The EU’s shift to ICE-style deportations threatens human rights

In a widely anticipated move, the European Parliament voted on 26 March to intensify the use of deportation and detention measures, including sending people to “return hubs”. These actions will affect tens of thousands of migrants who cross their borders in dangerous conditions each year. This concerns not only the individuals and cases affected by these laws, but also the countries that may agree to host deportees and establish “hubs” on their territory, as well as the duration of detention and deportation periods.

The European Parliament adopted the agreement by a relative majority, with 389 members voting in favour and 209 against. The vote comes nearly a year after it was presented in March 2025 to the European Commission, which submitted a draft regulation containing almost all the provisions included in the agreement approved by Parliament.

Right-wing parties, particularly the European People’s Party, in alliance with right-wing political groups in Parliament, succeeded in passing this agreement through a coalition they described as driven by fear of migrants.

European public opinion was mobilised under the banner of hostility towards migrants and foreigners. This occurs within a political context notably marked by the rise of right-wing populism, which has weaponised hostility towards migration as an electoral tool, even at the expense of minimum human rights set out in several international agreements, including the 1998 convention on the protection of migrants and their families, which also applies to “irregular migrants”.

The recent decision is not merely about deporting migrants according to established procedures, which usually take place under agreements between two nations. Rather, it is closer to a form of concealed banishment. Migrants are cast into a land that is not their country of origin, where they have no memory and no ties to the local communities, and without prior preparation.

Rights organisations fear this could serve as an entry point for stripping migrants of any basic rights and depriving them of fundamental human rights, while exposing them to significant risks that could affect their health and access to education.

Amnesty International expressed deep concern about the worsening humanitarian situation for hundreds of thousands of migrants stranded in various locations. Some transit countries, known for serious abuses against migrants, might use this as a pretext for further mistreatment to deter others.

In fact, this represents a continuation of measures already adopted by individual European countries. Italy, having found Tunisia and Libya as partners, has sought to enact stricter legislation to confront waves of migrants and remains the primary destination for those arriving on European shores, most of them from African countries. Before that, France and Germany followed broadly similar policies, albeit with less visibility, as their land borders remained relatively shielded from the largest initial waves of migrants.

The European Union has taken advantage of the international community’s preoccupation with the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, choosing not to become directly involved while attempting to distinguish itself from the US stance. This situation has been worsened by the limited negotiating abilities of its southern neighbours, Tunisia and Libya, enabling the passage of measures that are unfair to migrants and supporting this risky approach.

This mobilisation occurred despite most statistics published by the European Union and its member states showing a sharp decline in the number of migrants arriving, especially from African countries, over the past two years. Some North African nations have effectively created “breakwaters” through strict laws, discriminatory practices, and deportations to prevent those fleeing wars, famines, and natural disasters from arriving.

Many humanitarian organisations have warned about serious dangers faced by migrants, including threats to their lives, especially since many of the countries expected to accept deported migrants lack guarantees to oversee their conditions or uphold basic human rights.

Civil society organisations, along with a wide range of parliamentarians on the left, also echoed the warning. They referenced the US experience, especially that of Trump, whose handling of migration deliberately sidelined the humanitarian aspect in favour of a strict security approach. This approach is described as abusive due to the use of arrests, expulsions, imprisonment, and the denial of basic rights such as healthcare, housing, and education.

However, the failure of civil society, particularly rights organisations, to dissuade the European Union from pursuing its project aimed at halting migration and asylum flows is likely to turn the Mediterranean Sea into a watery grave where waves wash ashore thousands of bodies each year, in addition to those missing.

Article translated from Arabic by Afrah Almatwari. To read the original, click here.

Ali Mehdi Mabrouk, a former sociology professor at the University of Tunis, is Tunisia's minister of culture.

Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of al-Araby al-Jadeed, its editorial board or staff.