Authors: Dr Nassim Majidi and Juliette Samman, Samuel Hall
Highlights
A return may be lawful and operationally successful while still being regarded as illegitimate by actors involved in negotiating, implementing or receiving it.
- Lawfulness and completion of returns are not enough for legitimacy. Actors also judge return by how it is carried out, the consequences it produces, and how responsibilities are distributed between sending and receiving states.
- Acceptance of return is not unconditional. Many actors accept that states may return people after legal remedies are exhausted, while contesting practices that separate families, use degrading enforcement, misidentify people or return people with serious needs without adequate preparation or coordination.
- Responsibility does not end at arrival. Receiving actors judge return partly by its consequences after arrival, including whether individuals can access healthcare, livelihoods, psychosocial support and other essential services, and whether receiving institutions have the capacity and resources to respond.
- Cooperation requires ownership and partnership, not compliance alone. Receiving-country authorities need meaningful influence over how return cooperation is designed and implemented. Without such ownership, cooperation may exist formally but become fragile when political or operational conditions change.