Tribunal of Caltanissetta, 27 July 2026

The Tribunal of Caltanissetta, Holiday Section — immigration (judge Alice Muratore), in the appeal under Article 35-ter of Legislative Decree 25/2008 — having regard to Articles 35-bis and 35-ter «as amended by Decree-Law of 12 June 2026, no. 100» — has authorised a national of Bangladesh to remain on the national territory pending the conclusion of the proceedings, in effect suspending the effects of the decree of the Commissione territoriale of Syracuse which had rejected the application declaring it manifestly unfounded under Article 28-ter of Legislative Decree 25/2008 and Article 42(1), point (b), of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348, with a simultaneous attestation of the obligation to return and an entry ban under Article 10(2-ter), (2-sexies) and (6-bis) of Legislative Decree 286/1998.

The appeal alleged breach of the language safeguards and of the right to information, the excessive curtailment of the right of defence resulting from the shortness of the time elapsed between the making of the application and the audition, the failure to video-record the personal interview and the erroneous credibility assessment, which had not taken into account the applicant's personal context of vulnerability (attacked with a bladed weapon by a client, threatened with death, with an assault on his sister and a complaint attempted without result).

The Tribunal finds the fumus boni iuris established, with reasoning centred on the quality of the interview. The fact that the applicant had admitted that fellow countrymen had urged him to «tell a story» in order to avoid return is not in itself capable of grounding a finding of overall lack of credibility, having to be assessed in the context of the other statements and of his personal circumstances: «although the applicant's account is not free from intrinsic inconsistencies, the precarious condition in which he found himself at the time of the interview (deriving, in primis, from the excessive curtailment of the right of defence) may have affected the tenor of his statements». In particular, «the psychological conditioning after the journey and after the forced stay in Libya — certainly not yet subsided at the time of the interview with the Commission — as well as the absence of counsel and adequate information support resulted in a lack of knowledge of a complete and exhaustive picture of the applicant's condition, on which the Commission should have based its decision». The failure to video-record the interview, the decree adds, could make a subsequent audition necessary.

The periculum in mora coincides with the concrete and present danger to the applicant's personal safety, who, absent an authorisation to remain, would be immediately subject to enforcement of the return to Bangladesh, where effective State protection against the threats suffered might not be guaranteed to him. The hearing for the decision on the merits will be set by separate order.