Roma contro Roma
Publish date 13-06-2025
How can you seriously violate international law and make a bad impression on the planet, all at the same time?
Well, Italy has succeeded, with the decisions adopted in the “Almasri case”. It concerns the release and repatriation, by the Italian authorities who held him in custody, of Osama Elmasry (also known as Almasri Njeem), a Libyan citizen who was the subject of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court on 18 January 2025. This individual – responsible for the management of “prison facilities in Tripoli, where thousands of people have been detained for prolonged periods” – is accused of “crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder, torture, rape and sexual violence”, committed from February 2015 to the present. The Court’s Pre-Trial Chamber (which issued the warrant) found that these crimes were committed personally by Almasri or at his order, or with the assistance of members of the “special deterrent forces” (known as the Rada). The crimes took place in Mitiga prison, "against people imprisoned for religious reasons (as Christians or atheists), for having contravened the religious ideology of the prison (for example suspicions of immoral behavior or homosexuality)".
The Court sent the request for arrest to Interpol, after having notified the warrant to six European States, "including the Italian Republic", and informed of the movements of the accused. On 19 January, the Turin Digos then proceeded to arrest the Libyan, pending his delivery to the Court in The Hague. With a speed that is rather unusual for the Italian public administration and judiciary, without the Court being informed or consulted, on 21 January Almasri was arrested. was released from prison, loaded onto a state flight and taken to Tripoli, where he was greeted as a triumphant man and with derisive tones towards Italy.
From that moment on, a chaos broke out, all Italian-Italian, with the “noble” competition of passing the buck. The Minister of Justice Nordio first claimed not to know (while the state plane was already in Turin to quickly pick up Almasri), then he affirmed that the decision to release Almasri had been taken by order of the Court of Appeal of Rome. The Minister of the Interior Piantedosi declared that «he was released for reasons of urgency and security, given the dangerousness of the subject». Foreign Minister Tajani stated (and this is very serious!) that "it is not that those who govern in The Hague are the mouthpiece of truth, there can also be different views". I believe that it is not inappropriate to believe that a dangerous individual should be in jail, and that rather than being brought home with full honours, he should be handed over to the court that wants to try him. As for The Hague, the Court is an international tribunal, and does not govern there, and an arrest warrant is not susceptible to "different views".
In Parliament, ministers Piantedosi and Nordio have attempted to provide explanations; the Prime Minister - who frequently claims to "put her face on the line" - did not put it on this time. Generally speaking, the government has taken two paths: placing the responsibility for the decision on the judiciary and, at the same time, harshly attacking the Court in The Hague. Minister Tajani (who is also the vice president of the Council, i.e. deputy head of government) went so far as to declare that "I have many reservations about the Court's behavior in this matter; perhaps an investigation should be opened into the Criminal Court, we need to have clarifications on how it behaved."
In parliament, the argumentative contortions were accompanied by tragicomic statements, such as the one about the difficulty of evaluating the text of the mandate because... it was forty pages long in English! This summary reconstruction of the facts shows the ugly, very ugly figure.
But let's come to the serious violation of international law. The fundamental principle of this is pacta sunt servanda, agreements must be respected. All treaty law is based on the obligation of States to implement theme. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties provides that «every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith» (art. 26) and that «a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law to justify its failure to perform a treaty» (art. 27).
The Statute of the International Criminal Court provides for a general obligation (obligation, not option) for States Parties to cooperate: «States Parties shall cooperate fully with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions» (art. 86).
The Italian Society of International Law and European Union Law (SIDI) has adopted a declaration in which it underlines that «the lack of coordination between authorities investigators, the judiciary and the Ministry of Justice and the expulsion of a person declared to be dangerous (instead of the application of another measure that would have allowed his delivery or trial), accompanied by reckless declarations regarding the nature of the Court's rulings, risk - if they have not already done so - causing very serious and irreparable damage to the reputation of a country that has contributed so much to creating the main international criminal justice institution in existence today". It should not be forgotten, in fact, that the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court is not just any agreement, but is known throughout the world as the "Rome Statute". In 1998, Italy organized, hosted and directed the diplomatic conference that adopted it. To the legal obligation is added, therefore, a moral obligation.
NP March '25
Edoardo Greppi