Coalition of CSOs criticises the call for proposals for monitoring forced repatriations

On 3 February 2026, ASGI, ActionAid International Italia ETS, the Immigration Legal Clinic of the University of Roma Tre, Melting Pot Odv, Spazi Circolari and Le Carbet sent a  letter to the National Guarantor for the Rights of Persons Deprived of Personal Liberty containing critical observations on the December 2025 selection notice for the recruitment of 80 people to be trained and employed in monitoring forced repatriations.

While acknowledging the initiative's openness to civil society, the letter highlights structural issues with the call, including:

•  the lack of minimum entry requirements, 
• the vagueness of the selection criteria, 
• the potential arbitrariness of the exclusion criteria, and 
• the failure to explicitly provide for incompatibility conditions that would guarantee the independence of the selected individuals. 

These factors risk negatively impacting the independence, impartiality, and effectiveness of the monitoring mechanism, in violation of European standards regarding the protection of fundamental rights.

This issue is particularly relevant given the upcoming introduction, under the  Pact on Migration and Asylum, of screening and border procedures, which outline new operational contexts in which migrants may be subjected to intensive controls and restrictions on their personal freedom. Within this framework, the individuals selected through the call for applications may also be called upon to operate in these areas, carrying out access and observation activities in places characterised by a high risk of violations of fundamental rights.

The organisations emphasised the need for monitoring functions to be entrusted to independent and appropriately qualified consultants, with legal and interdisciplinary expertise, so that monitoring represents an effective tool for assurance and control. Therefore, the National Guarantor is asked to  review the terms of the notice, defining objective and verifiable evaluation criteria, explicitly specifying incompatibilities with roles directly involved in carrying out repatriations and managing CPRs, and reformulating the exclusion criteria in a manner consistent with the constitutional principles of legality, transparency and equal treatment.