In recent years a term that was once largely confined to fringe political discussions has entered the mainstream European debate: remigration. Across several European countries the concept has become one of the most controversial topics in discussions about migration policy. While some political actors present it as a necessary response to the perceived failures of integration policies, others view it as incompatible with the legal and constitutional foundations of European democracies.
For a British audience, the debate may appear familiar in certain respects. The United Kingdom has long experienced intense political discussion around immigration, border control and integration, particularly since the years leading up to the referendum on Brexit. Yet the European debate on remigration differs in important ways, largely because of the institutional and legal frameworks that govern migration across the continent.
Since the 1990s, Europe has experienced several waves of immigration driven by labour mobility, humanitarian protection, family reunification and irregular migration through Mediterranean routes. European states developed policies intended to balance humanitarian commitments with economic needs. However, in many countries public concern has grown regarding the long-term integration of migrant populations, especially in large urban areas where social tensions, segregation and integration challenges have become politically visible.
Within this context the concept of remigration has gained prominence. The idea is frequently associated with the Austrian activist Martin Sellner, who has promoted the term within the broader European identitarian movement. In its most radical interpretation, remigration does not refer solely to the deportation of irregular migrants – something already provided for under the laws of all European states. Rather, it suggests a broader political programme that could involve the return of individuals deemed insufficiently integrated into the host society.
This interpretation explains why the concept provokes such intense controversy.
Supporters argue that Europe faces a growing challenge to its social cohesion. In their view, decades of migration policies focused primarily on humanitarian admission or economic demand have led to structural integration problems in some parts of Europe. From this perspective, remigration is presented as a political instrument intended to restore social stability and cultural cohesion.
Critics, however, highlight the profound legal obstacles that such policies would encounter. European legal systems – shaped by national constitutions, European Union law and the European Convention on Human Rights – strongly protect individual rights such as family life, legal residence stability and non-discrimination. Any policy that attempts to determine a person’s right to remain in a country based on cultural or identity criteria would likely face significant legal challenges.
For the United Kingdom, which now operates outside the EU institutional framework, the debate still remains relevant. European migration trends continue to influence political dynamics across the continent, and the question of integration versus social fragmentation is one that affects many Western democracies.
In response to the growing polarisation surrounding remigration, some scholars and policymakers have proposed alternative frameworks for governing migration. One such approach is the paradigm of Integration or ReImmigration.
Unlike remigration, which is often interpreted as a policy centred primarily on large-scale returns, this paradigm focuses on conditional permanence. In this model, the right to remain permanently in the host country is linked to the successful completion of an integration process. Integration is understood in practical terms: participation in the labour market, knowledge of the national language and respect for the legal and institutional framework of the host society.
Where these conditions are met, the legal system may provide mechanisms for stabilising a migrant’s status, including forms of complementary protection or long-term residence. Where integration does not occur, the system must also provide mechanisms for an orderly return to the country of origin. In this context the concept of ReImmigration is presented not as an ideological objective but as a governance tool within migration policy.
The European controversy surrounding remigration therefore reflects a deeper transformation. For decades migration was often approached primarily through humanitarian obligations or economic considerations. Today European societies are increasingly searching for a new balance between openness, social cohesion and legal certainty.
The real question facing Europe is therefore not simply whether remigration is politically feasible. The more fundamental issue is what model of migration governance European societies will choose for the coming decades.
Avv. Fabio Loscerbo
Lobbyist – EU Transparency Register
ID 280782895721-36
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7030-0428
Lascia un commento