Mediterranea Saving People' 10 questions on migration policy

1. If you form a government, will you commit to immediately cease cooperation with the so-called Libyan Coast Guard, including its funding and arming, as requested by the Council of Europe in a formal letter to our country dated 21 February 2020?

2. Do you consider 'civil rescue', both at sea and on land, to be a crime of 'aiding and abetting illegal immigration'?

3. Do you support the immediate and urgent re-establishment of a mission such as Mare Nostrum and cooperation with civil fleet organisations at sea?

4. Do you agree to repeal Law 189 of 30 July 2002 (Bossi-Fini) and guarantee safe and legal migration routes for all migrants?

5. Italy can receive 142,000 Ukrainian refugees in 6 months, but cries invasion for the 60,000 people who will land in Italy in 2021. Will you work in all national and international fora to ensure that the European reception system, which has been applied in recent months to Ukrainian citizens, is recognised for all those who qualify, regardless of their country of origin?

6. Do you agree that Frontex, whose mandate is to assist in the search and rescue of migrants and the protection of migrants, is in fact cooperating with countries that subject migrants to inhuman and degrading treatment and expose them to the risk of death?

7. In the short term, are you committed to responding to requests and providing a safe place of disembarkation (POS) promptly (within 24 hours) to vessels of the civilian fleet?

8. Do you recognise the need and obligation to designate a Place of Safety (PoS) for the conclusion and resolution of distress cases involving persons rescued by ships of the civil fleet, rather than a Port of Disembarkation (PoD), a concept that refers to passengers and cargo and does not reflect the actual shipwreck status of those rescued?

9. Do you undertake, also in the short term, to ensure prompt intervention by the Italian GC in cases reported by civil society of vessels in distress inside and outside the Italian SAR zone, where there is an urgency due to serious danger to human life, in the absence of any other intervention?

10. Will you work in national and international fora to put an end to the European policy of external borders and refoulement, including in Bosnia, Morocco, Turkey and all other contexts where human rights violations are committed against people trying to enter Europe?

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FROM PARTY LEADERS

(in order of receipt)

FRATOIANNI // Alleanza Verdi Sinistra

1. No doubt! As we have always done in recent years with every parliamentary passage.

2. No. We see civil aid as a duty and a necessity that we will continue to support and defend in every way.

3. Absolutely yes. A national and European search and rescue mission would be necessary and, in cooperation with civil fleet organisations, would ensure a significant improvement in rescue capabilities.

4. Yes. We have been proposing this for years, including through legislative initiatives. The Bossi-Fini law essentially makes it impossible to enter our country legally and contributes to increasing the illegal status of migrants on our territory.

5. Yes. The European reception of Ukrainian refugees has exposed the hypocritical and propagandistic nature of the narrative of invasion and the emergency nature of the migratory phenomenon. It is possible and necessary to change Dublin 2 and create an effective European reception mechanism.

6. Yes. In recent years, migration policies have indeed focused on control and rejection mechanisms, encouraging the practice of externalising borders. A decisive reversal of this trend is necessary.

7. Yes.

8. Yes.

9. Yes.

10. Yes.

DE MAGISTRIS // Unione Popolare

1. Not only must relations be severed and the Memorandum of Understanding signed by Minister Minniti during the Gentiloni government be abrogated, but a future government of ours must dictate that the 'SAR' (Search and Rescue) zone, by which this self-appointed coastguard is entrusted with all forms of rescue, is no longer of any value to the EU.

2. Civil rescue', as part of numerous international conventions and the oldest and most inviolable 'Law of the Sea', must not and cannot be subject to any legislative and/or regulatory restrictions other than those that have the interests of the people to be rescued at their core.

3. Yes, the only way to limit (unfortunately not completely stop) the tragic death toll at sea is through a political decision involving the EU institutions. An intervention led by the Parliament itself, perhaps through the 'Liberty Commission' or with the European Commissioner for Human Rights as a guarantor, with the support of major humanitarian organisations, but made up of the naval assets of each State, with the authority to approach the coasts of the countries from which people are fleeing and guide each one to the European POS (Place of Safety).

