Abstract
The judgment of the Bologna Court of 12 December 2025, General Register 13822 of 2025, represents a significant contribution to the development of case law on complementary protection under Article 19 of Legislative Decree 25 July 1998, No. 286. The decision clarifies the scope of the right to respect for private and family life as a substantive limit on the administrative power to refuse residence and order removal, reaffirming the nature of this protection as a subjective right whenever an effective rooting of the foreign national in the national territory is established. This article examines the criteria for assessing integration, the principle of proportionality, and the transitional regime applicable to applications submitted prior to the entry into force of Decree-Law 10 March 2023, No. 20.
1. The Legal Framework of Complementary Protection
Complementary protection is grounded in Article 19, paragraphs 1 and 1.1, of the Italian Consolidated Immigration Act, as reformulated by Decree-Law 21 October 2020, No. 130, converted with amendments by Law 18 December 2020, No. 173. This reform significantly expanded the scope of protection by anchoring the prohibition of refusal and removal not only to the risk of persecution or inhuman or degrading treatment, but also to the protection of the right to respect for private and family life, in line with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
From this perspective, complementary protection operates as a residual yet autonomous instrument, designed to capture situations in which forced removal from the national territory would result in a disproportionate violation of fundamental rights, even in the absence of the requirements for refugee status or subsidiary protection.
2. The Case Decided by the Bologna Court
In the judgment under review, the Tribunale Ordinario di Bologna was called upon to assess the lawfulness of a refusal of complementary protection based on a negative assessment of the applicant’s level of social integration, expressed by the Territorial Commission and adopted by the police authority.
The Court reconstructed the applicant’s life trajectory in a detailed and analytical manner, attaching particular weight to elements such as long-term residence in Italy, the stability of the family unit, children’s school attendance, employment activity—albeit characterised by periods of discontinuity—and housing autonomy. These circumstances were assessed as a whole, through a comprehensive and non-fragmentary evaluation capable of reflecting the reality of the integration achieved within the national territory.
3. Private Life, Integration and the Principle of Proportionality
One of the most significant aspects of the decision lies in the broad interpretation of the notion of private life, understood as the network of social, emotional and professional relationships that contribute to shaping an individual’s personal identity. In this context, integration is not conceived as an ideal or absolute achievement, but rather as a dynamic process, demonstrable through any appreciable effort to participate in Italian social life.
The Court expressly refers to the principle of proportionality, emphasising that State interference with the private and family life of a foreign national may be considered lawful only where justified by concrete and current needs relating to national security or public order. In the absence of such prerequisites, removal from the national territory constitutes an unjustified restriction of fundamental rights, contrary to Article 8 ECHR and to the very rationale of Article 19 of the Consolidated Immigration Act.
4. Transitional Regime and Applicable Law
Of particular relevance is the reminder of the transitional regime provided for by Article 7 of Decree-Law 10 March 2023, No. 20, converted by Law 5 May 2023, No. 50. The Court reaffirms that applications submitted prior to the entry into force of that decree remain governed by the previous legal framework, resulting in the recognition of a residence permit with a two-year duration, renewable and convertible into a work-related residence permit.
This clarification has systemic importance, as it counters administrative practices aimed at applying more restrictive rules retroactively, in violation of the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations.
5. Concluding Remarks
The Bologna Court judgment of 12 December 2025, General Register 13822 of 2025, fits within an already consolidated line of case law and contributes to strengthening the concept of complementary protection as a full subjective right, enforceable before the courts. The decision confirms that the assessment of integration must be substantive and individualised, and that the administration may not rely on stereotypical or purely formal evaluations.
The full text of the judgment is available for consultation and further study on Calameo at the following link:
https://www.calameo.com/books/0080797751165099142b8
Avv. Fabio Loscerbo
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento