European States’ Obligations to Repatriate the Children Detained in Camps in Northeast Syria Finally, before resorting to separation, States have an obligation to do everything in their power to preserve personal relations between children and their parents 509 and to support parents to restore or enhance the family’s capacity to take care of the child. While authorities enjoy a wide margin of appreciation when deciding on custody matters or the necessity of taking a child into care, stricter scrutiny is called for when State actions risk effectively curtailing family relations between parents and a young child. 510 While primary caregivers may face criminal proceedings upon repatriation, a child’s physical proximity to them would allow them to maintain family relationships in a way that would be practically impossible should their primary caregivers not be repatriated. 511 In addition, consistent with States’ obligation to support parents to restore the family’s capacity to take care of the child before resorting to separation, European States should prioritize the rehabilitation and reintegration of the primary caregivers in their countries of origin. 509 ECtHR, “Gnahoré v. France”, Application No. 40031/98, 17 January 2001, para. 59. 510 ECtHR, “Sahin v. Germany”, Application No. 30943/96, 8 July 2003, para. 65; ECtHR, “Elsholz v. Germany”, Application No. 25735/94, 13 July 2000, para. 49. 511 UNCCT, “Handbook: Children Affected by the Foreign-fighter Phenomenon. Ensuring a Child Rights- based Approach,” para. 126. 86