The application of a Pakistani national was processed under the accelerated border procedure in accordance with Articles 43 and 45 of the Asylum Procedures Regulation. On 18 June 2026, the Prefect of Agrigento ordered that the applicant reside exclusively at the Villa Sikania reception centre in Siculiana (Agrigento) for a maximum period of 12 weeks, making access to reception conditions conditional upon residence at that facility, pursuant to Article 5-ter of Legislative Decree No 142/2015 and Article 54 of the Asylum Procedures Regulation. The applicant challenged the measure before the Tribunal of Palermo. He contested several aspects of the lawfulness of the measure, including the alleged breach of information obligations; the invalidity, due to lack of competence, of the decision by the President of the Territorial Commission ordering the application of the accelerated border procedure; the failure to assess his vulnerability, including indicators of trafficking; and the absence of a valid notification of the measure restricting his freedom of movement. The applicant also raised a constitutional challenge to Article 5-ter of Legislative Decree No 142/2015. Together with the complaint, the applicant sought, pursuant to Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an interim order suspending the enforceability of the contested measure.

As a preliminary matter, the Tribunal of Palermo held that the application for interim relief under Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure was admissible, as it constitutes a remedy available in the absence of specific interim measures capable of ensuring immediate and effective protection of the right at issue. It explained that Article 700 provides a residual remedy intended to guarantee the full effectiveness of judicial protection under Articles 24 and 113 of the Italian Constitution, when the requirements of fumus boni iuris and periculum in mora are satisfied. The tribunal considered that this principle is particularly relevant because Article 5-quinquies of Legislative Decree No 142/2015 provides for a complaint but does not establish any specific interim measures capable of immediately suspending the effects of the Prefect's decision.

The tribunal found that the requirement of fumus boni iuris was satisfied in light of the multiple grounds of unlawfulness raised by the applicant. In particular, it held that the failure to take account of the applicant's vulnerability, which had already emerged during the screening phase, could constitute a fundamental breach of procedural safeguards capable of vitiating the application of the accelerated border procedure, which forms the legal basis for the contested measure under Article 5-ter(2) of Legislative Decree No 142/2015. The tribunal held that the requirement of periculum in mora was also satisfied, as the applicant was subject to a measure directly affecting his personal liberty, or at least his freedom of movement, with potentially harmful consequences that could not be adequately remedied by compensation.

In light of these considerations, the tribunal held that interim relief under Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not only admissible but necessary, as it constituted the only remedy capable of preventing serious and irreparable harm to the applicant's fundamental rights. Accordingly, the tribunal suspended the enforceability of the order issued by the Prefect of Agrigento on 18 June 2026. It also scheduled a remote hearing for 13 July 2026 to examine the complaint and determine whether the suspension measure should be confirmed, amended or revoked.

Note: to access the original judgment users must create an account (free) on Meltingpot.org.