In recent years the concept of remigration has become increasingly prominent in debates on immigration across Europe. The idea is most closely associated with Austrian activist Martin Sellner, a leading figure of the European identitarian movement and former head of the Identitäre Bewegung Österreich.
Sellner has developed this concept through speeches, essays and particularly in the book Remigration: A Proposal, where he presents a political strategy intended to respond to what he considers the demographic and cultural transformation of European societies resulting from immigration over the last decades.
For a British audience, the debate may appear familiar. The United Kingdom has experienced intense political discussion about immigration for many years, especially in the context of border control, integration policies and the broader debate that led to Brexit. Questions about how migration affects social cohesion, national identity and public services continue to shape public discourse.
The theory of remigration attempts to offer a radical answer to these concerns. In Sellner’s framework, remigration is not limited to the removal of undocumented migrants. Instead, it represents a broader political project aimed at reversing the long-term demographic consequences of mass immigration.
This project generally includes stricter border enforcement, the reassessment of residence permits granted in previous years and the development of policies designed to encourage or enforce the return of migrants who are considered insufficiently assimilated into European societies.
The reasoning behind this approach is primarily cultural. According to Sellner, European societies are undergoing deep changes due to immigration from regions with different religious, linguistic and social traditions. Remigration, in this view, would be a way to restore what he perceives as the historical cultural balance of European nations.
However, such proposals raise significant legal and constitutional questions within the European context. European states operate within a complex legal framework that includes national constitutional systems as well as supranational structures such as the European Union and institutions like the Council of Europe.
These frameworks strongly protect fundamental rights, including family life, equality before the law and the stability of legal residence status. As a result, any proposal involving the large-scale removal of long-term residents inevitably faces substantial legal obstacles.
In response to these challenges, an alternative perspective has emerged within the Italian legal debate: the paradigm known as “Integration or ReImmigration.”
Unlike the theory of remigration, this paradigm does not treat immigration primarily as a cultural or demographic issue. Instead, it approaches migration as a question of legal governance that must be managed through clear and objective rules.
The central idea is straightforward: integration must become a verifiable condition for long-term residence in a country.
Under this model, the focus is not on a person’s origin, religion or cultural background. What matters is the individual’s real participation in the host society. Integration is assessed through concrete elements such as employment, knowledge of the national language and respect for the legal order.
When integration occurs, the state has a clear interest in stabilising the person’s legal status through residence permits or other forms of legal protection.
When integration does not occur, the legal system should provide orderly mechanisms for return to the country of origin. Within this paradigm, this process is referred to as ReImmigration.
ReImmigration is not conceived as a cultural or identity-based project. Rather, it is understood as a legal instrument for regulating migration flows when integration fails to take place.
The distinction between these two approaches is therefore fundamental.
The theory of remigration focuses primarily on cultural identity and demographic transformation. The Integration or ReImmigration paradigm instead places individual integration at the centre of the legal evaluation.
In practical terms, this means that a person’s right to remain in a country is not determined by their origin, but by their ability to become an active and law-abiding participant in the host society.
For the United Kingdom, which has long combined immigration with a strong tradition of civic integration, this distinction is particularly relevant. The key challenge is not simply how many migrants enter a country, but how effectively integration takes place once they arrive.
Without clear mechanisms to measure and manage integration, immigration policy risks oscillating between permissive systems that struggle to address social tensions and radical proposals that conflict with fundamental legal principles.
The Integration or ReImmigration paradigm attempts to outline a different path: a framework in which immigration remains possible, but where integration becomes a clear legal requirement and where, if integration fails, structured return mechanisms exist within the rule of law.
Avv. Fabio Loscerbo
Registered Lobbyist – EU Transparency Register ID 280782895721-36
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7030-0428
Lascia un commento