricorso presentato dalla Procura di Agrigento avverso il provvedimento di non convalida dell’arresto in flagranza – per i reati di cui agli artt. 1100 cod. nav. e 337 c.p. – eseguito dalla Guardia di Finanza nei confronti di Carola Rackete a seguito del tumultuoso sbarco nel Porto di Lampedusa della nave “SeaWatch3”, da lei capitanata, carica di migranti salvati in mare. I giudici di legittimità hanno infatti valutato che bene avesse fatto il Giudice delle indagini preliminari a rilevare una violazione dell’art. 385 c.p.p., il quale vieta l’arresto quando, tenuto conto delle circostanze del caso, “appaia” che il fatto sia stato compiuto nella ricorrenza di una causa di giustificazione, dove il concetto di “apparenza” va riportato a una situazione di “ragionevole esistenza” della causa di giustificazione – e non di “immediata evidenza” – sulla base di circostanze di fatto conosciute o conoscibili con l’ordinaria diligenza. Le forze dell’ordine incaricate dell’arresto avrebbero dovuto riconoscere che Carola Rackete, in qualità di capitano della nave SeaWatch3, aveva agito nell’adempimento del dovere di soccorso in mare posto in via pattizia e, prima ancora, consuetudinaria nel diritto internazionale. Questo dovere – come chiariscono la Convenzione internazionale SAR di Amburgo e le linee guida sul trattamento delle persone soccorse in mare allegate alla medesima Convenzione – non si esaurisce con il recupero a bordo della nave dei naufraghi ma comporta anche l’obbligo accessorio e conseguente di sbarcarli in un luogo sicuro (c.d. place of safety); ciò che non potrà considerarsi una nave in mare, essendo questo un luogo che, oltre a essere in balia degli eventi metereologici avversi, non consente il rispetto dei diritti fondamentali delle persone soccorse, impedendo peraltro di fatto alle medesime di esercitare il loro diritto di presentare domanda di protezione internazionale secondo la Convenzione di Ginevra del 1951.

 

Iscrizione anagrafica Trib. Bologna, ordinanza del 17 febbraio 2020, n. 387

Ai fini dell’iscrizione anagrafica si conferma la piena equiparazione tra i titolari del permesso di soggiorno per richiesta di asilo e tutti gli altri cittadini stranieri (e i cittadini italiani), essendo soltanto venuta meno la procedura semplificata o accelerata (cioè l’automatica iscrizione del richiedente asilo, per effetto della sua condizione di ospite nei centri di cui agli artt. 9,11 e 14, in base alla sola comunicazione del responsabile della convivenza e anche a prescindere dal decorso del termine di 3 mesi previsto dal TU Immigrazione).

 

Permeso di soggiornoC. App. Milano, sentenza 11 febbraio 2020, n. 2171

La cittadina straniera che – in presenza di un modulo comunale prestampato per la domanda  di indennità di maternità di base ex art. 74 dlgs 151/01 che non contempli l’ipotesi del permesso unico lavoro – abbia “crocettato” la condizione di lungo soggiornante allegando nel contempo il suo effettivo permesso di soggiorno, non incorre nella decadenza dalla prestazione prevista che è prevista  dall’art. 75 DPR 445/00 per i soli casi di autocertificazione falsa e ha diritto predetta indennità ai sensi dell’art.12 Direttiva 2011/98.

 

Rifugiato sur place  Cass. civ., sez. I, ordinanza del 7 febbraio 2020, n. 2954

Il pericolo di danno grave nel caso di rimpatrio deve essere considerato in linea meramente oggettiva, a prescindere dalle ragioni che hanno indotto il richiedente asilo ad emigrare e comunque con riferimento all’attualità; è infatti irrilevante che la situazione pericolosa di danno grave possa essere sorta in un momento successivo alla partenza del richiedente dal paese di origine; del pari ininfluente è il motivo che aveva originato la partenza, avendo il legislatore accolto il concetto di rifugiato sur place, divenuto tale cioè a causa di situazioni sopravvenute nel Paese di origine durante la sua assenza.

 

Permesso di soggiorno C.G.A.R.S., sentenza del 3 febbraio 2020, n. 94

In materia di rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno, vale a provare nell’an e nel quantum il soddisfacimento della condizione reddituale anche il verbale della Commissione medica che riconosce lo status di invalido in capo allo straniero, in quanto detto verbale costituisce l’ultimo atto del procedimento volto al riconoscimento dell’invalidità civile e precede l’erogazione dell’emolumento – il cui importo è fissato dalla legge – una volta rilasciato il titolo di soggiorno.

 

Cittadinanza italiana TAR Lazio, sentenza del 29 gennaio 2020, n. 1246

Ai fini del diniego della concessione della cittadinanza italiana, possono essere prese in considerazione dall’Amministrazione anche condotte criminose oggetto di un proscioglimento in sede penale per intervenuta prescrizione, in quanto indicative del mancato inserimento stabile dello straniero nella comunità nazionale.

