Amnesty International asks for explanations from Spain for the response to the arrival of 72,000 people in Ceuta and warns of possible summary returns.

As of August 2026, the basic framework for border management and returns in Spain remains the Organic Law 4/2000 (Immigration Law) — including its tenth additional provision on “border rejection” in Ceuta and Melilla — plus the case law of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. A major specific comprehensive reform on returns has not yet been approved, but there are several initiatives underway and political commitments pointing to partial changes, alongside a very active Executive response through regulations and material measures.

1. Ceuta/Melilla and “border rejection”

• Government–EH Bildu agreement linked to the reform of the Citizen Security Law
  According to the agreement published in October 2024, PSOE and Sumar have agreed with EH Bildu on a Bill to reform Organic Law 4/2015 (Citizen Security Law), which:
  • Prohibits “hot returns” in the security law itself.
  • Obliges the Government, within six months, to amend the Immigration Law to incorporate an additional provision regulating a special regime in Ceuta and Melilla that guarantees:
    • Identification and certification of persons potentially seeking asylum.
    • Evaluation of their application in facilities enabled at border crossings before any expulsion.
  This provision is currently a political mandate linked to the reform of the “Gag Law”, not an already approved reform of the Immigration Law. The citizen security bill is registered and in parliamentary process, but the specific amendment of the LOEX remains pending articulation in a text. (Demócrata)
• PP proposal to extend border rejection to the sea
  Following the Supreme Court ruling of July 8, 2026, which establishes that the tenth additional provision of the LOEX does not allow applying border rejection to those arriving by swimming because they do not overcome a physical containment element, the PP has reacted on two fronts:
  • Announces and registers in July 2026 a Bill to amend the tenth additional provision of the LOEX so that border rejection can be applied:
    • both to irregular entries by land (fence) and
    • to entries by sea in Ceuta and Melilla.
    The initiative, publicly presented by deputy Sofía Acedo, is registered in Congress, but available information only allows stating that it is in an initial phase (pending qualification and consideration). (Demócrata)
  • In parallel, the Ministry of the Interior has opted for an executive response: installation of inflatable barriers and containment buoys on the Tarajal breakwater in Ceuta to literally comply with the Supreme Court ruling, so that there are also “containment elements” at sea that allow applying the border rejection regime to those who overcome them. This has been done by government agreement and administrative resolution, not by law. (Interior note)

2. Reforms of the Immigration Law impacting returns/expulsions

• Reform for distribution of unaccompanied migrant minors
  Between 2024 and 2025, a reform of the LOEX has been processed focusing on the mandatory distribution of unaccompanied migrant minors from the Canary Islands, Ceuta, and Melilla to other autonomous communities:
  • Initially through a Bill (PSOE, Sumar, and CC) to amend article 35 LOEX and set contingency and mandatory referral criteria. (Demócrata)
  • Subsequently, Congress approved a royal decree-law that articulates this redistribution and is ratified, thus establishing a legal mechanism for transfer between communities. (Canarias Ahora)
  This reform affects the management of border pressure (relieving the Canary Islands, Ceuta, and Melilla), but does not fundamentally modify the legal figures of return, expulsion, or border rejection for adults.
• Extraordinary regularization and Popular Legislative Initiative (ILP) to reform the LOEX
  The Popular Legislative Initiative for an extraordinary regularization of foreign persons:
  • Was taken into consideration by Congress and continues in processing in committee, after an alternative text from Vox was rejected in June 2024. (Congress)
  • Amends the LOEX to enable the Government to issue, by Royal Decree, a regularization procedure for those residing in Spain before a certain date.
  It is a relevant reform in migration policy, but its focus is on residence and work in the territory, not on return/rejection mechanisms at the border.
• Regulatory reforms of the LOEX (already in force)
  The Government has approved the new Immigration Regulation (Royal Decree 1155/2024) and its amendment (Royal Decree 316/2026), aimed at:
  • Making the figures of integration more flexible and diverse.
  • Adjusting the system to the upcoming entry into force of the European Pact on Migration and Asylum, strengthening the management of return procedures and the integration of persons with long-term residence.
  These are regulatory norms (not laws) already published in the BOE, mainly affecting the stay and residence phase, and indirectly the ecosystem of expulsions and returns.
• Vox Organic Law Bill on expulsion of foreign criminals
  In July 2026, Vox registered in Congress the Organic Law Bill 122/000296 to reform the Penal Code and Civil Code, so that:
  • The penalty imposed on a foreigner is generally replaced by their expulsion.
  • The possibility of loss of Spanish nationality not by origin is strengthened.
  The initiative has been admitted for processing and is in an initial phase pending consideration. Its focus is on expulsion linked to criminal conviction, not immediate border rejection.

