Unaccompanied minors at EU borders

Each year, thousands of unaccompanied minors reach the borders of the European Union. In 2023 alone, more than 20,000 children crossed irregularly, while many more entered national asylum systems. Their journeys are long and dangerous, exposing them to violence, exploitation, and extreme hardship. Individual testimonies, such as that of Maldini, who spent months travelling across forests without food⁴, are not isolated cases but reflect a broader pattern shaped by the limited availability of safe and legal pathways into Europe. Despite being formally recognised as a vulnerable group, unaccompanied minors remain systematically exposed to exclusion and harm at EU borders.

The normative framework

At the normative level, the EU framework emphasises protection. The right to seek asylum is guaranteed under international law, and the principle of the “best interest of the child” is meant to guide all decisions concerning minors. The new Pact on Migration and Asylum aims to improve coordination between Member States through common procedures, mandatory border screening, and solidarity mechanisms.¹ In theory, the system is designed to balance efficiency and protection in migration management; in practice, however, its functioning raises significant concerns.

A procedure designed for adults: how the system processes minors

The process begins with a screening phase of up to seven days, during which individuals undergo identity verification, security checks, and biometric data collection. Following this phase, they are channelled either into asylum procedures or return processes.¹ Subsequently, individuals may enter accelerated border procedures, where asylum decisions are closely intertwined with return outcomes. While designed to increase efficiency, these procedures reduce the time available for assessment and can limit safeguards for vulnerable individuals.¹ At the same time, systems such as Eurodac allow for the collection of biometric data from children as young as six, enabling their tracking across the migration process.² Notably, minors are processed within the same procedural framework as adults. This procedural uniformity raises a substantive concern: the framework does not adequately account for the specific vulnerabilities of children, prioritising administrative processing over protection-oriented responses.

The gap between legal standards and practice

Evidence from recent reports, including Children’s rights in the 2024 Migration and Asylum Pact and Crossing Lines: Realities of Migrant Children at EU External Borders, highlights a persistent gap between legal standards and practices on the ground.³ ⁴ Across multiple contexts, unaccompanied minors are subject to pushbacks, denied effective access to asylum procedures, or held in conditions that amount to de facto detention.⁴ In some cases, children are returned without an individual assessment of their circumstances; in others, they remain without guardianship or adequate support structures. Particularly concerning is the presence of unregistered minors who remain effectively invisible within protection systems, an issue linked to deficiencies in identification and data collection mechanisms. As a result, the formal recognition of the right to asylum does not consistently translate into effective access to protection.

Guardianship, legal assistance, and age assessment: structural shortcomings

This implementation gap is rooted in a series of systemic shortcomings. Child protection actors are not always present at border points, leaving migration authorities to handle cases involving vulnerable minors without adequate child protection expertise.³ The appointment of guardians is often delayed and, when ensured, frequently proves insufficient: in some cases, a single guardian may be responsible for up to 30 children, severely limiting the possibility of effective and individualised support.³ Access to legal assistance is not automatic, and procedures are rarely adapted to children’s needs. Age assessment methods can be unreliable, creating the risk that minors are treated as adults and lose access to protection.⁴ More broadly, the system remains binary, offering only asylum or return, with limited space for alternative forms of protection.⁵

The Pact’s structural limitations for child protection

The new Pact on Migration and Asylum risks reinforcing several of these structural issues. Screening procedures do not adequately differentiate between adults and children, resulting in minors being treated primarily as migrants rather than as rights-holders with specific needs.³ The systematic collection of biometric data prioritises control over protection, while the absence of a clear prohibition on detention allows restrictive practices to persist.² Furthermore, the lack of early and consistent integration of age assessment mechanisms increases the risk of misclassification and inadequate safeguards from the outset of the procedure.⁴

Conclusion

Taken together, these elements point to a deeper structural issue in EU migration governance. The system is primarily oriented towards border management and the control of movement, rather than the protection of individuals.⁶ As a result, children are often treated as administrative cases rather than as rights-holders entitled to care and specific safeguards. The treatment of unaccompanied minors ultimately reveals a core tension in EU migration policy. The central question is not whether the Union can effectively manage migration flows, but whether it is willing, and able, to uphold its own normative commitments by treating children as children, rather than as migrants.

References

¹ European Union (2024), Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 establishing a common procedure for international protection in the Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202401348

² PICUM (2024), The EU Migration Pact: a dangerous regime of migrant surveillance. https://picum.org/blog/the-eu-migration-pact-a-dangerous-regime-of-migrant-surveillance/

³ PICUM (2024), Children’s rights in the 2024 Migration and Asylum Pact. https://picum.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/PICUM-Analysis-Children-Rights.pdf

⁴ Save the Children (2024), Crossing Lines: Realities of Migrant Children at EU External Borders. https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/pdf/Crossing_Lines_Full_Report_v2.pdf

⁵ Migration Policy Group (2025), The Migrant Return Policy Index (MIREX): A Human Rights-Based Comparative Analysis. https://www.migpolgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/MIREX-Report-Final.pdf

⁶ Migration Policy Group (2026), New Migrant Return Policy Index reveals major human rights gaps in European return policies. https://www.migpolgroup.com/index.php/2026/03/06/mirex/