 

Permesso di soggiorno TAR Veneto, sez. III, sentenza 6 febbraio 2020, n. 136

In materia di istanza di rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno per lavoro subordinato tardivamente proposta, non costituisce una ragione idonea a giustificare il ritardo la detenzione dell’istante all’estero, trattandosi di impedimento riconducibile alla sua condotta criminosa e in mancanza della prova dell’impossibilità di inoltrare l’istanza tramite la direzione del carcere. Inoltre, l’omissione dell’invito alla partenza volontaria ex art. 12, co. 1, dPR 394/99 non determina l’illegittimità del provvedimento questorile che dichiara inammissibile la richiesta di rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno, non incidendo sulla correttezza del potere esercitato dalla Questura e sul contenuto dispositivo del provvedimento di inammissibilità, ed essendo comunque previsto dall’art. 12, comma 2, del predetto d.P.R. un termine massimo di quindici giorni lavorativi per l’allontanamento volontario.

Espulsioni collettiveECtHR, Judgment 24 March 2020, Asady and Others v. Slovakia, Application no. 24917/15

In November 2014 the applicants were found hidden in a truck by the Slovak Border and Foreigners. Police near the border with Ukraine. The applicants were part of a group of 32 people who were subsequently taken to the border police station in Petrovce to establish their identities. The police subsequently issued individual decisions on the administrative expulsion of each applicant with a three-year ban on re-entry. They were removed to Ukraine late in the evening of the same day they had been apprehended and were placed in temporary detention in the town of Chop. Twelve of the people apprehended at the same time as the applicants asked for asylum and were transferred to an asylum-seekers’ reception centre. The first four applicants appealed against the Slovakian administrative expulsion decisions, alleging violations of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights, taken in conjunction with Article 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment) and Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 (prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens) to the Convention. the European Court of Human Rights held, by four votes to three, that there had been no violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 (prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens) to the European Convention on Human Rights, since despite short interviews at the police station, they had been given a genuine possibility to draw the authorities’ attention to any issue which could have affected their status and entitled them to remain in Slovakia. Their removal had not been carried out without any examination of their individual circumstances.

 

Ricongiungimento familiareCGUE, sentenza del 27 febbraio 2020, Subdelegación del Gobierno en Ciudad Real c. RH, C-836/18 
L’art. 20 TFUE va interpretato nel senso che uno Stato membro non può respingere la domanda di ricongiungimento familiare di un cittadino di un Paese terzo, coniuge di un cittadino dell’Unione che è anche cittadino di detto Stato membro e che non ha mai esercitato la propria libertà di circolazione, per l’unico motivo che tale ultimo cittadino non possiede risorse economiche sufficienti ai sensi dell’art. 7, par. 1, lett. b) e par. 2 dir. 2004/38 e senza esaminare se sussiste tra i coniugi un rapporto di dipendenza tale per cui, in caso di diniego del diritto di soggiorno al cittadino dello stato terzo, lo stesso cittadino dell’Unione sarebbe costretto a lasciare il territorio dell’Unione europea complessivamente considerato, così da essere privato del godimento effettivo del contenuto essenziale dei diritti conferiti dal suo status.

 

Accesso all’abitazione Corte cost., sentenza 9 marzo 2020, n. 44

L’art. 22, co. 1, lett. b), della l. reg. Lombardia n. 16/2016, nella parte in cui fissa il requisito della residenza (o dell’occupazione) ultraquinquennale in regione come condizione di accesso al beneficio dell’alloggio di edilizia residenziale pubblica, contrasta sia con i principi di eguaglianza e ragionevolezza di cui all’art. 3, co. 1, Cost., perché produce un’irragionevole disparità di trattamento a danno di chi, cittadino o straniero, non ne sia in possesso, sia con il principio di eguaglianza sostanziale di cui all’art. 3, co. 2, Cost., perché tale requisito contraddice la funzione sociale dell’edilizia residenziale pubblica.

 

Espulsione amministrativa Cass. civ., sez. I, ordinanza del 3 marzo 2020, n. 5881

È illegittimo e va, pertanto, annullato il decreto di espulsione dello straniero dal territorio dello Stato emesso dal vice prefetto in sostituzione del Prefetto (con dicitura “P. il Prefetto”) in assenza della necessaria delega del Prefetto.

 

Decreto di espulsioneCass. civ., sez. I, ordinanza del 27 febbraio 2020, n. 5437

La richiesta di protezione internazionale, formulata dallo straniero nei cui confronti sia stato adottato un decreto di espulsione, non ne determina l’invalidità ma soltanto la sospensione dell’efficacia. Ne consegue che il giudice di pace adito ex art. 13, co. 8, TUI non può disporre l’annullamento del decreto espulsivo in ragione del fatto che lo straniero ha successivamente richiesto la protezione.

