Category Archives: Economic and Social Cooperation

To Cooperate, but on Its Own Terms: Italy, the WHO, and the Defence of Health Sovereignty

In 2025 and 2026, Italy’s position towards the World Health Organization (WHO) and global health governance more in general was marked by a significant ambivalence. On the one hand, the Government repeatedly reaffirmed the need for international cooperation in the field of public health, acknowledging that global health emergencies cannot be addressed through unilateral action. On the other, Italy’s diplomatic and parliamentary practice showed a growing insistence on the preservation of the State’s margin of discretion in the implementation of international health standards.

During the 158th session of the WHO Executive Board in 2026, for instance, Italy affirmed that WHO is most effective when focused on its core functions and comparative advantages, and that its action should be “underpinned by national ownership”, since Member States retain “primary responsibility and prerogatives for health policies and health systems”.[1] The same attitude emerged in other contexts: Italy’s explanation of vote on the United Nations General Assembly resolution on Global Health and Foreign Policy, the domestic debate on a possible withdrawal from the WHO, the rejection of all the 2024 amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), and Italy’s abstention on the WHO Pandemic Agreement.

Continue reading →

To Cooperate or Not to Cooperate: The Repercussions of the Elmasry Case and Italy’s Gradual Distancing from the International Criminal Court

Leave a reply

In 2025, Italy was requested for the first time to cooperate with the International Criminal Court (ICC) in arresting and surrendering a suspect; it failed to do so and was therefore found non-compliant and referred to the Assembly of States Parties (ASP). The “Elmasry case”, from the name of the Libyan suspect Italy first arrested and then brought back to Libya thus violating its obligations to cooperate with the ICC, revealed the Italian Government’s ambiguity with regard to its conditional support to international criminal justice.[1] Additionally, the case exposed a legal disagreement concerning the role of the Minister of Justice under Italian implementing legislation (Law no. 237 of 20 December 2012). In particular, the Minister of Justice, Mr. Carlo Nordio, appeared to rely on the view that the Government retained a margin of discretionary assessment as to the transmission and execution of the ICC’s cooperation requests.[2] However, as it will be explained below, the ICC has found Italy’s defences to be inconsistent with the obligations under the Rome Statute. In this connection, a case is currently pending regarding the constitutionality of certain provisions of Law no. 237. This note will focus on the aftermath of the Elmasry case, at both the domestic and international levels, showing that, unless legal changes are made, there is a real risk that this episode will be only the first in a series of failures to cooperate by Italy.

Continue reading →

The Ongoing Reform of the Italian Law on Arms Export and Recent Policy Trends in This Field

Leave a reply

Italy stands out as one of the first countries to have established a detailed legal regime for arms export control, with Law No. 185 of 1990. Despite having ratified the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in 2013, Italy has never introduced any implementing legislation or undertaken a substantial revision of Law 185/1990 to align it with the ATT obligations. The reform of such law – long awaited due to partial divergence from ATT provisions – thus appeared to many as necessary. Against this background, the draft amendments to Law 185/1990 were formally submitted to the Senate of the Republic on 11 August 2023 by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation in coordination with the Ministers of Defence, of the Interior, of Justice, of Economy and Finance and of Enterprises and Made in Italy. However, it is striking that the current reform makes no explicit reference to the ATT, nor does it seem to address the need for legal harmonisation.[1] This calls for a closer examination of the actual drivers behind the reform of Italy’s legislation on arms export control.

Continue reading →

Italy’s Support to Ukraine’s War Effort: Neither Unconditional Military Aid, Nor Unconditional Peace

2 Replies

In 2024, the Russia-Ukraine conflict remained one of the main topics of debate in foreign policy matters in Italy. Among the aspects discussed by governmental representatives, the most significant ones are the extent of Italian support to Ukraine’s war effort, the final aim this support pursues (i.e., the conditions attached to a future peace arrangement), and military aid to Russia from other States.

Continue reading →

The Enforcement of Arrest Warrants Issued by the International Criminal Court: Between the Duty to Cooperate and Realpolitik

1 Reply

In late 2024 and early 2025 the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued several arrest warrants in the context of politically sensitive investigations, including those regarding the ongoing armed conflicts in Ukraine and Palestine.[1] Some of these decisions concern alleged perpetrators holding high-level political positions in States that are close allies of Italy, such as Israel. Furthermore, in January 2025, Italy was requested by the Court to execute on its territory an arrest warrant issued against General Osema Almasri Najeem in the context of the investigation in Libya. Italy’s recent behaviour in relation to arrest warrants in the situations in Palestine and Libya is indicative of a shift from the traditionally supportive attitude to a more cautious (and lees cooperative) one in its relations with international criminal tribunals. This contribution analyses the Italian Government’s conduct, which shows a discrepancy between the rhetorical support for the ICC and the lack of actual cooperation in the execution of its requests.

