Italy’s Chamber of Deputies has given final approval to a contentious decree on assisted voluntary repatriation, cementing into law a measure that had already been revised after the Quirinale raised constitutional objections. The vote — 147 in favour, 93 against, with three abstentions — passed the text unchanged from the Senate version, triggering sharp exchanges in the chamber. The legislation provides for a state-funded compensation, from 2026 to 2028, to a mandated representative who assists a foreign national in applying for a voluntary return programme. Crucially, the payment is now triggered by the conclusion of the administrative procedure rather than the migrant’s actual departure, a modification that followed protests from legal professionals. Lawyers were initially included among eligible representatives but were subsequently removed, a retreat that opposition figures seized upon to accuse the right-wing coalition of hypocrisy. The debate was further inflamed by the parliamentary bloc loyal to General Roberto Vannacci, which monopolised the floor on immigration and security while the main centre-right parties remained conspicuously silent.

Viewed from Brussels, the Italian vote is the latest national manifestation of a broader European pivot. The European Union has definitively adopted a new return regulation, replacing a legal framework widely derided as dysfunctional after years of deadlock. The regulation, which enters into force immediately, opens the door to the creation of “return hubs” outside EU territory — offshore centres where migrants subject to removal orders could be held pending deportation. Italy and Germany jointly spearheaded the initiative, and according to the Financial Times, the European Commission is now prepared to finance such hubs. Analysts in London note that this marks a decisive break from the “accoglientista” approach that dominated EU migration policy for over a decade, shifting instead toward a model that prioritises enforcement and externalisation.

In Paris, the new regulation has galvanised voices on the centre-right who argue the French government has been too timid. François-Xavier Bellamy, vice-president of Les Républicains and a member of the European Parliament, pressed the executive to seize the opportunity to establish offshore detention centres in cooperation with third countries. He described the previous legal regime as a symbol of decades of failure, and insisted the regulation’s immediate applicability leaves no room for further delay. The French interior ministry has yet to signal how it intends to use the new tools, but the political pressure from within the EU’s founding core suggests that the return hub concept will soon move from legislative text to operational planning.

Meanwhile, in a reminder that legislative energy is not confined to migration, Morocco’s House of Representatives adopted a bill amending the kingdom’s Code of Real Rights. Justice Minister Abdelatif Ouahbi told lawmakers the reform addresses persistent dysfunctions in the drafting of acts concerning immovable property, particularly for assets that are non-transferable or subject to special procedures. The bill also modifies the law on co-ownership of buildings and the Code of Obligations and Contracts. While unrelated to the migration debate, the Moroccan reform underscores a parallel dynamic: as European capitals tighten the legal architecture around movement of people, North African states are modernising the legal architecture around property and investment — a quiet but significant recalibration of the Mediterranean’s legal landscape.