The table below compares developments in EU Member States over the past four years.
Two aspects warrant highlighting. First, in 2014, ten EU Member States lacked operational return monitoring systems that FRA considered sufficiently independent to qualify as “effective”. By 2017, that number dropped to three – and two of these were taking steps to have effective monitoring systems by 2018. Second, developments have not been linear: in at least two EU Member States – Croatia and Lithuania – monitoring was project-based and was suspended when funding came to an end. In France, the independent authority tasked with forced return monitoring did not carry out any such mission in 2016, resuming them in February 2017.
|Organisation responsible for the monitoring||Operational?|
|AT||Human Rights Association Austria (Verein Menschenrechte Österreich)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|BE||General Inspectorate of the General Federal Police and the Local Police (AIG) (Inspection générale de la police fédérale et de la police locale, Algemene inspectie van de federale politie en van de lokale politie)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|BG||Ombudsman (О̀мбудсманът), Centre for the Study of Democracy NGO (national and international NGOs)||✘||✔||✔||✔|
|CY||Office of the Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsman)||✘||✘||✘||✘|
|CZ||Ombudsman, Public Defender of Rights (PDR) (Veřejný ochránce práv, VOP)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|DE||Fora at various airports (Frankfurt, Hamburg, Düsseldorf, Berlin)||(✘)||(✘)||(✘)||(✘)|
|DK||Parliamentary Ombudsman (Folketingets Ombudsmand)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|EE||Estonian Red Cross (Eesti Punane Rist)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|EL||Greek Ombudsman (Συνήγορος του Πολίτη)||✘||✔||✔||✔|
|ES||Ombudsman (Defensor del Pueblo)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|FI||Non-Discrimination Ombudsman (Yhdenvertaisuusvaltuutettu)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|FR***||General Inspector of All Places of Deprivation of Liberty (Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté)||✔||✔||✘||✔|
|HR||Croatian Ombudsman, Croatian Law Centre (Hrvatski pravni centar)||✘||✔||✘||✔|
|HU||Prosecution Service of Hungary (Magyarország ügyészsége)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|IE*||No monitoring system in law||–||–||–||–|
|IT||National authority for the rights of person deprived of liberty (Garante nazionale dei diritti delle persone detenute o private della liberta' personale)||✘||✘||✔||✔|
|LT||Lithuanian Red Cross Society (Lietuvos Raudonojo Kryžiaus draugija)||✔||✘||✘||✔|
|LU||Luxembourg Red Cross (Croix-Rouge luxembourgeoise)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|LV||Ombudsman’s Office (Tiesībsarga birojs)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|MT||Monitoring Board for Detained Persons||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|NL||Inspectorate of Justice and Security(Inspectie Veiligheid en Justitie)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|PL||Various NGOs, e.g. Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, Rule of Law Institute Foundation, Halina Nieć Legal Aid Centre, MultiOcalenie Foundation||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|PT||General Inspectorate of Internal Affairs (Inspecção-geral da Administração Interna, IGAI)||✘||✔||✔||✔|
|RO||Romanian National Council for Refugees (Consiliul Național Român pentru Refugiați, CNRR) (NGO)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
|SE**||Swedish Migration Agency (Migrationsverket)||✘||✘||✘||✘|
|SK**||Ministry of Interior||✘||✘||✘||✘|
|UK*||Her Majesty’s Inspector of Prisons (HMIP), Independent Monitoring Boards (IMBs)||✔||✔||✔||✔|
Operational means that a monitoring entity has been appointed and has carried out some monitoring activities during the year.
* Ireland and the United Kingdom are not bound by the Return Directive.
** In Slovakia and Sweden, monitoring is implemented by an agency belonging to the branch of government responsible for return. Thus it is not sufficiently independent to qualify as ‘effective’ under Article 8 (6) of the Return Directive.
*** In France, the “Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté” did not monitor any forced return operations during 2016.
|(✘)||In Germany, the return monitoring system covers only parts of the country.|
|–||Information not applicable|
Source: FRA, 2018
Find additional data on forced return monitoring systems in our interactive data explorer.
The information on this page is up to date as of 5 June 2018.