The new regulation on deportations represents the first tangible result of the outsourcing trend that EU leaders endorsed last year.
The European Commission presented on Tuesday a new regulation that, if approved, will enable member states to transfer rejected asylum seekers to distant countries where they have never set foot, signalling a transformative shift in migration policy.
The law falls short of establishing an EU-wide programme to build deportation centres (or “return hubs”, as Brussels calls them) but lays the necessary legal groundwork to allow governments to strike arrangements with nations outside the bloc that might be willing to host migrants in return for financial incentives.
The physical transfer will only happen after the applicant has exhausted all legal avenues to obtain international protection and has been given a definitive return order.
Tuesday’s regulation is the first tangible result of the outsourcing push that EU leaders endorsed in a watershed summit in October. Back then, heads of state and government agreed to explore “new ways to prevent and counter irregular migration”, a broad yet vague formulation that has given Brussels permission to enter uncharted territories.
With its proposal, the Commission brings outsourcing a step closer by redefining what “country of return” means in practice. Under current rules, member states can send rejected asylum seekers to their country of origin, a country of transit that has a readmission agreement or any other country if the migrant “voluntarily” consents.
In the new law, the consent is eroded and the modalities for transfer are expanded to allow EU countries to strike deals with non-EU countries and build deportation centres.
The Commission will not spearhead the construction or management of these facilities, leaving it instead to governments to decide if they want to pursue the project, which is expected to be costly, logistically challenging and politically controversial. Still, the possibility of schemes at the EU level is not completely ruled out.
“We’re creating the legal frame, we’re not creating the content,” said Magnus Brunner, the European Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration. “It’s an innovative new solution for member states, they’re free to take it.”
Italy, Denmark and the Netherlands have led discussions on outsourcing and appear to be the likeliest candidates to move ahead. Italy is reportedly considering a plan to turn its centres in Albania, meant to process asylum claims, into full-fledged “return hubs”. The Albanian centres are currently empty after being paralysed by legal action.
The regulation, however, sets out minimum criteria that these centres should meet, such as an independent body to monitor the “effective application” of the agreement, an exemption for unaccompanied minors and families with children, and a clear definition of responsibilities to handle potential violations of human rights.
Such violations are inevitable, humanitarian organisations have warned since the October summit. In their view, sending migrants, without their consent, to distant nations will result in deficient oversight and substandard conditions, creating fertile ground for rampant breaches of human rights that go unpunished.
NGOs have also raised the alarm about the widespread use of detention that outsourcing will require, as the asylum seekers will need to be physically kept inside the facilities.
The law presented on Tuesday foresees an extensive list of reasons to place rejected asylum seekers in detention, lasting a maximum of two years “in a given member state”. It does not set a maximum for the detention in an overseas centre, which should be determined in a bilateral agreement and “may be in the short or longer term”.
“The European Commission has caved to the unworkable, expensive and inhumane demands of a few shrill anti-human rights and anti-migration governments,” said Eve Geddie, the director of Amnesty International’s EU office.
“Today’s proposal lays the ground for states to send people to countries to which they have no connection, to languish in detention centres, with little credible guarantees that their rights will be upheld. Frankly, this is a new low for Europe.”
ADVERTISEMENTDuring the presentation, Brunner sought to flip the contentious narrative around outsourcing by depicting it as an effort that is, at least, worth trying.
“Let’s look into whether it works or not,” he said. “Let’s be open-minded on those ideas as well. The ‘return hub’ possibility is something new, something different, which we can explore in the different member states.”
The missing piece
The Return Regulation intends to close the gap left in the Pact for Migration and Asylum, the all-encompassing reform that the EU approved last year after almost four years of hard-fought negotiations. The Pact establishes common rules for the reception and management of asylum seekers, with a system of “mandatory solidarity” to ensure that all governments, from North to South, help share the burden.
But the overhaul did not address the issue of returns, the last stage of the process for asylum seekers whose applications are turned down and who no longer have the right to stay on European soil. A previous attempt to revamp the existing legislation became stuck in the European Parliament and never saw the light of day.
ADVERTISEMENTFor years, the bloc has struggled to speed up the rate of effective deportations, which fluctuates between 20% and 25%, with no visible progress. NGOs have warned the data behind the return rate is incomplete and should not be used to guide policy-making.
The reasons for the stagnation relate to a lack of cooperation between asylum seekers and authorities, between member states themselves and, especially, between member states and the countries of origin, which often refuse to take back their nationals.
With far-right forces exploiting the issue of irregular migration for electoral gains, member states piled pressure on the Commission to put forward a more stringent text and break the decades-long taboo on outsourcing.
The reply from Brussels seems to deliver on the assignment: besides enshrining in law the permission to build deportation centres in faraway nations, the proposed regulation lays down obligations that rejected asylum seekers must respect, such as providing personal ID, biometric data, contact details and information on countries they transited.
ADVERTISEMENTMigrants must remain available at all times throughout the return process and allow their belongings to be searched if “necessary and duly justified”, the law says.
Those who breach these obligations could see their social benefits cut off, travel documents seized and work permits revoked. They could also face prolonged bans to enter the EU in the future and even “financial penalties”, which the text does not detail.
Additionally, the law establishes a fast-tracked procedure to detain and expel asylum seekers who are deemed to pose “security risks”.
NGOs have decried this “punitive” approach, arguing it would harm the rights of asylum seekers, reinforce “dangerous stereotypes”, and blur the line between migration and criminal law. The fact that the Commission did not carry out an impact assessment before unveiling the regulation has alarmed civil society, who feel the legislation has been rushed under political pressure and without meaningful consultation.
ADVERTISEMENTBy contrast, the political reception is expected to be warmer.
The Council and the Parliament, the two co-legislators who will negotiate the draft law, have turned markedly to the right in recent years, demanding a harder line to curb irregular migration. Asylum applications across the EU, Norway and Switzerland decreased by 11% in 2024 but remained above the one-million mark.
Lukas Mandl, a conservative MEP from Austria, praised the Commission’s proposal as “really impressive” and “very good”, including the outsourcing element, and predicted it would be embraced by a “vast majority” in the Parliament. “I’m confident (that) we will have a proper and good regulation,” Mandl told Euronews.
Meanwhile, Cecilia Strada, an Italian socialist, criticised how the Commission has tweaked the legal definitions to enable the transfer of migrants to countries with which “they have no type of connection and where they can, potentially, stay forever.”
ADVERTISEMENT“This is not the path that we feel like taking,” Strada said.
Additionally, the regulation foresees the introduction of a European Return Order to facilitate the recognition of deportation decisions between countries, which is patchy today. After the Migration Pact enters into force, the Commission will make mutual recognition mandatory across the bloc to allow decisions to be directly enforceable.
This article has been updated.