4. The 'Bossi Fini' law must be repealed, not only because it establishes an indissoluble link between the residence permit and the employment contract, not only because it has led to all sorts of injustices and is blatantly xenophobic, but also because it has proved to be a bankrupt law, even in terms of its stated objectives (controlling arrivals and matching supply and demand on the labour market). It must be radically repealed and replaced by a text adapted to the 21st century, which guarantees freedom of movement while putting the security of those who choose to do so at the centre. Decades of scientific studies on the subject show that "invasions do not exist" and that movements of people that are not caused by wars and/or climatic or economic disasters have a circular trend and are themselves, if not stopped by a prohibitionist logic, factors of development and economic, social and cultural growth.

5. In the case of the Ukrainian citizens, the EU applied for the first time Directive 55/2001, which in the circle of insiders we used to call "dormant" because it had never been taken into account in the more than 20 years since it was adopted. This directive, which has been rightly applied in the conflict in Ukraine, makes it possible to overcome the constraints that guarantee refugee status and to enter into humanitarian protection circuits that the EU can safely manage, disbursing only a part of the resources uselessly spent on repressive and refoulement policies. In our view, this directive should be implemented in the context of any ongoing conflict and, if it were made systematic, would make much of the flight less traumatic. Think, for example, of the positive results that could be achieved if it were applied today in the Horn of Africa, in Syria, in some countries of sub-Saharan Africa and the Sahel, and even in Afghanistan. Not only would there be fewer victims of journeys entrusted to traffickers, but there would also be arrivals that the authorities of the 'receiving countries' could manage themselves, without having to oscillate between repression and an emergency approach.

6. The Frontex agency, whose top management is under investigation both for the illegality of the rejections it has carried out and for the management of the resources entrusted to it, should, in our opinion, simply be abolished. The very purpose for which it was created - border control to prevent illegal entry - makes it blatantly at odds with any humanitarian policy. In the past, its naval assets in the central Mediterranean were sometimes used for rescue purposes. Now its own missions, carried out with the help of drones and aircraft, serve only to signal to the Libyan or Tunisian authorities that vessels should be stopped and brought back to shore. In many cases, not even this intervention has taken place, resulting in shipwrecks. The resources used for Frontex and its (often secret) missions could be used to answer question 3, obviously guaranteeing the control of the Member States.

7. Yes, by also providing any medical assistance or ensuring the transfer of rescued people.

8. Certainly, because the very concept of PoD is to take responsibility away from the countries with the closest safe ports and, above all, because the definition of rescued persons as 'passengers' opens the way to the procedures that could be used if the EU succeeds in making the new pact on migration and asylum operational in September 2020. Indeed, the 'plan' envisages making it easier to enforce the return of rescued persons by restricting access to asylum. Being considered 'passengers' would influence the decisions of the commissions responsible for granting or not granting refugee status or forms of humanitarian protection.

9. I would even turn the question on its head: the GC's failure to act promptly should be considered a failure to assist and is a crime. Reports received must be seen for what they are: requests for assistance to which the State authorities, including the maritime authorities, are obliged to respond immediately. After all, many of those who work at sea are aware that even half an hour's delay can have tragic consequences for the lives of people in distress.

10. Not only towards these countries, but also towards others, many others, whose governments cannot be considered reliable partners, from Egypt to Nigeria to Belarus, to name but a few. With these governments, not only must the policy of outsourcing be abolished, but also the bilateral readmission agreements, where they exist, which have led to serious violations of human rights by subjecting the expellees to inhuman and degrading treatment or by returning them to the hands of the criminal organisations that had guaranteed their escape in exchange for large debts to be paid.

ACERBO // Rifondazione Comunista

1. It is difficult for us to go to the government, but certainly Rifondazione Comunista and Unione Popolare will continue to fight in parliament and in the country, as we have done so far, for the immediate cessation of the cooperation with the 'Libyan coastguard' and the cancellation of the MOU (Memorandum Of Understanding) of the Gentiloni/Minniti government, which is the basis of this cooperation and should not be renewed until November 2nd. Mobilisation against the renewal is a must.

2. No, we consider those who criminalise rescue to be criminals, and also from the point of view of national and international law, failure to rescue is a crime that must be prosecuted.

3. Yes, with a wide margin of manoeuvre, with the allocation, according to the choice of the refugee, in the EU countries of refugees, with the possibility of manoeuvring this mission even near the countries of refuge, and with the non-recognition of the so-called Libyan SAR (Search And Rescue) zone. This is because Libya does not offer 'safe havens' and does not guarantee the necessary rescue. The management of this mission, to be carried out with the resources to be taken away from Frontex, must be under the control of the European Commissioner for Human Rights, the LIBE Commission of the European Parliament and must be supported by international humanitarian organisations.

4. We have always supported it. It is our programme. The law in question not only makes migratory flows precarious and fragile, but also makes the residence permit subordinate to the employment contract. It is a xenophobic and bankrupt law that makes it more difficult to meet demand and supply in the labour market, lowers wages even for locals and encourages the conditions of administrative irregularity from which so many benefit.

5. We have been in this position since the beginning of the war. With the refugees from Ukraine, European Directive 55/2001, which has never been applied before and which facilitates and removes bureaucratic and legal obstacles to entry into the EU, has been implemented. This directive must be made available to all refugees from wars, dictatorships or environmental disasters.

6. We are in favour of abolishing Frontex. The resources of this agency (some of whose directors are under investigation for illegal refoulements and non-transparent use of available funds) should instead be used for rescue at sea and ensuring safe entry.

7. Yes, the resources of the Italian Navy should be used to guarantee medical assistance and possible transhipment of refugees.

8. The very idea of PoDs is hypocritical and serves the purpose of forced repatriation of those who (as passengers) can be sent back to countries of flight or to third countries without even having their claims for asylum or humanitarian protection examined.

9. Failure to do so is not only a crime against humanity but also a violation of most international conventions. Those who fail to provide assistance cannot have citizenship in that country.

10. This has always been our position, but it does not only concern these countries. Think of Egypt, the countries of the Horn of Africa, the Sahel, sub-Saharan Africa, Central America, Belarus, Afghanistan... Where they still exist, bilateral agreements that allow repatriation in these countries must also be terminated.

LETTA // Partito Democratico

1. In 2021, the PD asked the Draghi government with an amendment to radically review the relationship with the Libyan coast guard. This did not happen. That is why, in July 2022, we did not vote for the refinancing. We believe that respect for human rights cannot be disregarded: for us, any future policy of cooperation with Libya must have as an inescapable condition the protection of and respect for human rights.

2. Absolutely not. We believe that the 'civilian fleet' is doing a very valuable job and is also a substitute for the serious shortcomings of European countries. Saving human lives can never be considered a crime.

3. Mare Nostrum was the wish of the government I led and I am proud of it. It was the most important and difficult decision of my life. Almost ten years later - years of serious political mistakes and changes in the scenario - I am firmly convinced that cooperation between Italy and the NGOs must start again on a new basis, trying to return precisely to that positive model that made it possible to save thousands and thousands of lives through cooperation between institutions and the civil fleet.

4. Overcoming the Bossi-Fini is one of the priorities of our programme. We intend to develop a structured plan for the rapid and organised activation of humanitarian corridors in the event of particularly urgent situations, and to adopt a new immigration law that will allow legal entry for work purposes, also on the basis of indications from the business system and the third sector. This model will reduce irregularities, facilitate integration and meet the needs of the productive system.

5. The innovative work developed by our country during the Ukrainian crisis shows that even very large flows can be managed without causing alarm. We must learn from this experience to improve our management system.

6. The work of Frontex in recent years has been shadowy, as shown by journalistic investigations and by the European institutions themselves. However, the resignation of its director, Fabrice Leggeri, could open a new phase, thanks also to the constant monitoring by the European Parliament and NGOs.

