Europe

Advocating for Alternatives to Detention in Europe

A version of this article was originally published in European Programme for Integration and Migration (EPIM) Policy Update February 2019

What progress are we making towards change to reduce immigration detention? This was the main question we asked ourselves with European Alternatives to Detention (ATD) Network partners, when we met for our fourth regular meeting in Brussels in February.

The context is difficult, with intense political pressure to resolve the perceived crisis of migration in the region. While EU policy is promoting more and longer detention to increase returns and prevent secondary movement, several countries are planning expansions of the use of detention. Effective opposition to detention is becoming harder and harder, as governments feel that they have no option but to do something.  

Set up in March 2017, the European ATD Network is a space for strategizing for a different future to the looming dystopia of widening mass detention in Europe – because to achieve reform away from immigration detention, we believe we need to both make it a political problem and provide solutions. The Network links NGO partners running case management ATD pilots in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Poland and the UK, with IDC and PICUM.

We started by developing a shared theory of change, setting out how implementing small alternatives pilots in four countries could build learning, evidence and momentum to work towards the expansion of alternatives and reduction of detention. We sought to address key barriers in Europe: a lack of practice and evidence on engagement-based ATD and limited NGO buy-in for solutions-based advocacy around alternatives.  

It was and is a challenging strategy.  Can small NGOs, doing structured case management with small numbers of migrants in four countries, really be the seed for wider change across a Europe increasingly in thrall to populism and xenophobia?

Left to themselves, governments are likely to propose ever more extreme forms of coercion and detention, because those are the tools that they have. Can civil society alternatives to detention, based on high quality case management, show that engagement with migrants in the community works better for everyone?

Almost two years on, though geopolitical optimism in general is in even shorter supply, the Network is seeing real progress on our strategy. Momentum around alternatives is building: the European Commission is putting significant political investment into alternatives involving civil society, while a range of regional, national and local stakeholders are increasingly exploring, promoting and collaborating around ATD.

And we now have evidence to point to: EPIM’s first independent evaluation of pilots shows that 97% of migrants stayed engaged – in countries with often high overall rates of secondary movement - and that case management had a positive impact towards case resolution in 88% of cases. The qualitative findings are helping us frame the discussion with decision-makers to address the full complexity of strengthening immigration systems, rather than being limited to crude metrics of short-term return numbers.

But less obvious achievements are equally significant. The Network has become a hub of learning among trusted allies and beyond. Last week in Brussels, we exchanged with NGOs from a host of other countries who are working on ATD as a strategy – from Greece and Lithuania to Belgium and Slovakia. This national-level civil society engagement is crucial for getting governments on board with alternatives that can really lead to detention reduction.

We’ve seen this in the UK, where strategic campaigning linked with advocacy around an ATD pilot has been successful in achieving change. In July 2018, the government made a high-profile commitment to fund further NGO-led alternatives projects as part of detention reform which has already seen the numbers of people in detention reduce by 40%.

There are many ongoing challenges to wrestle with, not least how we can develop alternatives in complex political contexts and work with migrants towards resolving their cases, when there are very few options. It’s also a long-term strategy, as the UK experience shows.

But despite these challenges, levels of confidence at our Network meeting were high. At a time when there’s unprecedented pressure to detain regionally, there was a sense that this growing movement on alternatives could be a catalyst for change - towards migration management systems that produce better outcomes for migrants, communities and governments without relying on detention.

For more information please see:

• The European ATD Network’s website www.atdnetwork.org
• EPIM’s interim evaluation of three alternatives to detention pilot projects (September 2018): www.epim.info/publications/evaluation-report-of-epim-atd-pilot-projects/

The European ATD Network is supported by EPIM. Please also see EPIM Call for Proposals: "Unlocking Alternatives. Piloting new pathways to migrant case resolution." Deadline for proposals is 4 April, 2019.

by IDC

Recast Return Directive Foresees More Immigration Detention

On 12 September 2018, in his state of union speech, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker announced a Recast of the Return Directive to “accelerate the return of irregular migrants,” among a series of measures on migration.

The legislative proposal foresees more immigration detention to “support enforcement of return”, in particular it introduces:

• a requirement for Member States to “allow for an initial detention period of not less than 3 months” of pre-removal detention;
• a new ground for detention where people subject to a returndecision “pose a threat to public order or security”
• 16 common criteria for determining risk of absconding, including broad grounds such as “illegal entry” and lack of financial resources.

Other changes include a new “obligation to cooperate”, a new border procedure and limiting possibilities for voluntary departure and appeals.

The proposals broadly reflect the Commission’s approach in its 2017 policy package which seeks to increase the rate of returns through enforcement-based measures.

