The applicant, a national from Egypt, a country designated as safe by Decree-Law No 158 of 23 October 2024, requested asylum in Italy (Pozzallo) and had his application channeled to the accelerated procedure and was issued with a detention order pursuant to Article 6 bis of Legislative Decree No 142/2015 by the Quaestor of the Province of Ragusa.

The court examined whether, and to what extent, Decree-Law No 158 of 23 October 2024 was relevant in the present procedure for validating detention where Egypt has been classified as a safe country. The court noted that the classification done in the Decree Law does not exempt the court from the obligation to verify the compatibility of that designation with EU law in a full and ex nunc examination, which is an obligation stated by the Court of Justice of the EU in the judgment of 4 October 2024 of the Grand Chamber in Case C-406/2022.

The court held that the designation of Egypt as safe country is not compatible with EU law, taking into account the COI relating to Egypt which reveals serious problems related to respect for human rights, namely:

• the right to life (the death penalty is practiced and the number of executions is among the highest),
• freedom of speech and freedom of the press (numerous cases of arbitrary detentions and warrantless arrests by Egyptian police forces, forced disappearances, vague definitions of terrorism-related cases, ill-treatment, enforced disappearances, lack of procedural guarantees and due process, use of criminal laws to repress the activity of social media users perceived as critical of the regime and to criminalise activities characterised as ‘violation of public morals’ and ‘threat to family values’),
• the right to a fair trial (violations against human rights lawyers, rights activists, journalists and opposition politicians, recourse to military courts),
• freedom of religion (investigations, arrests, detentions, prosecutions and, in some cases, convictions for blasphemy),
• regarding women and minors (discrimination, domestic violence, including marital rape, not yet explicitly criminalised in national legislation and clemency in the Criminal Code for so-called ‘honour crimes’)
• LGBTI rights (prosecutions of homosexual behaviour or same-sex unions on charges of “debauchery”, “prostitution” or “violation of family values”, while discrimination is widespread),
• torture or other forms of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (allegations of systematic use of torture and ill-treatment by police, prison guards, law enforcement and military personnel for opponents and critics of the government; lack of investigation and accountability in relation to these abuses),
• in addition, Egypt has not ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on Torture and has not ratified Optional Protocol II to the Convention on Civil and Political Rights (the death penalty) and it does not appear to have accepted the procedures for individual complaints provided for in many of the international conventions.

The court also noted that the Fact Sheet from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation listed exceptions for certain categories of persons when noting that Egypt was a safe country. Specifically, for Egypt: political opponents, dissidents, human rights defenders, or those at risk of persecution.

The court noted that these risks of insecurity that affect, in a stable and ordinary manner, entire and indeterminate categories of people lead to the conclusion that Egypt cannot be considered a safe country in the light of EU law and CJEU judgment of 4 October 2024, which require that the country be characterized by a ‘general and constant’ security situation.

In light of the above arguments, the court held that is was necessary to disapply the Decree Law of 23 October 2024 and decided not validate the detention order of the Quaestor of the Province of Ragusa and ordered the immediate release of the applicant.