Author
The Italian reception system for asylum seekers and beneficiaries of national/international protection is governed by Legislative Decree 142/2015 (from now on “Reception Decree”), which transposed into national law the recast Reception Directive. The model the Reception Decree initially outlined created a common reception system, articulated in different phases but centred on the Reception and Integration System (SAI, former SPRAR, then SIPROIMI) as the standard form of reception of asylum seekers. Since 2015, the regulatory text has undergone several reforms.
After the exclusion of asylum seekers from the SAI system through Law Decree No. 113/2018, Law Decree No. 130/2020 partially restored the previous model, reintroducing a single reception system for both asylum seekers and beneficiaries of national and international protection, without, however, providing for an adequate and proportional expansion of the number of available places.
In May 2023, Law 50/2023, which converted Decree Law 20/2023, came into force. Among the many changes introduced, all marked by a strongly restrictive and penalising approach towards asylum seekers, one of the most significant concerns is that, once more, asylum seekers have been excluded from the possibility to access the SAI system. The reception system is then set to return to a situation in which applicants will only have access to collective government centres and temporary facilities, while the SAI will become a sub-system reserved exclusively to protection holders, adopting a similar approach as the so-called “Salvini Decree” (DL 113/2018). The only novelty compared to said Decree is the provision establishing that access to the SAI will be granted to asylum seekers who have been identified as vulnerable and to those who have legally entered Italy through complementary pathways (government-led resettlements or private sponsored humanitarian admission programs).[1]
Law 50/2023 also introduced a new type of “provisional” centres: pending the identification of the availability of places in governmental reception centres or in CAS, the Prefect may order that reception take place, for the time strictly necessary, in temporary reception facilities where only food, clothing, health care and linguistic-cultural mediation are provided (Article 11 (2 bis) Legislative Decree No. 142/2015).
Moreover, Article 6-ter of Law Decree No. 20/2023 excluded the obligation to provide psychological assistance services, Italian language courses and legal and territorial orientation services in favour of asylum seekers accommodated in first reception centres, CAS and temporary centres.
The picture that emerges now is one of a reception system fragmented into different “reception” places with different reception measures to which foreign nationals are sent according to the stage of access to the asylum procedure, or to the way they enter the territory, or to their particular psychophysical conditions.
It should be noted that the Government extended the state of emergency “as a consequence of the exceptional increase in the flows of migrant people entering the national territory via the Mediterranean migratory routes” from October 2023 to April 2024.On 10 April 2024, a further extension of six months was announced.[2]
Access to the reception system
Access to the Reception System is reserved to applicants for international protection and third-country nationals holding international or national complementary protection permits. According to the law, admission to reception should take place immediately after the expression of the intention to seek asylum.[3] This is why access to reception is directed affected by the problems in accessing – or re accessing – the asylum procedure (see Access to procedure).
As mentioned, after the 2023 reform, access to the SAI system is only be granted to asylum seekers identified as vulnerable and to those who have entered Italy through government-led resettlements or private sponsored humanitarian admission programs.[4]
At least three factors, which have characterised the Italian reception system since its creation, affect the functioning of the system and the possibility for asylum seekers to access reception centres. As better detailed in the next dedicated paragraph, they could be summarised as follows:
- Although the provision of reception measures is mandatory, the activation of SAI facilities is done on a voluntary basis: Municipalities can decide whether to adhere to the SAI network and have discretionarily as to the extension, increase or reduction of the existing places, regardless of the reception needs that emerge on the national territory and in the single territories;
- The chronic unavailability of places in SAI results in the need for local Prefectures to prepare temporary measures and set up government reception centres (CAS), but the drastically lowered costs provided by the tender specifications schemes for reception in these facilities de facto favoured the creation of large centres managed by multinationals or for-profit organisations and excluded many of the small non-profit and professional organisations and cooperatives from the accommodation landscape.
- The conceptualisation of reception obligations as an emergency to be faced in the short term – and the unconcealed intentions to limit arrivals – have so far prevented serious and reasoned interventions on the implementation of an efficient accommodation system able to face the numbers of arrivals which periodically and systematically increase.
As a direct consequence, the number of places in the ordinary reception system is largely insufficient when compared to the existing needs, therefore access to the reception system for all those entitled to it, is a utopia.
It should also be noted that the modalities to access the reception system are different depending on the mode of arrival. Those who are disembarked after search and rescue operations – directly moved to hotspot facilities (eventually facing the hotspot procedure, see Hotspots). All other sea or land arrivals often have to wait for months to access the asylum procedure and consequently reception conditions (See Access to procedure).