These increased measures have been proposed despite well-established and wide-scale concerns that detention is harmful to health and wellbeing and causes unnecessary suffering. In addition, immigration detention is an extremely costly policy that is challenging to implement, and rarely fulfils its objectives.

Numerous alternatives to detention exist that are less costly, and do not risk an infringement on the human rights of migrants. Using engagement, rather than enforcement to build trust and support migrants and enable governments to achieve their compliance and case resolution goals without detention.

For more information:

• Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (recast)
• European Commission – Press release: State of the Union 2018 – Commission proposes last elements needed for compromise on migration and border reform
• ECRE publishes comments on the Commission Proposal for a Recast Return Directive (ECRE, 30 November 2018)
• European Commission releases proposal to recast Return Directive (ECRE, 14 September 2018)
• EU to shore up borders, returnsand migrant detentions (EUobserver, 12 September 2018)
• EU Eyes Beefed-Up Coast Guard to Protect Outside Borders(New York Times 12 September 2018)

by IDC

Evidence That Alternatives to Detention Can Be Effective

The first independent evaluation report on three alternatives to detention pilot projects in the European ATD Network is now out.

Read the Report and Briefing Paper.

In the context of increased pressure across Europe to detain migrants, the interim evaluation provides evidence that community-based case management can be effective in helping migrants to work towards resolving their cases in the community.

The pilot projects in Bulgaria, Cyprus and Poland provide holistic case management, as part of an advocacy strategy for reducing immigration detention.

They aim to build evidence that detention is not the solution: with support and engagement, people can resolve their cases in the community without harmful and costly detention.

The interim evaluation finds that 97% of migrants on the pilots cooperated with case management and did not abscond, including in countries with high overall rates of secondary movement.

The evidence of the pilots shows that through quality case management, people can better engage with immigration procedures to work towards resolving their cases, providing better outcomes for individuals and governments. This is including in cases of great complexity and previous experience of detention.

This is one of the first qualitative evaluations of alternatives to detention, and can provide important learning on how to develop effective and sustainable alternatives, in a context where discussion often focuses on crude numbers of returns and absconding.

The findings are a step towards bridging the gap between the growing discussion of alternatives in Europe, and the need for practical development of effective engagement-based models.

The report also provides insight into how, practically, a case management pilot project can be set up, and the challenges faced, which can support further pilots for evidence-building. A further evaluation will be conducted in the future.

The pilots and the evaluation are funded by the European Programme for Integration and Migration.

More information on the alternative to detention pilot projects and the European ATD Network is available at www.atdnetwork.org.

by IDC

Trust & Support is Key to Effective ATD

New guidance from the Council of Europe could help European governments refocus on the kind of alternatives that really work to reduce harmful and expensive immigration detention.

A detailed and practical guide, it uses a broad understanding of alternatives to immigration detention, “across a range of non-restrictive and restrictive options, in order to consider a wider range of practices that can help states avoid the use of detention in the context of migration”.

The Analysis of the legal and practical aspects of effective alternatives to detention in the context of migration was adopted by representatives of all forty-seven member States of the Council of Europe, through its foremost inter-governmental human rights body, the Steering Committee on Human Rights.

It analyses the European and international standards relevant to alternatives to detention and provides guidance on the practical aspects of implementing effective alternatives, recognising persisting challenges in this field.

But the real added value of the document is that it sets out key elements which make alternatives to detention effective. According to the study, alternatives are more effective in terms of ensuring respect for human rights, compliance and cost efficiency when they:

• Use screening and assessment to address individual circumstances, including vulnerabilities and risks;
• Provide clear and precise information about rights, duties and consequences of non-compliance;
• Ensure access to legal assistance from the beginning and throughout the process;
• Build trust in asylum and migration procedures;
• Uphold individualised case management services;
• Safeguard the dignity and fundamental rights of the persons concerned.

This holistic approach to migration systems helps move beyond the traditional focus in Europe on types of risks and conditions, to understand the factors that help achieve government objectives while also ensuring the rights and welfare of migrants.

“The Analysis highlights that by building trust and supporting migrants, governments can achieve their compliance and case resolution goals without detention” said Jem Stevens, IDC’s Europe Regional Coordinator, “Council of Europe governments have agreed that to ensure detention is really a last resort, they can and should be trying this approach first.”

The Analysis is the result of over a year’s work carried out by Council of Europe’s Drafting Group on Migration and Human Rights (CDDH-MIG) in 2016 – 2017. In terms of follow-up, it suggests developing a practical and user-friendly handbook for authorities on effectively implementing alternatives to immigration detention as a next step to this work.

Read the guidance here.

by IDC