Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.

WEEKLY BULLETIN

13 March 2025

Would you like to receive this and/or other newsletters directly from ECRE?
Subscribe

Does your organisation have any recent reports, upcoming events or open job vacancies that you would like to see included in the Weekly Bulletin? If so, please send them to Ben Moore.

EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENTS

Proposal for an EU Return Regulation

NATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS

IRELAND

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has defended an appeal by the state against a High Court judgment relating to the provision of asylum accommodation.
A new report by the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) has revealed serious issues in asylum accommodation centres.
A record number of people died whilst in the international protection system in Ireland in 2024.
The government is considering a reduction in payments to homeowners who host Ukrainian refugees.

ITALY

A criminal trial related to the Cutro shipwreck has opened in Crotone.
Italy has been ordered to pay compensation to a group of people who were prevented from disembarking from an Italian coastguard ship.
The Italian National Press Federation (FNSI) has launched legal action against the government over the recent spyware scandal.
A new NGO report has condemned the detention centres in Albania and called for their closure.

NEWS FROM THE ECRE OFFICE

Comments Paper on Schengen Border Code

RECENT REPORTS

UPCOMING EVENTS

OPEN JOB VACANCIES

ONGOING CAMPAIGNS

CALLS FOR PAPERS, PROJECT PROPOSALS, UNIVERSITY COURSES etc.

EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENTS

Proposal for an EU Return Regulation

The European Commission (EC) has published its proposal for a ‘Regulation establishing a common system for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union’, commonly referred to as the Return Regulation. If adopted, it will replace the 2008 Return Directive (Directive on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals).

The main elements of the proposal, which was adopted by the College of Commissioners on 11 March and presented to the European Parliament (EP) by Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration Magnus Brunner later on the same day, are set out below.

Structure

The proposal consists of nine chapters:

General provisions
Return procedure
Obligations of third-country nationals
Safeguards and remedies
Prevention of absconding and detention
Readmission
Sharing and transfer of personal data
Common system for returns
Final provisions, including measures to be implemented in times of emergency

Return hubs

The proposal paves the way for the establishment of “return hubs” in third countries by providing a legal basis for EU member states (MS) to set them up if they reach an agreement with a third country. It also foresees a significant expansion of the possible countries to which third-country nationals can be returned against their will beyond their country of origin. This goes even further than the proposed idea of return hubs in countries where the people affected may have previously resided or where they have the right to enter.

European Return Order

A central element of the proposal is the introduction of a new “European Return Order” (ERO) and the mutual recognition of return decisions by MS. Under this provision, if an individual’s application for international protection is rejected in one MS and they receive a return decision but subsequently move to another MS, the second MS must recognise the return decision issued by the first and deport them from the EU. It will be optional until 2027 when it will become mandatory. It is facilitated by the creation of the ERO: When a MS issues a return decision it must enter information into EU databases which creates ERO. The ERO requires all MS to recognise and enforce the return decision.

Voluntary return

The proposal also significantly limits the options for voluntary return by removing a minimum period during which the applicant can choose to return and instead imposing a maximum return period of 30 days. It introduces various circumstances in which people are excluded from voluntary return, including if they have not met an extensive list of obligations for co-operation or if they fall under a broad set of criteria for assessing the risk of absconding.

Detention

The proposal expands the grounds for detention, including to prevent absconding for which there is an extensive list of criteria for preventing absconding, such as the absence of a reliable address. It also extends the maximum detention period from 18 months under the Return Directive to up to 24 months. Even after this period, other coercive measures, such as electronic monitoring, may still apply to track people.

Entry bans

The proposal introduces new grounds and extended durations for entry bans. A significant number of people issued with a return decision may also receive entry bans lasting up to 10 years.

Appeal rights

Regarding legal remedies, the proposal weakens procedural safeguards. Notably, the suspensive effect of appeals is not automatic, meaning that people may be removed from the EU before a decision on their appeal is taken. This raises concerns about the right to an effective remedy.

Conclusion

The proposal introduces several restrictive measures and rules that could significantly impact the rights of third-country nationals and limit their access to legal remedies and assistance. However, it also includes some positive measures compared to the Return Directive, including strengthened provisions for assessing the risk of non-refoulement and the bolstering of an independent monitoring mechanism for forced return procedures.

Next steps

The proposal will now be scrutinised by the EP and the Council of the EU.

Related articles

ECRE publishes comments on the Commission Proposal for a Recast Return Directive (November 2018)
European Commission releases proposal to recast Return Directive (September 2018)

NATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS

IRELAND

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has defended an appeal by the state against a High Court judgment relating to the provision of asylum accommodation.
A new report by the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) has revealed serious issues in asylum accommodation centres.
A record number of people died whilst in the international protection system in Ireland in 2024.
The government is considering a reduction in payments to homeowners who host Ukrainian refugees.

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) has contested an appeal by the state against a court ruling relating to the provision of asylum accommodation. In August 2024, the High Court ruled that the state had breached the right to human dignity of people seeking asylum in Ireland by failing to provide accommodation for new arrivals between December 2023 and May 2024. The state lodged an appeal in November 2024. In February, IHREC Chief Commissioner Liam Herrick criticised the state’s failure to plan adequately for the increase in asylum applications despite having “full notice of” the issue. Speaking in advance of the Court of Appeal hearing on 6-7 March, he also reiterated IHREC’s position that “people applying for international protection have a right to adequate shelter and basic living conditions under national and EU law”. According to IHREC, 3,512 international protection applicants were without state accommodation, up from 259 when the case started in December 2023.

A new report has revealed serious issues in asylum accommodation centres. The report by the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA), covers the first year of its monitoring and inspection of centres managed by the International Protection Accommodation Services (IPAS). It found that over half of them did not have effective governance systems, more than a third lacked policies to protect residents from harm and 35% of staff were not properly vetted by the police. HIQA said that there was “considerable room for improvement” in governance, risk management, safeguarding and protection, and called for “urgent action”.

A record number of people died in the international protection system in Ireland in 2024. According to data published by IPAS, 14 people died whilst in the system in 2024, the highest annual figure since records began in 2002. According to the Irish Times, in 2024, a doctor from the NGO Safetynet Primary Care warned that a “higher than expected number of patients” living in “extreme isolation” in a remote centre had become “suicidal”. Bulelani Mfaco, a former spokesperson for the Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland, said: “A lot of people come to Ireland and end up in direct provision because they feared death in their own country. When someone dies close to you it brings back the reality of what they escaped from”.

The government is considering a reduction in payments to homeowners who host Ukrainian refugees. According to the Irish Times, the Accommodation Recognition Payment (ARP), which was initially set at € 400 and increased to € 800 in December 2022, may be reduced by approximately €200. The current ARP scheme is due to end on 31 March but the government is expected to extend it beyond that date and any possible cuts are only likely to come into effect later in the year.

Related articles

NATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS

ITALY

A criminal trial related to the Cutro shipwreck has opened in Crotone.
Italy has been ordered to pay compensation to a group of people who were prevented from disembarking from an Italian coastguard ship.
The Italian National Press Federation (FNSI) has launched legal action against the government over the recent spyware scandal.
A new NGO report has condemned the detention centres in Albania and called for their closure.

A criminal trial related to the Cutro shipwreck has opened in Crotone. Six officers from the Italian coastguard and Financial Police are accused of shipwreck and multiple manslaughter in relation to the Cutro shipwreck which cost the lives of at least 94 people, including 35 minors, off the coast of Calabria in February 2023. Marco Bertotto from Doctors Without Borders (MSF) said that his organisation would be following the court proceedings closely “to express our solidarity with the survivors and families of the victims, who have the right to truth and justice”. He added that the shipwreck “could have been avoided” and that the victims were “the product of years of Italian and European policies based on rejections, deterrence and criminalisation of migrants, as well as on agreements with third countries”. Describing the shipwreck as “part of a framework of responsibilities much broader than merely individual ones and which concern a political and regulatory approach that hinders those who protect human rights and criminalises migrants”, Serena Chiodo from Amnesty International Italy called for “truth and justice” for the victims and their families. She also called for a change in the Consolidated Law on Immigration “to decriminalise the crime of irregular entry”, a guarantee of “safe and legal routes for those fleeing conflict, persecution and crisis situations” and the removal of “any obstacle to the search and recuse activities of NGOs”. In addition, a group of search and rescue (SAR) NGOs have expressed their willingness to act as a civil party in the trial. “Italian authorities have systematically ignored their duty to rescue, but the deadly cycle of impunity must end now” they said on the opening day of the trial (5 March), adding: “Those in power must no longer be able to evade justice while people drown at sea”.

Italy has been ordered to pay compensation to a group of people who were prevented from disembarking from an Italian coastguard ship. On 7 March, the Supreme Court of Cassation ruled that the 177 people, many of whom were from Eritrea, were entitled to compensation on the grounds that they had been deprived of their personal freedom when they were forced to remain on the Italian coastguard ship Diciotti for 10 days after they were rescued off the coast of Lampedusa in August 2018. The Italian government has reacted angrily to the ruling. Responding to the comments from various senior figures, including Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Antonio Tajani and Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini (who was Minister of the Interior at the time of the incident), First President of the Supreme Court of Cassation Margherita Cassano said: “The decisions of the Court of Cassation, like those of other judges, can be criticised. However, insults that call into question the division of powers on which the rule of law is based are unacceptable”.

