domenica 15 febbraio 2026

New on TikTok: Welcome to a new episode of the Immigration Law podcast. My name is lawyer Fabio Loscerbo. Today we focus on SIS alerts, meaning alerts entered into the Schengen Information System, a topic that in practice has a decisive impact on freedom of movement, the right to re-enter Italy, and more generally on the legal status of foreign nationals. .The key question is this: what happens to an SIS alert when an expulsion order is annulled by a judge? The answer is not always what one might expect, and it is clearly explained by a recent judgment of the Regional Administrative Court of Campania, Seventh Section, published on 2 February 2026, judgment number 724 of 2026, issued in proceedings registered under general register number 2589 of 2025tar campagnia segnalazione sis In this case, a Justice of the Peace had annulled a prefectural expulsion decree. Following that decision, the Police Headquarters correctly cancelled the SIS alert linked to that specific decree. However, another alert remained in the databases, based not on the annulled prefectural measure, but on a criminal expulsion measure resulting from a final criminal conviction adopted several years earlier. The applicant therefore brought enforcement proceedings, arguing that the annulment of the expulsion should have resulted in the cancellation of all adverse SIS alerts. The Administrative Court rejected that argument and clarified a fundamental principle that must be stated plainly: the annulment of an expulsion order only affects the SIS alert that is legally based on that specific order. It does not invalidate, nor render ineffective, other alerts based on different legal grounds, such as an expulsion measure imposed as a consequence of a criminal conviction. In other words, the Schengen Information System is not a single, uniform entry. It is a system that may contain multiple alerts, each legally autonomous. Each alert stands or falls depending on its own legal basis. If that legal basis remains valid, the alert remains lawful. This point is crucial in legal practice. Obtaining the annulment of an expulsion does not automatically mean that the SIS position is fully cleared. It is always necessary to verify the concrete origin of the alert, to distinguish between administrative and criminal measures, and to assess whether any legal grounds are still in force. The judgment of the Regional Administrative Court of Campania makes it clear, without any ambiguity, that immigration law is built on legal stratification. Effective protection depends on legal precision, not on automatic assumptions. We will return to this topic, because SIS alerts remain one of the most delicate and least understood elements of the entire system. Thank you for listening, and see you in the next episode of the Immigration Law podcast.

https://ift.tt/9zWb8xr

Nessun commento:

Posta un commento

New on TikTok: Residence permit denied by the Police but granted by the Court: a job and real integration are enough for special protection Welcome to a new episode of the podcast Immigration Law. My name is lawyer Fabio Loscerbo, and today we address a very practical issue: what happens when the Police deny a residence permit, but the Court overturns that decision. We are talking about a judgment of the Court of Bologna, case number 591 of 2025, concerning the recognition of special protection . The Police had denied the permit, arguing that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient integration. This is a very common reasoning in practice: authorities often expect an almost “perfect” level of integration, as if a foreign national had to prove complete and definitive social inclusion. The Court takes a different approach, one that is more consistent with the law and recent case law. It clearly states that full integration is not required. What matters is a serious and concrete path of integration, even if it is still ongoing. In this case, the applicant had a stable job, an income, had attended language courses, and had been living in Italy for several years. All these elements, taken together, show real social integration. At this point, a key legal principle comes into play: the right to private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This concept does not only concern family ties, but also includes social relationships, work, and the life a person builds over time. The Court states that removing a person in such circumstances would mean uprooting them and seriously affecting their fundamental rights. It also adds an important point: if there are no concerns related to public safety or public order, the State’s interest in expulsion becomes weak. The outcome is clear: the Court recognizes the right to a residence permit for special protection, valid for two years, renewable and convertible into a work permit . The message of this decision is straightforward: if a person works, integrates, and builds a life in Italy, this reality cannot be ignored. And this is exactly where the future of immigration law will increasingly be decided. Thank you for listening, and see you soon for a new episode of Immigration Law.

https://ift.tt/r7DH6df