7. Yes, a rescue operation ends with disembarkation in a safe port. This must be guaranteed in good time. In recent years, the delay of days in the operation has often been completely unjustified and instrumental. And it is a practice that must be stopped immediately.

8. It is imperative that rescued people are taken to safe places where they are out of danger and where their rights are respected. A model that forgets or puts aside respect for dignity and fundamental human rights is not acceptable.

9. There is an obligation to intervene when a life is in danger, always in accordance with international rules and laws.

10. Yes, Europe must assume its responsibilities and adopt policies that guarantee rights at all times. The first step is certainly to move towards a Europe of solidarity, also in terms of reception, by overcoming the Dublin Regulation.

MAGI // +Europa

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

The issue of migration is one of those dossiers, not only in Italy but all over Europe and the world, on which false news is most easily spread and used for profit in order to shift electoral percentages. The more imaginative the political proposals, the less applicable they are. Throughout my work as an MP in this 18th Parliament, I have always tried to keep a high profile on this issue, constantly striving to bring the public debate back to reality. It is necessary to approach this issue with common sense, taking care to emphasise the need to ensure respect for human rights and international conventions.

The very high number of victims in the Mediterranean and the testimonies of the horrors suffered by migrants in Libyan detention centres cannot leave us indifferent. Democracy and respect for human rights are sacred principles that must never be sacrificed on the altar of cynical political calculation. It is no longer acceptable that, in 2022, the central Mediterranean is still one big graveyard. I am convinced that we must intervene to open new humanitarian corridors so that people fleeing from situations we can scarcely imagine can reach European territory in safety. The agreements with Libya must finally be cancelled. In recent years, Più Europa and I personally have always opposed their renewal, as well as the refinancing of the so-called Libyan coastguard, which, apart from the declared desire to limit and manage migratory flows, has created a situation of exploitation, violence and abuse to which our country has been an accomplice for too long.

At the time of the (in)security decrees of the then Minister of the Interior Salvini, I wanted to underline my support for the action of the NGOs that have been and are carrying out the necessary rescue and search work at sea in the Sicilian Channel. I travelled on one of these boats in 2019, where I was able to witness the horror experienced on their skin by people fleeing Libya in an attempt to reach 'Fortress Europe'. I remain deeply convinced that exploiting people who have experienced inhumane treatment on their skin for electoral gain cannot be considered a policy worthy of our country.

The phenomenon of migration, which in recent years has become an event of immense proportions and is destined to increase in the near future, can no longer be managed at the level of the nation state. We at Più Europa are convinced that it is high time for the European Union to be given powers in this strategic and fundamental area. A comprehensive and organic reform of the European asylum system, including the Dublin system, is finally needed. It is time to give the European Commission and all related institutions the authority to intervene for a real solidarity system, so that there is a real redistribution of migrants, to protect those who arrive on European territory in search of protection or a better life. Even with regard to rescue operations at sea, we must arrive at an intervention by the European institutions, which are the only ones capable of supporting, even financially, the pressure of this fundamental activity. Finally, with a view to a general intervention on these issues at European level, I believe that a reform of Frontex, whose activity has been severely damaged by scandals in recent years, can no longer be postponed.

The situation of the external borders is another issue on which I have been personally involved. In particular, I have denounced in this House the practice of illegal refusals, which our government, in agreement with Slovenia and Croatia, has been carrying out for a long time on our eastern border, along the so-called Balkan route. The stories of those who, often very young, are subjected to 'the game', as it is called by the applicants trying to reach Europe, are terrible and perhaps even more difficult to bear because all this is happening so close to us and, what is more, with the agreement of the Italian government. Thanks to my work in the courtroom and on the ground, with the collaboration of those who work in these areas, we have managed to put the spotlight on this macroscopic violation of the right to asylum by getting the Viminale to abandon these 'informal readmissions'. We have managed to lift the veil of hypocrisy behind even the term used to define what are in fact illegal refusals.

As Più Europa, we believe that the regulation of immigration does not only mean the management of landings or arrivals from the eastern border, but it is necessary to plan legal channels of arrival and an active policy of integration into society. For this reason, we believe that the time has come to finally repeal the Bossi-Fini law (no. 189 of 30 July 2022), whose only merit in the last twenty years has been to create vast areas of irregularity, to the extent that it has forced successive governments to resort to amnesties that do not resolve the problem. Also with a view to re-establishing fairer rules on entry into the country, I was one of the promoters, along with many associations, of the "Ero Straniero - L'Umanità che fa bene" campaign, which in October 2017 led to the submission of a popular initiative bill signed by more than 90,000 citizens. On this bill, for which I was appointed rapporteur in the Commission for Constitutional Affairs, we held an in-depth round of hearings that demonstrated its goodness, but this did not serve to open a constructive debate and move it forward. It is now inevitable that the issue of immigration in Italy will have to be approached with a confrontation free from the violent ideological clash with which it has been treated in recent years.

The crisis in Ukraine, which began last February, has shown us that Europe, all of Europe, can show real solidarity with those fleeing the madness of war. We must extend that solidarity to all those who come seeking protection, without choosing whom to help on the basis of skin colour or professed religion. War is such a thing, and the horrors it brings are the same everywhere in the world.

To the various political forces that are proposing unworkable solutions to the problem of migration, we want to respond not only by appealing to concreteness, but also to a sense of humanity and solidarity that must necessarily recall the highest values on which the Republic and the European Union were born. More Europe is convinced that a different immigration policy is possible. Personally, as a Member of the Republic, I have been working in recent years to raise awareness of these issues and to finally tackle them pragmatically, with a long-term perspective, and not by resorting to temporary interventions.

GRANATO // Potere Al Popolo

1. Since the birth of Potere al Popolo, i.e. since the beginning of the agreement between the Italian Republic and the Tripoli government, we have expressed our clear opposition to the initiative of the Gentiloni government. In fact, the organisations, movements, associations and individual activists who decided to give life to the Potere al Popolo experience were already operating on the ground, promoting a variety of social and political initiatives aimed at disrupting the system. This regime of cooperation between the two governments raises serious concerns, not only because it institutionalises forms of violation of the principle of non-refoulement, enshrined in Article 33 of the Geneva Convention and transposed into Italian law, but also because it calls for serious and careful reflection on the allocation of resources and arms. Indeed, the agreement promoted by the former Minister of the Interior, Marco Minniti, to delegate search and rescue operations to the Libyan coastguard is an insurmountable obstacle to the effective exercise of the right to asylum. This state of affairs must be analysed in the context of the Libyan scenario, in which, in addition to the loss of effective control by the established state authority over large parts of the country, the phenomena of systematic human rights violations persist. Abuse, rape, torture, trafficking and arbitrary detention cannot be dismissed as episodic events. Their endemic nature must therefore be recognised. In this context, it must be pointed out that, according to heterogeneous and documentable sources, the perpetrators of such heinous human rights violations can often be traced back to the Libyan authorities themselves, in particular as regards the management of detention centres or the disproportionate use of force during landings by the Libyan coastguard. This figure, when analysed in the light of the resources provided and allocated by the Italian Government to the Libyan authorities, is more than alarming.

Finally, given the incalculable cost in human lives of such agreements, we call for their immediate termination in favour of other initiatives aimed at guaranteeing the physical and psychological safety of all people in transit on Libyan soil.