Four days after the court ruling, one of the plaintiffs in the case, an Eritrean man who was on board the Dicciotti, said that he had been motivated by a desire for justice. “I wasn’t interested in compensation but in ascertaining the responsibility of those who implemented those decisions” he said, adding: “It was an injustice. They deprived us of our freedom and of the ability to ask for asylum without us having committed any crime”. Commenting on the negative reactions that followed the court ruling, the man’s lawyer, Alessandro Ferrara, said that he felt that the judges had merely “reiterated consolidated principles”. “There is nothing political here, because fundamental rights are safeguarded regardless of citizenship, the colour of skin and social background,” he added.

The Italian National Press Federation (FNSI) has launched legal action against the government over the recent spyware scandal. On 19 February, the FNSI submitted a criminal complaint to prosecutors in Rome after President of the Chamber of Deputies Lorenzo Fontana invoked a rule which allowed the government to refrain from answering questions on its alleged use of spyware to hack mobile phones belonging to journalists, refugee rights activists and other critics on the grounds that all unclassified information had already been shared. FNSI Secretary General Alessandra Costante said: “We want clarity. We want journalists to be able to do their job without the risk of being intercepted”. “We’re dealing with facts that not only violate the criminal code but the constitution itself,” she added. The founder of the SAR NGO Mediterraneanea Saving Humans, Luca Casarini, who was one of the seven people in Italy who received a message from WhatsApp telling them that their phone had been hacked, said: “By refusing to answer the questions in parliament, the government is laying bare its deep difficulties”. “Regardless of which agency deployed this spyware against me, these wiretaps are entirely illegal. There is no doubt that the targets are political opponents of the government,” he added.

A new NGO report has condemned the detention centres in Albania and called for their closure. The report, which was published by the Asylum and Immigration Working Group (TAI), a coalition of NGOs that includes several ECRE member organisations, is based on information gathered during three monitoring missions to the centres in Shëngjin and Gjadër since October 2024. Speaking in a press conference to mark the launch of the report on 25 February, Nazzarena Zorzella from ECRE member organisation the Association for Juridical Studies on Immigration (ASGI) said: “During our mission, we found that asylum seekers are not adequately informed about the complexity of the procedure to which they are subjected. This lack of information and clarity has the effect of a clear violation of the right to defence, which in turn compromises the right to asylum”.

In addition to contributing to the TAI report, ASGI has also published an analysis of the compatibility of the Italy-Albania Protocol with EU law. The new policy paper identifies several critical issues, including “ineffective screening of ‘vulnerable’ people”, “lack of effective legal information for asylum seekers detained in Albania” and “arbitrary detention of asylum seekers in centres located in Albania” and concludes that the Protocol and its implementation “undermine the application of harmonised rules and obligations under Union law” and harm both the Common European Asylum System and the rights and guarantees that EU member states have to grant to people in need of international protection. It includes ASGI’s recommendation for the European Commission to “act as soon as possible to ensure compliance with EU law” and its rejection of the possibility of transforming the two centres into repatriation centres.

Related articles

NEWS FROM THE ECRE OFFICE

Comments Paper: Schengen Borders Code

ECRE has published a comments paper on the Regulation amending the Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders, commonly known as the Schengen Borders Code (SBC).

This comments paper includes ECRE’s analysis of the changes that were introduced during the latest reform of the SBC which started in December 2021 and was concluded in June 2024. It should be read together with the comments paper on the proposal to amend the SBC and the policy note on the SBC amendments.

The proposed amendments corresponded to the particular context at the end of 2021. First, provisions related to pandemics and health emergencies aimed at applying the learning from the Covid-19 pandemic and the related travel restrictions and management of borders in the Schengen area. Second, revisions of rules applicable to the application and prolongation of border checks and related activities not classed as border checks, given the persistent and ongoing use of internal border checks by certain member states. Third, the introduction of the concept of instrumentalisation of migration as a response to the situation of people arriving at the EU’s border with Belarus. In addition, a transfer procedure for people apprehended at internal borders was also proposed.

ECRE has paid particular attention to provisions related to the crossing of external borders, the closure of border crossings or the limiting of their opening hours, the inclusion of instrumentalisation of migration, the expansion of border surveillance, restrictions of travel to the EU in times of health emergencies, checks within the territory in border areas and a new optional procedure for the transfer of people apprehended at the internal border.

The comments paper also includes implementation considerations and recommendations to member states, the European Commission and the European Parliament.