EditItaly’s Security Decree faces backlash over controversial lawyers’ incentive for migrant voluntary returns
Reports suggest that without a convincing revision to “unequivocally neutralise” the problematic provision, the President Sergio Mattarella could withhold his signature
Italy’s government, led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s centre-right coalition, frequently uses decree-laws (decreti-legge) to address urgent matters in public security, immigration, and crime prevention. These measures take immediate effect upon publication but must be approved (converted) by Parliament within 60 days, or they automatically lapse.
The latest Security Decree (Decree-Law No. 23 of 24 February 2026) contains a package of provisions on public order, police operations, investigative powers, and immigration management. It was approved by the Senate (upper house) in recent weeks, largely along majority lines, and is now under examination in the Chamber of Deputies (lower house). The conversion deadline is 25 April 2026 – after which the entire decree would expire if not passed.
The decree has encountered strong opposition from centre-left parties, including the Democratic Party (PD) and Alleanza Verdi e Sinistra, as well as criticism from legal professionals and constitutional experts. Opponents argue that certain measures risk undermining fundamental rights, particularly the independence of the legal profession and the right to defence.
The most contentious clause: €615 incentive for lawyers
At the centre of the current controversy is a majority amendment (Article 30-bis) introduced during the Senate debate. It would provide a financial incentive = estimated at around €615 per case – to lawyers who assist foreign nationals in assisted voluntary return programmes. Payment would be made only if the client actually returns to their country of origin.
These voluntary return programmes already exist in Italian migration policy. They offer logistical and financial support from the state to migrants who agree to leave Italy voluntarily rather than face forced expulsion. The new clause would channel funds (initially €246,000 for 2026, rising in subsequent years) through the National Bar Council (Consiglio Nazionale Forense) to compensate participating lawyers.
Why the clause has sparked outrage
Critics, including major legal bodies, contend that tying payment to the outcome (successful return) violates a core ethical and constitutional principle: lawyers have an obligation of means, not of results. They must act in their client’s best interest with complete independence, not be financially incentivised to steer clients toward a government-preferred result.
The National Bar Council has strongly protested, noting it was never consulted and demanding the removal of any reference to its involvement in administering the incentives. Similar concerns have been raised by the Organismo Congressuale Forense and the Union of Criminal Chambers, which view the measure as incompatible with professional ethics and Article 24 of the Italian Constitution (right to defence).
Even within the governing majority, unease has surfaced. Enrico Costa, Forza Italia group leader in the Chamber of Deputies, has proposed addressing the issue through a parliamentary motion (ordine del giorno) and implementing rules, but this has not yet satisfied institutional concerns.
President Mattarella’s close scrutiny
The controversy has reached the Quirinale, the residence and office of President Sergio Mattarella. Institutional sources indicate the head of state is closely monitoring the file and awaiting a parliamentary solution.
While the President typically signs laws once they reach his desk, he has the power to refuse promulgation or send the text back to Parliament if he identifies serious constitutional issues. Reports suggest that without a convincing revision to “unequivocally neutralise” the problematic provision, Mattarella could withhold his signature – creating a significant institutional standoff.
Presidential offices have noted growing awareness even inside the majority that the clause needs correction. However, the extremely tight timeline leaves limited room for substantial changes.
Political and procedural pressures
Opposition parties have used the debate to launch a wider attack on the government’s migration and security policies. PD leader Elly Schlein accused the executive of trying to turn lawyers into “executors of political will,” thereby undermining the constitutional right to defence. Justice Committee members from the PD have described the measure as “deeply distortive” and a threat to professional independence.
The government and majority have accelerated proceedings to ensure conversion before the 25 April deadline, reducing opportunities for deeper scrutiny. Yet the mounting criticism from the legal world, opposition, and signals from the Quirinale could still force last-minute adjustments
.As the Chamber of Deputies prepares to vote, the lawyers’ incentive clause remains the focal point of tension. The episode highlights broader debates in Italy over balancing effective immigration management with the protection of constitutional rights and the independence of the legal profession.
The original article in Italian by EUalive’s partner FocusEurope.it can be found here.
Caption: Italian President Sergio Mattarella (R) meets Cyprus President Nikos Christodoulides (not seen on this photo) during an official visit in Rome, Italy, 27 February 2026. EPA/FRANCESCO AMMENDOLA
Updated: April 21, 2026 - 13:04
