EU Parliament Approves Sweeping New Migration and Deportation Measures
The European Parliament has given its backing to a significant piece of legislation designed to expedite the return of irregular migrants to their home countries. This new law introduces a raft of stricter measures, including the controversial prospect of establishing deportation centres outside the European Union. The approval marks a notable shift in the EU’s political landscape, reflecting a broader trend towards more stringent migration policies across the continent.
The legislation, often referred to as the “return regulation,” is central to the EU’s renewed efforts to address irregular migration. Its primary aim is to substantially increase the rate at which individuals without a legal right to remain in the EU are returned. This is seen as a cornerstone of a comprehensive strategy to regain control over the bloc’s external borders and manage migration flows more effectively.
A key element of the new regulation is the authorization for EU member states to deport irregular migrants to third countries that may not be their country of origin. This provision hinges on the existence of bilateral agreements with non-EU states, which would host dedicated facilities, termed “return hubs,” on their territories. The intention is to create more viable pathways for deportation, even when direct return to a country of origin is complex or impossible.
The vote in the European Parliament saw substantial support, with 389 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) voting in favour, while 206 voted against, and 32 abstained. The outcome was met with applause and cheers from a significant portion of the parliamentary chamber, underscoring the political weight and anticipated impact of this legislation.
The approved text will now proceed to negotiations between the Parliament and EU member states. These discussions are anticipated to be relatively smooth, as there are reportedly no major divergences between the legislative proposals put forth by both bodies.
Key Provisions and Controversies
The new regulation introduces several significant changes to current EU migration policy:
- Extended Detention Periods: The law permits an increase in the legal detention period for individuals awaiting deportation, setting a maximum of 24 months. This is a reduction from the 30 months initially proposed by member states, but still represents a considerable extension of current practices.
- Unlimited Entry Bans: A particularly contentious aspect of the law is the imposition of practically unlimited entry bans for individuals returned from the EU. While the Parliament’s version has pushed for unlimited maximum durations, member states had initially proposed a 20-year limit. This aims to deter future irregular entries by individuals who have previously been returned.
- Deportation to Unrelated Third Countries: The regulation empowers EU countries to deport irregular migrants to third countries with which they have no direct connection, provided a bilateral agreement for return hubs is in place.
- Families with Children: Both the Parliament and EU member states intend to include families with children in deportation measures, with the sole exclusion being unaccompanied minors.
- Appeals Process: The legislation seeks to alter the automatic suspensive effect of appeals. Under the current system, an appeal automatically halts a deportation until a final court judgment. The new text aims to grant judicial authorities discretion to decide on a case-by-case basis whether an appeal should suspend a deportation.
- Cooperation with Non-Recognised Entities: The Parliament’s version of the law includes a provision that allows for discussions and cooperation with “non-recognised third country entities” for readmission purposes. This could potentially lead to partnerships with non-democratic regimes to facilitate deportations.
Concerns and Criticisms
The new legislation has not been without its critics, who have raised serious concerns about its alignment with fundamental human rights and EU values.
- Cooperation with the Taliban: Green MEP Melissa Camara expressed strong disapproval, stating that the adopted text “gives a green light to the cooperation with the Talibans to enable the forced return of Afghan nationals. It is a total renouncement of the EU values.” This highlights fears that the pragmatic need for deportations could lead to ethically questionable alliances.
- Potential for Rights Violations: Leftist groups have voiced opposition, arguing that the law moves beyond simply returning individuals to potentially sending them to countries they have no prior connection with, raising questions about safety and well-being.
- Search Powers: The Parliament’s decision to remove a provision that would have allowed authorities to search the place of residence of individuals with expulsion orders has been seen by some as a positive step, preventing potentially intrusive raids similar to those conducted by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). However, the initial proposal had raised significant privacy concerns among NGOs and civil society groups.
- Security Risk Bans: The inclusion of a permanent entry ban for individuals deemed a security risk further tightens the net for those entering the EU irregularly.
Political Alignments and Divisions
The passage of the “return regulation” was notably facilitated by an alignment between the mainstream conservative European People’s Party (EPP) and far-right political groups. This collaboration occurred despite prior controversy surrounding their cooperation in drafting the bill at the committee stage, which reportedly involved a private WhatsApp chat.
A small number of EPP MEPs from countries such as Luxembourg, Belgium, Ireland, and Finland dissented, either opposing the bill or abstaining. Francois-Xavier Bellamy, an EPP MEP from France and the drafter of the text, articulated the prevailing sentiment within his group on social media platform X: “We will impose a simple principle: who comes to Europe illegally cannot stay.”
Conversely, leftist groups largely voted against the law, citing fundamental rights concerns. However, there were notable exceptions within the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) group, with lawmakers from Denmark, Malta, and Latvia voting in favour, reflecting their national governments’ migration policies. Similarly, MEPs from the Renew Europe group, particularly those from Nordic and German constituencies, also supported the legislation. This demonstrates a complex and often fragmented political landscape surrounding migration policy within the EU.
