For more than three decades, the European debate on migration has largely been built around a single assumption: integration. The prevailing idea has been that immigration can remain socially sustainable if governments implement policies capable of integrating newcomers into the economic, social, and cultural structures of European societies. Employment, language acquisition, education, social participation, and eventually access to citizenship have been presented as the main pillars of this model. In this narrative, integration has been seen not only as a policy objective but as the essential condition for the long-term stability of immigration in Europe.
Yet within this framework a crucial question has often remained largely unaddressed: what happens when integration fails?
For many years European governments have focused almost exclusively on policies designed to facilitate integration, while paying far less attention to the legal and institutional consequences of its failure. Integration is not an automatic process. It depends on economic opportunities, social stability, and cultural adaptation. Most importantly, it requires the active participation of the immigrant population itself. When this process does not occur, or when it breaks down, societies may face situations of social marginalization, community tension, and in some cases criminal activity.
In recent years statistical data have contributed to reopening this debate across Europe. Official figures regarding prison populations in several European countries show a significant presence of foreign nationals among detainees. These numbers are not political interpretations but official statistics produced by public institutions. Data published by the European statistical office show that the proportion of foreign nationals among prisoners varies significantly across European states, but in several countries it represents a substantial share of the prison population. These statistics can be consulted on the official Eurostat website:
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Prison_statistics
Italy provides a clear example of this broader European trend. According to statistics published by the Italian Ministry of Justice, foreign nationals consistently represent roughly one third of the total prison population. These official data are published by the Department of Penitentiary Administration and can be consulted here:
https://www.giustizia.it/giustizia/it/mg_1_14_1.page
Such figures, of course, must be interpreted carefully. Criminological research has long shown that the presence of foreign nationals in prison is influenced by a range of structural factors. These include economic vulnerability, unstable residence status, reduced access to alternative sentencing measures, and fewer resources for legal defense. These structural conditions can significantly influence prison population statistics and must be taken into account when analyzing the data.
Nevertheless, beyond sociological explanations, a broader political question remains unavoidable. If integration is the cornerstone of European migration policy, it cannot remain merely an aspirational objective. Integration necessarily implies responsibility. It cannot be understood solely as a set of social opportunities offered by the host state; it must also involve a commitment by newcomers to respect the legal order and the fundamental norms of the society in which they live.
Integration therefore goes beyond employment or access to public services. It also involves adherence to the rule of law, respect for public institutions, and meaningful participation in civic life. When these elements are absent, governments inevitably face a difficult question: how should the legal system respond when integration does not occur?
It is within this context that the concept of Reimmigration emerges. By this term we do not mean a program of collective deportation or a policy targeting individuals because of their origin. Rather, Reimmigration refers to a legal and policy principle linking the right of long-term residence in a country to the effective integration of the individual within the host society.
It is important to clarify a frequent misunderstanding in contemporary political debates. Reimmigration is fundamentally different from the concept often referred to as “remigration.” In some political contexts, particularly in certain European debates, remigration has been used to describe proposals for large-scale or collective return of immigrant populations. The concept of Reimmigration follows a completely different logic. It does not rely on cultural, ethnic, or identity-based criteria. Instead, it is grounded in an individual legal assessment of the relationship between a person’s right to remain in a country and their demonstrated integration within that society.
Reimmigration therefore operates strictly within the framework of the rule of law. It presupposes legal procedures, individual evaluations, judicial safeguards, and institutional accountability. It does not target individuals because of their nationality or cultural background. Rather, it addresses situations in which the integration process has clearly failed and where the legal justification for continued residence must be reassessed.
In reality, European law already recognizes principles that move in this direction. The legal framework of the European Union allows member states to restrict residence rights when public order or public security are at stake. The relevant provisions can be found in the European directive on free movement, which explicitly allows states to adopt restrictive measures under specific circumstances. The directive is available here:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32004L0038
Similarly, the European Return Directive establishes the legal framework governing the return of third-country nationals whose presence in the territory of the European Union is no longer lawful. The text of the directive can be consulted here:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0115
The issue, therefore, is not the absence of legal tools. Rather, it is the absence of a coherent conceptual framework through which these tools can be understood and applied. For many years European political discourse has emphasized integration while avoiding the more difficult conversation about what should happen when integration does not succeed.
Demographic change, social tensions in certain urban environments, and growing polarization in public debate across Europe suggest that this question will become increasingly unavoidable. If integration remains the central pillar of migration policy, then it must also include the principle of responsibility. Where that responsibility disappears, legal systems must retain the capacity to act.
The paradigm “Integration or Reimmigration” arises precisely from this observation. Its purpose is not to replace integration with Reimmigration, but to affirm that integration cannot remain a political promise without consequences. In societies governed by the rule of law, rights and responsibilities must remain inseparable.
Over the past decades Europe has developed one of the most advanced legal systems in the world for protecting the fundamental rights of migrants. The next step in the evolution of migration governance may well involve strengthening the principle of responsibility within that same legal framework.
If this debate is not addressed rationally and within a legal and institutional structure, there is a significant risk that it will be dominated by ideological extremes or simplified political narratives. For this reason, the concept of Reimmigration should enter international discussion not as a slogan, but as a legal and policy framework aimed at preserving the balance between integration, responsibility, and the rule of law.
Integration remains the primary path. But a credible migration policy cannot ignore what happens when that path is not taken.
Avv. Fabio Loscerbo
Immigration Lawyer
Lobbyist registered in the European Union Transparency Register
ID: 280782895721-36
ORCID
https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7030-0428
Lascia un commento