Moreover, by L. 14 of 21 February 2024, the Italian Parliament has ratified the Protocol signed in Rome on 6 November 2023 between the Italian and the Albanian Government aimed at cooperation on migration matters[5] and, in the government’s intent, this will introduce a further variable in the reception process for those who intend to request international protection: people rescued in international waters by Italian ships,[6] subject to the border procedure, will be transported directly to Albania where, according to the agreement, three centres will be established under Italian jurisdiction: one, in the locality of Shengjin, to provide health screening, identification and collection of asylum applications and two others in the locality of Gjader, one functioning as accommodation centre ( 880 places) and the other one as repatriation centre (CPR) (144 places).
The government published the notice for the award of the contract on March 21, 2024 with a deadline until March 28 to submit offers.[7]
Finally, the management of these centres has been entrusted to the cooperative Medihospes, the same managing the collective centre Cavarzerani, in Udine (see Reception conditions).
Reception facilities
After the 2023 reform, the reception system is comprised of first governmental centres, temporary centres (CAS), provisional centres, and SAI centres.
- 50/2023 introduced a new typology of reception facilities, the provisional centres, which only provide basic services (see below, “Services provided”). The regulatory provision[8] is included within the law governing temporary centres (CAS) even if these centres are conceived as structures to be used for the “strictly necessary time” to identify available places in the government centres or in CAS facilities.
The provision presents both positive and critical aspects. On one hand, it could offer greater protection pending the identification of suitable reception places, as it makes it easier to find structures and bodies capable of offering this type of service; on the other hand, it could lead to asylum seekers being hosted n centres providing lower standards in terms of reception conditions for indefinite periods of time.
Moreover, DL 133/2023, converted with amendments by L. 176/2023, allowed, in cases of extreme urgency, to derogate from the maximum capacity parameters established by law for government reception centres and CAS facilities, occupying up to double of the places foreseen for these centres, in order to face “ the needs of public order and security connected to the management of migratory flows”.[9]
Decree Law 124/2023, converted into L. 162/2023, entrusted the Ministry of Defence with the creation of reception centres, hotspots and CPRs.[10]
For the realisation of such facilities the law also provides that the Ministry of Defence is authorised to make use of the “highest urgency procedures and civil protection procedures” (pursuant to art. 140 of Legislative Decree 31 March 2023, no. 36).
At the same time, the law provides that, by Decree of the President of the Council of Ministers, upon proposal of the Ministers of the Interior and Defence, in agreement with the Minister of Economy and Finance, it will be approved the Extraordinary Plan for the identification of the areas interested in the creation of a suitable number of hotspots, CPR, government centres and CAS, also through the valorisation of existing properties.[11]
As underlined by a study, these new provisions have a significant weight because “facilities for migrants, without distinction, from those aimed at reception to those dedicated to detention and deprivation of liberty, will be implemented by adopting “highly urgent procedures”, thus crystallising the systemic emergency approach. Centers and structures that will be built on the basis of a plan adopted by the Council of Ministers based on the indications provided by the Minister of the Interior and the Minister of Defence, in contrast with what it is provided for by the Reception Decree in terms of planning and consultation, and forgetting that «the reception system for applicants for international protection is based on fairness collaboration between the different levels of government involved” (art. 8 Legislative Decree no. 142/2015)”.[12]
Services provided
The 2018 “Security Decree” marked a net change in the reception approach, preferring a system based on large CAS centres, attracting for-profit companies and effectively cutting out small local cooperatives from participating in public calls for the management of centres. The very low numbers of operators benefitting from available funds, compared to the number of guests, led to the loss of many jobs and the services’ cut made reception a mere management of food and accommodation, also reducing the positive effects on the host territories, in terms of income and social and labour integration.
Decree Law 130/2020 maintained the distinction between a range of services addressed to asylum seekers and others reserved exclusively to beneficiaries of protection, thus replicating the policy of restricting high level services only to protection holders – or at least to migrants having obtained a more stable residence permit-, contrary to a logic of generalised protection, ultimately considerably slowing down the process of regaining self-sufficiency for asylum seekers.
As highlighted by ActionAid and Openpolis in their report,[13] between 2018 and 2021, over 3,500 reception facilities have been closed (-29.1%) throughout the country, while available places fell from 169,471 to 97,670 in the same period. The centres that underwent closure were mainly small-medium sized ones, while at the same time, larger CAS facilities have often seen an increase in their capacity.
After the 2023 reform, on 27 March 2024, the new tender specification schemes for reception services in government centres and CAS were published.[14]
The new schemes[15] allow discretion to reception bodies regarding the provision of services that were instead compulsory under DL 130/2020. According to Article 2 of the tender specifications schemes, psychological assistance, Italian language courses and professional training, legal and territorial orientation, are listed as possible subcategories of social assistance, but there is no obligation for the service provider to ensure their accessibility to asylum seekers.
In addition, in the new provisional centres, the services are even more limited, as just services relating to food, accommodation, clothing, healthcare and linguistic-cultural mediation are ensured.
If applicants are admitted into SAI centres, they still have access only to so-called “first level” services, that do not include support for integration on the territory, job search, job orientation and professional training. These services, that are completely absent within the governmental and temporary centres (CAS), in SAI are restricted only to beneficiaries of national or international protection.[16]
The 2023 reform unfortunately reflects the same approach as the 2018 reform and maintains the limits of the 2020 reform: SAI are still activated on a voluntary basis at the local level; access to SAI centres is limited to few categories of asylum seekers and essential services are no longer mandatory and therefore left to the discretion of the managing body.
With increasing frequency since 2022, beneficiaries of international protection are notified of the termination of reception conditions in CAS immediately after receiving the residence permit or even the mere decision recognising the international or special protection, without a previous check for available places in SAI being carried out.
Unaccompanied children who, on paper, should have immediate access to SAI, still spend most of their accommodation period in first governmental centres, temporary structures or in residential care facilities (see Reception for unaccompanied minors) and those who reached the majority of age while still within the reception system and benefit from an administrative extension of guardianship, also entitled to access SAI, still remain, in practice, excluded from these centres.
Accommodation for people escaping the Ukrainian conflict
See Annex on Temporary Protection.
Financing, coordination and monitoring
Financing
Research carried out by Openpolis showed that reception funds belong to the “mission no. 27” of expenditure, dedicated to “immigration, reception and guarantee of rights”.[17]
This mission is divided into three programs, each assigned to a different Ministry. The program including funds for reception is the no. 2, attributed to the Ministry of the Interior and entitled “Migratory flows, interventions for the development of social cohesion, guarantee of rights, relations with religious denominations”. The program is allocated 1.9 billion euros, which represents almost two thirds of the entire mission (60.7%). Out of these, around 95% (or 1.8 billion) is used for activities related to asylum seekers, but the items of expenditure are very different and not all are related to reception.
The expenditure forecast for 2021 was a total of 1.75 billion, out of which 1.068,59 million for Cas and first accommodation facilities. For 2022, the expenditure was 1,834.20 million and for 2023 it was 1,807.38 million,[18] but the actual expenditure is not known at the time of writing.
In attributing the responsibility for the creation of reception centres, hotspots and CPR to the Ministry of Defence, Decree Law 124/2023 (converted into L. 162/2023) also established a specific fund, with an allocation of 20 million euros to the Ministry of Defence[19] for 2023 and authorised the expenditure of 1,000,000 euros per year[20] starting from the year 2024 as a contribution to the functioning of the reception and repatriation structures and of 400,000 euros for the year 2023 for the costs deriving from the establishment and functioning of the related technical structures to the preliminary stages of construction (preparation of areas, security and surveillance).
DL 133/2023 introduced a financial measure to support municipalities affected by significant and close in time arrivals of migrants on their territory providing that the waste collection connected to the activities of government centres, hotspots and to the transit of migrants in border municipalities located near the border with other EU states can be insured by the territorially competent Prefect until 31 December 2025. For this activity, the DL 133/2023 has foreseen a maximum expenditure of 500,000.00 euros for 2023 and 2,000,000.00 for each of the years 2024 and 2025.[21]
DL 145 of 18 October 2023, converted in L. 191/2023, provided for the establishment of a Ministry of the Interior fund for the reception of migrants and minors of 46,859 million euros for the year 2023[22] and authorised, for extraordinary first aid emergencies, a 1,000,000 euros expenditure for 2023.[23]
Later, the 2024 Budget Law stated that the Fund is refinanced in the amount of 172,739,236 euros for the year 2024, of 269,179,697 euros for the year 2025 and of 185,000,000 euros for the year 2026.[24]
Albania
As regards the preparation of the project in Albania, the Government has estimated, for the reception provided there, an annual fee to the managing body of approximately €34 million.[25]
Furthermore, in the technical report, the estimated cost for the operation over 5 years is of approximately 653 million euros.[26]
Funding for the reception system expansion due to the Ukrainian and Afghan crisis
For the activation of 3,000 additional SAI places, initially programmed for asylum seekers from Afghanistan and later also for people fleeing from Ukraine, DL no. 139 of 8 October 2021 established an increase in the funds allocated to the National Fund for Asylum,[27] of 11,335.320 euros for 2021 and of 44,971,650 euros for each year in 2022 and 2023,[28] taken from the MOI resources relating, for the respective years, to the activation, rental and management of detention and reception centres for migrants.
