Place of detention

Poland

Country Report: Place of detention Last updated: 15/07/25

Author

Independent

There are two types of detention centres in Poland, both used for detaining asylum applicants and foreigners subject to return procedures, namely guarded centres and so-called rigorous detention centres.

All detention centres are for migration-related purposes and the Border Guard is in charge of their management. Asylum applicants are never placed in regular prisons with ordinary prisoners but are detained together with migrants in an irregular situation in a guarded centre or rigorous detention centre. There is no special facility where only asylum applicants are detained.

The design and layout of some of the centres create the impression of a prison-like environment: thick walls, bars in the windows (Krosno, Białystok, Przemyśl)[1] and on the corridors. In addition, all centres are surrounded by high walls topped with barbed wire.[2]

There is the possibility of limiting the personal space of a foreigner to only 2 m2 – contrary to international standards – in detention centres, and there is insufficient access to medical and psychological care. [3]

 

Guarded centres

At the end of 2024 there were 5 guarded detention centres in Poland, which were destined to different demographics: Białystok, Przemyśl, Kętrzyn, Biała Podlaska and Krosno Odrzańskie (closed for renovation in September 2024) were for men. Women, married couples, unaccompanied children and families with children were placed in Lesznowola.

Detention centres for foreigners are located in:

Centre 2021 2022 2023 2024
Capacity Occupancy at end of year Capacity Occupancy at end of year Capacity Occupancy at end of year Capacity Occupancy at end of year
Biała Podlaska 188 0 130 74 130 103 100 90
Biała Podlaska (adapter open centre) 200 152 0 0
Białystok

Czerwony Bór

141

147

134

122

159

0

155

0

159

57

159 125
Lesznowola 192 147 392 158 200 48 267 87
Kętrzyn 478 392 220 48 137(10) 129 108 98 (144 as of 30.06.24)
Krosno

Odrzańskie

Wędrzyn

80

700

74

612

80 79 80

 

80

 

0 0 as it was closed for renovation, but at the end of June 2024 there were 79 persons
Przemyśl (guarded centre) 145 81 147 131 147[4]

 

131 147 106
Przemyśl (Arrest for Foreigners) 37 23 24 8 24 9 24 9
Total 2,308 1,737 1,152 535 877 509 805  

Source: Border Guard, 1 February 2022, 29 March 2022, 25 January 2023, 7 March 2023, 12 February 2024, Headquarters 21 March 2024.Information from different Border Guard divisions, 2025.

 

According to the Border Guard, there is a possibility to change a room upon justified demand, depending on availability and safety reasons.[5]

In 2024, the number of migrants and asylum applicants hosted in the centres were as follows: 538 in Bialystok, 552 in Biala Podlaska, 447 in Lesznowola, 460 in Ketrzyn and 218 in Krosno.[6] The average stay in detention centre in Przemyśl was 5 months, in Ketrzyn 155 days and in Lesznowola 110 days at the end of the year.[7]

Polish authorities removed bars from the windows in some detention centres and installed special secure windows in Lesznowola, Kętrzyn and Biała Podlaska (in a reopened detention centre).[8]

 

“Rigorous detention centres” (areszt dla cudzoziemców)

The term, literally translated as “arrests for foreigners”, replaced that of “pre-removal centres” as of 1 May 2014. These facilities impose more rigorous conditions of detention than guarded centres.[9] At of the end of 2024, there were 24 places in Przemyśl for men and women.[10] The building is single unit with a separate entrance. The facility is covered by video surveillance that includes residential cells, public areas and the outside area 24 hours per day.[11]

An asylum applicant can be placed in a more rigorous detention centre for foreigners only if there is a risk that they will not obey the rules in force in a guarded centre or the applicant has already disobeyed these rules.[12] These detention centres are more prison-like than guarded centres. An asylum applicant placed in such a centre cannot freely move around (they are closed in the ward). In practice, it means that foreigners have to stay in a cell for most of the day and have limited access to additional activities. Asylum applicants have limited access to the internet and the phone. They have to knock at the door to be taken to the toilet, in some cases having to wait for a long period of time.[13]

According to the Commissioner for Human Rights, sanitary and living prison-like conditions are not sufficient and not meeting the provisions of the international standards of the rights of persons in administrative detention.[14] The facility needs urgent renovation works. One of the problems was the lack of sanitary corners in the cells. Therefore, individuals who stay there for a couple of months have to call an officer every time they need to use the toilet. In the case of high occupancy in the facility, this can result in prolonged waiting times to deal with physiological needs.[15] The living cells are permanently monitored and furniture items are permanently fixed to the floor.[16]

