Safe third countries, the EU Council has reached agreement

On a defined day “decisive” for European migration policythe interior ministers reached agreement on three weight regulations that redesign the common system are repatriationsSafe countries and solidaritymarking – according to the Minister of the Interior, Matteo Piantedosi – “the turning point that Italy had been asking for for some time“.

At the Internal Affairs Council, the governments closed the agreement on new repatriation regulationwhich he introduces for the first time precise obligations for citizens of irregular third countries, procedure accelerate and the possibility to create “return hubs” (or repatriation centers) in non-EU countries. And Italy is already a candidate Albanian centers he first European model of ‘return hubs’.

The role of Italy and the new border procedures

Piantedosi claimed the role played by Roma: “We finally got one European list of safe countries of origincompletely reformed the concept of Safe third country and we are about to create a European repatriation system really effective. Member States will be able to apply accelerated border proceduresas required by Italy-Albania protocoland they will no longer have any recourse automatic suspensive effect“.

Reform of the concept of safe third country and EU list

The Council also adopted its position on reform of the concept of safe third country and on the first EU list of safe countries of origin. The new rules will allow you to declare asylum applications are inadmissible in three cases: transit in a safe third country, formal agreement with a safe country or presence of a “connection”, which however will no longer be a mandatory requirement. It also expires automatic right to remain in the EU during the appeals, although the possibility of requesting a suspension from the judge remains. For the first time it is defined as one EU list of safe countries of origin: Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, India, Kosovo, Morocco and Tunisia, in addition to the candidate countries for accession, except for exceptions linked to conflicts or systemic violations of fundamental rights. According to the ministers, this will allow speed up procedures and to concentrate efforts on applicants truly in need of protection.

The ‘solidarity pool’ and the migration and asylum pact

On the domestic front, the Twenty-Seven also reached political agreement on “solidarity pool” of the Migration and asylum pact for 2026, equal to 21 thousand relocations or equivalent contributions of 420 million euros, intended to support countries under pressure: Italy, Greece, Cyprus and Spain. The choice of the form of solidarity – relocations, funds or alternative measures – will remain up to individual governments. France, Germany and other partners will also have room to reduce obligations if affected by cumulative migratory pressures in previous years.

The anticipation of the rules and the Albanian model

Piantedosi also rejoices at the anticipation of some provisions of the Pact – which will allow the center in Albania to immediately operate at full capacity and “strengthening the powers of border states in rapidly distinguishing between those who have right to asylum and who it should be repatriated“. “The centers will return to being fully operational for all the functions for which they were conceived, aiming to become the first example of return hubs foreseen by European regulation“, said the head of the Interior Ministry. As for management, it will remain Italian, even if EU legislation allows future outsourcing.

Italian success and Spanish criticism

For Italy, the day represents “a great success“said Piantedosi, recalling the decision shared with Germany to suspend the Dublin Regulation until the entry into force of the new Pact, “definitively overcoming the criticisms” aimed at Rome when it had adopted the same choice unilaterally. “We make up for this with our full role of Country of first entry and controller of the external border”, assured the minister. He criticizes Spain which – with the minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska – expressed “legal doubts” on the introduction of repatriation hub.