Pursuant to national, EU and international provisions, voluntary return is the primary option for persons who have sought international protection but whose asylum application has been rejected. Voluntary returnees can be given cash assistance, in-kind assistance, or both to facilitate their re-integration into their home country. Particularly in-kind assistance, which is paid to local operators, is an effective tool in facilitating the re-integration process. However, more effective monitoring of the use of in-kind assistance could generate useful information of the benefits and impacts involved.
Voluntary return is the primary option for persons who have sought international protection but whose asylum application has been rejected. According to a review carried out by the National Audit Office of Finland (NAOF), the voluntary return programme has become an established measure among authorities and reception services. In principle, the programme functions effectively and the costs involved are relatively low.
Provided that the system is actively used, it can save costs arising from the reception process and escorted returns. The programme also prevents and reduces potential costs associated with illegal residence in Finland. From the returnee’s perspective, the model provides a humane and assisted way for return.
According to the review, compared with cash assistance, in-kind assistance is a more effective tool to provide long-term support for the returnee and to help returnees to re-integrate into their home country. In-kind assistance takes better account of the personal needs and the situation in the country of return and can include a range of utilities and services such as providing help in finding work, accessing health care services, starting a business, securing entry to a degree programme, or finding accommodation. In its recent decree (1278/2018), the Ministry of the Interior has raised the maximum amount of in-kind assistance for the year 2019.
‘More effective monitoring of the use of in-kind assistance could generate useful information of the benefits and impacts involved. Systematic assessment of the voluntary return programme would also help to ensure its effectiveness in situations where the number of people seeking international protection varies,’ says Anna-Liisa Pasanen, Director for Performance Audit at NAOF.
In recent years, measures to enhance the effectiveness of the voluntary return programme have included legislative amendments and increasing the amount of cash assistance paid out to returnees. In addition, guidance concerning voluntary return has been provided at reception centres, and information about the topic has also been distributed via websites and in social media. Despite these measures, the number of voluntary returnees has reduced. Instead of returning, many asylum seekers opt for appealing against the rejection decision or they file a subsequent application.
‘According to the National Audit Office, the benefits to state finances could increase to tens of millions of euros if half of the asylum seekers whose application has been rejected would choose the voluntary return option, and the processing times of asylum applications would shorten from the current level,’ says Pasanen.
Study the publication: Assisted voluntary return
Read more about good governance and the audits performed by the NAOF: VTV.fi
Additional information
