Eura Eu Readmission Agreements

This book was produced as part of the EURA-NET (Transnational Migration in Transition) research project, which has been a partner institute of CEPS and is funded by the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Commission`s DG Research. For more information about the project, see www.uta.fi/edu/en/research/projects/eura-net/index.html. One of the reasons for the low effective rate of return of migrants who have been ordered to leave the EU is the lack of cooperation from some third countries in identifying and returning their nationals. This is why the EU cooperates very actively with the countries of origin of irregular migrants, including through “readmission agreements”. It sets out clear obligations and procedures for authorities in non-EU countries and EU Member States as to when and how irregular migrants should be removed. They aim to improve administrative cooperation and can only be used after a return decision, in line with the procedural safeguards of the Return Directive and EU asylum rules (Asylum Procedures Directive). In February 2011, based on an assessment of the EU readmission agreements already in force and an assessment of the ongoing readmission negotiations, the Commission made several recommendations for a renewed EU readmission policy. So far, the EU has concluded readmission agreements with the following third countries. Over the past 16 years and since May 2016, the European Union has concluded 17 EU Readmission Agreements (EUAs) with different non-EU countries, which are key instruments for EU-third country cooperation on the expulsion of illegal third-country nationals.

This book examines how the European Commission and Member States organise the effectiveness of the EU`s return policy on the basis of “successful return rates”, as well as the policy and legislative initiatives taken to increase the number of expulsions. It assesses existing knowledge on the role of travel documents and the determination of identity as obstacles to expulsion or readmission to their country of origin and examines the administrative procedures and common rules provided for by EURA in order to ensure rapid identification or “identification” of the nationality of persons who need to be reintegrated into their country of origin. The book focuses in particular on how nationality will be determined or presumed with Pakistan under EURA 2010 and compares it to those provided for in the ESAs, which have since been concluded with Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cape Verde, Georgia and Turkey. In conclusion, the author critically analyses the challenges related to the proper functioning of the ESAs, which focus mainly on the lack of accountability and transparency mechanisms, as well as the dilemmas they pose to international and European standards in determining nationality by States and for individuals as holders of fundamental human rights. . . .