Since 2014, every year, FRA has been publishing an annual update of the forced return monitoring systems EU Member States have set up under Article 8 (6) of the Return Directive. The update describes the different indicators for an effective forced return monitoring system, including the organisation responsible for monitoring forced return, the number of operations monitored in 2019, the phases of return operations which were monitored, the number of staff trained and working as monitors, and whether the monitoring body issued public reports about their monitoring activities.

Whereas all EU Member States have some forms of return monitoring in law, in practice, gaps remain. For example, in Germany and in Sweden the main monitoring entity is closely connected to the authority responsible for returns. Without sufficient separation between the two, a monitoring system cannot be effective.

In some EU Member States, only very few operations are monitored or the monitoring does not cover all phases of return.

Developments over the years also show that the implementation of national monitoring systems is not linear. Particularly where it is project-based or based on a temporary agreement between the authority and the monitoring entity, an adequate forced return monitoring system may be in place for some time but gaps reemerge when funding comes to an end.

The table below compares developments in EU Member States and the United Kingdom over the past five years. The overview does not cover the pool of forced return monitors under the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, Frontex.