Are you undocumented and do you need help?

Blog - 25.02.26

The proposed Deportation (“Return”) Regulation

  1. What is the proposed Deportation (“Return”) Regulation?
  2. What are some of the key elements in the Commission’s proposal?
  3. What would happen to undocumented people if this becomes law?
  4. Would there be any consequences for professionals, city level authorities and anyone supporting undocumented people?
  5. What other policy choices do governments have besides deportations?
  6. What is PICUM calling for?
  7. What’s next in terms of negotiations on this proposal?
  8. What can you do to oppose this?

What is the proposed Deportation (“Return”) Regulation?

The Deportation regulation (officially called “Return regulation”) is a legislative proposal that sets out the EU’s agenda on deportations of people who lack residence status. It was presented by the European Commission in March 2025, with the purpose of increasing deportation rates and allowing for swifter deportations. If adopted, it would replace the 2008 Return Directive.

Note on terminology: the Commission’s proposal uses the term “return” rather than “deportation” concerning this proposed legislation. PICUM, as many civil society organisations, prefers to use the term “deportation” as the proposal relies overwhelmingly on increased use of force and coercion in its various elements. Furthermore, what the proposal describes as “voluntary return” in fact corresponds to “voluntary departure”, meaning a person’s compliance with a mandatory return decision rather than a genuinely free and informed choice to return to their country of origin.

What are some of the key elements in the Commission’s proposal?

The Commission’s proposal strengthens the tools available to EU member states to identify, control, detain, and deport people in an irregular situation. It looks at deportations as the only possible way to reduce the number of people living irregularly in the EU, without considering any of the root causes that lead people to live without papers, or avenues that would allow them to regularise their status.

 The main proposed changes include:

  • Expansion of countries where people can be deported and deportation centres outside the EU, including in countries where they have no prior ties. This includes the possibility for member states to conclude arrangements with any country that would be willing to accept their deportees. These arrangements – also known as “deportation hubs” – are likely to be based on detention and containment, such as Italy’s deal with Albania – and raise serious concerns about fundamental rights, discrimination, and democratic scrutiny.
  • The proposal requires member states to deploy undefined broad detection measures. These might result in different measures and tools designed to “detect” people who have an irregular administrative status to facilitate their deportation. These practices could include police raids on workplaces and in public spaces, invasive and indiscriminate uses of surveillance technologies, racial profiling, and, in some cases obligations on public service workers in schools and hospitals to report anyone suspected to be undocumented. To learn more about detection measures, you can read PICUM’s explainer here.
  • Vast expansion of immigration detention, both in terms of length (up to two years) and the criteria on the basis of which people could be detained. These include reasons such as having entered Europe irregularly, being homeless or not having documents – which could de facto cover all undocumented people. The proposal also allows for the immigration detention of children, despite international human rights standards indicating that it is always a child rights violation and never in a child’s best interests, and global commitment by governments to work to end the practice. 
  • Limitations to access national permits and increased irregularity. More people would be pushed into irregularity and legal limbo as the proposal requires member states to immediately issue deportation orders alongside any decision ending regular stay, without prior consideration of other national-level status options (such as permits for humanitarian, best interests of the child, medical or family reasons, as well as during statelessness determination procedures or in other cases where deportation is not possible). The proposal also weakens protections for those who cannot be deported as it removes the current requirement to identify and assess other individual circumstances apart from the risk of refoulement, ignoring that in many cases “return” may not be appropriate or even possible.
  • Harsh sanctions and punishment for living with irregular residence status. First, the proposal introduces extensive, disproportionate and unrealistic cooperation requirements on people issued a deportation order, such as having to provide identity documents they may not possess, having their bodies and belongings searched, or cooperating with third countries to obtain travel documents. These are coupled with punitive and heavy sanctions in cases of ‘non-compliance’, including financial penalties, entry bans, restrictions on voluntary departure, as well as refusal of benefits, allowances or work permits. Additional specific sanctions are also foreseen for people on “security and public order” grounds, which are vaguely defined and may be applied abusively.

