Since 2014, 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 EU’s Return Directive. This overview describes different indicators for an effective forced return monitoring system. It includes the organisation responsible for monitoring forced return, the number of operations monitored in 2020, the phases of monitored return operations, the number of staff trained and working as monitors, and whether the monitoring body issued public reports about their monitoring.

All EU Member States have some form of return monitoring by law. But 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 entirely effective.

In some EU Member States, only very few operations are monitored or the monitoring is limited to the pre-return phase and does not cover in-flight and arrival phases of return. These are equally essential.

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 but gaps re-emerge when the funding ends. Such gaps occurred in 2020 in, for instance, Italy, Bulgaria and Lithuania, where the assigned civil society organisations’ financing expired.

In 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic considerably affected the number of returns in the EU. Consequently, return monitoring figures also decreased in 2020.

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