Tag Archives: Frontex

by | 06 Apr 2010 · 04:30

UNHCR Comments on Malta’s Decision Not to Host Frontex Missions

Times of Malta reports on comments made by the head of UNHCR’s Malta Office, Jon Hoisaeter, who said that “international law was not clearly defined when it came to the disembarkation of migrants after rescue operations.”

“There are situations when urgent health and safety considerations would require that those rescued are brought to the nearest safe port of call. In fact, even the new Frontex guidelines acknowledge this… Asylum seekers should be brought to a territory where their situation and claims can be individually assessed in a fair manner.  Of course, close cooperation among relevant states will often be crucial to successfully undertake rescue-at-sea operations.”

“The UNHCR supports the development of guidelines that can facilitate rescue and reduce the risk of lives being lost at sea. However, with or without support from Frontex, search and rescue operations are primarily the responsibility of states.”

Click here for article.

Leave a comment

Filed under Frontex, Malta, Mediterranean, News, UNHCR

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | 30 Mar 2010 · 05:21

ECRE Interview with Frontex Spokesperson

ECRE interviewed Frontex spokesperson Michal Parzyszek about the changes to Frontex’s mandate.  The interview took place before the 25 March European Parliament’s vote which allowed the changes to take effect.

Click here for the interview.

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, Frontex, News

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 29 Mar 2010 · 06:05

Malta Will Not Host Future Frontex Operations

Maltese PM Lawrence Gonzi said on 28 March that because of the new guidelines approved by the European Parliament addressing Frontex sea operations, Malta will no longer host Frontex operations.  “This is a major disappointment…our position is that the new rule does not make sense and unless this rule is amended, Malta will not participate in Frontex operations. However, if the rule if changed, we will take part.”

Malta objects to a provision in the new guidelines requiring that intercepted migrants be brought to the member state hosting the Frontex operation rather than the closest available port which in the past has meant that intercepted migrants would often be brought to an Italian port rather than Malta.

Click here and here for articles.

4 Comments

Filed under European Union, Frontex, Malta, Mediterranean, News

Tagged as , , ,

by | 26 Mar 2010 · 03:52

EP Vote Allows New Guidelines for Frontex Operations at Sea to Take Effect

New guidelines governing Frontex enforcement operations at sea will now take effect even though the European Parliament voted on 25 March to reject the guidelines by a vote of 336 to 253 with 30 abstentions.  However, an absolute majority of all EP Members, 369 votes, was required in order to block the new guidelines.

Malta opposes the new guidelines.  The Times of Malta reported that “the European Commission and Council have managed to get their way and will be able to introduce new rules of engagement during this year’s anti-migration patrol missions coordinated by Frontex as the resolution to reject these rules approved by the Civil Liberties Committee last week didn’t manage to garner the necessary support of the Socialist group in the EP.”

“According to the new rules, all irregular immigrants and asylum seekers saved on the high-seas during a Frontex mission have to be taken to the mission’s host country and not to the closer safe port. This means that if Malta hosts a Frontex mission in the future, as it has done in the past two years, it will have to take all the illegal immigrants found at sea. Malta has already declared that it will not continue to take part in Frontex missions under these rules.”

An EP press release stated that the “EU guidelines say[]that border patrols have a moral duty to rescue migrants in distress at sea….  The guidelines cover ‘search and rescue situations and for disembarkation’ in the context of operations on the EU’s sea borders.  They state that Member States fleets operating under FRONTEX must render assistance to persons in distress at sea, regardless of their nationality or status, or the circumstances in which that person is found…. Disembarkation procedures should be carried out in line with international law and existing bilateral agreements between Member States and third countries.”

Click here for article.

Click here for EP Press Release.

Click here, here and here for earlier posts on the new Guidelines.

2 Comments

Filed under Aegean Sea, Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Frontex, Malta, Mediterranean, News

Tagged as , , ,

by | 18 Mar 2010 · 06:30

EP Civil Liberties Committee Rejects Rule on Frontex Operations at Sea

The European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee has rejected proposed revisions to guidelines pertaining to Frontex enforcement operations at sea.  The vote was 24 votes against the proposed revisions and 11 in favour.  MEP Michael Cashman (S&D, UK), withdrew his name as rapporteur after the vote.

According to an EP press statement, “Civil Liberties Committee MEPs rejected the proposal Wednesday, on the grounds that although the guidelines are right to affirm the duty to search for and rescue migrants at sea, this duty should be enshrined in law, not mere guidelines.”

