The Return Directive was implemented in Italy with delay following the ECJ landmark decision in the case El Dridi that had showed the inconsistency of some national provisions in force with the EU legislation. Since then the interaction between the national judiciary and the Court of Justice has not been constantly ensured, also in consideration of the judge that was assigned lawfulness control over the measures functional to the foreigner’s removal. In fact, such control is carried out by justices of peace, i.e. lay magistrates temporarily exercising judicial duties. Their independence and preparation in tackling an issue that directly affect personal freedom and fundamental rights are debated and the judicial practice on expulsion and pre-removal detention has not showed an in-depth legal analysis. In that regard greater attention to the European rules and jurisprudence emerges instead in the decisions of the Court of Cassation, whose intervention is however limited due to the reduced number of cases challenged before such court of superior jurisdiction. Overall, the choice made by the Legislature raises several critical profiles that will be discussed in this chapter.

Can a Justice of the Peace be a good Detention Judge? The case of Italy / A. DI PASCALE (MODERN STUDIES IN EUROPEAN LAW). - In: Law and Judicial Dialogue on the Return of Irregular Migrants from the European Union / [a cura di] M. Moraru, G. Cornelisse, P. De Bruycker. - Prima edizione. - Oxford, New York : Hart Publishing, 2020. - ISBN 9781509922956. - pp. 301-317

Can a Justice of the Peace be a good Detention Judge? The case of Italy

A. DI PASCALE
2020

Abstract

The Return Directive was implemented in Italy with delay following the ECJ landmark decision in the case El Dridi that had showed the inconsistency of some national provisions in force with the EU legislation. Since then the interaction between the national judiciary and the Court of Justice has not been constantly ensured, also in consideration of the judge that was assigned lawfulness control over the measures functional to the foreigner’s removal. In fact, such control is carried out by justices of peace, i.e. lay magistrates temporarily exercising judicial duties. Their independence and preparation in tackling an issue that directly affect personal freedom and fundamental rights are debated and the judicial practice on expulsion and pre-removal detention has not showed an in-depth legal analysis. In that regard greater attention to the European rules and jurisprudence emerges instead in the decisions of the Court of Cassation, whose intervention is however limited due to the reduced number of cases challenged before such court of superior jurisdiction. Overall, the choice made by the Legislature raises several critical profiles that will be discussed in this chapter.
Settore IUS/14 - Diritto dell'Unione Europea
2020
Book Part (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Chapter 13 A di Pascale.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Post-print, accepted manuscript ecc. (versione accettata dall'editore)
Dimensione 599.41 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
599.41 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/745659
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact