Which are called Cutro’s decision – approved after the shipwreck in which, in February 2023, I was 94 migrants diedamong them 34 children – does not affect the right to respectpersonal and family life. A crackdown on the law, aimed at eradicating illegal immigration, through tightening the rules for obtaining residence permits for special protectionin fact, it does not preclude the recognition of such unauthorized aliens «complementary protection»in the event of effective rooting in the territory, if its removal may constitute a violation of the right to family or private life. The Supreme Court entrusted oneThe ruling is 43 pages long, that isresponse to initial questions posed by the Venetian Court.
Not from the Territorial Commission
On the basis of questions submitted to the Supreme Court, the appeal of a Senegalese immigrant, which was rejected by the territorial commission international protection. The Court’s doubts relate to the possibility of still giving weight to the protection of private and family life after the final blow, with the Cutro Decision, in Article 19, paragraph 1.1., third and fourth sentences, of the Consolidated Law on Immigration (Legislation 286/1998), repealing the sections introduced in 2020, which expanded the scope of the ban on expulsion.
Supreme Court Response
The response from the Supreme Court was clear. The Supreme Court actually clarified that «judicial review, through statutory decision no. 20 of 2023 was changed to Law no. 50 of 2023, on the institution of complementary protection does not lead to the loss of protection for the personal and family life of foreigners residing in Italy, especially since the regulatory structure continues to require compliance with constitutional and conventional obligations”. Therefore, the stoat stipulates that «complementary protection can be provided in the presence of a rooting of foreign nationals in national territory sufficiently strong to state that his dismissal, which was not carried out on grounds of national security or prevailing public order, would result in a violation of his right to family life or private life”. With the further clarification that “the fact that this establishment occurred at the time necessary to examine the foreign national’s request for access to greater protection does not imply any impediment”.
The protection of private and family life – the bottom line of judges’ legitimacy – still requires an evaluation of proportionality and balance in a particular case, in accordance with the criteria developed by the ECtHR and its decisions.United Parts September 9, 2021, n. 24413. Therefore, the weight i family ties developedin Italy, the duration of a person’s presence in the national territory, the social relations established, their degree work integration achieved and ties with society also in terms of the necessary respect for its rules.
All elements must be placed “in comparison with the existence of family, cultural or social ties with the country of origin and the severity of the difficulties the applicant may face in the country to which he must return.”