3. Asylum Law and protection pathways

• Bills on access to asylum in embassies and consulates
  The Plurinational Sumar Group has registered in 2024 several bills (e.g., 122/000049 and 122/000071) to:
  • Amend Law 12/2009 on Asylum.
  • Facilitate international protection applications in embassies and consulates and strengthen the non-refoulement principle.
  Both are admitted and awaiting consideration in Congress. They are directly relevant for guarantees at the border (ensuring that those under Spain’s effective control can apply for asylum), although so far they have not advanced to later stages.

4. Summary

In summary, the parliamentary processing on border management and returns in Spain is characterized by:

• Multiple initiatives in very early stages (registration, admission, and awaiting consideration) on LOEX, asylum, and Ceuta/Melilla.
• A political commitment —not yet materialized in law— to reform the LOEX to incorporate a more guarantee-based special regime for Ceuta and Melilla, linked to the reform of the Citizen Security Law.
• Already approved reforms affecting migration management (distribution of minors, regularization, immigration regulation), but only indirectly affecting the legal core of return/border rejection.
• An immediate executive reaction by the Government to the Supreme Court ruling through maritime barriers and administrative coordination, while the legislative debate on how to redefine border rejection has barely started in the Cortes.

The Government delegate in Ceuta is the highest representative of the Government of Spain in the autonomous city and the body that directs and coordinates the General State Administration (AGE) in its territory. Its powers are basically regulated in Law 40/2015, on the Legal Regime of the Public Sector, which defines the functions of Government delegates and extends this regime to the delegates in the cities of Ceuta and Melilla. Other sectoral regulations (citizen security, civil protection, etc.) assign specific functions on those matters.

1. Representation of the Government in the city

The Government delegate in Ceuta represents the Government of the Nation in the territory of the autonomous city. This representation is institutional and political: they act as the “face” of the central Government before local authorities, economic and social agents, and the citizenry, without prejudice to the representation corresponding to other State authorities (for example, judiciary, Armed Forces, etc.).

In this representative role, they lead official State acts in Ceuta, channel instructions and political directives from the Government, and convey information about the political, social, and economic reality of the territory to the Government.

2. Direction and coordination of the AGE in Ceuta

According to Law 40/2015, the Government delegate directs and supervises the actions of all territorial services of the General State Administration and its public bodies within their scope. Their main functions include:

• Promoting, coordinating, and supervising the activity of state services in Ceuta, both those integrated in the Delegation itself and those directly dependent on ministries or central bodies.
• Appointing and directing, when applicable, Government sub-delegates or island directors under their dependency, and coordinating the actions of the different functional areas of the Delegation.
• Gathering information from all territorial services of the AGE (structure, resources, activity, assets) to ensure coordinated and effective management.
• Optimizing resources: informing and proposing measures for rationalization of structures and use of human and material means, with special reference to coordinating the use of state administrative buildings in the city.

3. Information and relationship with the citizenry

Legislation assigns the Government delegate a central role in information matters:

• Coordinating information about Government and AGE programs and activities in Ceuta, so that citizens receive a coherent view of State action.
• Promoting collaboration with other administrations (Autonomous City, local entities) in citizen information matters.
• Submitting annual reports to the Government on the functioning of state public services in the city.

4. Relations with the Autonomous City of Ceuta

Although Ceuta is not an autonomous community, Law 40/2015 specifically provides for Government delegates in the cities of Ceuta and Melilla and their role in coordination and cooperation relations between the State Administration and the city’s institutions.

• Communicating and receiving information between the Government of Spain and the Autonomous City authorities.
• Promoting agreements and collaboration between the AGE and the Autonomous City, especially on programs financed by the State.
• Participating in cooperation bodies State–Autonomous City when so provided.

5. Legality control and sanctioning power

The Government delegate exercises relevant legal control and sanctioning powers:

• Resolving administrative appeals against acts and resolutions issued by Delegation bodies, with the power to suspend their execution under the terms provided by administrative procedure regulations.
• Ensuring respect for State competencies and correct application of State regulations, being able to promote appeals, jurisdictional conflicts, or attribution conflicts and other appropriate actions.
• Exercising sanctioning and expropriation powers and any others directly attributed by norms or delegated or decentralized (for example, in matters of immigration, transport, citizen security, or State heritage, depending on the sector).

