Denmark outsourcing prisoners to Kosovo set pattern for Meloni and Albania

In recent years, EU member states have increasingly turned to 'outsourcing' their societal challenges, from asylum policy to waste management and industrial pollution, not to mention security and defence.

This trend, often framed as pragmatic, is in reality a costly and ethically fraught abdication of responsibility.

Two recent cases exemplify this, one of them little-reported and one well-documented: Denmark’s agreement to send convicted prisoners to Kosovo and Italy’s outsourcing of asylum processing to Albania. 

The fact that this tendency to outsourcing is shared by both northern and southern member states point to the urgent need for a cohesive, federal response to Europe’s challenges that are rooted in solidarity and the rule of law. 

Something rotten in state of Denmark?

Denmark’s approach to penal outsourcing, while less internationally reported, is highly concerning.

In 2021, Denmark signed a deal to send 300 prisoners — convicted in Denmark and slated for deportation — to Kosovo. The Danish deal with Kosovo is not explicitly focused on offshoring societal issues wholesale but the underlying reason for this is certainly to target a key demographic among the Danish electorate, and to appear to stand for rule of law.

However, the very value that these arrangements are supposed to protect, are tarnished by their abuse. 

For how can Denmark’s legal system credibly monitor and support a system hundreds of kilometers away? How will they ensure that prisoners are afforded the same standards of care and human rights? How can the legal authorities of Denmark comfortably sentence people to deportation, if they cannot justifiable ensure their rights are being safeguarded — after all, the fundamental reason for having a penal system is reform, not merely reprehension. 

Such outsourcing of justice and the exportation of prisoners is merely a temporary fix to avoid domestic investment in a long-term penal reform.

The deal risks isolating prisoners from their families, lawyers, and Danish society, undermining the rehabilitative purpose of incarceration. Rehabilitation itself — proven to reduce recidivism and enhance public safety — may be at risk in an area where legal, cultural, and linguistic barriers may further isolate prisoners. 

Denmark’s relationship to Rwanda is equally worrisome.

A first-mover in suggesting asylum processing sites outside of Europe, other countries, like UK, followed suit — like lemmings over the precipice — never seemingly flinching at the notion of pouring millions of pounds or krona into a migratory Eldorado only the conquistadors might rival in their lust for a dreamed up answer.

However, as the implacability of the Danish and British authorities have met harsh reality, we find ourselves again at the crux of the challenge: The protection of our Europe values require solutions that adhere and protect them. In a multipolar world or disintegrating stability, we in Europe must hold firm to our ideals and this means not only tackling migrati and asylum seekers’ needs, but also actively and proactively integrate them into European society. 

Enter Meloni

The Italy-Albania deal, currently under intense scrutiny , exemplifies the worst of this trait. Italian PM Giorgia Meloni has touted the €680m deal as a bold solution to the nation’s migration pressures.

Under this bilateral agreement, migrants intercepted en route to Italy are transferred to the centres in Albania if they meet specific criteria: they must originate from countries classified by the government as “safe”, where individuals are presumed to not require international protection, and must not belong to vulnerable groups such as unaccompanied minors, women and individuals with health or age-related vulnerabilities. 

The agreement primarily targets adult male migrants who are supposedly subjected to an accelerated 28-day asylum procedure. Approved asylum claims result in transfer to Italy, while rejections lead to deportation from Albania to their countries of origin. Reports indicate how these centers face legal uncertainties and are poorly equipped to manage the influx of applicants. 

Beyond its logistical failings, the plan appears to be a cynical attempt to placate anti-immigration voters rather than a smart solution. By outsourcing the asylum procedure, Meloni shifts the problem out of sight, setting a dangerous unilateral precedent that undermines the EU’s collective ability to address migration challenges effectively. The fact that Italy has felt the need to pursue a bilateral agreement reflects the lack of confidence in first-arrival countries in the New EU Migration Pact and Frontex’s role.

The EU’s current exportation of responsibilities has troubling implications. They not only create further occasions for division within the EU, but they also dramatically undermine the continent’s moral leadership, as Italy and Denmark’s strategies exemplify. International asylum law seeks to prohibit practices that could result in inhuman or degrading treatment — a risk inherent in outsourcing justice or migration management to countries with less resources or weaker legal safeguards. 

But perhaps most concerning, these deals erode the trust in the EU as a unified body committed to shared values.

The abdication of responsibility is merely a symptom of the EU’s disfunctional governance, with unanimity voting at its core, that hampers its consensus-building capacity and prevents EU action in principle. When wealthier nations offload their responsibilities, they not only strain their relationships with less affluent neighbours but also send a message that solidarity is secondary to political expediency. This is hardly a successful strategy to bring the Western Balkans into the EU. 

Shared infrastructure, funding, and oversight would standardise practices and relieve individual member states from shouldering disproportionate burdens. If member states continue to push for bilateral agreements that disperse and run counter to European values, they not only riddle the effectiveness of EU treaties and existing legislation, but also hinder the development of new, federal approaches. The EU’s strength and its global projection should be centred around its ability to lead with values, from pioneering human rights protection to championing democratic governance. 

Outsourcing societal responsibilities amounts to sweeping the dust under the carpet, and it is a betrayal of its legacy. If the EU is to remain a moral leader it must confront its challenges with transparency, solidarity and a commitment to truly European solutions, which are the only way to forge policies that reflect its ideals. No member state should be left to carry the burdens alone.