EU moves to legalize controversial migrant return centers

The European Union is set to legalize migrant return centers in third countries, a policy aimed at curbing irregular migration but criticized for potential human rights violations.

The proposal, championed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, was presented to the European Parliament on March 11 and has sparked significant debate.

New migration strategy and legal framework

Von der Leyen outlined the EU’s migration strategy as one of her administration’s key priorities, drawing from agreements such as the 2023 Italy-Albania deal.

The strategy seeks to accelerate deportations and extend the legal basis for sending asylum seekers to third countries, mirroring the UK’s controversial plan to relocate migrants to Rwanda.

The proposal comes amid growing concerns that only 20% of rejected asylum seekers in the EU are successfully deported. By streamlining bureaucratic processes and making deportation decisions applicable across all EU member states, the initiative aims to enhance the bloc’s enforcement capabilities.

Criticism over human rights concerns

Human rights groups and migration experts have raised alarms over the legal and ethical implications of these centers.

Hanne Bierens, director of the Brussels-based Migration Policy Institute, criticized the vague security measures within the proposal.

“Security protocols and fundamental principles governing such agreements remain unclear. It must be explicitly stated how individuals will be transferred, what conditions they will face upon arrival, and whether an independent monitoring mechanism will oversee these facilities,” Bierens told Anadolu Agency (AA).

She stressed that political rhetoric is driving the proposal rather than sustainable migration management. “If the goal is to increase returns, experience shows that the most effective approach is forming long-term partnerships with third countries to facilitate dignified repatriation and reintegration programs,” she added.

Legal, financial challenges of return centers

The concept of offshore return centers is not new, but remains controversial.

The U.K.’s Rwanda plan and the Italy-Albania agreement have faced legal and operational hurdles. Bierens warned such centers could become excessively costly and inefficient.

“For instance, the Italy-Albania deal may cost up to €1 billion, equivalent to Belgium’s annual reception budget for 35,000 migrants. These solutions resemble expensive policy experiments with limited effectiveness,” she explained.

Expanded scope for migrant deportations

Under the new framework, rejected asylum seekers may be deported not only to their country of origin but also to any “safe third country” with which the EU has agreements.

This broadens the EU’s deportation capabilities but raises further legal and ethical concerns.

Flor Didden, a representative of the Brussels-based human rights NGO “11.11.11,” expressed deep concerns about migrants being held in return centers without guarantees of fair treatment.

“Migrants sent to third-country return centers will be beyond the EU’s jurisdiction. There are no guarantees that their rights will be upheld. If their home countries refuse to accept them, will they remain in indefinite detention? There are too many unanswered questions,” Didden said.

Didden also criticized the policy for abandoning the “connection criteria”—a principle that considers meaningful ties between migrants and their return destinations. “Now, rejected asylum seekers can be sent to any country willing to accept them. This is no longer returning people; it is simply sending them elsewhere,” she argued.

Political context, growing support

Despite human rights concerns, von der Leyen’s proposal has garnered widespread support among EU leaders, particularly from right-wing governments advocating stricter migration policies.

The European Commission’s plan aligns with calls from at least 15 EU member states urging stronger migration control measures.

“Many governments favor tougher migration policies, but history has shown that these experimental solutions rarely succeed,” Didden noted. “These measures are largely symbolic, aimed at appearing tough on migration rather than offering real, sustainable solutions.”

Future of the legislation

The proposed law is set to be debated by the European Parliament and EU member states in the coming months.

If passed, it will provide a legal foundation for the EU’s migration strategy, allowing rejected asylum seekers to be relocated to third countries regardless of their ties to those nations.