6. Citizen security and civil protection

In the field of security and emergencies, the position of the Government delegate in Ceuta is especially relevant:

• Guaranteeing citizen security and protecting the free exercise of rights and freedoms, directing the State Security Forces and Corps in the city under the functional dependence of the Ministry of the Interior.
• Presiding or co-presiding coordination bodies on security and crime prevention at the local level, according to regulations on Local Security Boards.
• Directing and coordinating civil protection in their scope, in coordination with the Autonomous City and based on civil protection legislation and state and territorial emergency plans.

7. Summary

In sum, the Government delegate in Ceuta concentrates functions of political representation of the State, direction and coordination of all state services in the city, guarantee of public order and security, and legal control of administrative action, as well as being the key piece in the institutional relationship between the Government of Spain and the Autonomous City.

For a return to Morocco to be considered truly voluntary and not forced, Spanish law and international human rights standards essentially require that the decision be made with free and informed consent, that there is a real alternative to remain in Spain, that asylum and non-refoulement guarantees are respected, and that the return is carried out in a safe and dignified manner. Otherwise, the return approaches a forced expulsion or removal, even if formally presented as “voluntary.”

1. Spanish framework: voluntary departure and return programs

Organic Law 4/2000 on the rights and freedoms of foreigners and its reforms (LO 8/2000, LO 2/2009, etc.) practically distinguish between:

• Voluntary departure (leaving the territory within a deadline) which may be offered to the foreigner before executing an expulsion or removal sanction.
• Forced expulsion or removal, coercively executed by the Administration when there is no voluntary departure or in especially serious cases.

Additionally, there are specific assisted voluntary return programs. A central example is Royal Decree 1800/2008, which develops Royal Decree-law 4/2008 for the lump-sum payment of unemployment benefits to non-EU foreigners who “voluntarily return” to their country of origin. The decree requires, among other conditions:

• Being legally unemployed with recognized entitlement to benefits.
• Assuming an express commitment to return to the country of origin and not to return to Spain to reside or work for three years.
• Not being subject to prohibitions on leaving the national territory.

Beyond this unemployment program, Spain funds, through Order ISM/820/2023 and numerous agreements with the International Organization for Migration (IOM), projects of “assisted voluntary return and reintegration” for vulnerable non-EU migrants. Notably, agreements from 2020, 2022, and 2023 with the Ministry of the Interior and the IOM explicitly include projects of voluntary return and reintegration from Morocco for vulnerable migrants. These instruments emphasize an “orderly and humane” management of migration and the need for “safe and dignified” return.

2. International human rights standards

Although international treaties do not provide a closed definition of “voluntary return,” they set very clear limits on what can be done:

• The principle of non-refoulement, present in the Geneva Convention on refugees, the Convention against Torture, and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, prohibits returning a person to a country where there is a real risk of torture, inhuman treatment, or persecution.
• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights impose an individualized assessment of those risks before any departure, voluntary or not.
• Guidelines from bodies such as UNHCR and IOM on assisted voluntary return stress that the will to return must be free, informed, and revocable to a reasonable extent, and that guarantees of dignified treatment and support for reintegration must be offered.

3. Key requirements for the return to be truly voluntary

Based on this framework, a “voluntary return” to Morocco should meet, at minimum, the following conditions:

• Free and informed consent: the person signs acceptance without physical or psychological coercion, having received understandable information about their rights, possible legal alternatives to remain, and the consequences of return (including, if applicable, the commitment not to return temporarily as in RD 1800/2008).
• Real possibility to remain legally: adherence to the program cannot be the only practical way to avoid worse treatment (for example, the immediate threat of summary expulsion without guarantees). Adequate information must have been provided about options such as asylum, subsidiary protection, integration, or other figures.
• Respect for the right to asylum and the non-refoulement principle: no one can be “induced” to accept a return if they have submitted or wish to submit an international protection application that has not been resolved with guarantees, or if there are reasonable indications of serious risk in Morocco (or the specific region to which they would return).
• Absence of detention or abusive pressure: staying in a Foreigners’ Detention Center or in detention does not automatically invalidate voluntariness, but practices such as threats of worse conditions, misinformation, or unreasonably short deadlines to decide can make the return de facto forced.
• Safe and dignified return: the journey and arrival must be organized to protect the person’s integrity and private life, with necessary documentation and, if applicable, reintegration measures in Morocco (as provided in Spain–IOM reintegration agreements).
• Attention to vulnerable persons: minors, trafficking victims, rejected asylum seekers still under review, sick or disabled persons require enhanced safeguards and often the intervention of specialized services before accepting a return.

If any of these elements fail — for example, because consent is obtained under strong pressure, there is insufficient information about the possibility of international protection, or serious risks in Morocco are ignored — the return can hardly be considered voluntary from the perspective of Spanish law interpreted in light of international human rights standards.