2. Absolutely not. On the contrary, we express our full solidarity, both moral and material, with all those who, as informal organisations, struggle movements, individual activists, associations or NGOs, provide rescue at sea as well as on land. Never before has civil assistance played such an important role as in this particular historical and political conjuncture. The proliferation of conflict zones on the international scene, the entrenchment and capillarity of certain terrorist organisations in the Middle East and on the African continent, the open rapacity of the Western powers on the markets and the consequences of climate change have undoubtedly led to a progressive increase in emigration on a global scale. This historic phenomenon has not yet been met by any structural initiative on the part of the countries of destination to ensure the safety of those who undertake migration. On the contrary, the tendency of EU member states to close their land and sea borders cannot be underestimated. The attempted construction of external borders is the mother of all evidence of this. Factors related to the increase in emigration and the lack of safe entry channels for third-country nationals contribute to a significant increase in the risk coefficient for all those in transit to the continent. Therefore, while maintaining as an integral part of our political agenda the need for a change of pace in the country and in the Union as a whole, in the sense of building safe channels of entry and waiting for this to happen, we recognise the centrality of civil rescue operations in the current context and distance ourselves from those who accuse the actors of such operations of the crime of 'aiding and abetting illegal immigration', or who speak of 'taxis of the sea', if only to construct a securitarian and anti-solidarity discourse. Or who speak of 'sea taxis', if only to construct a securitarian and anti-solidarity discourse.

3. The increase in the number of victims at sea, while the number of crossings is estimated to be decreasing, is more than alarming. A new humanitarian mission to save lives in the Mediterranean is urgently needed. In addition, the wide range of objectives of the now defunct military-humanitarian operation known as Mare Nostrum, and the complexity of the task in comparison with that of the Mare Nostrum operation, call for a significant expansion of the maritime surveillance apparatus.The possible revival and expansion of the mission must be conceived not only in terms of the deployment of more resources, but also in terms of new forms of coordination and cooperation with the organisations that make up the civil fleet. This would optimise efforts to maximise the chances of rescue.

4. The repeal of Law 189/2002 is a first step towards a serious and structural reform of immigration law. The link sanctioned by the regulation between the permanence of foreign citizens in a state of freedom on the national territory and their employment conditions inevitably generates a regime of serious wage compression and labour rights in general. Overcoming this situation cannot be done without introducing a new regulatory framework that does not involve any form of deprivation of personal liberty on the basis of a status of administrative irregularity, that provides for criteria other than employment status for the granting of residence permits, and that establishes accessible and secure channels for the entry of third-country nationals into the territory of the State.

5. We have always fought, not only during the elections, to ensure that all those in need of rescue and reception on Italian and European territory are provided with timely, effective and transparent support services, without discrimination as to the countries of origin of those arriving on European soil. This objective cannot be achieved without overcoming the Dublin Convention through new agreements that finally take into account the real needs of applicants for international protection. With regard to the forms of reception, it should be noted that the current system in force in Italy, regulated by Legislative Decree 142/2015, has shown serious shortcomings that cannot be attributed to mere contingency, but are clearly structural. Therefore, this sector also needs a reform that considers the places and forms of reception as functional synapses, not only for assistance, but also for the full development of the human capacities of the beneficiaries. The current rules on the reception of applicants for international protection and refugees, which are characterised by an emergency approach and are the result of serious ideological prejudices, result in the majority of eligible persons being crammed into extraordinary centres, with meagre resources, scattered throughout the territory without any planning, and whose management is entrusted to a large number of private bodies. The difficulties in monitoring the work of the actors in the sector, the consequent presence of speculative phenomena and, consequently, the inefficiencies, shortcomings, inconveniences and sometimes abuses suffered and often denounced by the persons received, are, in short, the product of a structurally inadequate reception system.

6. Since 2015, the year after the end of the Mare Nostrum mission, more than 19,000 people have lost their lives at sea. Since the same year, the Frontex agency has invested considerable resources in improving its air assets, while disinvesting in the maritime sector. Given the central role of maritime means in saving lives, the focus of operations is clear: Frontex is dedicated to controlling flows in order to protect borders. This assertion is also reflected in the agency's operations in third countries, in the implementation of agreements that are essentially aimed at keeping migrants outside Europe's borders, on the very coasts where the flows originate, where they are most at risk of being subjected to forms of violence, abuse, arbitrary detention or trafficking. For these reasons, over and above the corruption that Frontex has also contributed to, we believe that Frontex is part of the problem and not part of the solution.

