Luxembourg: The Court of Justice ruled on 15 October 2026 that Hungary’s system of special reintegration detention breached EU law on penalties for migrant smuggling. In Case C-521/25, Commission v Hungary, the judges found that a 2023 government decree failed to deliver the effective, dissuasive and proportionate sanctions that European rules demand.
The decree behind special reintegration detention automatically converted final custodial sentences for preparing or committing human trafficking into special reintegration detention whenever the court also ordered expulsion. In practice the convicted person left the country with an entry ban instead of serving the prison term. The scheme covered 2,525 people before the government repealed the decree on 19 August 2025.
The Commission argued that special reintegration detention infringed Articles 1 and 3 of Council Directive 2002/90/EC and Article 1(1) and (3) of Framework Decision 2002/946/JHA. Those texts oblige member states to punish the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence with suitable penalties. The Court agreed and held that Hungary had failed to meet that duty.
The judges tested the penalty on three grounds. It was not effective, they said, because the sentence was not enforced as custody and became an obligation to leave and a ban on returning. It was not dissuasive, because an offender could expect at worst deportation and a temporary re-entry ban.
Special reintegration detention was also not proportionate. Conversion and release happened automatically, with no individual assessment of the offender or the offence, and matching the length of the ban to the sentence did not cure that flaw. The decree even reached offences that EU law requires member states to punish with at least eight years of imprisonment, such as facilitation for financial gain, within a criminal organisation or in ways that endanger lives.
The Commission had warned of a systemic risk of impunity for people who help others enter the Union illegally. It said the practice undermined the area of freedom, security and justice and the common immigration and border policy. The Court’s reasoning supports that concern, because a penalty that removes the offender from the country removes the deterrent as well.
The judgment arrives while the decree no longer applies, so its practical effect lies in the principle. Hungary must comply without delay, which means drawing the legal consequences of the ruling for people who benefited from special reintegration detention. If the Commission finds that Hungary has not complied, it may bring a further action asking the Court to impose financial penalties.
The case also sends a message to other capitals that are tempted to use release or expulsion as a shortcut. Governments keep wide discretion over sentencing, but they cannot empty a criminal sanction of its content when EU law sets a minimum standard. After this ruling on special reintegration detention, any national scheme that swaps prison for departure will face close scrutiny in Luxembourg.
