A New Politics of Immigration: The Contradictions Behind The Salvini Bill

In 2018, migration flows to Italy have consistently decreased. This might sound unexpected in light of current conservative rhetoric and tense political debate on migration. Yet, data from the UNHCR (UN High Commissioner for Refugees) speak very clearly: sea arrivals to Italy between January and September of 2018 dropped by 80% compared to 2017. To date, the UNHCR has counted a total of 86,601 arrivals by sea in the Mediterranean basin, of which, only 20,948 reached Italian shores, while 45,371 people landed in Spain, and 24,821 in Greece . The picture still looks concerning, however, it is impossible to overlook a significant stabilization and decline of the migration flows over the last five years - especially since 2015 when UNHCR registered 1,015,078 sea arrivals to Europe (153,842 to Italy), decreasing to 362,753 in 2016, and 172, 301 in whole 2017. Even though immigration has declined, the voyage has become more deadly. The percentage of people missing or dying by sea has risen from one in every 52 people in 2017, to one in every 48 this year, suggesting the urgency of strengthening rescue capacity and implementing a more effective coordination of NGOs throughout the Mediterranean.

The data presented by the UNHCR should relieve far right, anti-immigrant, EU policy makers; however, since it was inaugurated in June 2018, the new Italian government has mobilized a vigorous public campaign to implement new anti-immigration policies. On August 13, Minister of the Interior Matteo Salvini sent an explicit message to Europe when he blocked the German-registered humanitarian boat Acquarius from disembarking 141 migrants on the shores of Italy. In July, Salvini asked Italian prefectures to reduce the number of residency permits granted to migrants. Indeed, according to an Italian legislation approved in 1998, Italy can guarantee residency permits and the possibility to work - up to two years, renewable - for certain categories who are not eligible for refugee status, but who cannot be sent home.

A decisive move, however, was taken last month with the proposal, and eventual approval on September 24, of the Salvini Bill on Security and Migration. The bill includes several hardline measures on migration that represent, as Salvini stated, “a step forward to making Italy safer” . Such measures include the abolishment of humanitarian protections guaranteed by the 1998 legislation and their replacement with a permit system that recognizes eligibility for residency to victims of natural disasters or people with serious illness. The refugee status process will also be suspended for those who are considered “socially dangerous”, or who have been convicted for a crime. In addition to the weakening of the SPRAR (Sistema di Protezione per Richiedenti Asilo e Rifugiati) system - the previous reception system -, the bill will strengthen the power of first reception centres and CPR (Centri Per il Rimpatrio). Indeed, it extended the time limit for people to be held in CPR from 90 to 180 days. Furthermore, it provides for the tripling of public funding for repatriations. The document also gives more power to the police and strengthens the fight against the mafia and human traffickers.

The text of this bill clears up any uncertainty about the intentions of the current Italian government to block migration flows to Italy. However, according to some experts, the main outcome will be an increase in the number of irregular migrants. Professor of Law and Immigration Policies at Luiss University in Rome, Christopher Hein, affirms that this bill is to be conceived as part of a large deterrent plan - including the closure of seaports and the criminalization of migrant rescue NGOs - which aims at preventing arrivals. Nevertheless, if people don’t have chances to be granted humanitarian protection, or if they get rejected; it does not mean that they would simply come back home. ISPI (Istituto Per gli studi di Politica Internazionale) research fellow in its Migration Programme, Matteo Villa demonstrates the inefficacy of the bill for migrants who have already been granted humanitarian protection: at current return rates, he demonstrated, out of 39,000 foreigners having been assigned humanitarian protection in 2016-2017, only 6,000 would possibly come back. The rest would stay in the country as irregulars. In both perspectives, such a policy of deterrence will jeopardize the lives of migrants in Italy and worsen the conditions of their journeys, rather than change their decision to migrate.

One week after the approval of the bill, another event sent a strong message to Italian civil society and beyond about the new government’s intentions. On October 2, Mayor of Riace Domenico Lucano was placed under house arrest for “promoting illegal migration”. Lucano and his model have been lauded internationally as an example of hospitality and integration. He was included among the world’s 50 greatest leaders by Fortune Magazine. With the aim to repopulate the deserted Calabrian village of Riace in the early 2000s, Lucano foresaw the revival of the town and its economy by integrating migrants. The Riace model allowed migrants to live for free in abandoned buildings and established that the money supplied by the government for hospitality projects would be invested in commercial activities managed by the migrants themselves in collaboration with local residents. The arrest of Lucano was a strong statement by the government and is part of the same plan to hinder migration and criminalize its accomplices. Lucano’s arrest provoked several protests throughout the country, nonetheless Minister Salvini seems unwilling to roll back his positions.

Despite a decline in migration flows, after four months the new government has already charted a clear course. The policies approved by the Salvini Bill on Security and Migration will have a significant impact on the lives of migrants, both those who have already arrived, and those who will in the near future. An understanding of the full effects of these policies is not yet clear, however, we can catch a glimpse of the potential impact in the strengthening of racialized practices (for example: racially motivated violence and public expressions of xenophobia) and discourses in Italian political debate and civil society. It is the first time in Italian history that a bill on migration has been combined with one on national security: the path that Italy has committed itself to on immigration is very alarming.