According to the press release of the CJEU:

"Under Directive 2013/32/EU, Member States may accelerate the examination of applications for international protection and conduct it at the border where those applications are made by nationals of countries considered to offer adequate protection. In Italy, that designation of third countries as ‘safe countries of origin’ has been effected, since October 2024, by a legislative act. Under that act, Bangladesh is considered in Italy to be such a ‘safe country of origin’.

It is in that context that two Bangladeshi nationals, rescued at sea by the Italian authorities, were taken to a detention centre in Albania under the Italy-Albania Protocol, where they lodged an application for international protection. Their application was examined under the accelerated border procedure by the Italian authorities, which rejected it as unfounded, on the ground that their country of origin is considered ‘safe’.

The applicants challenged the rejection decision before the Rome District Court, which made a reference to the Court of Justice in order to clarify the application of the safe country of origin concept and the Member States’ obligations in terms of effective judicial review. The referring court maintains that, unlike the previous scheme, the legislative act of October 2024 does not specify the sources of information on which the Italian legislature relied in order to assess a country’s safety. Consequently, according to that court, both the applicant and the judicial authority are deprived of the possibility, respectively, of challenging and reviewing the lawfulness of such a presumption of safety, by examining in particular the origin, authoritativeness, reliability, relevance, topicality and completeness of those sources.

The Court answers that EU law does not preclude a Member State from designating a third country as a safe country of origin by means of a legislative act, provided that that designation can be subject to effective judicial review. That review must relate to compliance with the material conditions for such a designation set out in Annex I to the Directive, in particular where an action is brought against a decision rejecting an application for asylum under the accelerated procedure applicable to nationals of countries thus designated.

The Court also points out that the sources of information on which such a designation is based must be sufficiently accessible, both for the applicant and for the court or tribunal having jurisdiction. Thatrequirement is intended to ensure effective judicial protection, enabling the applicant to assert his or her rights effectively and the national court or tribunal to exercise its power of review fully. Furthermore, the court or tribunal may, when it verifies whether such a designation complies with the conditions set out in Annex I to the Directive, take account of the information which it has itself gathered, provided that it ascertains that that information is reliable and gives the two parties to the proceedings the opportunity to submit their observations on that additional information.

Finally, the Court points out that, until the entry into force of a new regulation which will replace the directive currently applicable, a Member State may not designate as a ‘safe’ country of origin a third country which does not satisfy, for certain categories of persons, the material conditions for such a designation. The new regulation, which allows designations to be made with exceptions for such clearly identifiable categories of persons, will be applicable as from 12 June 2026, but it is open to the EU legislature to bring that date forward."