Cutro Shipwreck: Constitutional Duties, European Responsibility, and Human Rights Protection – Reflections on Italy, Frontex, and the Right to Life

ABSTRACT The Cutro shipwreck of 26 February 2023, in which more than ninety migrants lost their lives along the Calabrian coast, represents one of the most tragic and emblematic events in the recent history of the Mediterranean migration crisis. It exposes the unresolved tension between humanitarian duties, state sovereignty, and border control policies. Far from being an isolated incident, the tragedy highlights the persistent gap between the constitutional and international duty to protect human life at sea and the dominant logic of deterrence in European migration governance. While human rights obligations apply extraterritorially at sea, States have often attempted to evade these duties by invoking maritime jurisdictional limits. Both the United States, in its interdiction practices, and Italy, in the context of push-back operations toward Libya, have justified their actions by arguing that human rights treaties do not extend beyond national territorial waters. Such interpretations represent a deliberate distortion of international law, producing catastrophic consequences for migrants in distress. This thesis examines the Cutro case through the lens of constitutional, European, and international law, integrating historical and contemporary perspectives on Mediterranean migration flows and shipwrecks. Particular attention is paid to the interaction between the Italian Constitution (Articles 10 and 117), international human rights instruments (including the 1951 Geneva Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights), and operational frameworks such as SAR conventions and the designation of Places of Safety. The analysis also considers the role of smugglers and the criminalization of humanitarian actors, highlighting the legal and ethical dilemmas faced by NGOs and States in balancing border control and rescue obligations. Key legal principles—including the right to life, non-refoulement, and the prohibition of collective expulsions—are examined with reference to landmark cases such as Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy (2012), which clarify that effective state control at sea triggers full human rights responsibilities. The Cutro tragedy is analysed as both a consequence of operational failures and a structural deficit in the European migration system, where fragmented responsibilities among States, the EU, and Frontex have produced a “grey zone” of accountability. The thesis concludes by arguing that preventing deaths at sea requires not only operational improvements in search and rescue coordination but also a reaffirmation of constitutional and international obligations, stronger accountability mechanisms, and legal reforms ensuring that humanitarian imperatives and the protection of fundamental rights prevail over securitarian approaches in Mediterranean migration governance.