Five European governments seek deals with non-EU states to host migrant return centres

Interior ministers from Germany, Austria, Greece, Denmark and the Netherlands announced on Sept. 4 that they will seek agreements with countries outside the European Union to establish return centres for migrants who do not have legal residence in Europe. The ministers met in Copenhagen and said they had agreed on concrete steps to try to secure such arrangements before the end of the calendar year, though they did not name any potential host countries.

Germany’s interior minister, Alexander Dobrindt, told reporters that the aim is to finalise an agreement with third countries within the year. The five governments said they plan to reconvene at the end of September in Munich to review progress and advance negotiations on the proposed mechanism for returning migrants found to lack the right to remain in the EU.

The ministers’ initiative follows reforms adopted by the European Parliament in June that altered the EU’s migration policy framework to speed up deportation procedures and to allow for the establishment of return facilities outside the bloc. Proponents say external centres could streamline returns and reduce irregular arrivals by providing a structured way to process and remove those without legal entitlement to stay in EU states.

However, the proposal has already drawn criticism and caution from human-rights bodies. The Council of Europe and a number of human-rights organisations have warned that establishing return centres beyond the EU’s borders risks violating the fundamental rights of asylum-seekers and migrants. Concerns include the potential denial of access to fair asylum procedures, inadequate safeguards against refoulement, and the difficulty of ensuring independent oversight in partner countries.

At the same time, the Danish Refugee Council was cited as saying the plan could act as a deterrent to migrants taking more dangerous routes. Denmark’s government has set a longer timeline for operationalising transfers and expects that it will be able to send migrants to one of the external centres by the end of 2027, indicating the complexities and time needed to negotiate host-country agreements and put procedures in place.

The five governments also said they intend to engage international agencies in shaping the proposal’s next steps. They plan discussions with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), signalling an awareness that any external arrangements would require coordination with multilateral organisations responsible for migration management and refugee protection.

Ministers did not disclose which non-EU states they regard as candidates to host such centres, and details on how transfers, legal processing, appeals and monitoring would operate remain sparse. The lack of named partners underlines both the diplomatic sensitivity of the proposal and the legal and logistical hurdles that would need to be overcome to create facilities that conform with international obligations.

Human-rights advocates argue that pushing asylum processing beyond EU borders risks outsourcing responsibility for protection and could place vulnerable people in environments where safeguards are weaker. Supporters of the scheme counter that, if accompanied by robust agreements and oversight, external return centres could reduce irregular migration pressure on frontline states and offer a controlled route for returns.

The proposal’s development will be watched closely by governments, international organisations and rights groups. The ministers’ commitment to consult IOM and UNHCR and their timeframe for reaching agreements by year’s end and for Denmark’s operational target of 2027 suggest a phased approach. Still, whether such centres can be established in ways that both satisfy participating governments’ policy objectives and ensure compliance with international human-rights and refugee law remains a central and unresolved question.