Then, to face the need to accommodate Afghan nationals evacuated after the Taliban’s takeover of the country – and later similar needs for people fleeing from the Ukrainian conflict[29] – and allow for the opening of 2,000 additional SAI places, the budget Law of 30 December 2021 no 234[30] provided for an increase in the endowment of the National Fund for Asylum of 29,981.100 euros for each of the years 2022, 2023 and 2024.[31]
To cover the costs for the creation of 3,000 new S.A.I. places, to be granted to people escaped from Ukraine, the L 28/2022 provides for the use of a portion of the National Fund for asylum,[32] and precisely: 37,702,260 € for the year 2022 and 44,971,650 € for each of the years 2023 and 2024.[33]
To cover the 54,162,000 euros needed for activating new CAS and first governmental reception facilities it is provided to reduce the Fund for economic policy interventions.[34]
Article 44 (3) of DL 50 of 17 May 2022 converted by L. 91 of 15 July 2022, allocated 112,749.000€ for the response to displacement from Ukraine in 2022.
Moreover, the same DL authorised an expenditure of 40 million to be distributed to municipalities whose social services were most affected by the presence of temporary protection holders.[35]
To cover the former expenditure and the one related to the empowerment of the reception measures for people fleeing from Ukraine the LD states to increase the resources of the National Emergency Fund.[36]
Article 31 (4) LD 21 of 21 March 2022 provides that, until 31 December 2022, MOI resources allocated to the activation, rental and management of the reception centres are increased by an additional 7,533,750 euros, also to be allocated to the activation of new first reception centres and CAS facilities.[37]
The law also provides not to apply, for the year 2022, the provision according to which savings achieved in accommodation of migrants have to be allocated to the international cooperation fund and to the repatriation fund,[38] and authorises changes among the funds assigned to the single budget chapters under the MOI program “Migratory flows, interventions for the development of social cohesion, guarantee of rights, relations with religious confessions”.[39]
DL 145/2023, converted by L 191/2023[40] authorised the expenditure of 180 million euros for the year 2023, while L. 213 of 30 December 2023[41] (Budget Law) provided for further 274 million euros for the year 2024 dedicated to assistance activities in the national territory for the Ukrainian population.
Article 1, par. 388 of L. 213/2023 also allocated the amount of 7,650,000 euro to ensure the extension of the hosting programs already in place.
Funding for alternative forms of assistance for Ukrainian asking for temporary protection
To face the assistance measures within the total limit of 348 million euros for the year 2022, LD 21 of 21 March 2022, at Article 31, provides the possibility to draw additional resources from the National Fund for emergencies,[42] that is consequently increased.
In order to cover these costs, LD 21/2022 provides an increase of 40 million for 2022 and of 80 million for 2023 the fund of the Ministry of Economy and Finance fed with share of tax and contribution revenues and aimed at equalising tax measures.[43]
LD 21/2022 foresees that the expenses, including those for reception of people fleeing from Ukraine, will be covered for 2022 by the higher revenues deriving from the contributions paid by the subjects who exercise, in Italy, for the subsequent sale, the activity of production of electricity, methane gas or extraction of natural gas, and of the subjects who carry out the production activity, distribution and trade of petroleum products.[44]
- 213/2023, article 1, par. 391 also allocated 40,000,000euros to improve social services in the municipalities that host a significant number of holders of Temporary Protection.[45]
Management and Coordination
The Ministry of Interior is responsible for the overall management of the national reception system,[46] while its peripheral administrations, Prefectures or Local Government Bureaus, are in charge of managing reception at the provincial level.
The law provides for a National Coordination Table to be set up at the Ministry of the Interior (Department for Civil Liberties and Immigration) and for Regional Coordination Tables to be established at every Prefecture of the regional capitals.[47] The National Table is responsible, among others, for defining the guidelines and planning the interventions aimed at optimising the reception system. This includes the criteria for regional allocation of posts to be allocated to reception. The Table develops, on a yearly basis, a National reception plan that identifies national reception needs, based on projections for new arrivals.[48]
Guidelines and programming prepared by the Table are then to be implemented at territorial level through the Regional coordination tables, which identify the location criteria for CARA and CAS facilities as well as the distribution criteria within the Region of the places to be allocated to reception purposes, taking into account the places already activated, in the territory of reference, within the SAI system. In the perspective of national coordination and multi-level governance of reception, several institutional acts have also been taken, beginning with the approval of a National Operational Plan by the Unified Conference[49] of 10 July 2014,[50] which represented a first attempt to develop a system of planning, organisation and national management of the reception of migrants and refugees. The fundamental aspect on which the implementation of the Plan was based was the progressive overcoming of the emergency-focused management that had characterised the Italian reception system until then.