A more detailed overview of the Commission’s proposal and PICUM’s concerns, can be found here.

What would happen to undocumented people if this becomes law?

The proposed Deportation Regulation would make everyday life more unsafe and unstable for undocumented people.

  • Constant uncertainty and more precarious lives: Undocumented people will be more likely to live with the threat of a deportation order that could be enforced at any time, uprooting them from countries where they may have lived for years, worked, paid taxes, and built friendships and family ties. This uncertainty would also affect people who could not be deported due to human rights issues: they would receive only temporary “suspensions” of deportation that have to be reviewed every six months, instead of a longer leave to stay or a regular status that would allow them to rebuild their lives with stability and dignity.
  • More fear and exclusion from essential services: Detection-driven policies could discourage people from accessing healthcare, education, housing support or reporting abuse, out of fear that seeking help may expose them to deportation procedures.
  • Risks to the right to health: Health is a fundamental right under EU law. When people avoid medical care because of detection risks, or are placed in immigration detention, this harms individual wellbeing and weakens public health strategies.
  • Punishment linked to migration status and chilling effect on solidarity: The proposal’s sanctions and restrictive approach risk pushing people further into homelessness, exploitation and isolation.

Would there be any consequences for professionals, city level authorities and anyone supporting undocumented people?

The proposed Deportation Regulation would also place significant new pressures for those providing support to undocumented individuals:

  • Pressure on professionals and erosion of trust: If access to public services becomes formally linked to immigration enforcement, professionals such as doctors, teachers, social workers, and volunteers may face conflicts between their ethical obligations and expectations to cooperate with immigration authorities. This could undermine professional independence, weaken trust between service providers and communities, and ultimately make essential services less accessible.
  • Chilling effect on community support: Individuals and organisations offering assistance – including neighbours, faith groups, and civil society organisations – may fear that providing basic humanitarian support could expose them or the people they assist to surveillance, checks, or investigations. Such concerns could discourage community solidarity and reduce access to informal support networks.

What other policy choices do governments have besides deportations?

The proposal reflects a false assumption that deportation should be the only option for people whose asylum application has been rejected or whose residence permits have expired or been revoked. To reduce the number of people trapped in irregularity, EU states should uphold access to existing human-rights-related permits, and expand avenues to a broad range of residence permits that allow people to plan their lives, engage in regular work, study, and fully participate in all the economic, social, and cultural facets of the societies in which they live.  For example, the Spanish government recently announced a broad regularisation programme which could benefit around 500,000 people. This shows that regularisation is not only possible – it works, and it’s the right thing to do to offer dignity, stability, and access to basic rights.

What is PICUM calling for?

Together with over 250 other civil society organisations, PICUM has called for the Deportation regulation proposal to be rejected. We believe the proposal would have such far-reaching consequences for the rights of undocumented people, as well as for the societies in which they live, that without a fundamental revision of its approach, no safeguard could make this legislation acceptable.

What’s next in terms of negotiations on this proposal?

EU governments have already agreed on a common position and pushed the proposal further, further expanding the use of detention, opening the door for further restrictive measures under national law, and introducing a new article which would enable authorities to conduct home raids. The European Parliament is now reviewing the proposal and is set to vote on its position in March 2026.

Even after the European Parliament vote, negotiations between the Parliament and the Council will continue to reach a final agreement.

This means there is still space to influence the outcome – and pressure now matters.

What can you do to oppose this?

This is a moment for collective action. Across Europe, people are already mobilising to oppose this legislation. You can add your voice and strengthen this momentum in different ways.

  1. Join and support existing mobilisation against the deportation law
  1. Help us spread the word
  • Organise discussions in your workplace, organisation or community
  • Help make this information accessible by translating or adapting it for different audiences (contact us if you’d like support)
  1. Put pressure on decision-makers
  1. Act locally – in your city
  • Contact your local City Council or city representatives and ask them to take a stand against this EU law and fulfil their mandate to guarantee services and protection to all inhabitants
  • Mobilise with others in your community, including through public meetings, collective statements, or peaceful protest

Additional Resources: