Extraterritorial Detention and State Responsibility under the Italy–Albania Protocol

Abstract

Bilateral arrangements that relocate immigration detention can divide operational functions between two States without extinguishing either State’s international obligations. This article assesses the Italy–Albania Protocol through a public-international-law framework that keeps extraterritorial human-rights jurisdiction, attribution of conduct, breach of obligations and the consequences of responsibility analytically separate. Drawing on the Protocol, the European Convention on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Refugee Convention, the International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility, and international judicial materials, it conducts a structured doctrinal analysis of custody, procedural transitions and available remedies. The central finding is that territorial relocation cannot by itself displace Italy’s duties where its agents exercise authority over individuals; nor does Albania’s territorial sovereignty automatically prove joint responsibility for every Italian detention decision. Responsibility must be established actor by actor and obligation by obligation. A second finding is that each transfer, new detention decision and protection claim requires its own legal and remedial assessment. The article advances an attribution-to-remedy matrix for bilateral detention arrangements, specifying where a legal duty arises, whose conduct engages it, how a breach is tested and which forms of redress follow. This approach connects international accountability to Mediterranean institutional governance without conflating international law with European asylum administration.

Keywords

public international law; extraterritorial jurisdiction; state responsibility; immigration detention; non-refoulement; effective remedy; bilateral migration agreements

JEL codes

K33; K37; F22; H11