In practice, at least as regards the reception of applicants and protection holders, Italian Governments have often shown both a chronic lack of foresight in terms of contingency planning on reception, as well as a tendency to centralise choices on the reception system, reducing to the minimum concertation and co-decision with other stakeholders. Proof of this is the fact that, still in 2023, not only was the Government reception system once again unprepared for the growing numbers of asylum seekers to be received – with the consequence that new centres had to be opened in a rush, while an incalculable number of people was left homeless without any assistance –[51], but also most decisions in this sense were taken by the central government, without consultation with other relevant actors.[52] These two levels influence each other: if proper multiannual planning is not carried out, coordinating with local realities, the reception system as a whole cannot be stabilised, let alone enhanced. Conversely, as the Government frequently finds itself in urgent and unforeseen need for thousands of new places, which cannot wait for the lengthy process of consulting and involving local actors.[53] The most recent example of a proposed solution to this problem is the declaration of the state of emergency of 11 April 2023 which was then extended from October 2023 to April 2024[54] and again, on 10 April 2024, announced for further six months[55] according to the national Government, such measure was necessary to ensure the proper management of reception needs following disembarkations but the Italian regions were not involved in the decision-making process.
Monitoring
The legislation provides that the Ministry of Interior (Department of Civil Liberties and Immigration) is responsible for supervising and monitoring the management of reception facilities, both directly and via local Prefectures. As far as they are concerned, Prefectures may also avail themselves of the services of the social services of the relevant Municipality.[56] Monitoring activities concern the verification of the quality of the services provided, as well as the procedures for the award of reception services. While the Ministry is obliged to present the results of said monitoring activity in the comprehensive report on reception it must submit to Parliament at the latest by 30 June every year, there have been major delays recently, so much so that the 2020 report was only presented in October 2022, while the 2021 report was presented at the end of November 2022.[57]
From the most recent data available, it emerges that in 2021, 1,081 inspection controls were carried out in presence (which involved 950 facilities) and 2,224 (which involved 561 facilities) were carried out remotely. Said 3,305 controls would therefore have concerned 1,511 structures, out of a total of 4,225 structures active in 2021 (less than 36% of the total).[58] Remote monitoring was considered necessary, as was the case for 2020, as a result of distancing and isolation measures derived from the Covid-19 pandemic.[59]
Data on inspections carried out in 2022 and 2023 is not publicly available.
The issue of inspection checks on reception is characterised by a certain lack of transparency. Actionaid submitted, in July 2020, a request for access to the documents concerning the inspections carried out by the Ministry of the Interior, which rejected the request on grounds of confidentiality and protection of managers. Following two appeals, only in June 2022 the Council of State ordered the Ministry of the Interior to make the 2019 data available.[60] Subsequent requests for access to the documents, relating to the years 2020 and 2021, saw a new refusal by the Government, which denied the release of the aggregated detail of the data relating to inspections in the centres, necessary to be able to provide insights and analysis on the subject.
In addition to transparency issues, the subject of inspections presents at least two other important weaknesses, relating to whether the controls are actually performed and to the quality with which they are carried out. Available data shows that some Prefectures carried out an adequate number, at least numerically, of inspection checks in their own structures, while others carried out a significantly smaller number, or none at all. This figure seems to be transversal to the total number of reception facilities in the province concerned, indeed, paradoxically often the greater the number of facilities, the fewer the number of controls. This figure can only be explained on the one hand by a difference in sensitivity to the issue of controls by certain Prefectures, on the other hand with the fact that offices that have to manage multiple facilities are already under pressure with the management work and have neither time nor staff to carry out inspections.[61]
The other key aspect regards the quality of the controls. While it is true that the specifications scheme is the common reference at national level for services, it remains an administrative tender document, which establishes only quantitative indications, therefore inadequate as a reference for a minimally thorough inspection. Italian Prefectures have historically lacked a qualitative-quantitative tool aimed specifically at inspections, despite some attempts have been made over the years,[62] as well as uniform standards of evaluation. This leads to many elements of variability and therefore of criticality. Some Prefectures have formalised the creation of permanent inspection units, while others recruit officials on a time to time availability basis. The inspection team may include only Prefecture staff, who have only administrative responsibilities, while in other occasions it is enlarged to include other responsibilities and other administrations, including for example: social worker, fire brigade, health authorities, reporting experts. Furthermore, the Prefectures’ staff is usually not trained before conducting inspections, nor are they familiar with the issues of forced migration, the right of asylum, and the handling of vulnerabilities. Finally, the presence of linguistic and cultural mediators in support of inspectors, who often do not even speak English, is extremely rare, with the consequence that it is not possible to interview the accepted people and collect complaints, reports and needs. All this results in a very wide heterogeneity and discretion in the quality of the controls, a general inability to carry out a qualitative evaluation of the effectiveness of the services offered. Especially as Prefecture-managed centres account for almost three quarters of the total number of reception centres in Italy; this continues to be a strong limit for the entire reception system.
