The goal of the Meloni government would now be to cancel the so-called "special protection", since according to Nicola Molteni, Undersecretary of the Interior in the League, "it would create (would) create the conditions for irregularity". In fact, until now, the residence permit for special protection would have been granted in cases in which the Territorial Commission did not recognize the asylum-seeking foreigner either the refugee status or subsidiary protection, but, in any case, the necessary conditions were met to guarantee protection to the person from expulsion or refoulement to a State where he could be subjected to persecution or where there were reasonable grounds for believing that the foreigner, in the event of expulsion, risked being subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, effectively widening the hospitality. All without considering that in past years the Salvini decrees, which to be honest, in spite of the ally the Prime Minister would not want to revive, had already shown themselves to be totally ineffective, since they would have been, if anything, suitable to determine the conditions favoring greater irregularity, which, paradoxically, is in fact the problem they claimed to want to solve. So let us agree primarily on one point: if the special protection, beyond any announcement, even propaganda in its form, should really be set aside in the context of the government project, then the circumstance would have repercussions both on the asylum seekers themselves, who would see their own fundamental rights, and on our community as a whole, which, quite evidently, could not derive any benefit from the presence of people left to their fate, unable to play an active and effective role in society. Our Prime Minister, according to what the media reports, would have said that so far the European Union would be confusing the distinction between illegal immigrants and refugees, without considering, and on reflection, that, in reality, the question would seem to arise more complex compared to that represented by the leader of the Brothers of Italy.
Europe has always been the convenient scapegoat when, and the Meloni Government does not seem to be an exception, internally, it is not possible to manage thorny policies that strongly affect public opinion causing important shifts in the electoral balance 'approval rating. If Europe, according to Meloni's requests, were to make a clear distinction, necessarily a priori, between refugees and irregular migrants, and if the parameter of welcoming "refugees" and "refugees" could really be distinguished from that applied for the remaining migratory policies conceptually reconnected to the implementation of economic needs, one would in any case act to the detriment of the most critical subjects due to the contingent assessment needs which could only be summary, and as such, imprecise and discriminatory. Lastly, Giorgia Meloni, in her visit to Ethiopia, represented her own programmatic intention: to strengthen Italy's strategic role in the Horn of Africa and economically support the country, to try to limit the departures of migrants. Mutatis mutandis, the only real goal, on balance, would seem to be to eliminate at root any hypothesis of arrival on the Italian coasts. But can the so-called Mattei Plan so dear to Giorgia Meloni realistically still be considered current considering that it dates back to the 1960s, when Italy was experiencing an important moment of economic growth that cannot be recorded today? Can it really constitute the solution useful for managing situations which, compared to the moment of its first elaboration, have clearly undergone considerable transformations in a structural sense? But wouldn't it be more useful for everyone if the Government elaborated its own original and personalized plan, to be presented to Europe, for the common management of an emergency that is now structural and therefore no longer such? The answers are as always immediately consequential. In the meantime, because, pace the President of the Council of Ministers, the pursuit of the objective aimed at strengthening cooperation with the African country to relaunch the Italian presence in the Horn of Africa and try to block the departures of migrants on the Mediterranean route , far from being immediate, would in turn seem to require the elaboration of a juridical project which protects it from any potential violation of unavoidable prohibitions, such as those connected to the hypotheses of "refoulement", albeit indirect. Therefore, because if the intention, which is anything but original, is precisely to support Ethiopia economically, precisely in an attempt to discourage people from leaving the country, then, perhaps, other equally relevant and directly connected circumstances would be neglected to the sheer simple freedom of movement. Furthermore, because, if Ethiopia really stands out as one of the priority African states for Italian Cooperation, it would clearly be so in order to make Italy the most important energy hub of the European Union, admitted and not granted that this could happen closely, and admitted and not granted, that over time, Ethiopia itself remains available in this sense and does so under appreciable conditions. Finally, because, despite our "premier", the reference to the founder of Eni (Mattei) is not a guarantee of success, given that such a plan, conceived by Mattei in the sixties, presupposed close cooperation in the market circuit dominated by the then large companies and which was supported by a direct relationship between the producing country and the consuming country in which Eni would have allowed these nations to keep as much as 75% of the revenues for themselves. Condition to date probably not achievable given the current crisis.
In short, even considering everything, at the government level there would not yet seem to be a precise idea, a truly contingent Plan to be pursued with determination along the path of change.
Despite everything, at European level the Meloni government has failed to be decisive, and only one factor continues to appear in its indisputable certainty: migrants must remain in the countries of first entry and secondary movements must be stopped.
Giuseppina Di Salvatore – lawyer, Nuoro