Skip to content
Adopted text

Implementation report on the Return Directive

TA-9-2020-0362 · P9_TA(2020)0362 · PE653.716

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 25 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

Parliament's resolution reviews how the Return Directive (2008/115/EC) is applied and calls on the Commission to carry out the implementation assessment due in 2017 under Article 19 of that directive. It asks Member States to collect and publish data on return decisions, entry bans and detention, and to measure effectiveness by return rates, sustainability of returns and respect for fundamental rights safeguards. It calls for voluntary returns to be prioritised over forced returns, for funding for assisted voluntary return programmes, and for formal EU readmission agreements with parliamentary scrutiny and judicial oversight. It asks Member States to individualise return and entry-ban decisions, guarantee the right to an effective remedy, and apply the directive at borders. It calls for entry bans not to be automatic but based on individual assessment, and for detention to remain a measure of last resort with viable alternatives, and for children never to be detained for immigration purposes. It urges the Commission and Member States to set up independent return monitoring covering all phases of return operations and a post-return monitoring mechanism.

Key points

  1. Notes the Commission has not carried out the implementation assessment due in 2017 under Article 19 of the Return Directive and calls on it to do so.
  2. Calls on the Commission to urge Member States to collect and publish qualitative and quantitative data on entry bans and detention, using SIS return and Regulation (EU) 2020/851, and invites Member States to collect statistics and join pilot studies.
  3. Notes the return rate fell from 46 % in 2016 to 37 % in 2017 and that return decisions enforced have decreased since 2015; says effectiveness should be measured by return rate, sustainability of returns, fundamental rights safeguards, procedural guarantees and voluntary returns.
  4. Calls on the Commission to launch infringement procedures where justified and on Member States to allocate adequate capacity, human resources and training to authorities taking and implementing return decisions.
  5. Calls on Member States to enable the Commission to conclude formal EU readmission agreements with parliamentary scrutiny and judicial oversight, and stresses that bilateral readmission agreements lack adequate procedural safeguards.
  6. Calls for more cooperation on returns between Member States, including information sharing and application of Directive 2001/40/EC, and for increased cooperation with Frontex.
  7. Calls on the Commission to keep voluntary returns as the preferred option, to fund assisted voluntary return programmes, and on Member States and Frontex to share best practices on voluntary returns.
  8. Highlights that Article 7 of the Return Directive provides a voluntary departure period of between 7 and 30 days, extendable where necessary, and that Article 14(2) requires written confirmation when removal is postponed.
  9. Stresses that return and entry-ban decisions must be individualised, justified, in writing and include information on remedies in a language the person understands; says unaccompanied children should not be returned unless it is in their best interests.
  10. Calls for the right to an effective remedy, including information and legal aid, and for Member States to apply the Return Directive to border situations and ensure suspensive remedies where there is a risk of refoulement.
  11. Calls on Member States to expand the use of Article 6(4) residence permits for people who cannot be returned, and to lift or withdraw entry bans on humanitarian grounds and base them on individual assessment.
  12. Calls on Member States to offer community-based alternatives to detention, to report on them, and to ensure independent oversight of detention conditions; calls on the Commission to ensure monitoring bodies and a post-return monitoring mechanism.

Who is affected

  • Member States: must collect and publish return data, individualise decisions, provide alternatives to detention and apply the directive at borders.
  • The Commission: asked to carry out the overdue implementation assessment, launch infringement procedures where justified and fund voluntary return programmes.
  • Third-country nationals staying irregularly: affected by return decisions, entry bans, detention and access to voluntary departure and residence permits.
  • Unaccompanied minors and children: should not be detained for immigration purposes and should not be returned unless it is in their best interests.
  • Frontex: asked to share information and best practices on voluntary returns and to have monitoring bodies in place.

Figures and deadlines

  • Return rate decreased from 46 % in 2016 to 37 % in 2017.
  • Around 40 % of returns were voluntary departures, up from just 14 % in 2009.
  • 300 000 people per year cannot be returned owing to administrative barriers, health issues or the risk of refoulement.
  • Irregular border crossings decreased from 1,82 million to 142 000 between 2014 and 2018.
  • Asylum applications decreased from 1,29 million in 2015 to 698 000 in 2019.
  • In 2018, Member States issued 283 880 return decisions, of which 147 815 people returned.
  • Voluntary departure period of between 7 and 30 days under Article 7 of the Return Directive.