 

Minore età dello stranieroCass. civ., sez. I, sentenza del 3 marzo 2020, n. 5936

Qualora sussistano fondati dubbi sull’età dello straniero e questa non sia accertabile attraverso documenti identificativi (passaporto o altro documento di riconoscimento munito di fotografia) anche in copia, le Forze di Polizia possono richiedere al Tribunale per i minorenni – giudice competente per la tutela – l’autorizzazione all’avvio della procedura multidisciplinare per l’accertamento dell’età (art. 5, l. n. 47/2017) che deve essere condotta nel rispetto del superiore interesse del minore. In caso di dubbi, si presume la minore età. Ne segue che l’accertamento dell’età non può essere ritenuto valido ove: a) faccia prevalere i risultati degli accertamenti sanitari rispetto ai dati anagrafici certificati dal passaporto o da altro documento di identità; b) determini la maggiore età dell’interessato sulla base di un unico esame, ad es. la radiografia del polso-mano, anziché su una procedura multidisciplinare consistente nello svolgimento di un colloquio sociale, di una visita pediatrica auxologica e di una valutazione psicologica o neuropsichiatrica, alla presenza di un mediatore culturale, tenendo conto delle specificità relative all’origine etnica e culturale dell’interessato; c) non specifichi il margine di errore insito nella variabilità biologica e nelle metodiche utilizzate ed i conseguenti valori minimo e massimo attribuibile: la mancata indicazione del margine di errore, infatti, impedisce di applicare il principio della presunzione di minore età in caso di dubbio.

 

ApolidiaCass. pen., sez. I, 25 febbraio 2020, n. 7458

Lo status di “apolide”, ostativo all’espulsione in base all’art. 31 della Convenzione di New York del 1954, segue all’accertamento dell’impossibilità, per l’interessato, di conseguire la cittadinanza del Paese con cui sussiste un collegamento giuridicamente rilevante in base alla legislazione nazionale di riferimento. Ne consegue che non riveste detto status – e può dunque essere espulso – colui il quale, pur potendola ottenere, non si sia mai attivato per conseguire detta cittadinanza.

 

Permesso di soggiorno Cons. Stato, sez. III, 3 marzo 2020, n. 1543

L’alto numero di dipendenti e l’accertamento dell’incapienza del datore di lavoro non consentono di dimostrare univocamente il carattere fittizio del rapporto lavorativo che giustifica il titolo di soggiorno. In tali circostanze, l’Amministrazione dunque non può, su tali basi, negare la conversione del permesso per lavoro subordinato in permesso per lavoro autonomo senza svolgere ulteriori accertamenti.

 

Conversione del permesso di soggiorno TAR Campania, sez. VI, 9 marzo 2020, n. 1077

È dichiarato inammissibile per difetto di giurisdizione il ricorso avverso il silenzio-inadempimento dell’Amministrazione sull’istanza di conversione del permesso di soggiorno da “assistenza minori” a “motivi familiari” atteso che la giurisdizione sul rapporto sostanziale, trattandosi di provvedimenti dell’autorità amministrativa in materia di diritto all’unità familiare, appartiene al giudice ordinario (art. 30, co. 6, TUI).

 

Permesso di soggiorno TAR Lazio, sez. I ter, 4 marzo 2020, n. 2852

L’iniziativa del procedimento di emersione è rimessa dall’art. 1-ter della l. n. 102/2009 al datore di lavoro. Ne segue che, ove il datore di lavoro dimostri il suo disinteresse per il buon esito del procedimento, l’Amministrazione non può concluderlo con un provvedimento finale favorevole all’emersione del lavoratore straniero. È pertanto legittima, trattandosi di atto vincolato, l’archiviazione del procedimento per il rilascio del permesso di soggiorno disposta dal Questore conseguentemente al rigetto dell’istanza di emersione da parte dello Sportello unico a causa della mancapresentazione del datore di lavoro a stipulare il contratto di soggiorno.

 

Spese di lite TAR Friuli Venezia Giulia, sez. I, 2 marzo 2020, n. 94

Sono interamente compensate per “ragioni di solidarietà sociale” le spese di lite relative al ricorso avverso il diniego di rinnovo del permesso di soggiorno per motivi di lavoro subordinato giudicato del tutto destituito di fondamento, per essere il ricorrente ictu oculi sprovvisto dei requisiti minimi necessari.

 

Conversione permesso di soggiorno – TAR Lazio, sez. I ter, 2 marzo 2020, n. 2704

L’Amministrazione non può rifiutare l’accesso agli atti relativi al procedimento per il rilascio del permesso di soggi