Controversies surrounding coerced returns: A plea for a transparent, knowledge-based, and inclusive migration policy

Executive Summary

Are there alternatives to the permanent crisis mode of German migration policy, and what might they look like? This analysis seeks answers—and solutions—within the multi-level and multi-stakeholder infrastructure that implements migration and return policy in Germany. Drawing on empirical research, it traces its inherent and politically induced lines of conflict, which revolve around objectives and target groups, the legitimacy of means, the necessity of legal certainty, around levels of responsibility and between the enforcement of the obligation to leave and actual chances for reintegration. As political objectives are increasingly decoupled from constitutional and human rights responsibilities, their implementation requires growing opacity—partly under the guise of centralization — bureaucratic overregulation as an attempt at legal safeguarding and leads to dwindling trust between the various actors and into the infrastructure as a whole. Current political measures ignore both the structural challenges and the conflictual dynamics within the implementation infrastructure but also exacerbate them in many cases. Through targeted allocation of funds, the expansion of executive powers on the one hand, and the questioning of the role of (civil) society actors on the other, competencies and resources are being redistributed, and insecurities and conflicts tend to harden. To counteract this, we advocate for bringing the diverging perspectives and interests into a constructive dialogue; acting on a solid knowledge base and creating transparency and reliable data on the real costs and effects of political alternatives; and returning to a clear legal foundation, realistic implementation conditions, and the courage to consistently prioritise human rights standards over political symbolism. 

Display and/or download the entire Policy Brief by clicking the button.

---