In a controversial move that has ignited international condemnation, Italy found itself at the center of a human rights crisis after releasing Osama Almasri Njeem, a Libyan militia and judicial police chief wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity. The Italian government’s decision to return him to Libya just two days after his arrest in Turin has triggered lawsuits, an ICC inquiry, and sharp accusations that Rome prioritized migration control over justice and human rights.
This is now a critical part of a larger discussion about how Europe manages its immigration policy, what role cooperation with the Libyan government plays in this discussion, and whether or not Italy has committed any violations of international law and specifically the Rome Statute and non-refoulement doctrine. Indeed, two migrants have filed charges against Italy at the European Court of Human Rights based on the Italian government releasing a warlord who abuses migrants.
The Arrest and Sudden Release of a Wanted Warlord
How Osama Almasri Njeem Was Captured
On the date of January 19, 2025, Osama Almasri Njeem, also known as Osama Elmasry Njeem or Ossama Anziem, was arrested by the Italian government in Turin, Northern Italy. Osama is one of the leaders of Libya’s Judicial Police and is viewed as a strong militia leader in Libya. The individual was arrested on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court, accusing him of committing various acts such as murder, torture, sexual assault, and sexual violence at Libyan detention centers.
The arrest came as part of international efforts to hold accountable those responsible for atrocities against migrants and civilians in Libya, where detention centers have become infamous for their brutal conditions. Njeem’s presence in Italy was initially believed to be a breakthrough for international justice.
The Shocking Decision to Release Him
Forty-eight hours later, on January 21, 2025, the Italians released Njeem and transferred him back to Libya via an Italian Air Force jet plane. This development shocked human rights groups, legal professionals, and opposition politicians in Italy and elsewhere. Instead of going into ICC custody, Njeem is now back in Libya, where he remains in power.
Italy’s explanation for its action was based on procedural and technical mistakes in the transmission of the ICC warrant. According to the Italians, the arrest was made without the receipt of the request from Italy’s justice ministry, which amounted to a violation of Italian law.
Italy’s Official Defense: Procedural Errors, Not Policy Choice
Government Statements on the Release
The Italian authorities always said that there were legal technical reasons that forced them to do so and not political reasons behind the move. The Minister of Justice Carlo Nordio noted that there were “mistakes and inaccuracies” made in the warrant issued by the ICC that
“bypassed all of the protocols and proper procedures of the Italian justice ministry”.
The current Meloni government supported this statement saying that
“the arrest took place before the formal request of the justice ministry came into play, hence breaking all protocols and making the arrest null and void”.
Italy also claimed that the ICC warrant itself was flawed in its transmission process, initially bypassing the Italian justice ministry and creating legal ambiguity that forced the government’s hand.
The Underlying Political Reality
Despite the official narrative, critics argue that the release reflects Italy’s deeper dependence on Libya for migration control. The Italian government has long relied on Libyan authorities to intercept and detain migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean to Europe, a partnership that has drawn persistent accusations of complicity in human rights abuses.
Critics claim
“Italy released him because it depends on Libya to stem the flow of migrants from Africa”.
This interpretation suggests that protecting the migration partnership with Tripoli took precedence over international justice obligations, even when a warlord wanted for crimes against humanity was physically in Italian custody.
International Condemnation and Legal Repercussions
ICC Opens Inquiry Into Italy
Consequently, the International Criminal Court did not take long before reacting. In February 2025, the Court initiated an investigation on Italy for purportedly committing a breach of the Rome Statute through releasing a person that is suspected of crimes against humanity. This investigation seeks to establish if there was any violation of the legal duties imposed on Italy as part of the provisions of the Rome Statute.
Indeed, this is the first time when the International Criminal Court initiates an investigation on a country that is a member of the European Union for refusing to cooperate in enforcing an ICC arrest warrant.
Rights Groups Express Shock and Outrage
Various human rights watchdogs across the globe condemned Italy for releasing the warlord wanted by the International Criminal Court due to a mere “technicality.” It is said that such mistakes should never stand in the way of the essential process of trying a war criminal.
Human Rights Watch, in particular, urged Italy to terminate
“its disastrous pact with Libya for controlling its borders,”
stating that the arrangement has led to grave human rights violations of refugees and migrants. Human Rights Watch highlighted that the Memorandum of Understanding between Italy and Libya has facilitated the detention of migrants by Libyan guards, who receive money and resources from Italy.
Two Migrants Sue Italy at European Court of Human Rights
The most direct legal challenge came from two migrants who filed a lawsuit at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) against Italy. They argue that by releasing Njeem—a figure linked to the torture and abuse of migrants in Libyan detention centers—Italy breached their rights and violated international human rights law.
The claim is that Italy’s conduct put the asylum seekers at risk of further persecution or abuse, thereby violating the rule against refoulement, which prevents the return of persons to places where their lives and freedoms could be seriously threatened. It amounts to a bold move that may force the ECHR to make decisions on whether European countries will be responsible for releasing persons whose presence endangers migrants’ lives.
Human Rights Watch Calls for Pact Termination
In October 2025, Human Rights Watch issued a statement calling on Italy to “revoke its damaging migrant cooperation agreement with Libya”. The organization argued that the Italy-Libya Memorandum of Understanding has caused systematic harm to migrants’ human rights and that Italy bears responsibility for complicity in these abuses.
The Broader Debate on Migration Policy
The Njeem incident has also raised general questions regarding whether Italy’s immigration policies adhere to international obligations concerning human rights. Both the previous and current administrations in Italy have been accused of criminalizing the activities involved in migrant rescues but working hand in hand with those behind the exploitation of migrants.
It has been reported that the rhetoric might be stronger, but tactics similar to those that have been adopted by successive administrations in Italy in the past have been utilized, Human Rights Watch reports. The Njeem case is therefore a case of repetition of the same strategy.
What This Means for International Justice and Migration Policy
The matter of Osama Almasri Njeem is therefore crucial in determining the efficacy of international justice systems, EU migration policies, and the dilemma between sovereign power and human rights. Should the ICC investigation show that Italy violated the Rome Statute, it will be establishing a precedent where states could be made liable for failing to cooperate with international tribunals on criminal matters.
Likewise, should the decision by the European Court of Human Rights uphold the claims brought against Italy by the two migrants, it will create new precedents regarding the obligations of states in releasing persons who are likely to endanger the lives of migrants.
For now, the case remains a stark reminder of the tensions between international justice, human rights obligations, and the political realities of migration control. As Italy accused of breaching migrant rights faces ongoing legal scrutiny, the international community watches closely to see whether procedural technicalities will continue to override the pursuit of justice for victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The release of a Libyan warlord wanted for crimes against humanity, and the subsequent legal battles it has spawned, underscores a troubling reality: in the politics of migration, justic becomes secondary to border control. Whether this pattern will change remains uncertain, but the Njeem case has ensured that the question will not be easily ignored.