Measures of migration governance are often included in branches of international law not traditionally understood as "Migration law", such as Development and Cooperation Agreements. The focus of this analysis is the inclusion of “readmission clauses” within these agreements, which aim at facilitating the return of people (often from ‘developing countries’) who are residing in a country (often a 'developed state') irregularly. This practice reflects two dominant approaches of opposed policy options: addressing the root causes of irregular migration through development aid, or maximizing the developmental benefits of migration. These facets of the Migration and Development Nexus (M&D) ultimately aim to control migration. This dissertation explores the (mis)use of development aid as a conditionality to address the readmission of migrants adopted in the Cotonou and Samoa Cooperation Agreements alongside other bilateral agreements on development aid and assistance – including those that Italy and France have signed with third countries. Adopting a critical post-colonial approach, I investigate the reasons why African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) states agree on these readmission clauses within the context of Cooperation and Development Agreements. I highlight in my analysis how the fact that development aid has been provided only insofar as developing countries agree to collaborate with the EU in curbing migration reveals the neo-colonial legacies embedded in Development and Cooperation Agreements, and more broadly mainstream approaches to the Migration and Development Nexus.