On 21 February 2025, the Prefect of Cuneo province ordered the removal of a third-country national who was irregularly residing in Italy. On the same day, the Quaestor of Cuneo ordered his detention at the pre-removal centre (Centro di Permanenza per il Rimpatrio, CPR) of Gorizia-Gradisca d'Isonzo. The Justice of the Peace of Gorizia validated the detention measure on 25 February 2025. On 11 April 2025, the individual was transferred to the CPR of Gjader, Albania, and requested international protection therein on 2 May 2025. On the same day, the Quaestor of Rome ordered his detention, pursuant to Article 6(3) of Legislative Decree No 142/2015, at the CPR of Gjader. The Quaestor deemed that, due to the circumstances of time and place, his application for international protection appeared to be solely intended to delay or obstruct the removal. On 5 May 2025, the Court of Appeal of Rome did not validate the detention measure. The applicant was returned to Italy on 6 May 2025, where the Quaestor of Bari ordered his detention at the CPR of Bari-Palese on the same day. On 7 May 2025, the Bari Police Headquarters requested validation of the detention measure from the Court of Appeal of Bari.

The Court of Appeal of Bari affirmed that, in the present case, the court was only required to assess whether there were reasonable grounds to believe that the application for international protection was submitted ‘solely for the purpose of delaying or obstructing the execution of the refusal of entry or expulsion’ (Article 6(3) of Legislative Decree No 142/2015). The court clarified that the alleged 'abusive' nature of the application must be apparent prima facie, as the assessment of its merits falls within the exclusive competence of the Territorial Commission in the administrative phase, and of the judge in any subsequent judicial review.

The Court of Appeal of Bari noted that the Court of Appeal of Rome did not view the application as being made for the sole purpose of delaying or obstructing the removal, as the applicant had lived in Italy for about thirty years and was the father of two young children, whom he still had the right to visit as part of regaining his parental rights. The Court of Appeal of Bari clarified that, contrary to the Police Headquarters' position in the contested decision, the Court of Appeal of Rome, in rejecting the request for validation, explicitly ruled that the application was not made for the purpose of delaying or obstructing the removal. The Court of Appeal of Bari highlighted that this requirement is necessary for validating detention measures. The court refrained from further examining this requirement, as the Court of Appeal of Rome had already ruled on the matter. It affirmed that revisiting the issue would have violated the ne bis in idem principle. The court concluded that the conditions justifying the validation of the detention ordered by the Quaestor of Bari, pursuant to Article 6(3) of Legislative Decree No 142/2015, were not met, and therefore, it did not validate the detention measure.

Note: to access the original judgment users must create an account on Meltingpot.org, the source indicated under 'Show more info'.