Subscribe
In the context of European migration policies, the recent approval by the Council of the European Union of new rules on returns and the use of third countries as safe destinations represents a crucial step in the construction of a more centralized, binding and oriented system to control external borders. The measures discussed and adopted outline a paradigm shift that affects not only the management of applications for international protection, but also strategies for externalizing the migration phenomenon, with significant legal and political consequences. In this scenario, Italy occupies a particularly central position, not only as a border state, but also as a player that has promoted innovative approaches, including the bilateral agreement with Albania, which has now become a reference model in the new European regulatory framework.
THE EUROPEAN RETURN REGULATION: OBJECTIVES, TOOLS AND REGULATORY CHANGES
The new return regulation stems from the need to make expulsion procedures more effective and to standardize their application across Member States. Currently, only a fraction of return orders is enforced, a shortcoming that European institutions interpret as a symptom of administrative inefficiencies, regulatory inconsistencies and obstacles related to cooperation with migrants’ countries of origin. The regulation aims to make every return decision automatically valid throughout the Union, overcoming the fragmentation that currently requires reopening the procedure if a person moves within the European area. It also introduces a series of more severe measures against migrants who fail to cooperate with the enforcement of returns. In such cases, Member States will be able to withdraw work permits and impose criminal penalties, including detention. At the same time, the regulation strengthens the tools used to pressure third countries that do not facilitate the return of their citizens, also impacting bilateral relations and visa regimes. It is, therefore, a system that aims to achieve deterrence, procedural speed and uniformity without, however, ignoring potential humanitarian risks, especially with regard to the reassignment of individuals to countries with which they have no ties.
REPATRIATION HUBS AND THE OUTSOURCING OF MIGRATION MANAGEMENT
One of the most innovative aspects of the approved package is the introduction of repatriation hubs located in third countries. These facilities, which may be either temporary or permanent, represent a key element in the European strategy for externalizing the management of migration flows. The possibility of sending irregular migrants to countries other than their countries of origin – provided they are deemed safe and involved in bilateral agreements – marks a significant transformation of the European approach, adopting models already tested in other regions of the world. The “connection” criterion between the applicant and the third country, once required to propose a transfer, has been removed. Member States can now establish agreements with non-EU countries that are willing to host transit or detention hubs, opening the way to scenarios in which the application processing, admissibility assessment, and possible repatriation procedures take place outside European territory. This system aims to reduce pressure on Member States’ administrative systems and to discourage irregular departures, ensuring that arrival in Europe does not automatically guarantee access to territory or the standard asylum procedure.
THE CONCEPT OF SAFE THIRD COUNTRIES AND THE NEW EUROPEAN LIST OF SAFE COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN
In parallel with the Return Regulation, Member States approved amendments to the safe third country regime and adopted the first common European list of safe countries of origin. This list includes states deemed capable of guaranteeing adequate protection of fundamental rights, to the point where their asylum applications are presumed unfounded. Approval of the list significantly accelerates the examination of requests, as it allows applications from those countries to be immediately rejected as inadmissible, except in exceptional cases. Furthermore, it establishes the possibility of declaring a request inadmissible based on the concept of a safe third country, i.e. a non-EU country where the migrant could have sought protection, even if only by passing through it during the journey. One of the main innovations concerns the revocation of the applicant’s right to remain in the Union during the appeal against the inadmissibility decision. This change significantly reduces the possibility of extending the applicant’s stay in Europe through legal means, strengthening the deterrent effect of the new rules. The only relevant exception concerns unaccompanied minors, to whom the safe third country provisions do not apply.
ITALY’S ROLE IN EUROPEAN NEGOTIATIONS AND THE STRENGTHENING OF THE NATIONAL APPROACH
Among the Member States, Italy held a particularly prominent position during the approval process of the measures. The Italian government, represented by the Ministry of the Interior, interpreted the new rules as a legitimization of its policy, based on accelerated border procedures, increased repatriations and the use of agreements with third countries to outsource the preliminary stages of migration management. The Minister of the Interior emphasized that the agreement reached in Brussels largely reflects the solutions promoted by Italy in recent years. In particular, the anticipation of certain provisions envisaged by the Pact on Migration and Asylum will allow Member States to more rapidly implement expedited border procedures, a tool that Italy considers essential for managing flows in the most exposed areas, such as islands and southern regions. Italy’s negotiating role was therefore crucial, so much so that it was officially recognized as having played a decisive role in shaping the drafting of certain sections of the text.
THE ITALY-ALBANIA MODEL: FROM A NATIONAL EXPERIMENT TO A STRUCTURE COMPLIANT WITH THE EUROPEAN LEGAL BASIS
The bilateral agreement between Italy and Albania, which provides for the establishment of reception and repatriation centers on Albanian soil, has become a point of reference in the European debate. The new rules now provide a clear legal basis for agreements of this type, overcoming the political and legal challenges that, in the Italian context, had raised doubts about the project’s compatibility with European law. The centers located in Albania were designed to house migrants intercepted at sea and transferred to Italian jurisdiction, but physically detained in a safe third country. With the adoption of the new rules, these centers can fully perform the functions for which they were designed: detention, expedited processing of applications, application of the safe third country concept, and organization of repatriations. From a pioneering initiative, the Italian model is now consistent with the European regulatory framework, paving the way for its potential adoption by other Member States. The new regulatory framework also provides for the possibility of extending the management of the centers to other EU countries, should multilateral agreements be signed. Italy thus transitions from an experimental state to a potential promoter of a shared model, strengthening its role in defining European outsourcing strategies.
THE DIFFERENT POSITIONS OF MEMBER STATES AND THE UNDERLYING GEOPOLITICAL TENSIONS
Although a qualified majority was reached, some Member States – including Spain, Greece, France and Portugal – voted against. Their reservations are linked to concerns that an overly rigid approach could violate fundamental rights and excessively shift the focus of migration management outside the Union. Internal divisions reflect political differences, as well as differing geographical and socioeconomic conditions. Despite this, the push by the Commission and a large part of the Council confirms the trend toward a tightening of migration policies, supported by public opinion and political forces demanding greater control and speed. Tensions with some third countries, which have demonstrated poor cooperation on repatriations, remain a sensitive issue. The difficulties that emerged between France and Algeria are an example of how repatriation policy can impact bilateral relations and visa management.
POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR EUROPE AND ITALY
The new European rules on repatriations, the concept of safe third countries, and outsourced hubs mark a significant turning point in the Union’s migration management system. The goal is to create a more uniform, rapid and effective framework, even at the cost of expanding the use of deterrent measures and outsourcing. In this scenario, Italy is no longer simply a frontline country, but becomes a central player in defining European policies thanks to its ability to anticipate solutions that are currently formally recognized. Future evolution will depend on the ability of Member States to effectively implement the new rules and negotiate solid agreements with third countries. The Italian model can only thrive if it is part of a coordinated European strategy capable of combining border control, respect for fundamental rights, and international cooperation. In any case, the new regulatory framework marks a strengthening of Italy’s political role and ushers in a phase of profound transformation in the European approach to migration.