4 Executive Summary This briefing presents noteworthy practices at the and organisations in Belgium, Italy and the United national and European Union (EU) level related to Kingdom, among others. safeguarding the rights of people in immigration detention and ultimately ending detention for The second chapter focuses on immigration detention migration purposes, by focusing on a wide range of of children, a practice which is never in the child’s actors spanning from civil society to national gov- best interests and should always be forbidden.1 ernments. It focuses on three advocacy objectives: While EU law still allows for immigration detention of children, there have been developments at the 1. raising the visibility of detention and its harms, political and legislative levels in Germany, Belgium, 2. ending the detention of children in the context France and Greece aiming at restricting the situations of migration, and in which children could be detained for immigration 3. implementing community-based solutions that purposes. The cases of Ireland, Italy and Spain are can ultimately prevent and contribute to ending also explored, as these states do not generally detain detention. children (whether they are unaccompanied or with their families). Overall, to comply with international The first chapter of the briefing explores civil society standards and to put an end to child detention in the efforts aimed at unveiling what happens in immi- migration context, further efforts are needed at both gration detention centres as well as the harmful the EU and national levels. impact of immigration detention itself. Ensuring that people in detention speak to the outside world The final chapter focuses on community-based and giving NGOs access to detention centres have solutions to prevent or end immigration detention. been identified as the most important tools in this This section focuses in particular on the advantages regard. It is also contended that further research, as of providing support through case management, well as litigation and advocacy, related to the right which is a structured social work approach which to communicate is needed. NGOs in the Netherlands empowers individuals to work towards case reso- and the UK have set up hotline systems to establish lution (i.e., any temporary or permanent migration contact with individuals in detention, most of whom outcome, such as a visa, regularization scheme, do not have access to their mobile phones. In Italy, re-migration or voluntary return). This section strategic litigation has challenged the state’s denial explores case studies from Belgium, Bulgaria, Poland, to grant NGOs access to detention facilities. Both the UK and Italy, where case management projects activities – phone communication and civil society are run by civil society originations, in cooperation visits - can be seen as part of a wider advocacy with local (Belgium) or national (Bulgaria, Poland, UK) strategy advocacy to end immigrant detention, as governments. Although each national experience is exemplified by the work of civil society coalitions unique, the independent evaluation of these projects 1 Comvmittee on the protection of all Migrant Workers and Committee on the Rights of the Child, Joint General ,Comment No. 4 (2017) of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and No. 23 (2017) of the Committee on the Rights of the Child on State Obligations Regarding the Human Rights of Children in the Context of International Migration in Countries of Origin, Transit, Destination and Return, CMW/C/GC/4-CRC/C/ GC/23, paras. 10-13; Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, 2020, Ending immigration detention of children and providing adequate care and reception for them, para. 86.