Conference “Administrative Detention and Forced Removal following the 2008/115/CE Directive on Repatriations”

Palermo,
Aula Sturzo, Piazza Bologni 8
Programme:
Welcome
Prof. Aldo Schiavello, Coordinator of the Research Doctorate in “Human Rights:
protection, evolution, limits”
Introduction to the Work
Dr. Judith Gleitze from borderline-europe/Borderline Sicilia Onlus
Presentation of the Conference
Prof. Fulvio Vassallo Paleologo (University of Palermo) From the Directive on
Repatriations 2008/115/CE to the norms concerning the enforcement of the
Italian Order in the case of Forced Removals and Administrative Detention.

Programmed Speakers
Prof. Massimo Starita (University of Palermo) – The Multi-level Protection of a Person’s
Fundamental Rights
Prof. Emilio Santoro (University of Florence) – The Adoption of the Repatriation
Directive in Italy:
Realisation or Betrayal?
Lawyer Alessandra Ballerini from the Court of Genoa – The Principle of Legality
and the Practice of Refoulement at Borders
Lawyer Barbara Cattelan from the Court of Turin – The Effective Exercising of
Illegal Immigrants’ Defence Rights
Lawyer Gaetano Pasqualino from the Court of Palermo – Procedures Applied in
Cases of Forced Removal
Lawyer Giuseppe Buscaino from the Court of Trapani – Procedures Applied in
Cases of Administrative Detention
Lawyer Christian Valle from the Court of Naples – The Temporary CIE (Immigrant
Detention Centre) Experience and its Jurisdictional Controls
Dr. Gabriella Guido (Roma) – The Lasciatecientrare
Campaign and the Right to Information

Debates and other non-programmed events
To enrol and for further info: Fulvio Vassallo Paleologo
tel. 348 3363054 ; email: fulvio.vassallopaleologo@unipa.it

The late
and only partial adoption of the directive on repatriation (2008/115/CE) in Italy is today still raising uncertainties about its
applied procedures and significant interpretative doubts which could result in
the possible de-application of domestic norms on administrative detention and
forced removal as they result in being incompatible with the directive’s text
and ratio. Further interventions from the European Court of Justice, following
the fundamental sentence of the El Dridi case of 26th April 2011, could also
happen. The repatriation directive has the objective to create common norms for
an effective politics on the removal and repatriation of illegal immigrants from
within the territory. It is important to note that the same directive
privileges voluntary removal above forced removal and tends to guarantee the
fundamental rights of the migrants, including the right to personal freedom and
the right to a defence which are also present in Articles 13 and 24 of the
Italian Constitution.

European
directives have a higher hierarchical rank compared to national directives and
the job of the judge is to apply- through treaties and under Art. 11 of the
Italian Constitution- sources of European law, which are brought into effect
immediately, in addition to also applying national law. In this way, national
law is conformed to and the objectives of the European law are also met. The
Italian legislator has not enforced the important parts of the directive
2008/115/CE and has extended administrative detention to a generality of cases
which according to the directive should be finalised exclusively with the
execution of the measures of forced removal and must cease as soon as it is
evident that such removal cannot occur. Furthermore, according to the
directive, administrative detention in Detention Centres can be longer than six
months only in exceptional cases. The lack of application of this directive or its
incorrect enforcement, has resulted in various problems. The first is the cost
of running the Detention Centres, which has risen despite the attempts of the
Minister of the Interior to re-consider reducing the cost of all the existing agreements.
It has also led to a decrease in the number of immigrants effectively
accompanied to the border, in addition to tawdry violations of the individual’s
fundamental human rights. These are serious violations to the detriment of
people who have already been subjected to a total limitation of their personal
freedom. All of this occurs just because the migrants do not have a valid entry
document or permit of stay to enter or stay on Italian soil. The refoulement
cases which remain entrusted to administrative discretion or to Italian law end
up contradicting the directive 2008/115/CE. This is largely due to the fact
that the directive does not take into account the case of “delayed”
refoulement, which, as it is currently applied, could even be considered as
going against constitutional principles (Art. 3, 13, 24, 32) as well as
Schengen Regulations (n. 562/ 2006).

The
conference aims to address the general situation concerning how the directive
is being applied in the area of repatriations in Italy, in addition to also going as
far as to individualise the responsibilities for late legislation and for the
violation of the law which had already been highlighted in important international
relationships.