Malta has actively supported a proposal to keep the policy of immigrants’ detention in the hands of EU Member States to determine, in discussions that hammered an agreement over the controversial Returns Directive.
EU justice minsters agreed on the text for the proposed directive which defines common standards for returning illegally staying third country nationals.
Justice and Home Affairs Minister, Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, participated in the meeting. The text will be referred to the European Parliament to vote upon.
Europe plans to act tough on illegal migration by providing for a period of “voluntary departure” of up to four weeks. If an illegal immigrant who has been refused asylum does not leave voluntarily to his home country within this period, the national authorities can issue a “removal order”.
The removal orders include a re-entry ban of a maximum of five years. Then the countries can use “coercive measures” to carry out the repatriation (usually by air) of illegal immigrants who resist removal.
The tough new rules aim at expelling visa-overstayers which could see them banned for five years if they resist.
As far as forced expulsions are concerned, authorities could decide to keep individuals in custody for up to six months – 18 months under exceptional circumstances – particularly if they are deemed likely to run away.
This could also happen if their home countries are slow to provide documents.
In Malta, asylum seekers who are not recognised as refugees and have their appeals rejected face up to 18 months in detention pending their removal – unless they have already been discharged into an open centre.
The directive as it stands has generated concern among the European Bishops and Christian organisations, who last Thursday urged the European Parliament to restrict the use of administrative detention and limit the mandatory entry ban to exceptional circumstances.
This was the last Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting under the current Slovenian presidency as the EU Presidency will now be passed on to France as from 1 July.
Civil rights watchdog Statewatch noted that while the European Parliament had secured improvements, the text is still too weak as regards the maximum time limit for detention - where the EP and the Council are jointly responsible for the 18-month limit.
Statewatch claims the text is still too weak as regards substantive safeguards against expulsion, the rules on mandatory postponement of expulsions and re-entry bans and the grounds for and review of detention.
“Many of the provisions of the Council text... would potentially violate human rights standards… Put bluntly, the discussions are heading in the wrong direction at the moment. It remains to be seen whether MEPs will accept this, or can muster the political will to demand further changes to ensure that minimum standards of proportionality, fairness and humanity are satisfied – which must include a reversal of the EP’s position approving an 18-month time limit for detention.”

mvella@mediatoday.com.mt