On 9th March, Members of the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) voted on the EU’s controversial new deportations bill (draft EU Return Regulation).

The vote followed the collapse of negotiations between Renew (liberals) rapporteur Malik Azmani and the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D). In response, the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) tabled an alternative version of the bill, backed by far-right groups including Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN), European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and Patriots for Europe (PfE).

Critics had already warned that Azmani’s compromise text differed little in substance from the harder-line proposal and contained few meaningful safeguards to prevent fundamental rights violations in the law’s implementation.

In this vote, both texts were put to MEPs. The S&D ultimately rejected both versions, as did The Left and the Greens/EFA groups. The EPP’s proposal therefore secured a majority with the backing of far-right groups.

Silvia Carta, Advocacy Officer, Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants, said: “This vote seals a toxic alliance between centre-right and far-right forces, after weeks of backroom deals to kill the last remaining safeguards. It puts hundreds of thousands of people, including children, at risk of detention across Europe and allows member states to tear families apart, sending them to deportation centres in countries they have never set foot in. The proposals grant sweeping powers to restrict people’s movements, search belongings, impose disproportionate “security” measures, and share personal data with countries that lack safeguards. After the outrage over ICE operations in the United States, this text opens the door to similarly violent immigration enforcement across Europe. Human dignity, freedom, equality: this vote betrays the very values the EU claims to uphold.”

The text that was voted:

• Opens the door for member states to set up deportation centres outside the EU – including for families with children – leading to automatic arbitrary detention, accountability and human rights monitoring challenges, risks of chain deportations towards unsafe countries and numerous other violations of human rights and international law;
• Turns forced returns (deportations) into the default option for people found in an irregular situation, despite the higher risk of violence and fundamental rights violations, further restricting people’s agency and options.
• Massively expands the use and duration of immigration detention (from 18 to 24 months, with restrictive measures possible after the 24 months, including electronic monitoring and reporting obligations), including for children – despite a global commitment from governments to eradicate locking up children for immigration reasons;
• Requires member states to impose geographical restrictions or reporting obligations for all people in the return procedure, or any other restrictive measures defined in national law;
• Despite creating the conditions for overcrowded detention centres, it introduces “emergency” possibilities for member states to disregard safeguards during detention such as limiting judicial review of detention decisions, including for families and children, when there are “exceptionally large numbers” of people awaiting their deportation.
• Introduces severe punitive measures, such as entry bans of undefined duration that could be determined at national level (including “permanent” in cases where security risks are invoked), financial penalties, reduction of financial assistance to rebuild a life after their deportation, and even criminal sanctions for people who do not cooperate towards their deportation;
• Introduces specific derogations from fundamental rights for migrants who are considered a risk for national security and public policy, further blurring the lines between criminal law and migration while reinforcing dangerous stereotypes;
• Reinforces the false assumption that all people who are not eligible for asylum should be immediately deported, making it harder for people to access permits on other grounds, including humanitarian, family and work permits. 

On 10th December, the European Parliament and the EU Council reached an agreement on the revision of the Victims’ Rights Directive, the EU’s law setting minimum protection and redress standards for victims of crime.  

The leaked draft shows that EU lawmakers agreed on a text that fails to protect undocumented victims from detention and deportation should they report abuse or violence to police.

Louise Bonneau, Advocacy Officer at PICUM, said “Across Europe, undocumented people already face the impossible choice between enduring abuse or risking detention and deportation if they seek help. This agreement reinforces that fear by signaling that some victims are less worthy of protection, undermining equality before the law and the fundamental rights the EU claims to uphold.” 

The Directive requires that victims should not be ‘discouraged’ from reporting and that their rights under the Directive must not be obstructed, yet it leaves it entirely to member states to decide whether to introduce concrete safeguards, such as guarantees that no personal data of undocumented migrant victims would be shared between police and immigration enforcement officials (e.g. “firewalls”). In practice, this means there will be no EU-wide guarantee of safe reporting mechanisms.

The text clarifies that member states can issue special residence permits for undocumented victims, but they are not required to do so. Only access to secure and autonomous residence status can ensure that victims can report crimes and seek redress without fear.  

Suzanne Hoff, International Coordinator of La Strada International, said “For trafficked and exploited people, one of the biggest barriers is the lack of safe reporting mechanisms, which are generally absent in Europe. We had hoped that the revision of the Victim Rights Directive would remedy this gap in the EU anti-trafficking law, but this did not happen. If the EU is serious about fighting human trafficking and other serve forms of exploitation and abuse it should ensure that reporting abuse does not lead to detention or deportation: without this guarantee, many victims will remain too afraid to come forward”.  

NOTES TO THE EDITORS:

• The political agreement reached by the European Parliament and the Council will then have to be formally adopted by both institutions, before it is published in the Official Journal and enters into force.
• The European Commission had proposed a minimal safeguard preventing authorities from sharing victims’ residence-status data with migration authorities until completion of the first individual needs assessment. Although far from a full safe-reporting guarantee, it acknowledged the risks faced by undocumented victims. Member states rejected even this limited protection, repeating the missed opportunity seen last year in the Violence Against Women Directive.
• These gaps must also be understood in the broader context of EU migration policy. Proposals such as the “Return Regulation” would further expand enforcement powers that already deter undocumented people – especially women and girls exposed to gender-based violence – from seeking help. Without binding safe-reporting safeguards across EU law, the rights set out in the Directive will remain inaccessible to many of those who need them most.

On 8^th December, the EU Council voted its negotiating position on the draft Return Regulation, the EU’s flagship initiative to escalate immigration detention and deportations of undocumented people, including to countries outside the EU. 

