Is Italy’s model for offshoring migrants doomed to fail?

It was an embarrassing defeat for Italy’s government. Just weeks ago, at an EU summit, far-right Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had been promoting her “innovative” approach to processing asylum applications in non-EU third countries.
But now, the processing and detention facilities constructed in Albania expressly for this purpose are empty once again — save a few Italian staff members.
In October, Meloni’s government had been forced to return the first 16 asylum-seekers it was holding in Albania back to Italy. Four claimed to be minors or ill. A court in Rome ruled that the remaining 12 asylum-seekers had the right to a trial in Italy.
In early November, the ring-wing administration made a second attempt, and transferred seven adults from Bangladesh and Egypt to a detention center in Albania. Days later, the government had to backtrack when a court in Rome ordered all seven be returned to Italy. A naval ship took them to the port of Brindisi, in southern Italy. 
Judges in Rome have now sought clarification on the issue from European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. 
At full capacity, Italy’s government had hoped its facilities in Albania would be able to process up to 40,000 asylum applications a year. But not even two months into the launch of the project, it remains unclear whether the centers will ever be used.
“Now, the right move for Meloni’s government would be to say, ‘OK, we tried, but it’s just not possible’,” said Christopher Hein, a professor of migration and asylum law at Luiss University in Rome.
Both the European Court of Justice and various Italian courts have expressed concerns over Italy’s classification of safe countries of origin, he explained, “especially with regard to Egypt and Bangladesh, as well as Tunisia, which is a key country of origin for asylum-seekers in Italy.”
Italy’s three-way, right-wing governing alliance has now launched an attack on the country’s judiciary, with which it has been at loggerheads over other issues as well.
Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, the leader of the right-wing Lega (League) party, who faces a prison sentence for his 2019 treatment of migrants during his tenure as interior minister, said the courts’ decisions were politically motivated, and would affect Italian security.
The somewhat more moderate minister for foreign affairs, Antonio Tajani, meanwhile, spoke of “a few judges who want to impose their political line on the government.”
Tech billionaire Elon Musk, who has been tapped to lead a new Department of Government Efficiency in the new administration of US President-elect Donald Trump, has now also weighed in on the controversy, posting on his social media platform X, “[t]hese judges need to go.”
Meloni’s Albania model is not the only way Italy’s government under the post-fascist Brothers of Italy party has tried to clamp down on irregular migration.
For example, since assuming office in 2022, Meloni has passed legislation that tightly restricts sea rescue. Now, ships are obliged to conclude their missions as soon as they have brought shipwrecked people aboard. These ships are frequently assigned to distant ports in northern Italy, which makes their operations more costly and less efficient.
A speaker for the UN International Organization for Migration told DW that far fewer arrivals had been recorded this year than in the same period last year.
However, the spokesperson also explained that: “considering the arrivals recorded over the past month, which was, in any case, characterized by bad weather, we can say that, at present, the Italy-Albania agreement has not had a deterrent effect, given that over the last 11 days alone, more than 3,300 sea arrivals have been recorded in Italy.”
The spokesperson added that, when looking at the number of irregular migrants arriving, Europe was still a far cry from the emergency situation witnessed in 2015.
Italy’s agreement with its neighbor across the Adriatic still seems to appeal to other European governments. Denmark, the Netherlands and some politicians in Germany have also started expressing their own thoughts on involving third countries as a sort of service provider for offloading migrant caseloads.
Italy has set a precedent within the EU, and is therefore receiving as much attention as the UK did with its controversial Rwanda deal. Just this summer, London finally scrapped plans to deport asylum-seekers to Rwanda. But that was only after the former Tory government had sunk £700 million (€830 million/$888 million) of public funds in the undertaking.
“The legal, logistical and financial difficulties — and the Albania model has shown this — are so high, that the whole thing isn’t worth it,” said legal expert Hein.
He added that these were “desperate attempts to deal with the migrant and asylum situation in a way that did not do justice to those seeking asylum, or the legitimate need of the population for a more orderly procedure.”
Italy’s Albania model is also on the verge of become a financial disaster. The government currently expects operating costs to run up to €500 million by 2029. Now, the Court of Auditors, the highest audit institution in the heavily indebted EU member state, has intervened.
Hein spoke of a glaring disproportion between expenditure and the number of asylum-seekers involved. “This could even have consequences under criminal law,” he cautioned. 
As a result of its inquiries, the Court of Auditors would also have the authority to prohibit further spending, the expert added.
In the coming weeks, Italy’s Supreme Court of Cassation, the country’s highest court of appeal, will rule on whether national laws on safe countries of origin are in line with EU legislation. Decisions by the European Court of Justice on the matter are also outstanding.
Soon, the decision over whether to continue with the Albania model may no longer be up to Italy’s government.
This article was originally written in German.