EU pushes return hubs despite Albania failure

The EU is finalizing its first legal framework for holding failed asylum seekers in centers outside Europe. The proposed Return Regulation, now in trilogue (the three-way talks between Commission, Parliament, and Council that produce final EU law), would let member states transfer rejected applicants to "return hubs" in non-EU countries. The only existing model, Italy's centers in Albania, has processed roughly 1.5% of its stated target.

Two instruments, one direction

The Return Regulation, tabled March 2025, would replace the 2008 Return Directive, the current EU rulebook on deporting people with no right to stay. The old Directive set minimum standards but left enforcement to each member state, producing 27 different systems. The new text is a Regulation, meaning it applies identically across all EU countries without national transposition (Solidar).

Its core provision, Article 17, creates a legal basis for detention facilities on non-EU soil (Verfassungsblog). The European Parliament backed this in March 2026, voting 389 to 206 (Euronews). Trilogue talks broke off on 20 May without a deal; the next round is set for 1 June (NAMPA/AFP).

Six days before, all 46 members of the Council of Europe (the continent's human rights body, separate from the EU) adopted the Chișinău Declaration. The Declaration does not amend the European Convention on Human Rights. It instructs that Convention protections, including the ban on torture and the right to family life, should not automatically block deportations once national courts have assessed the risks (AP, BIICL). The Commission welcomed both instruments as "consistent" with its migration agenda (EU Perspectives). The Regulation builds the operational infrastructure. The Declaration weakens the judicial checks that could block it.

What Albania actually shows

Italy's detention centers in Albania are the only live precedent. Prime Minister Meloni announced the protocol in 2023, targeting 36,000 transfers per year. By April 2026, Italy's National Ombudsman (Garante nazionale, an independent oversight body) counted 192 people who had passed through the facilities, with 56 deported (Pagella Politica). Even the government's own figure of 536 transfers represents 1.5% of the annual goal. The five-year budget stands at roughly €670 million.

The operational absurdity runs deeper. Every deportation from the Albanian centers requires transferring the person back to Italy first, because direct deportation from Albanian soil isn't legally permitted. The hubs don't shorten the process. They add a step. Italian courts blocked the scheme in October 2024 as incompatible with EU law. The government responded with a decree reclassifying the centers from asylum-processing sites into deportation holding facilities. Albania's foreign minister has said the protocol will not extend beyond 2030 (La Notizia Giornale).

The real bottleneck

Across the EU, only about 28% of return orders are carried out, a record high that still means seven in ten people ordered to leave never do (Eurostat). The obstacle is diplomatic: countries of origin refuse to take their nationals back. France issued roughly 156,000 return orders in 2025 and executed fewer than 15,000 (Le Figaro). Germany deported 4,807 people in Q1 2026, down 22% year-on-year, despite an interior minister who has made return hubs his signature policy (Stern).

No third country has signed an agreement to host a hub. France refuses to participate, citing constitutional constraints. The French Senate concluded the mechanism "risks undermining procedural guarantees" while solving the wrong problem (French Senate).

The EU Court of Justice has not ruled on whether offshore detention is compatible with EU law. An Advocate General's opinion (a non-binding legal recommendation to the court) in April opened the door in principle but drew a sharp line between Italy's current arrangement and the broader hubs concept the Regulation would create (EU Law Analysis). The full ruling, expected later this year, could constrain the entire framework before a single hub opens.

The Albania precedent shows legal machinery pointed at the wrong bottleneck. The real obstacle is persuading origin countries to cooperate, and that hasn't moved.