Salvini Acquitted in Open Arms Case: A Controversial Political Trial
In a significant legal decision, the Palermo court acquitted former Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini in the first instance of the trial concerning the Open Arms case. The verdict was delivered on Friday, with judges stating that the accusations against Salvini—kidnapping and refusal of public acts—were not proven, a ruling delivered with the phrase "because the fact does not exist."
The case dates back to 2019 when Salvini, in his role as Minister of the Interior, denied a Spanish NGO ship, Open Arms, the right to dock in Lampedusa while carrying 147 migrants rescued at sea. Salvini's acquittal came after his defense attorney, Giulia Bongiorno, argued that the trial was politically motivated. She claimed that the NGO's decision to anchor off the Italian coast was a tactic to challenge Salvini's strict immigration policies, which were aimed at reducing illegal landings and immigration into Italy.
As of now, the court has yet to release the detailed reasoning behind its decision, leaving open questions regarding the judges' rationale. Journalist Giovanni Bianconi suggested two possible interpretations: either the court accepted Bongiorno’s argument regarding the political nature of the trial, or it concluded that, from a legal standpoint, Salvini could not be held responsible for the charges against him.
During closing statements on October 18, Bongiorno emphasized that the Open Arms had numerous opportunities to disembark migrants in other non-Italian ports. She contended that the ship lingered to place Salvini in a difficult position politically. According to international law, the appropriate disembarkation site for rescued individuals should be the nearest safe port. In the context of the central Mediterranean, this is typically Lampedusa, due to its proximity to Libya, where the rescues took place.
In August 2019, the Open Arms completed three rescue missions off the Libyan coast and sought permission from the Italian authorities to dock. However, Malta’s conditional offer to accept only 39 migrants was declined by the NGO, which argued that it would lead to chaos for the remaining passengers. Spain, as the flag country, also proposed ports for disembarkation, but these were deemed unacceptable due to the distance involved.
The prosecution had requested a six-year prison sentence for Salvini, alleging that his refusal to authorize the docking of the Open Arms amounted to a violation of international and Italian law. Deputy Prosecutor Marzia Sabella asserted that the NGO had abided by established regulations, highlighting the pressing humanitarian needs onboard the ship during its 20-day stalemate at sea.
Throughout this period, the tension mounted as almost half the original group of migrants displayed desperation, with some jumping into the sea and others attempting to reach land on small boats. The standoff persisted until Luigi Patronaggio, the Agrigento prosecutor, intervened, resulting in an order to disembark the migrants after a visit to the ship.
While only 83 individuals remained by the time of their eventual disembarkation, many had already left the ship during the prolonged wait, some had been granted safe passage because they were minors—a measure that Salvini had resisted.
As the legal landscape develops, the founder of Open Arms, Oscar Camps, expressed that the NGO is awaiting the publication of the court's motives before deciding whether to appeal the decision. The full details and rationale for the acquittal by the Palermo judges are expected to be documented and released within the next three months, potentially altering the course of this controversial case further.
Related Sources: