In a landmark decision, a court in Bologna has granted subsidiary protection to a 30-year-old Bangladeshi man, effectively blocking his expulsion from Italy. This ruling comes amid ongoing tensions between the judiciary and the government regarding immigration policy, particularly in light of recent controversies surrounding the 'safe countries' decree. Judges ruled that the man would face 'degrading treatment' if returned to Bangladesh, thus affirming the need for legal protection against potential human rights violations.

The case has sparked a significant political debate, particularly following the initial rejection of his asylum request by the Forlì-Cesena territorial commission. The legal proceedings had been prolonged for over a year, during which the case was referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union to determine whether EU law or national legislation held precedence in such matters. The European court ruled in August 2025 that while states can designate 'safe countries' through legislation, this must be balanced with the need to protect individuals from returning to places where they may suffer harm.

This decision not only highlights the complexities of immigration law in Italy but also emphasizes the ongoing struggles between judicial independence and government policy. The implications of this ruling may set a precedent for future cases involving migrants seeking protection from countries deemed 'safe' by national legislation, indicating a potential shift in Italy's approach to immigration and human rights considerations. This situation is indicative of the broader challenges faced by the Italian judiciary as it navigates the intricate landscape of immigration laws and human rights protections in the context of national policies.