
STOP THE ITALY–LIBYA MoU
Stop the Italy–Libya Memorandum
No agreement can justify detention, torture, enslavement, interception and return to danger.
The Italy–Libya Memorandum of Understanding has become one of the central instruments through which Italy and the European Union seek to prevent refugees and migrants from reaching Europe across the Central Mediterranean.
For governments, it is described through the language of migration management, border security and cooperation.
For many of us, its consequences have been experienced through interception at sea, forced return to Libya, arbitrary detention, exploitation, violence and repeated attempts to escape.
Refugees in Libya challenges the Memorandum because we know the system it sustains from the inside.
What Is The Italy-Libya Memorandum?
On 2 February 2017, Italy and Libya signed a Memorandum of Understanding on migration, border control, human trafficking and what the agreement describes as combating “illegal immigration”.
The agreement established cooperation between the two states aimed at strengthening Libya’s capacity to control migration routes and prevent departures towards Europe.
It provides for Italian technical and technological support to Libyan institutions responsible for border control, including the Coast Guard and other security bodies.
It also provides for cooperation concerning migration centres in Libya, border surveillance, training, equipment and initiatives financed by Italy, including through funds available from the European Union.
The Memorandum was initially concluded for three years and contains an automatic renewal mechanism.
Despite years of documentation, survivor testimony, legal challenges and mobilisation, Italy allowed the agreement to renew again in February 2026.
What Does the Agreement Actually Say?
Article 1 — Supporting Libyan Border Authorities
The Memorandum commits Italy to providing technical and technological support to Libyan institutions responsible for combating irregular migration, including the Libyan Coast Guard, border authorities and relevant bodies of the Ministry of Interior.
In practice, this cooperation has contributed to building Libya’s capacity to intercept people attempting to leave the country by sea.
Article 2 — Borders and “Hosting Centres”
The agreement provides for strengthening control of Libya’s southern borders and for financing and adapting existing centres in Libya.
The language of the Memorandum refers to these facilities as centres for the reception or hosting of migrants.
But for refugees and migrants who have experienced Libya’s detention system, the reality behind such terminology cannot be separated from arbitrary detention, violence, extortion, forced labour, sexual violence and other grave abuses documented over many years.
Article 4 — Italian and European Funding
The Memorandum provides that Italy will finance initiatives arising from the agreement and may use funds made available by the European Union.
The following day, on 3 February 2017, European Union leaders welcomed the Italy–Libya Memorandum through the Malta Declaration and committed to supporting measures including training, equipment and assistance for the Libyan Coast Guard and other authorities.
The Memorandum is therefore not isolated from European border policy. It forms part of a wider system designed to prevent people from reaching European territory.
Article 5 — Human Rights
The Memorandum states that it should be interpreted and implemented in accordance with the international obligations and human rights commitments of both countries.
This raises a fundamental question:
What happened to Article 5?
The agreement speaks of respect for human rights while people intercepted under the system it supports continue to be returned to a country where torture, arbitrary detention, sexual violence, enslavement and other grave abuses against refugees and migrants have been extensively documented.
The agreement promises respect for human rights.
The reality experienced by those returned to Libya tells another story.
Article 8 — Automatic Renewal
The Memorandum remains in force for three-year periods and renews automatically unless one of the parties gives written notice within the required period.
Our 2025 campaign sought to prevent another automatic renewal.
Italy did not terminate the agreement.
The Memorandum therefore entered another three-year period in February 2026.
Our campaign continues because the system it represents continues.
From Europe’s Border to Libya
European border control does not begin on European shores.
Through policies of externalisation, states increasingly move border enforcement beyond their own territory.
In the Central Mediterranean, this can mean:
-
European political and financial support
-
Training, equipment and capacity for Libyan authorities
-
Detection and interception of boats at sea
-
Return to Libya
-
Detention, exploitation and renewed attempts to escape
For people trapped inside this cycle, Europe’s border can effectively begin hundreds of kilometres south of European territory.
The Reality Behind the Agreement
The Italy–Libya Memorandum cannot be understood only through the language of borders, interceptions and migration management.
Behind that language is an economy of captivity.
People prevented from leaving Libya are not simply “contained”. They are returned to an environment in which Black African refugees and migrants have been abducted, detained, tortured, raped, enslaved, exploited for labour, held for ransom, forcibly recruited and, in some cases, disappeared or killed.
For many of us, these are not distant allegations. They are experiences carried in our bodies, our families and our communities.
Interception and Forced Return
People attempting to escape Libya across the Mediterranean are intercepted at sea and returned to the country they were trying to flee.
Return does not restore safety.
For many, it marks the beginning of another cycle of detention, trafficking, exploitation and violence.
Abduction and Captivity
Refugees and migrants are rounded up in streets, taken from their homes, captured while travelling or transferred after interception.
Some enter official detention facilities. Others disappear into trafficking houses, warehouses, farms, prisons and unofficial detention sites controlled by militias, armed groups or criminal networks.
Families may spend weeks or months trying to discover where their relatives have been taken.
Rape and Sexual Violence
Rape and other forms of sexual violence are not incidental to this system.
Women, girls, men and children have been subjected to rape, gang rape, sexual exploitation, forced prostitution and other forms of sexual violence in detention facilities, trafficking sites, workplaces and places of captivity.
Sexual violence has been used to punish, terrorise, humiliate and exploit people whose movement and legal status leave them almost entirely without protection.
A Violent Business Model
Captivity generates revenue.
A person can be abducted and a ransom demanded from their family. They can be tortured while relatives listen over the telephone until money is transferred. They can be sold or transferred between trafficking networks. Their labour can be exploited without payment. Their belongings and identification documents can be confiscated and resold.
A person who cannot pay may remain imprisoned, be forced to work or be transferred to another captor.
The system created around containment therefore does more than prevent movement. It creates conditions in which refugees and migrants can repeatedly be monetised through detention, extortion, trafficking and exploitation.
Forced Labour, Enslavement and Forced Recruitment
Refugees and migrants have been forced to work in construction, agriculture, private homes, workshops and other sectors without payment and under threat of violence.
Others have been forced to perform work for armed groups, including transporting weapons and ammunition, repairing military equipment and supporting militia operations.
There have also been documented cases of refugees and migrants being forcibly recruited or compelled to participate in activities connected to armed groups.
A person prevented from leaving Libya can therefore become simultaneously a detainee, a commodity, a labourer and an instrument of armed power.
Death, Disappearance and Mass Graves
Many never emerge from this system.
People disappear after abduction or detention. Others die from torture, violence, starvation, untreated illness or killings.
Mass graves containing the bodies of migrants have repeatedly been discovered in Libya, including at trafficking sites.
These graves are not disconnected from the politics of containment.
They are among the most extreme consequences of a system in which people can be intercepted, returned, disappear into captivity and remain beyond meaningful legal protection or public scrutiny.
Anti-Black Racism and Scapegoating
The violence is also racialised.
Black Africans are routinely exposed to racism, racial profiling, arbitrary arrest, exploitation and violence because of the colour of their skin and their perceived status as migrants.
Political authorities and public figures have repeatedly portrayed migrants as threats to Libya’s security, identity and demographic future. Such rhetoric has helped fuel mass arrests, collective expulsions and violence against Black African communities.
The same Black bodies that can be exploited for labour, ransom and trafficking are simultaneously portrayed as an invasion that must be contained.
This contradiction is not accidental to the system. It helps sustain it.
More Than Border Externalisation
For Refugees in Libya, the Italy–Libya Memorandum represents more than the externalisation of a European border.
It represents a colonial continuity.
European states seek to preserve freedom of movement and security for their own populations while financing systems designed to restrict the movement of Africans outside European territory.
Europe provides money, equipment, technology and political legitimacy. African territory becomes the buffer zone. Libyan forces become the gatekeepers. And Black African bodies absorb the violence required to make that border regime function.
The geography has changed, but the hierarchy is familiar: some people retain the power to move, decide and control, while others are confined, exploited and required to justify their very presence.
The Mediterranean border is therefore not simply moving south.
A political order is being reproduced in which African mobility is treated as a threat, African territory as a containment zone and Black lives as expendable in the defence of European borders.
This is why we challenge the Memorandum not merely as a migration agreement, but as part of a wider system of racialised containment, exploitation and colonial continuity.