Continue reading →

The Arrest and Detention of Ilaria Salis in Hungary

Leave a reply

On 13 February 2023, the Italian Embassy in Hungary was informed that Ilaria Salis, an Italian national, had been arrested in Budapest two days earlier. She had been taken into custody on charges of armed group violence for assaulting far-right activists during a demonstration. She was accused of being part of organised groups that allegedly planned to attack people present at the demonstration. The Embassy was informed that Ms. Salis was being held in a Budapest prison and that the prosecution was seeking a prison sentence of 11 years.

In 2024, while expressing concern for non-compliance with fair trial and minimum standards on detention, Italy initially only stressed the need to respect Hungary’s sovereignty and the impartiality of its judiciary.[1] On 29 January 2024, the Minister of Justice, Mr. Carlo Nordio, emphasised that “the Hungarian judiciary is sovereign” and that Italy could only take action through diplomatic channels to improve the conditions of detention.[2] Further statements by both Mr. Nordio and the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Mr. Antonio Tajani, underlined that the principle of judicial sovereignty of a State would prevent interference in the conduct of the trial and Ms. Salis’s detention status.[3]

Continue reading →

The Non-extradition of Italian Terrorists from France, Between Political and Legal Issues

Leave a reply

On 28 March 2023, the French Cour de Cassation upheld the decision of 29 June 2022 whereby the Cour d’appel of Paris had ruled that ten of the former members of the left-wing terrorist organization known as the Red Brigades – who had found refuge in France for almost 40 years – should not be extradited to Italy. The Italian Government, which in January 2020, with the support of the French authorities, had requested the extradition of the former terrorists,^[1] condemned the decision of the Cour de Cassation, thus continuing the never-ending debate on the political gradient of extradition.^[2]

Continue reading →

International Standards on Criminal Punishment: Italy’s Position Between Progressive Tendencies and Lack of Legal Clarity

Leave a reply

In 2022, the Italian Government addressed the issue of criminal punishment on various occasions, thus shedding light on the interpretation of its features in accordance with relevant international standards. The resulting picture is a composite one, anchored in human rights and directed at expanding the reach of international law to an area traditionally considered to be within the reserved domain of States – but not always on the basis of clear legal arguments.

Continue reading →

Migration Policy and Management under the “Conte 1” Government

Leave a reply

The fight against “irregular” migration to Italy featured prominently in the election manifesto of the Lega (League – a right-wing political party) and was incorporated in the coalition agreement concluded between the two governing parties after the 4 March 2018 general election, namely the League and the Movimento 5 Stelle (Five Star Movement). Accordingly, on 5 June 2018, the President of the Council of Ministers, Mr Giuseppe Conte, outlined the approach on migration of the newly formed Italian Government during his first speech before the Senate of the Republic (9th Meeting, XVIII Legislature):

It is clear to everyone that the management of migratory flows as implemented to date has failed. Europe allowed – we must emphasize it – selfish positions by Member States, which ended up placing the burden, which should have been shared, on border States, first and foremost on Italy. That is why we will vigorously demand to go beyond the Dublin Regulation, so as to ensure actual compliance with the principle of equitable responsibility-sharing and implement automatic mechanisms for the mandatory relocation of asylum seekers. […]

We want asylum procedures to be well-established and swift, also with a view to more effectively ensuring that the rights [of asylum seekers] are guaranteed and that they do not live in uncertainty. […]

We must also re-organize the reception system and make it efficient with a view to ensuring the transparent use of public funds and preventing any infiltration by organized crime. Should there be no grounds for the stay [of migrants in Italy], we will take action to make repatriation procedures effective and, at the European level, to compel third States willing to conclude cooperation agreements with any EU Member States to ratify bilateral agreements for the management of migratory flows.

Continue reading →

The Scope and Means of Action of the United Nations Security Council as Seen by Italy during its “Shared Membership”

1 Reply

Italy has a long tradition of taking public stances on issues concerning the United Nations (UN) in general, and the Security Council (SC) in particular. The most important of such issues is perhaps the reform of the SC, a hotly debated question on which Italy has been taking a leading position for many years, promoting a series of proposals around which a group known as “Uniting for Consensus” has gathered.^[1] This very same theme has been discussed by Italian representatives at the UN also in 2017 and 2018, when they reiterated and further clarified their country’s view.^[2] Those years also correspond to the biennium that saw Italy and the Netherlands share a split non-permanent seat at the SC (the former being a member in 2017). Therefore, Italy has recently had many occasions to express its ideas on the action of the SC.

It is well known that the role of the SC has been progressively expanding since the end of the Cold War, so that nowadays its activities have a far wider scope than that envisioned in 1945 by the drafters of the UN Charter. Such legal developments can be said to be, by now, largely accepted by the international community, and even those States that occasionally veto or anyhow oppose certain SC resolutions, sometimes do that inconsistently and by putting forth political rather than legal justifications.^[3] This notwithstanding, the issue of how far-reaching the powers of the SC are remains the subject of scholarly debate and is still of some practical importance for States. From this perspective, it may be useful to review Italy’s stances on the action of the SC.

Continue reading →