7. This is a requirement already provided for, inter alia, in international maritime law. Even if this were not the case, the question we should always ask ourselves is this: when two rights conflict, which one prevails? We have no doubt: the constraints, the rules, the security architecture necessarily give way to the right to the protection of life, which can be unparalleled. And if we really want to protect life, we have no choice but to build instruments that enable us to act effectively and promptly.

8. We believe that the landing of survivors, as well as the other phases of the rescue operation, must be handled with the utmost care and attention. The location of the rescued persons' near or final destination and the immediate availability of food and medical care are of paramount importance to those who have just returned from a physically and psychologically trying experience. For this reason, we believe that the possible use of a pod at the end of an emergency is an affront to human dignity.

9. The timely intervention of the Italian Coast Guard in the event of an emergency situation involving a civil fleet vessel in its SAR area must be undoubtedly guaranteed. Furthermore, in accordance with International Maritime Law, we undertake to immediately notify the competent national authorities of the presence of an emergency situation in the SAR area of another State. If the latter do not confirm their willingness to take command of the operations, we undertake to take over the coordination of the operations.

10. All initiatives of the Italian Government and the European Union aimed at outsourcing border control must be opposed by reporting their illegality to the competent authorities.

We also consider unacceptable the delegation of powers to the Turkish state, which is responsible for systematic violations of the most basic human rights, to manage the flows of people entering European territory. We therefore intend to propose the termination of these agreements and a different use of the conspicuous funds provided. This change of course would make it possible to carry out relocation procedures within the Schengen area and to significantly strengthen the reception systems of the Member States with the greatest difficulties. This would ensure that all those who have set out to migrate towards Europe have an effective opportunity to exercise their right to asylum in safe conditions.

Finally, we reiterate our firm opposition to the policy of refusing entry at the border, for which Italy has already been condemned by the ECHR in the case of Hirsi Jamaa and others.

CONTE // Movimento 5 Stelle

1. We have been arguing in Parliament since 2021 for an end to this cooperation and the involvement of the European Union, but this has not happened at the behest of Draghi and the Farnesina. We reiterated this in July when we once again decided not to vote for the refinancing of this mission.

2. Rescue at sea is a legal obligation under international law. That is why, as soon as possible, we repealed the parts of the Salvini decrees that we never agreed with because they criminalised and discouraged rescue at sea.

3. Italy's maritime borders are Europe's maritime borders and that is why, as we have been saying for some time, the EU has the duty to take charge of patrolling the Mediterranean to combat human trafficking and to coordinate rescue operations in full compliance with international and national law.

4. We have always supported the need to open legal channels of entry into Europe for those fleeing wars - as is the case today in Ukraine - humanitarian emergencies or persecution. The same applies to so-called economic migrants, who should be admitted on the basis of national quotas set at European level and European agreements with the countries of origin, including automatic repatriation for those who emigrate outside these legal mechanisms.

5. Of course: human rights are universal and there can be no double standards. Those who are entitled to asylum in Europe must receive it regardless of their nationality.

6. The problematic performance of Frontex is a fact that led to the resignation of its director, Leggeri. In our view, it will be crucial, on the one hand, to strictly monitor the functioning of Frontex so that it always operates in full compliance with its mandate and the rights of migrants and, on the other hand, to further strengthen existing European development cooperation programmes and funds in order to eliminate the economic and political causes of migration in the countries of origin.

7. Human life comes first. In emergency situations, long delays in the designation of a safe port of disembarkation are unacceptable: in case of danger, the response must be immediate. What is needed, however, is a European agreement that obliges the other EU Mediterranean states to do the same, and a compulsory European redistribution mechanism for all migrants, not just those who have been rescued.

8. If the nearest port is not safe for rescued migrants, they cannot and should not be disembarked there.

9. In emergency and life-threatening situations, rescue operations should always be timely.

10. Cooperation with transit countries must be radically transformed, with respect for human rights as the basis for any future cooperation agreement with transit countries.