Persons detained have a right to use two walking yards, twice a day by one hour. On the other hand, in the opinion of the representatives of the Commissioner, health condition of foreigners placed in this facility was justifying their release from detention. Furthermore, there were, among others, 6 Afghan nationals, who were previously not placed in detention centre for foreigners.[17]

The Commissioner also pointed out that the very mode of placing foreigners in rigorous detention raises concerns. The risk that a foreigner may not adhere to the rules of their stay is considered to be a sufficient ground for placing in this type of facility. However, the concept of “risk” is vague. If it does not have to be assessed on the basis of the facts of a specific case, it may lead to abuse of detention.

Previously, the NPM analysed court decisions on the detention of foreigners in the Guarded Centre and Detention Centre for Foreigners in Przemyśl. It was found that, in some situations, sufficient arguments for doing so – bypassing the guarded centre – included crossing the border in violation of the law, lack of documents or the assumption that Poland was supposed to be a transit country for the foreigner. And it did not appear from the documentation that the persons actively resisted arrest or demonstrated in any way that they would not comply with the regulations of the guarded centre. According to the Commissioner, the risk of non-compliance with the rules of stay in a guarded centre should be real and examined on a case-by-case basis, based on the specific attitude and behaviour of the foreigner.[18]

 

 

 

[1] Commissioner for Human Rights, Krajowy Mechanizm Prewencji KMP.572.6.2023.MD, Raport Krajowego Mechanizmu Prewencji Tortur z wizytacji Strzeżonego Ośrodka i Aresztu dla Cudzoziemców w Przemyślu, 12 January 2024, available in Polish here.

[2] Information BG, Przemyśl 10 March 2023, Krosno 3 March 2023.

[3] SIP, ‘We intervene before the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights’, 5 September 2024, available in Polish here. Information from different Border Guards units, 2025.

[4] Since 1 February 2024 – 93 places in detention centre in Przemyśl.

[5] Information provided different Border Guards Units, 2025.

[6] Information from different Border Guards Units, 2025.

[7] Information from different Boder Guard Units, 2025.

[8] Information provided by different divisions of  Border Guard, 2025.

[9] Order No 23 of the Ministry of Interior of 1 July 2014 on the designation of areas in which the arrest for foreigners is executed.

[10] Commissioner for Human Rights, Krajowy Mechanizm Prewencji KMP.572.7.2023.KK, Raport Krajowego Mechanizmu Prewencji Tortur z wizytacji Strzeżonego Ośrodka dla Cudzoziemców w Białej Podlaskiej, 4 January 2024, available in Polish here. Information provided by the Bieszczadzki Border Guard Unit, 2025.

[11] Information provided by BG, 10 March 2023.

[12] Article 88a(2) Law on Protection.

[13] Commissioner for Human Rights, Krajowy Mechanizm Prewencji KMP.572.6.2023.MD, Raport Krajowego Mechanizmu Prewencji Tortur z wizytacji Strzeżonego Ośrodka i Aresztu dla Cudzoziemców w Przemyślu, 12 January 2024, available in Polish here.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Commissioner for Human Rights, Cudzoziemcy zbyt łatwo trafiają do aresztu – zamiast do ośrodka. Wystąpienie do MSWiA, Foreigners are too easily taken into custody – instead of a centre. Submission to the Ministry of the Interior and Administration, February 2023, available in Polish here, Commissioner for Human Rights, Krajowy Mechanizm Prewencji KMP.572.6.2023.MD, Raport Krajowego Mechanizmu Prewencji Tortur z wizytacji Strzeżonego Ośrodka i Aresztu dla Cudzoziemców w Przemyślu, 12 January 2024, available in Polish here.

[17] Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Visit in detention centre in Przemyśl’, 8 February 2022, available in Polish here.

[18] Commissioner for Human Rights, Cudzoziemcy zbyt łatwo trafiają do aresztu – zamiast do ośrodka. Wystąpienie do MSWiA, Foreigners are too easily taken into custody – instead of a centre. Submission to the Ministry of the Interior and Administration, available in Polish here, NPM, Report on a visit in arrest in Przemysl, 30 January 2023, available in Polish, here.

Table of contents

  • Statistics
  • Overview of the legal framework
  • Overview of the main changes since the previous report update
  • Asylum Procedure
  • Reception Conditions
  • Detention of Asylum Seekers
  • Content of International Protection
  • ANNEX I – Transposition of the CEAS in national legislation