Il controllo parlamentare nell'esternalizzazoine delle politiche migratorie: una comparazione tra Regno Unito e Italia

The article examines the growing recourse to simplified international agreements in the externalisation of asylum procedures, focusing on the comparative experience of the United Kingdom and Italy. By analysing the Rwanda Plan and the Italy–Albania Protocol, the study highlights how executives increasingly rely on non-ratified instruments to bypass parliamentary scrutiny in politically sensitive areas such as migration and fundamental rights. The paper situates this trend within the broader strengthening of executive power in parliamentary systems and explores the procedural and constitutional implications of reduced legislative oversight. Attention is devoted to the role of Westminster—especially the House of Lords—and to the Italian Parliament’s reaction, assessing whether recent practices signal a structural imbalance in the relationship between Government and Parliament.