Decree-Law 20/2023 (Article 6) provides that, in cases where in government centres or in the CAS there is a serious breach of the obligations arising from the service contract, but concurrently said services cannot be interrupted as compelling for the protection of fundamental rights, the Prefect appoints a Commissioner for the extraordinary and temporary management of the enterprise. At the same time, the Prefect starts the procedures for the direct award of a new contract for the supply of goods and services.
As highlighted by ActionAid, the use of a generic formula such as “serious breaches” does not appear sufficiently clear in delimiting the perimeter of this intervention. Moreover, it is not clear why prefectural officials with no experience in managing social services should be better able to restore correct management nor why the law provides for the use of direct award to assign the contract again (Article 6 (3) Cutro Decree).[63]
Among the tasks that the law assigns to the Central Service SAI, one of the most important is to carry out monitoring activities of SAI reception projects and to provide technical assistance to the local authorities sponsoring these projects.[64] Specifically, the Ministerial Decree that regulates the SAI system provides that the activities of the Central Service accompany the entire life cycle of local reception projects; among these, on-site visits to support local authorities in the application of the relevant legislation and operational instructions can be carried out, also identifying the most appropriate corrective actions to increase the quality of reception services.[65] In practice, the Central Service mainly provides technical support in the realisation and in the practical management of the reception project, providing the local authority and the managing body of the project with advice, helping in the management of the most complex cases, facilitation in interfacing with other local and national realities. This activity is very important, as it allows project staff to receive specialised support on an ongoing basis.
In addition to this, the monitoring unit of the Central Service periodically carries out on-site monitoring visits, to directly verify the progress of the reception project, the actual provision and quality of services, and the adequacy of the accommodation used. These activities are carried out by qualified and trained personnel, who deal with the qualitative monitoring of projects as their main activity. The agreement signed with the Ministry of the Interior provides that, during each year, at least one monitoring visit is to be carried out for each individual project (the SAI network, in February 2023, consisted of 934 projects). Officials specialised in reporting and administration, as well as officials from the Ministry of the Interior, the Prefecture, UNHCR, etc., can participate in these missions based on existing needs. The SAI monitoring visits are particularly thorough and often last several days; a typical visit includes a visit to the reception facilities involved, interviews with the hosted beneficiaries with the help of cultural-linguistic mediators, a meeting with the staff directly managing the project and a final meeting with representatives of the local authority responsible for the project. After the visit, a follow-up report is produced, containing a descriptive part of its outcome, recommendations and tips for the services’ improvement and mandatory requirements and requests for adjustment or correction, with respect to any findings on shortcomings detected during monitoring. Project managers are then given a date by which to submit their comments and provide evidence of the corrections that have been implemented. In this interlocution, which continues until a positive response is given by the Central Service, the Ministry of the Interior and the Prefecture responsible for the territory are involved. Data relating to monitoring visits carried out by the Central Service is not made public and no other information is available to the general public.
While existing legislation provides that the duty of conducting inspections regarding the entire reception system, including SAI projects, lies with the Ministry of Interior and its Prefectures,[66] in practice SAI monitoring has been carried out almost exclusively by the Central Service. In 2019, however, the Ministry gave orders to the Prefectures to carry out inspections in SAI projects (at that time SIPROIMI) pertaining to their territory of competence, “in coordination with the Central Service”.[67] Since then, however, only few Prefectures have carried out inspections in the SAI; additionally, these were often conducted in a heterogeneous manner, sometimes carrying out joint missions with the Central Service, sometimes without any contact nor coordination, while often not doing them at all, on the grounds of limited staff availability.
[1] See also M. Giovannetti, Il prisma dell’accoglienza: la disciplina del sistema alla luce della legge n. 50/2023, in Questione Giustizia, available in Italian at: https://acesse.dev/zt1rw.
