the forced return seem inappropriate. In its comments, the Federal Ministry of the Interior replied that the man was only restrained to prevent him from fleeing and to return him to the vehicle, but not to carry out the return. Accordingly, the recommendations of the former Human Rights Advisory Board did not apply. The affected person strongly resisted while lying on the ground. Moreover, he had been informed that the return had been cancelled. In the opinion of the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the children were not in a panic but ran away on command. Resistance despite the fact that the official act has been cancelled? It was difficult for the NPM to believe that the affected person resisted after being informed that the return had been cancelled. The assertion that the children ran away on command was not consistent with the commission’s record and the statements of the independent witness. Six days later, the commission observed a new attempt to effectuate this return. On the way to the bus that was to take him and his family to Poland, the man’s crutches were taken away from him because they were the property of Mödling Hospital. Moreover, the affected person was placed in body cuffs, which remained on him during the entire trip. The Austrian authorities failed to inform the Polish authorities of the need for crutches. The Federal Ministry of the Interior regretted this error. Contrary to the opinion of the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the NPM believes that the man was never a danger to himself or others due to his poor physical condition. Therefore, the restraining straps should have been removed from the affected person during the trip to Poland. Was restraint necessary? In the same case, the question of voluntary returns to the country of origin arose. While the wife told the commission that she and her family would have preferred to voluntarily return to Poland, the authorities had no knowledge of the fact that the family wished to voluntarily return to their homeland, according to the Federal Ministry of the Interior. Voluntary return versus (forced) return The NPM takes note of the frequent difficulties in communication between affected persons, the Association of Human Rights Austria and the Federal Ministry of the Interior with respect to the question of voluntary return to the home country. Therefore, the NPM recommended to the Federal Ministry of the Interior already in 2013 that it should define guidelines so that guidance can be given to persons who wish to voluntarily return to their home countries. These guidelines, which must be communicated to the affected persons, should clearly state by what date and at what office or organisation an appropriate application for voluntary return should be filed. 148