Abstract Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of street‐level bureaucracy and the evolving role of prosecutors under institutional pressure, this article offers an empirical contribution to the literature on ‘crimmigration’. It interrogates how prosecutors interpret their role within human‐smuggling cases and how these interpretations affect the criminalization or protection of migrants. The findings suggest that excessive criminalization may stem not only from broad legal definitions but also from the ways in which prosecutors understand and enact their role in practice. The article further contends that promoting a more magisterial prosecutorial role – characterized by legal autonomy, normative deliberation, and a rule‐of‐law‐based weighing of interests – can foster a more balanced and rights‐compliant approach to human smuggling. Such an orientation, it suggests, better aligns prosecutorial practices with international and European legal standards, and may help to counter the overreach of criminal law in migration governance.
Flavia Patanè (Fri,) studied this question.