The amended Procedure Decree provides for an accelerated procedure that applies where:
(a) the asylum request is made by the applicant placed in CIE.1 In this case the Questura, upon receipt of the application, immediately transmits the necessary documentation to the CTRPI that within 7 days of the receipt of the documentation takes steps for the personal hearing. The decision is taken within the following 2 days.
These time limits are doubled in the other three cases where the procedure is applicable:
(b) the application is manifestly unfounded;
(c) the applicant has introduced a subsequent application for international protection;
(d) when the applicant has lodged his/her application after being stopped for avoiding or attempting to avoid border controls or after being stopped for irregular stay, merely in order to delay or frustrate the adoption or the enforcement of an earlier expulsion or rejection at the border order.2
According to Article 28-bis of the Procedure Decree, the CTRPI may exceed the abovementioned time limits where necessary to ensure an adequate and complete examination of the application for international protection, except the (maximum) time limit of 18 months.3 Where the application is made by the applicant placed in CIE, the above terms are reduced to a third i.e. maximum 6 months.4
The law does not clarify whether the procedure can be declared accelerated even if the procedure and the time limit set out in the law have not been respected.
In practice, in some regions, ASGI has reported that asylum seekers whose application has been rejected as “manifestly unfounded” come to know that they have been involved in an accelerated procedure, and that they have half the time available (15 days) to appeal against the decision, only when they are notified of the rejection by the Questura.
In several cases, even if the law does not provide it, the rejection of an asylum request as “manifestly unfounded” has been automatically connected with the accelerated procedure, therefore applying the shorter appeal time limit for 15 days. During 2016, the Caserta Territorial Commission has rejected many asylum requests as “manifestly unfounded”, and most of the appeals were considered inadmissible by the Court of Naples because they were not lodged within the ostensible 15-day deadline. The judges, after refusing the suspensive request, give dates for the hearing one year later.
As result, asylum seekers, mostly coming from Gambia, Mali, Senegal, Ghana but even from Pakistan, have been obliged to leave the accommodation centre and, waiting for the definitive court decision, to abscond and avoid being repatriated or sent to a CIE.5
The same guarantees are those applied during the regular procedure are applied.
The same rules apply as under the regular procedure.
- 1. Article 28-bis LD 25/2008, as inserted by LD 142/2015.
- 2. Article 28-bis LD 25/2008, as amended by LD 142/2015.
- 3. Article 27(3)-(3-bis) LD 25/2008, as amended by LD 142/2015.
- 4. Article 28-bis(2) LD 25/2008, as inserted by LD 142/2015.
- 5. Interview with ASGI members.
- 6. Article 19(3) LD 150/2011 as amended by Article 27 LD 142/2015.
- 7. Article 35 LD 25/2008, as amended by Article 19(4) LD 150/2011 and Article 27 LD 142/2015.