Deportation centers are legally contentious, expensive and the subject of political controversy: For years, Brussels has been grappling with the issue of establishing such centers outside the EU for rejected asylum seekers. Previous attempts have failed due to legal objections, but now, a "group of five" consisting of Greece, Germany, Austria, Denmark and the Netherlands believes it has overcome these hurdles. During an interview with the Greek television channel ANT1, Greece's Minister of Migration, Thanos Plevris, stated that the first of these so-called "return hubs" is scheduled to begin operations as early as the second half of 2027 — just in time for Greece to assume the EU Council Presidency.
Plevris said Greece had chosen an African country but could not reveal its name yet. Diplomatic circles and media outlets close to the EU have repeatedly cited Rwanda or Uganda, but neither country has been confirmed as the location. "We are not talking about centers in the sense that someone whose asylum application is rejected is sent to a closed facility in a third country," Plevris said.
The plan was rather to establish "open facilities" while the final return to the actual country of origin is being organized, he added. The responsibility for the transferred individuals will not be transferred to the African partner country in order to prevent legal action for human rights violations, but will remain with the five participating EU member states. The EU "group of five" will also finance the project entirely on its own.
There are also plans for international organizations such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) or the International Organization for Migration (IOM) to monitor operations to ensure that international human rights standards and principles of international law are upheld. Various attempts have been made in recent years to outsource asylum proceedings or deportations to countries outside the EU. None of these models worked as planned.
All failed due to legal impediments, changes in government, or high costs. Below are some of the best-known precedents. The United Kingdom, under the Conservative government of Boris Johnson — and later under Rishi Sunak — sought to permanently deport migrants who had entered the country irregularly via the English Channel to Rwanda so they could undergo their asylum proceedings there.
However, the British Supreme Court ruled the plan illegal, finding that there were substantial grounds for believing that asylum seekers sent to Rwanda faced a real risk of refoulement — being returned to countries where they could face persecution or other inhumane treatment. Prior to that, the British government had spent £715 million (€835 million/$966 million) in taxpayer funds on the Rwanda partnership and related implementation costs. In return, a total of four people had voluntarily relocated to Rwanda Under Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Italy signed an agreement with Albania to transport migrants intercepted in the Mediterranean directly to Italian-run centers established in Albania where expedited asylum proceedings could be conducted.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
