Spain sends African and Asian migrants back to Morocco under expanded return arrangements

Spain has begun deporting migrants from sub-Saharan Africa and Asia to Morocco after rejecting their asylum applications, putting into practice Rabat’s commitment to readmit foreign nationals who entered Ceuta during July’s mass border crossings.

Spanish authorities confirmed that Morocco had agreed to accept the first group, returned on Friday, October 23, despite the migrants not being Moroccan citizens.

Humanitarian organizations identified 16 people from Senegal, Nigeria, Cameroon, Yemen and Bangladesh. Spain’s Interior Ministry confirmed the returns but did not disclose the group’s nationalities.

The operation follows an undertaking Morocco communicated to European lawmakers on September 15, when its diplomatic mission to the European Union said the kingdom would readmit people who entered Ceuta during the July crossings, including Moroccan nationals, unaccompanied minors and citizens of third countries.

The commitment was subsequently discussed during a September 24 meeting in New York between Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita and his Spanish counterpart José Manuel Albares.

Returns raise legal questions

The deportations have drawn criticism from humanitarian organizations, which question whether migrants returned to Morocco will receive adequate protection and whether Spain has respected their right to appeal rejected asylum applications.

A particularly contentious case involves a Yemeni asylum seeker returned to Morocco despite a Spanish National Court order allowing him to remain while his appeal was considered.

Spain’s Interior Ministry acknowledged the deportation but said the judicial order arrived after the removal had taken place. It said arrangements would be made for his return to Spain.

The controversy comes as Spain processes asylum applications following the July 30-31 crossings, with approximately 100 migrants from that period already granted international protection.

Spanish authorities maintain that the initial returns complied with the law because the individuals concerned had not appealed their asylum refusals within the prescribed period.