"The deficient reform of António Costa's government allowed an influx of irregular immigrants and did not contain the access of criminal organisations exploiting illegal immigration," said the professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Lisbon, in response to Lusa, arguing that the government should take advantage of the leeway granted by the European return directive to introduce fundamental changes to the Portuguese system.

“Chaotic legacy”

The government has already announced that it intends to review the legislation by the end of the year to facilitate the expulsion of irregular foreigners, with all indications suggesting that detention periods will be increased and administrative safeguards reduced, within the framework of the announced review of the European return directive, associated with the Pact for Migration and Asylum.

Criticising the “chaotic legacy” inherited from the Socialist Party government, Blanco de Morais pointed to the problems of the Agency for Integration, Migration and Asylum (AIMA) in managing these processes, having opened only 194 cases for the forced removal of undocumented immigrants, but “only a small part of these cases resulted in effective departures”.

“Despite AIMA having opened more than 9,000 cases this year, the path to expulsion is lengthy and even Kafkaesque” because the legislation is “deficient and complex”, and is “unnecessarily focused on guarantees by providing for excessive judicialization in the expulsion of undocumented immigrants, with second instances of appeal against expulsion court decisions, excessively short temporary detention periods, and a lack of adequate means for locating, identifying, detaining, and expelling undocumented immigrants”.

Cutting deadlines

Therefore, the professor proposes “shortening the current legal deadlines for acceptance of the voluntary departure agreement” to a maximum of seven days and, “in case of refusal or lack of response,” placing them in a “temporary detention centre for coercive return proceedings,” ensuring their “expedited expulsion” if “there is a risk of flight or obstruction of return.”

In cases of “non-compliance with the deadlines for voluntary departure or coercive departure,” the jurist advocates “expedited expulsion,” and, to avoid cases like the one that happened with the group of Moroccans in the summer, proposes “extending the detention period for irregulars in an installation centre from two to 18 months, in accordance with the maximum limit of the directive,” with regular evaluation by a lower court judge.

“Screening operations”

Among other detailed proposals, Blanco de Morais advocates for “screening operations” in border areas, “greater flexibility in refusing entry in accordance with the provisions of the European Pact,” and, in cases where countries of origin refuse to receive expelled irregular migrants, proposes “cooperation agreements” with third countries, “with which an agreement is reached so that they can guarantee transit.”

In some of these third countries, “return centres for irregular migrants and asylum seekers who do not immediately prove persecution or threat of persecution” should be created, he argued.

To overcome issues within the Portuguese legal system, Blanco de Morais advocates for the “creation of new courts in lower courts” to address the issue, the “shortening of deadlines for administrative procedures and judicial processes corresponding to forced return,” and a “very significant increase, to deterrent levels, in fines for airlines that facilitate the entry, on aircraft, of unaccompanied and undocumented minors, usually used by illegal immigration networks.”

The professor advocates for the urgent construction of "provisional detention centers" near air and port borders, the reinforcement of border police personnel, and increased investigations to "assess the financing of commercial establishments without activity justifying the payment of high commercial rents," seeking to "identify their sources of funding," among other matters.

“Problematic”

In Portugal, as in the rest of Europe, immigration is currently "a problematic situation," which, according to Blanco de Morais, is due to the "evident lack of control over the migratory influx," coupled with an "illegal immigration industry," with the "financial support of so-called philanthropic associations linked to transnational centres of economic power" and "NGOs involved in obscure mass landings on the Mediterranean coast."

The jurist also speaks of the “abuse of asylum applications by non-persecuted immigrants,” the “crises in the Middle East partly generated by Anglo-American interventionism and Russian pressure aimed at exacerbating migratory pressure,” or the “illegal immigration networks sponsored by many companies eager for cheap labour, supported by obscure jurisdictional representatives”, among other concerns.

He is also concerned about “breakdowns observed both in public security and in the functioning of the welfare state”, not trusting the “not always reliable statistics” in Portugal.

On the other hand, Blanco de Morais stressed that “there is a natural identity issue linked to the reaction of the native population to a disproportionate influx of foreigners with clearly different cultures and ways of life”.

The jurist said that “certain communities of third-party states reject integration”, creating a context of “multiculturalism”, with “the autonomous coexistence of various ethnicities, cultures or clearly differentiated ways of life, in the same state or region, with the derogation of state laws and symbols”.

In this way, he argued, “urban enclaves or ‘micro-sultanates’ are created with their own material laws that ignore the law and order of the host state”.

In the Portuguese case, the “easy obtaining of nationality for mere reasons of convenience, such as The professor emphasized that the irresponsible legislation that was in effect until 2025 also did not help integration.

In European countries, "a large sector of the indigenous and identity-based population reacts electorally to this migratory disorder, voting for populist right-wing parties that advocate drastic restrictions on the phenomenon," and this rise ends up destabilizing the party system and generating instability, he further stressed.