Cassazione n. 15751/2025 and the right of defence in CPRs: a relative can appoint a lawyer

The ordinance of the First Criminal Section no. 15751 of 22 April 2025 addresses a highly topical issue: the judicial protection of foreigners detained in Centres for the Permanence of Repatriation (CPR) following decree-law 145/2024, converted into law 187/2024. The Court of Cassation, annulling with referral the decision of the Justice of the Peace of Trapani, recognises the full legitimacy of the appointment of a defence lawyer made by a close relative of the detained person. This is a step that strengthens the right of defence in proceedings characterised by extremely short appeal periods.

The reference regulatory framework

The amended art. 14, para. 6, legislative decree 286/1998 provides for a legitimacy judgment before the Court of Cassation against the validation of administrative detention. Although the matter is formally "administrative", the legislator has modelled the procedure on criminal procedural principles, with very short deadlines for appeal. Hence the need to guarantee effective access to defence even for those who, being de facto deprived of liberty, have difficulty conferring the mandate in person.

• Art. 96, para. 3, c.p.p.: allows a relative to appoint a defence lawyer for detained defendants.
• Art. 14, para. 6, legislative decree 286/1998: governs appeals to the Court of Cassation regarding detention.
• Decree-law 145/2024 converted into law 187/2024: has extended the duration of detention and judicial control powers.

The Cassation Court's decision

In the matter of administrative detention of foreign nationals under the procedural regime following decree-law of 11 October 2024, no. 145, converted, with amendments, by law of 9 December 2024, no. 187, in the legitimacy judgment held pursuant to the amended art. 14, paragraph 6, legislative decree of 25 July 1998, no. 286, the defence appointment made by a close relative of the person detained in a repatriation centre is ritual, given the same substantial prerequisite – the state of personal liberty deprivation of the interested party – as the situations indicated by art. 96, paragraph 3, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and considering the need to guarantee the effectiveness of judicial protection within the strict appeal deadlines.

Comment: The Court analogously extends the institution provided for detained defendants to appeals in immigration matters, emphasising how the restriction of personal liberty requires equivalent defence guarantees. Family appointment therefore becomes an essential tool to prevent the shortness of time from rendering the control of the legitimacy judge ineffective.

Referring to previous rulings no. 9556/2025 and 16140/2023, the Court of Cassation emphasises the "substantially custodial" nature of the detention, which justifies the application of the same guarantees provided for in criminal matters. The annulment with referral invites the lower court judge to re-examine the admissibility of the appeal, this time upholding the validity of the mandate issued by a family member.

Practical implications for lawyers and families

The decision offers useful operational guidance:

• Families of detained foreign nationals can immediately grant special power of attorney to a defence lawyer, even without prior authorisation from the detained person.
• Upon receiving the mandate, the lawyer must attach documentation proving the family relationship and the detention status.
• Justices of the Peace and the Court of Cassation must assess appeals without raising formal nullities related to the origin of the appointment.

Looking ahead, the practice outlined by the ruling could affect the guarantees offered by Directive 2013/33/EU (reception of asylum seekers) and Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR, which require an effective right to judicial remedy.

Conclusions

Ruling no. 15751/2025 marks a step forward in the protection of migrants' fundamental rights, incorporating the demands for effective defence coming from European jurisprudence. By extending the possibility of appointing a defence lawyer to family members, the Court of Cassation prevents the strict appeal deadlines from emptying the judicial control over detention of its content. Legal professionals are called upon to leverage this opening to ensure timely and qualified assistance to detained persons.