[2] See press release published on the Government website on 9 April 2024: bit.ly/3wsVqDE. To be published in Gazzetta Ufficiale.
[3] Article 1 (2) Reception Decree.
[4] Article 1 sexies ( 1 bis) DL 416/1989 converted into L. 39/1990, as amended by DL 20/2023
[5] L. 14/2024, available at: bit.ly/44vBGfr.
[6] According to Article 3 (2) L. 14/2024, those are the ones who could be subject to the procedure.
[7] See the notice published on 21 March 2024 available in Italian at: bit.ly/4by66Qr.
[8] Article 11 ( 2 bis) Reception Decree
[9] Article 7 DL 133/2023 amending Article 11 (2) LD 142/2015
[10] Article 21 (1) Decree Law 124/2023 converted into L. 162/2023
[11] Article 21 (2) Decree Law 124/2023 converted into L. 162/2023
[12] M. Giovannetti, Il prisma dell’accoglienza: la disciplina del sistema alla luce della legge n. 50/2023, in Questione Giustizia, available in Italian at: https://acesse.dev/zt1rw.
[13] Actionaid and Openpolis, Centri d’Italia. Report 2022. Il vuoto dell’accoglienza, available at: https://bit.ly/3KZSaVo.
[14] As per Minister Decree, 4 March 2024. Schemes and Decree available at: bit.ly/3JU5KaZ.
[15] Available at: bit.ly/3ws5KvP.
[16] Article 1 sexies (2 bis) DL 416/1989, introduced by DL 130/2020.
[17] Openpolis, Il ministero dell’interno e il bilancio dell’accoglienza, July 2021, available at: https://bit.ly/3vP8gYP.
[18] See Senate report for the years 201-2023 available at: bit.ly/3JXhF7W.
[19] Article 21 (4) DL 124/2023 converted into L. 162/2023.
[20] Article 21 (6) DL 124/2023 converted into L. 162/2023.
[21] Article 8 DL 133/2023.
[22] Article 21 (1) DL 145/2023 converted in L 191/2023.
[23] Article 21 (7) DL 145/2023 converted in L 191/2023.
[24] Law 213/2023, Article 1 (361).
[25] See notice published on 21 March 2024 available at: bit.ly/4by66Q.
[26] Available at: bit.ly/3UWwLAM.
[27] Article 1-septies of Legislative Decree 416/1989 converted into Law 39/1990.
[28] Article 7 DL 139/2021, as amended by Article 5 quarter DL 14/2022 converted with modification into L 28/2022.
[29] Article 5-quater (6) extended the provision also to people fleeing from Ukraine.
[30] Article 1 (390) L 234/2021 as amended by Article 5 quater (6) DL 14/2022 converted with modification into L 28/2022.
[31] Article 1-septies of Legislative Decree 416/1989 converted into Law 39/1990.
[32] Article 1-septies LD no. 416/1989.
[33] Article 5-quater (3) DL 14/2022 as modified by the conversion L 28/2022.
[34] Article 5-quater (9) DL 14/2022 as modified by the conversion L 28/2022.
[35] Article 44 (4) DL 50 of 17 May 2022 converted by L. 91 of 15 July 2022.
[36] LD 1/2018 Article 44.
[37] Article 31 (4) LD 21/2022.
[38] Article 5-quater (8) dl 14/2022 as modified by the conversion L 28/2022 which states not to apply the second sentence of Article 1(767) L 145/2018.
[39] Article 5-quater (8) dl 14/2022 as modified by L 28/2022 which refers to the budget of the Moi program belonging to the “Mission 27” “Immigration, reception and guarantee of rights”, to be adopted pursuant to article 33, paragraph 4, of the law 31 December 2009, n. 196. The Mission 27 expending has been reported by the Senate in the publication Una analisi per missioni, programmi e azioni: la pubblica amministrazione, l’ordine pubblico e l’immigrazione available at: https://bit.ly/3uYeQwG. More in general, regarding funds addressed to the reception system, see also Openpolis at: https://bit.ly/3vP8gYP.
[40] Article 21 (9) DL 145/2023 converted in L 191/2023.
[41] Article 1 (389) amending Article 21 (9) DL 145/2023.
[42] Article 31 (4) LD 21/2022, which refers to the fund ruled by Article 44 LD 1/ 2018.
[43] Article 38 LD 21/2022 which refers to the fund ruled by Article 1 quarter DL 137/ 2020 converted into L 176/2020.
[44] Article 38 (2) and Article 37 LD 21/2022.
[45] L. 213/2023, art. 1, par. 391, available at: https://bitly.cx/MRGtN.
[46] The management and supervision of the entirety of the reception system are entrusted in particular to the Central Directorate of Immigration and Asylum Civil Services.
[47] The National Coordination Table is established pursuant to Article 29(3) of Legislative Decree 251/2007 (transposition of the recast Qualification Directive). As regards the reception, its duties are regulated by Article 9(1) and 16 of the Reception Decree, by Ministerial Decree 16 October 2014 and by the National Agreement of the Unified Conference of 10 July 2014.
[48] This plan was developed only once, in 2016, and has been largely unapplied. Source: MoI, Piano Accoglienza 2016, available at: https://bit.ly/3UaCv81.
[49] The Unified Conference (Conferenza Unificata) is a permanent body where the Central Government, Regions, Provinces and Municipalities are represented. It participates in decision-making processes involving matters for the State and the Regions, in order to foster cooperation between the State activity and the system of autonomies, examining matters and tasks of common interest, also carrying out advisory functions.
[50] The text of the agreement is available at: https://bit.ly/3Kq3ZDx.
[51] See Altreconomia, Scarsa programmazione, posti vuoti e persone al freddo: così ai migranti è negata l’accoglienza, 8 February 2023, available at: https://bit.ly/3ZFHJe5.
[52] Concerning the poor use of coordinating tables, see ANCI, Biffoni: “Ampliare capienza rete Sai per minori e riattivare tavolo di coordinamento”, available at: https://bit.ly/3Lk9gxc.
[53] On the topic, see: Campomori and Ambrosini, Multilevel governance in trouble: the implementation of asylum seekers’ reception in Italy as a battleground, in Comparative Migration Studies, (2020) 8:22, available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-020-00178-1. Campomori, Asylum seekers reception policies in Italy: Weaknesses and contradictions, in Politiche Sociali, 2018, available at: https://doi.org/10.7389/91920.
[54] See the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of 5 October 2023, available at: bit.ly/4amLIAP.
[55] See the press release published on the Government website on 9 April 2024: bit.ly/3wsVqDE, published in Gazzetta Ufficiale no. 122 of 27 May 2024.
[56] Article 20(1) Reception Decree.
[57] The 2020 and 2021 reports available at: https://bit.ly/3y8bRCN.
[58] The information made public by the Ministry in its reports to Parliament does not reach such a level of detail that it is possible to determine which structures have been visited and how many inspections, if any, have been repeated on the same structures. Moreover, it is not possible to understand how many of them have been carried out directly by the Ministry, how many by the Prefectures and how many by the officials of the SAI Central Service. Furthermore, the Government’s report deals exclusively with the controls carried out under Article 20, while there is little to none evidence about any other kind of controls, e.g. by health authorities, EU/international organisations (UNHCR, IOM, EUAA…), or as part of court proceedings.
[59] See Circular Letter Ministry of Interior, n. 12498, 26 June 2020.
[60] For data about inspection controls in 2019, see ActionAid, Centri d’Italia, Report 2022, available at: https://bit.ly/3Je6et6.
[61] This is for example the case of the Prefecture of Milan, which carried out only 20 inspections in 2019 and, in the face of an increase in its reception facilities in subsequent years, for a total capacity of over 2,000 people, made only 2 visits in the period 2021-2022.
[62] The reference is to the AMIF funded M.I.Re.Co. project (Monitoring and Improvement of Reception Conditions). The project’s aim was to carry out a significant number of monitoring visits in reception centres of all kinds, throughout Italy, and to develop guidelines and standard qualitative-quantitative monitoring tools. The project took place between May 2017 and the end of 2019, but the Government has never made public neither the guidelines nor the results of the around 3,000 monitoring visits that have been supposedly carried out. Only a small part of this data has been made available in the Report on the operation of the reception system designed to meet extraordinary needs connected with the exceptional influx of foreigners into the country (year 2017), August 2018, available at: https://bit.ly/3MyqffW.
[63] Actionaid, “Il decreto Cutro e il commissariamento dei centri di accoglienza”, available at: bit.ly/3JZryBV.
[64] Article 1-sexies (4 and 5) Decree Law 416/1989, converted with amendments into Law 39/1990, as last amended by Decree Law 130/2020, converted with amendments into Law 173/2020.
[65] Ministry of Interior Decree 18 November 2019.
[66] Article 20(1) Reception Decree.
[67] See Circular Letters from MoI DCLI no. 6021 of 23 May 2019 and no. 12246 of 12 July 2019.