The Council has endorsed a position that further worsens the Commission’s original proposal: 

• A new article which would enable authorities to conduct home raids, investigations and further controls to enforce deportations. Searches would cover both the homes of people to be deported and ‘other relevant premises’, which would potentially open the door to police raiding houses of citizens suspected of sheltering migrants, as well as offices and shelters run by humanitarian organisations. 
• A massive expansion in the use and duration of immigration detention, up to 30 months (up from the current 18 and from 24 in the Commission’s proposal), including for children.  
• Expanded grounds for detention, including absence of family ties, engaging in irregular work and insufficient means of subsistence, de facto criminalising poverty and exclusion. 
• Possibility for member states to establish deportation centres outside the EU, leading to arbitrary detention, serious accountability and human rights monitoring challenges, risks of chain deportations to unsafe countries and numerous other violations of human rights and international law- including for children travelling with their families. 
• Extended derogations from fundamental rights for migrants considered a risk to national security and public policy, further blurring the lines between criminal law and migration and reinforcing dangerous stereotypes. 
• Entry bans of up to 20 years, extendable to an indefinite duration when security risks are invoked, as well as disproportionate obligations on people deemed non cooperative in the return procedure – non-compliance would result in fines, cuts to financial assistance intended to rebuild a life after deportation and even criminal sanctions. 
• Additional ‘flexibility’ clauses opening the door to further measures of punishment and containment at national level, including expanding the grounds for absconding and detention, extra obligations to cooperate and sanctions for non-cooperation. 

The regulation would enter into force two years after adoption, despite having been presented as “urgent”. However, provisions designed to shift responsibility and externalise deportations –such as return hubs – would be applicable immediately. 

QUOTE PACK:

Silvia Carta, Advocacy Officer at PICUM, said: “This so-called ‘Return Regulation’ ushers in a deportation regime that entrenches punishment, violence, and discrimination. Instead of investing in safety, protection, and inclusion, the EU is choosing policies that will push more people into danger and legal limbo. The Council’s position goes against basic humanity and EU values. Now it is up to the European Parliament to reject this approach. Migration governance must be rooted in dignity and rights – not fear, racism, or exclusion.” 

Sarah Chander, Director at the Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice, said: “European governments are seeking to change the law to deport people to places they are not from, and have no connection to. With the ‘Returns Regulation’, the EU is legitimising offshore prisons, racial profiling and child detention in ways we have never seen. Instead of finding ways to ensure safety and protection for everybody, the EU is pushing a punishment regime for migrants, which will help no-one.”  

Olivia Sundberg Diez, EU Advocate on Migration and Asylum at Amnesty International, said: “Today, EU home affairs ministers are expected to significantly worsen the Commission’s already punitive and deeply flawed Return Regulation proposal. Detention as a default, home raids, new sanctions and surveillance on undocumented people, and deportations at any cost – systematically dismantling rights protections and allowing for indefinite detention in some cases. Mirroring the dehumanizing and unlawful mass arrests and deportations in the US, these hardline policies from EU member states reveal a complete disregard for international law and human dignity.” 

Freek Spinnewijn, FEANTSA director said: “The new proposal not only further criminalises migrants but also threatens those who provide aid or essential services. EU policy must uphold a strict firewall between immigration enforcement and humanitarian support, and Member States must respect the human-rights-based principles, neutrality and independence of humanitarian actors. Homelessness services must be safe spaces, protected from raids or any form of immigration control targeting undocumented people.” 

Sofie Croonenberg, advocacy officer at Stichting Vluchteling, said: “This proposal further legitimizes the extremely harmful externalization policies of the European Union. Learning from similar practices of the past the so-called ‘return hubs’, we know these will lead to extensive human rights violations and even the detention of children. We urge the EU to abandon this concept and shift to human centred policies for people on the move. This is only possible when human rights and dignity are at its core.”  

Federico Dessi, Executive Director at Médecins du Monde Belgium said: “The potential damage that this legislation could cause to the health and well-being of undocumented migrants is too great to ignore. Limited safeguards regarding the sharing of health data have been further weakened, detention periods have been extended, even for children, and measures to ‘detect’ third-country nationals now extend to their own homes and to undetermined types of “relevant premises”. This represents a significant setback for the protection of fundamental rights and the right to health in Europe, and undermines the necessary barriers between service provision and law enforcement.” 

Alkistis Agrafioti, Advocacy Officer & Lawyer at the Greek Council for Refugees (GCR), said: “Greece has become one of the EU’s starkest experiments in detaining asylum applicants — marked by prison-like conditions, a lack of effective monitoring mechanisms, and repeated findings of rights violations. The ‘Returns Regulation’ threatens to replicate and entrench this model across Europe. Instead of learning from the profound failures of detention-based approaches, the EU is choosing to scale them up, turning border zones into sites of coercion and trauma for people seeking protection. This is a dangerous step backwards. A humane migration system must be built on dignity, transparency, and the right to seek safety.” 

Judith Sunderland, Acting Europe and Central Asia Deputy Director at Human Rights Watch: EU governments took a terrible proposal from the European Commission and made it immeasurably worse. The draft Return Regulation opens the door for arbitrary and abusive raids on and prolonged detention of migrants, including children, based on racial profiling, who then face being shipped off to detention centers in random countries they never set foot in, all with minimal legal oversight. This dystopian future is about as far as the EU can go from its founding values of equality and respect for human rights. 

NOTES TO THE EDITORS:

• Last September, over 250 organisations signed a joint statement calling on EU lawmakers to reject the proposed Return Regulation, highlighting human rights risks and opaque decision-making. 
• The European Parliament will adopt its own negotiating position in the next months. Both institutions, the Parliament and the Council, will then need to find a compromise to finalise the text.