VUB criminologist examines Belgium's voluntary return policy
The order to leave the territory, or the 'scrap of paper' as it is sometimes called by politicians, is more important than assumed
The so-called 'voluntary return' has become a central pillar of Belgian migration policy in recent years, often presented as a humane and soft choice versus forced deportation. However, research by VUB criminologist Laure Deschuyteneer shows that in practice this voluntariness is less obvious than it seems. In a recent publication in the academic journal Panopticon, as part of her PhD on soft deportation and voluntary return programmes, she exposes how subtle forms of power and bureaucratic steering help shape migrants' choices. "They are guided by subtle forms of pressure and power," says Deschuyteneer. "These pressures are not in hard measures, but in procedures, documents, conversations and language."
In Belgium, migrants who are not allowed to stay in the country (any longer) can seek counselling and support for their return, often including financial assistance. In doing so, the government emphasises the voluntary nature of that decision. In 2024, Fedasil assisted 3,267 people to return to their country of origin, an increase of about 11 per cent compared to 2023 and 22 per cent compared to 2022. Of that group, 76 per cent also received reintegration support. Yet the study shows that those choices take place within a tightly defined framework. "The accosting policy, where migrants are actively monitored and urged to consider return, is enshrined in law," Deschuyteneer stresses. "The soft is in the dialogue with the migrant, but the power is in the fact that this dialogue takes place within a framework determined by the state."
An important part of that framework is administrative documents. Deschuyteneer analysed the so-called 'paper trails', the succession of documents and decisions that migrants have to go through. "The order to leave the territory, or the 'rag of paper' as it is sometimes called in the political debate, has become more important than is often assumed," she says. "Unlike before, it is now a necessary condition for voluntary return: migrants must first report to the Immigration Department and obtain such an order in order to receive support. "
These documents are not merely administrative, according to the researcher, but function as powerful tools that create time pressure, guide choices and determine which options are still open. The evolution towards a policy that relies on guidance and dialogue fits within a broader international trend described in the literature as soft deportation, a form of migration control without physical coercion but with a strong guiding outcome.
In Belgium, this translates among others into the so-called ICAM pathways, where migrants are invited for coaching and follow-up interviews. In 2024, 7,205 persons were invited to such a trajectory, of whom 2,990 were accepted by the police on Belgian territory. Ultimately, 326 persons left that year after ICAM coaching, of whom 187 left independently, 108 with Fedasil support and 31 through the Immigration Department. At the same time, 281 people obtained legal residence status during or after such a route. So not everyone disappears from view: a significant proportion remain or regularise their situation. "Soft power is not absolute," says Deschuyteneer. "Migrants develop strategies of resistance, for example by invoking their rights."
Belgian return policy is constantly evolving. Fedasil has been coordinating voluntary returns for more than 40 years, but recent developments, such as the reinforced role of the Immigration Department in accosting escorts, are reigniting the debate. Institutional reforms, such as plans to pool migration powers within a single federal government department, could also have major implications. "This not only impacts the organisations involved, but especially the migrants themselves," says Deschuyteneer. "The question remains how such evolutions relate to international human rights standards."
Although her research raises critical questions, Deschuyteneer herself makes no normative judgment on the policy. "I cannot say whether the accosting policy is good or bad. In any case, the return policy should comply with human rights standards," she argues. Above all, her analysis shows that the line between voluntariness and coercion is not black and white, but lies in a grey zone where the state provides direction through subtle mechanisms, while migrants try to navigate within the possibilities and constraints of the system.
Reference
Deschuyteneer, L. (2026). (G)a rag of paper? On the power and functioning of 'paper trails' in Belgian return policy. Panopticon, 47(1),34-50https://www.maklu-online.eu/nl/tijdschrift/panopticon/issue-1-januari-februari-2026/issue-1-januari-februari-2026/geen-vodje-papier/
