return would not be in the best interests of the child.257 This implies that the returning country should also consider the possibility of resettling the child in a third country. According to the EU Group of Experts, child victims “should never be forcibly returned to their country of origin if their family has not been traced, does not agree with the return of the child or is not able to provide her/him immediate and long term care”.258 OSCE participating States have also committed to making every effort to find a durable solution for child victims of trafficking, consisting of either: (a) return to and reintegration in the country of origin; (b) local integration into the country in which they are identified; or (c) relocation to a third country.259 In line with the OSCE commitments, participating States should make the decision to return a child to her or his country of origin only after having considered all the circumstances of a child victim’s case, and having ensured that there is a family member or special institution in the country of origin to provide for the child’s safety, protection, rehabilitation and reintegration.260 The starting point in the search for a durable solution is to consider the possibility of family reunification.261 The Council of Europe Trafficking Convention requires that, as soon as an unaccompanied child is identified as a victim, every effort be made to locate the family, provided that this is considered to be in the best interests of the child. In the case of unaccompanied children, EU legislation requires that states take the necessary measures towards finding a durable solution based on the best interests of the child.262 257  Council of Europe Trafficking Convention, art. 16.7 258  Report of the EU Group of Experts, “Explanatory Paper 13: Return and Social Inclusion”, pp. 198-199. This limitation is contained in the EU Return Directive, which requires that removal of an unaccompanied minor only be undertaken if the authorities of the member state are satisfied that the child will be returned to a member of her or his family, a nominated guardian or adequate reception facilities in the state of return (see EU Return Directive). The EU Group of Experts recommends that once the child reaches the age of majority, if no other type of residence permit is available, for example for work or study, permission to remain should be granted on humanitarian grounds (see Report of the EU Group of Experts, para. 96). 259  2005 Addendum to the OSCE Action Plan, rec. 9. 260  OSCE Action Plan, part V, para. 10.2. 261  UNHCR et al., Prevent, Combat, Protect: Human Trafficking, p. 83. 262  EU Trafficking Directive, art. 16(2). The joint UN Commentary on this directive notes that “a durable solution is one that seeks to provide a long-term and sustainable solution for the child” and should be a “concrete and secure solution” (see UNHCR et al., Prevent, Combat, Protect: Human Trafficking). The Commentary also notes that, when identifying a durable solution in the best interests of the child, security and risk assessments of each of the possible durable solutions should be conducted (see ibid., p. 83). It also recommends that states provide a formal “best interests” determination procedure for all decisions having a long-term impact on the child’s future, including when identifying a durable solution (see ibid., p. 71). This obligation is also contained in EU Directive 2004/81/EC on residence permits for victims of trafficking (art. 10(c)). In relation to unaccompanied children, Council Directive 2003/9/EC obliges states to trace family members as soon as possible. If there is a threat to the life or integrity of a child or her/his close relatives, care must be taken to ensure that the collection, processing and circulation of information is undertaken on a confidential basis, so as to avoid jeopardizing their safety (art. 19(3)). Note that Council Directive 2003/9/EC will be repealed and replaced as of 20 July 2015 by Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection, 29 June 2013, L 180/96. The recast directive provides that, in assessing the best interests of the child, EU member states shall take due account of safety and security considerations, in particular where there is a risk of the minor being a victim of human trafficking (see Directive 2013/33/EU, art. 23.2(c)). 74 Part 2: Explanatory Report to the Principles