David Cronin/IPS, Brussels - The EU’s "returns directive" — approved by members of Parliament (MEPs) Jun. 18 — is officially designed to provide a common approach to the length of time under which migrants facing expulsion can be kept in custody. At present, there is no mandatory limit on the duration for which migrants can be held in seven of the Union’s 27 countries.

Under the new law, a threshold for the maximum length of detention would be set at six months, yet this could be extended for a further 12 months in many circumstances.

The MEPs’ decision was taken despite strong opposition from a wide coalition of churches and groups campaigning on human rights and civil liberties, who regard the 18-month limit as an excessive measure, particularly given that most migrants have not been convicted of any crime.

Souhayr Belhassen, president of the International Federation for Human Rights, argued that the timing of the European Parliament’s vote was particularly unfortunate as the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights will be celebrated later this year.

"By adopting this text, the European legislator lets us understand that migrants are not human beings like any other, provided with rights and to whom states owe obligations," Belhassen added. "They are dehumanised."

Bolivian President Evo Morales was also highly critical of the directive, which he denounced as a "huge infringement of human rights."

"Mothers with children could be arrested, without regard to family and school, and be put in detention centres, where we know depression, hunger strikes and suicides happen," he said. "How can we accept it?"

Writing in British newspaper The Guardian, Morales called on Europe to recognise the positive contribution that migrants bring to the continent’s economy, rather than seeking to lock them up.

"The EU is now the main destination for migrants around the world, because of its positive image of prosperity and public freedom," he said. "The great majority of migrants contribute to, rather than exploit this prosperity. They are employed in public works, construction, cleaning, hospitals and domestic work. They take the jobs that Europeans cannot or will not do."

It is not just the provisions on jailing asylum-seekers that have proven contentious. Amnesty International has opposed the five-year ban that the directive would place on a deportee re-entering EU territory, complaining that this sets "an extremely bad example to other regions in the world." According to Amnesty, the law does not contain sufficient safeguards to ensure that child migrants who are unaccompanied by their parents will have their needs taken care of.

Other groups have protested that the directive would allow for deportations to occur to countries where they would be at risk of torture, harassment or even death. In some cases, migrants would be expelled to countries other than their own, according to some interpretations.

"The text allows — in an implicit manner — an unaccompanied minor from country A to be expelled to country B," said Patrick Peugeot, president of the French pro-refugee organisation Cimade. "How can we imagine something like this?"

Within the Parliament, however, the directive was defended by its major political groupings. MEPs voted 367 in favour of the proposal, with 206 against and over 100 abstentions.

Patrick Gaubert, a member of the assembly’s largest group, the centre-right European People’s Party, said that while the directive is "not perfect", it contains a number of safeguards. Detentions would be subject to judicial scrutiny and in principle deportations would take place with the consent of the individuals involved, he argued, claiming that the arbitrary standards in place until now would be replaced by proper rules.

"While the propaganda talks about a ’xenophobic move’, Europe is actually taking its responsibilities seriously, and refuses to leave these vulnerable persons in a legal void," said Gaubert.

Dutch Liberal MEP Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert supported his view, arguing that the proposal approved by a majority of her colleagues followed much bargaining between the Parliament, the European Commission and EU governments. "It should be crystal clear that this compromise package puts in place rules where none existed before," she said.

But Giusto Catania, an Italian left-wing MEP, accused EU governments who have supported the directive of taking an "authoritarian approach".

"This week may go down as some of the darkest days in the EU’s history," he said. "These measures will be decisive for the eight million irregular migrants present in Europe, decisive for those men and women, who, escaping wars and hunger, try to reach our shores."