The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Michael O’Flaherty, has issued a new self-assessment tool urging governments to examine the human-rights consequences of external migration cooperation before they sign agreements, establish return hubs or outsource border control.

He stresses that if states cannot demonstrate that people will be protected from refoulement, arbitrary detention, ill-treatment or denial of asylum, they should be prepared to abandon the plan.

The intervention comes as several European states consider shifting asylum or return procedures beyond their territory, or partnering with third countries to prevent irregular crossings into Europe. It also arrives in a policy environment shaped by an EU border system increasingly focused on enforcement and returns, built around Frontex operations, biometric databases, return support and cooperation with non-EU countries.

“Externalized migration policies carry human rights risks. As states prepare to launch new initiatives, now is the time for governments to take concrete action to prevent harm. Early scrutiny can reveal systemic weaknesses in cooperation agreements before they lead to violations," Commissioner O’Flaherty said in a statement.

"That’s why I am calling on states to demonstrate that they can overcome barriers to protect human rights in practice, and, if they are unable to do that, be prepared to step back from their plans,” he added.

The Council of Europe is separate from the European Union, and its 46 member states are bound by the European Convention on Human Rights, enforced by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The Commissioner for Human Rights is an independent, non-judicial institution within the Council of Europe that assesses human-rights practices, advises governments and can intervene before the court but cannot veto EU migration policies, bilateral agreements or return hubs. The new tool seeks to make clear that external cooperation does not remove states’ obligations to prevent torture, collective expulsion and refoulement.

Read Also'Migration paradox': How borders, aid drive human movement

A checklist before the deals

The publication, External migration policies under the human rights lens: A self-assessment tool, asks governments to examine six areas: the policy’s definition and implications; human-rights risk assessments; preventive measures and independent monitoring; responses to violations; transparency and democratic scrutiny and follow-up.

Its premise is demanding. External cooperation should not be assessed only after people have been detained, removed or denied protection. Governments must identify risks in advance, put safeguards in place, monitor conditions independently and remedy abuses when they occur.

“While it is the business of states to manage migration, their policies should never expose people to harm or ill-treatment, or deny access to adequate asylum procedures, humane reception conditions, and judicial remedies,” O’Flaherty said.

The tool applies both to new arrangements and to cooperation already under way. It does not endorse any particular externalization model. Instead, it places the burden on states to show that their arrangements comply with human-rights obligations.

“In outsourcing migration management, people’s human rights must never be overlooked,” O’Flaherty said.

Read AlsoBelgium approves home raids for migration enforcement

The EU’s returns machine

O’Flaherty warning comes as the European Commission seeks to make Frontex the EU’s central returns agency, with more staff, expanded powers and a greater role beyond Europe’s borders. Under the proposed reform, Frontex would coordinate the return process from early identification and voluntary-return counseling through removal operations and reintegration support.

The proposal would create a European Return Coordination Center within Frontex, tasked with collecting and analyzing return and reintegration data, forecasting future return needs and coordinating operations across the EU. It would also allow Frontex to provide technical and operational support to non-EU countries on returns, and to help organize and carry out returns from one non-EU country to another.

Those operations would require a specific agreement with the third country concerned and would have to comply with fundamental rights and the principle of non-refoulement, the prohibition on returning people to places where they face persecution, torture or other serious harm.

The plan would expand Frontex’s standing corps to 30,000 personnel over time. A Quick Reaction Force would be able to deploy within 24 hours in response to a member-state request.

European Home Affairs Commissioner Magnus Brunner said the reform would make Frontex the “central EU actor on returns.” Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the EU sought to strengthen the agency so that it could support member states “whenever and wherever needed,” including on returns.

Read AlsoBrussels proposes turning Frontex into the EU’s central returns agency

Where the risks lie

The new guidance builds on the O'Flaherty’s September 2025 report, Externalised asylum and migration policies and human rights law. That report identified three areas where risks are particularly acute: external processing of asylum claims; external return procedures, including “return hubs” and the outsourcing of border control to countries with documented histories of serious abuses against people on the move.

“External co-operation on asylum and migration needs to be designed and implemented with great care, so as not to put human rights at risk," O’Flaherty said when releasing the report.

"Governments developing externalization policies in this field should carefully assess their potential negative impact on human rights, as such policies can expose women, men and children to significant risks of serious harm and protracted suffering,” he stressed.

In the absence of adequate safeguards, externalization policies may expose people to torture or other ill-treatment, collective expulsions and arbitrary detention. They may also place lives at risk, obstruct access to asylum and deprive individuals of legal remedies.

Read AlsoFrontex investigation finds shortcomings in dealings with Libyan forces

The return-hub question

One of the most controversial elements is Frontex’s proposed role in returns from one non-EU country to another, potentially including return hubs in third countries. The EU’s recently adopted Return Regulation, which entered into force on October 16, permits member states to establish these hubs.

The European Parliament’s research service says many nongovernmental organizations have criticized the returns framework over its potential impact on migrants’ rights. It also concludes that the EU and member states lack adequate tools to monitor or enforce rights standards outside their territory.

Amnesty International warns that return hubs carry a risk of arbitrary detention, torture, ill-treatment and forced onward return. The EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) has similarly said they would require agreements with host countries and independent human-rights monitoring.

Read AlsoRwanda: Kigali emerges as site for Europe’s first migrant 'return hub'

What states must guarantee

The O'Flaherty’s recommendations set out a minimum standard for any external cooperation arrangement.

First, governments should adopt a precautionary approach: conduct comprehensive human-rights risk assessments, develop mitigation strategies before cooperation begins, and review the human-rights impact of activities already operating.

Second, they should establish clear and non-negotiable principles excluding any cooperation likely to expose people to human-rights violations. Children and other vulnerable people should never be subjected to externalized procedures.

Third, states must ensure adequate human-rights preconditions and safeguards tailored to each model of cooperation. That includes preventing responsibility from being shifted to partner countries, ensuring no one is transferred without a rigorous individual assessment and limiting return hubs to clearly defined situations.

Fourth, governments must strengthen transparency, monitoring and accountability through robust agreements, transparent information-sharing, independent monitoring and effective investigations of alleged violations.

O'Flaherty warned that as European states continue to pursue externalization, the "impact on the human rights and dignity of people on the move must not be overlooked."

"Member states should assess the risks involved, commit to strong legal guarantees, and ensure scrutiny of their actions. This is crucial for their policies to be in line with their legal obligations to uphold human rights at home and internationally,” he said.

Read Also35 Bangladeshi migrants deported from three EU countries

Can oversight keep pace?

The Frontex expansion comes as the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights reports persistent gaps in monitoring and investigations at the EU’s external borders. In 2025, Frontex monitors identified concerns over access to asylum, alleged collective expulsions and excessive use of force.

The Frontex expansion comes as the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) reports persistent gaps in monitoring and investigations at the EU’s external borders. Of 53 serious incidents referred to national authorities in 2025, only six were investigated by independent national institutions or courts.

Rights groups including Amnesty International and PICUM have warned that the proposal expands Frontex’s enforcement and deportation powers without matching safeguards. The Commission and Frontex say the reform would maintain respect for fundamental rights and human dignity.

“Fundamental rights obligations apply to all agencies and institutions, irrespective of their size, mandate or operational capacity,” an FRA spokesperson previously told InfoMigrants.

Read AlsoFrontex’s new powers: more returns, less oversight?