A rejected asylum seeker from Afghanistan could, under the deal struck in Brussels this week, find themselves on a plane to Uganda — a country they have never set foot in, with no personal ties, thousands of kilometers from home or the European city where they sought protection.

That is the core mechanism of the EU’s new returns regulation, provisionally agreed on June 1 by negotiators from the Council and European Parliament. The law allows member states to establish “return hubs” in third countries — centres where people with no legal right to remain in the EU can be held while awaiting deportation to their country of origin, or in some cases, as their final destination.

“With the new rules, we have more control over who can come to the EU, who can stay, and who needs to leave,” said European Commissioner for Migration Magnus Brunner.

The Deportation Gap

The political logic is straightforward: the European Commission says only about 20 percent of people under return orders actually leave EU territory. That enforcement gap has become politically untenable, even as irregular arrivals fell 26 percent in 2025 to their lowest level since 2021, according to EU data cited by Deutsche Welle and France 24.

The regulation introduces a European Return Order to streamline mutual recognition of deportation decisions between member states. It extends detention periods — up to 24 months, with a possible six-month extension, according to the German DPA news agency. Authorities would gain expanded powers to seize belongings, collect biometric data, conduct searches of “relevant premises,” and detain minors.

Where the Hubs Go — and Why

Which countries will host these centres remains undisclosed. But the outlines of a network are visible. The Netherlands is working with Denmark, Germany, Greece, and Austria to establish joint return and transit hubs, according to France 24. Bilateral talks between the Netherlands and Uganda have been placed on hold. Italy has its own agreement with Albania to house asylum seekers, though that deal faces court challenges. Spain and France have reportedly questioned the model’s effectiveness.

Third countries do not host return hubs out of goodwill. The EU can offer financial packages, visa facilitation, and trade incentives in return. The model — wealthy nations paying poorer ones to manage unwanted arrivals — is increasingly the global default. Australia’s offshore detention in Nauru and Papua New Guinea set an early template. The UK’s aborted Rwanda scheme drew on the same logic. The EU is now building that approach into continental law.

Rights Groups Warn of “Legal Black Holes”

The Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights has warned governments against creating “human rights black holes” at offshore centres. The regulation requires host countries to respect international human rights standards and the principle of non-refoulement — the prohibition on sending people to places where they face persecution. Unaccompanied minors are excluded from third-country transfers.

Whether those safeguards hold in practice will determine whether the policy survives legal challenge.

Silvia Carta of the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM) called the regulation “a draconian detention and deportation machine.” Marta Welander of the International Rescue Committee warned it would normalize immigration raids and expand detention in facilities outside EU territory that are “essentially legal black holes.”

NGOs point to an existing rise in deportations from Germany and other EU states, including night-time home searches to detain people and transfer them to airports — sometimes without allowing them to gather their belongings.

The Politics of Removal

The deal did not emerge from consensus. According to DPA, it was advanced with the support of right-wing parties in the European Parliament. DPA had earlier reported that during negotiations on the legislation, the centre-right European People’s Party coordinated with representatives of Alternative für Deutschland — despite German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s prohibition on such cooperation.

French Green lawmaker Mélissa Camara, who had denounced an earlier parliamentary vote on the legislation as “a vote of shame,” said of the deal: “The legal arsenal serving a xenophobic ideology is now complete.” The far-right ECR group hailed the agreement with a simple verdict: “The era of returns has begun.”

The regulation complements the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, which begins implementation on June 12. Most provisions would take effect immediately upon formal adoption, with some phased in over 12 months.

Europe is not alone in outsourcing its migration dilemmas. The pattern — wealthy democracies paying poorer nations to absorb people they do not want — is becoming the default response of a global system that has failed to agree on how to manage movement across borders. The EU has now given that approach a legal framework. Whether it solves the underlying problem or simply moves it elsewhere depends on what happens inside the return hubs — and whether anyone is watching.

Sources