The European Union is on the verge of creating offshore return hubs for migrants, a move that the Council of Europe's human rights commissioner warns could lead to human rights black holes. Following a European Parliament vote on the EU's return regulation, 19 member states signed an open letter urging the use of new legal possibilities to establish extraterritorial centres for processing people deemed to have no right to stay. Countries like Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, and the Netherlands are poised to set up joint hubs, despite opposition from Spain and France and outcry from rights groups.
Historical precedents raise alarm
Michael O'Flaherty, the Council of Europe commissioner for human rights, cautions that past offshore processing schemes have been disastrous. Australia's operations on Nauru and Papua New Guinea led to years of arbitrary detention, severe trauma, and at least 12 deaths. Israel's attempts to relocate Sudanese and Eritrean asylum seekers to Rwanda and Uganda resulted in abuse and legal limbo. In the US, Haitian refugees held at Guantánamo Bay faced torture and enforced disappearances. O'Flaherty asks: "Is this the kind of punitive, outsourced model we want to import here?"
EU failures and legal challenges
Europe's own externalisation policies have already caused violations in Libya and Tunisia. Italy's agreement with Albania faced questions over EU law compatibility, restricting migrants' access to lawyers and courts. The UK's Rwanda plan was blocked by the Supreme Court due to systemic weaknesses in Rwanda's asylum system. O'Flaherty notes that "there isn't a single initiative to outsource migration policy that has not raised serious human rights concerns."
Essential safeguards needed
Before implementing return hubs, O'Flaherty urges four commitments: full human rights risk assessments before any agreement; rigorous, independent real-time monitoring with an off switch for violations; legally binding agreements with enforceable human rights clauses; and public disclosure of all assessments, agreements, and reports. He states: "Demanding this level of rigour is not asking the impossible. It is the minimum required to mitigate the risks."
