Interim decree (Article 35-bis(4-bis) of Legislative Decree 25/2008) · Procedimento R.G. 18229/2026
Unofficial translation of the SOS Patto summary. The original decision or document is available in Italian only.
Headnote
The application of the accelerated procedure under Article 42(1), point (j), of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 — based on origin from a country with an EU recognition rate for international protection below 20% — does not exhaust the examination of the merits of the application and does not preclude authorisation to remain in the territory of the State, under Article 68 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 and Article 35-bis(4-bis) of Legislative Decree 25/2008, where there are serious and substantiated grounds derived from the COI consulted by the Tribunal of its own motion: in the case of the Pakistani national from the region of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the situation of indiscriminate violence, in constant deterioration and amounting to “indiscriminate violence” arising from “armed conflict” within the meaning of Article 14, point (c), of Legislative Decree 251/2007, justifies remaining pending the judgment on the merits.
The Tribunal of Turin (judge Fabrizio Alessandria) authorises the Pakistani national appellant to remain in the territory of the State pending the judgment on the merits. The Commissione territoriale had followed the accelerated procedure under Article 42(1), point (j), of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348, taking as its parameter the recognition rate below 20% in the EU for Pakistan. The application had been lodged after 12 June 2026, with the Procedures Regulation and Decree-Law 100/2026 therefore applying.
The decree does not enter into the question of whether Article 42(1), point (j) operates automatically — a matter on which other Tribunals are divided — but it deprives it of operative significance: the statistical threshold, as a matter of procedure, allows the examination to be accelerated, but does not bind the assessment of the need for protection, which remains anchored to the concrete elements of the case. The inquiry conducted of the Tribunal's own motion shows that the appellant comes from Mardan, in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, a region “currently” in a “situation of generalised violence in constant deterioration, such as to amount to a situation of ‘indiscriminate violence’ generated by ‘armed conflict’ within the meaning of point (c) of Article 14 of Legislative Decree 251/2007, such as to endanger the life and physical integrity” of the appellant if returned.
The request was made in good time pursuant to Article 35-bis(4) of Legislative Decree 25/2008 and Article 68(3) to (5) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348. The Tribunal, applying Article 68 and the new paragraph 4-bis of Article 35-bis — introduced by Decree-Law 100/2026 — finds the “serious and substantiated grounds” for granting the request. The decree authorises the appellant to remain.
The decree belongs to the line of case law rejecting the automatism deducible from the mere statistical designation of Article 42(1), point (j) — Trib. Palermo 9739, Trib. Roma 39909 — with a distinct approach: not disapplication of the parameter, but its being overcome at the level of the interim merits through the verification of the COI on the region of origin. The assessment remains open for the final decision.
Our thanks to Mr Marco Capriata for sharing this decision.
Related provisions