The paradigm “Integration or ReImmigrazione” is neither a political slogan nor a rhetorical provocation. It is a legal framework grounded in institutional realism, designed to address a structural weakness that has characterised European migration policy for decades: the belief that economic usefulness can replace genuine integration.
For too long, immigration has been managed almost exclusively through labour market logic. Migrants are accepted as long as they work; when employment ends, legal stability collapses. In this model, work does not support integration—it substitutes it. The result is legal uncertainty, social fragmentation, and a system in which rules exist formally but are applied inconsistently.
The Integration or ReImmigrazione paradigm starts from a different assumption: integration is not an economic function but a legal and civic obligation. Employment remains important, but only as one indicator of integration, not as the legal foundation of the right to remain. Language proficiency, respect for the law, civic behaviour, and adherence to the values of the host society are equally decisive.
This approach must be clearly distinguished from the notion of “remigration” as it has emerged in parts of the German debate. That concept often takes on collective, ideological, or identity-based connotations, raising serious rule-of-law concerns. ReImmigrazione, by contrast, is individual, conditional, and legally structured. It does not target origin or identity, but conduct. It evaluates personal trajectories, case by case, against objective and verifiable criteria.
A core instrument of this paradigm is the Integration Agreement, introduced in Italy by the Berlusconi government to make integration measurable and enforceable. The agreement was conceived as a reciprocal legal framework, defining concrete obligations—language, civic education, lawful conduct—and linking the right to stay to their effective fulfilment. Today, although the instrument still exists formally, it is largely disapplied, stripped of its practical consequences.
At present, the real operational laboratory of the Integration or ReImmigrazione paradigm is complementary protection. This form of protection does not grant an unconditional right to remain. It is based on an individual assessment of integration, proportionality, and behaviour. Crucially, the procedure requires the deposit of the passport with the immigration authorities.
This is not a technical detail. It is a structural guarantee of enforceability. It ensures that, should integration fail, the State retains the practical ability to implement ReImmigrazione. Integration without the capacity to enforce departure is not compassionate governance—it is institutional weakness.
From a UK perspective, this logic is far from alien. British constitutional culture has long recognised that credibility in public policy depends on enforcement. A system that can grant leave to remain but cannot require departure undermines both public trust and the rule of law.
Integration or ReImmigrazione does not seek to radicalise the debate. It seeks to restore coherence. Those who integrate stay. Those who refuse integration return. Clear rules, individual assessment, and effective execution—this is not extremism, but responsible governance.
Avv. Fabio Loscerbo
Attorney at Law – Bologna Bar
Lobbyist registered in the EU Transparency Register
ID 280782895721-36
Lascia un commento