This paper examines changes to the Italian legal and case-law framework governing maritime rescue, highlighting the friction between rescue obligations and migration control policies. After describing the institutional structure of the Italian search and rescue (SAR) system, it traces the shift from an approach centred on rescue to a strategy aimed at limiting disembarkations, notably through cooperation with Libya and the adoption of restrictive measures against NGOs. Whilst authorities have introduced a growing number of administrative and legislative measures to hinder rescue operations, Italian case law has frequently reaffirmed the primacy of international obligations, the requirement to disembark in a place of safety, and respect for the principle of non-refoulement. The picture that emerges is one of significant institutional conflict, in which the protection of rights relies primarily on judicial review carried out a posteriori.
De Vittor, F., L’évolution du cadre juridique et jurisprudentiel italien en matière de sauvetage en mer : entre obligations internationales et adaptations nationales, <<CIVITAS EUROPA>>, 2026; n° 56 (1): 11-28. [doi:10.3917/civit.056.0012] [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/345996]
L’évolution du cadre juridique et jurisprudentiel italien en matière de sauvetage en mer : entre obligations internationales et adaptations nationales
De Vittor, Francesca
2026
Abstract
This paper examines changes to the Italian legal and case-law framework governing maritime rescue, highlighting the friction between rescue obligations and migration control policies. After describing the institutional structure of the Italian search and rescue (SAR) system, it traces the shift from an approach centred on rescue to a strategy aimed at limiting disembarkations, notably through cooperation with Libya and the adoption of restrictive measures against NGOs. Whilst authorities have introduced a growing number of administrative and legislative measures to hinder rescue operations, Italian case law has frequently reaffirmed the primacy of international obligations, the requirement to disembark in a place of safety, and respect for the principle of non-refoulement. The picture that emerges is one of significant institutional conflict, in which the protection of rights relies primarily on judicial review carried out a posteriori.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.