“[R]apporteur Michael Cashman … said that the measure would ‘bring a sense of certainty’ to Member States’ obligations to intercept, search and rescue.  What we do not want is last year’s situation’ where ‘two Member States didn’t want to deal’ with possible asylum requests, he said, arguing that with the proposed text, ‘the legal obligation to search and rescue will become something that Member States can no longer shirk’. The rapporteur’s opinion was backed by Council and Commission representatives.”

The EP press statement also said that “[t]he proposed act is the focus of a legal controversy. The European Commission says the act falls under its implementing powers granted by the Schengen Borders Code, whereas Civil Liberties Committee MEPs argue that it should be examined under the ordinary legislative procedure. … The European Parliament has repeatedly called for more parliamentary scrutiny over the FRONTEX external border agency’s activities, as watchdogs criticized its procedures as abusive vis-à-vis migrants. Another proposal being examined by Parliament aims to improve the training of FRONTEX agents in fundamental rights.”

The Times of Malta reported that “[d]uring the past few days MEPs were pressured by both the Commission and the Council to approve the new rules so that they could come into force before the start of the new Frontex patrols before summer. However [Maltese MEP Simon Busuttil, EPP’s coordinator for the Committee] insisted that the new rules were ‘ultra vires’ and that the Commission had overstepped its remit in their drafting.”

Click here for EP Press Statement.

Click here for article.

Click here and here for earlier posts on the proposed Guidelines.

1 Comment

Filed under European Union, Frontex, Italy, Malta, Mediterranean, News

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 16 Mar 2010 · 05:15

EP Report: “What system of burden-sharing between Member States for the reception of asylum seekers?”

At the beginning of March, a 200+ page report assessing the cost of asylum seekers on EU member states was released by the European Parliament’s Directorate General for Internal Policies, Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs.

The report is entitled: “What system of burden-sharing between Member States for the reception of asylum seekers?”

Excerpts from the Executive Summary:

“Background –  [***] Moreover, although asylum figures today are higher than in the mid 1980s, the number of asylum applications has not been steadily increasing as many assume. … There has been increased concern in tackling irregular migration among the European Member States, which has led to an increasing focus on preventing irregular migrants from reaching the EU. Consequently, joint efforts at border management, under the auspices of FRONTEX, have exposed grey areas in the international protection regime. For example, the extent of States’ responsibilities towards asylum seekers rescued or intercepted in international waters has been subject to debate. Operation Nautilus in 2008 illustrated the difficulties Member States face in agreeing on who should be responsible for asylum seekers amongst irregular migrants intercepted at sea. Member States have also been hampered by the lack of an agreed protocol to assign responsibility for any asylum seekers amongst the irregular migrants.

Some Member States, notably Malta, have protested at the uneven distribution of asylum seekers between EU Member States, and their experiences of particular pressures resulting from their geographical situation. Linked to this, European parliamentarians, NGOs, some Member States and other stakeholders have repeatedly pointed out that the Dublin system allocates responsibility for asylum seekers without attempting to share it equitably. The pressures on EU border countries have been a particularly contentious part of this discussion, but the discussion is not limited to these. In the last six years, Sweden has for example received 40% of the 100,000 Iraqis who have claimed asylum in the EU8….

Aim of the study – The current study aims to provide information and evidence to inform the ongoing debates. This is largely based on three overarching questions:

• What are the asylum related costs borne by Member States?

• Which of these costs could be shared at European level?

• How could these costs be shared? [***]

Key Findings

• Overall refugee numbers in Europe are relatively low. In 2007 Europe only hosted 14 per cent of the world’s refugees or people in refugee-like situations. In 2007 about 220,000 asylum applications were received within the EU27, only just over half the 2001-02 peak of over 420,000 asylum seekers, and about a third of the peak of 1992. This is equivalent to less than one asylum seeker per 2200 European inhabitants.

• The total size of asylum spending reported by Member States is relatively low. The total size of direct spending by each Member State has generally not been more than the equivalent of 1/14th of the international aid target of 0.7 per cent of Gross National Income. At €4,160m EU wide, these total asylum-related costs to EU Member States in 2007 are less than what UK citizens spent on pets and pet food in the same year….

• Some countries face disproportionately high asylum costs, with the share of asylum spending in relation to GDP being 1000 times higher in some Member States (e.g. Malta) than others (e.g. Portugal) in 2007. When cost of living is taken into account, the differences remain large….

• If no additional responsibility sharing measures are introduced and current proposals are not implemented, there will continue to be a highly uneven distribution of asylum costs and pressures across Europe. This study shows that there are critical differences between Member States and the costs they carry for receiving asylum seekers….

• Only physical relocation of asylum seekers will make a significant contribution to a more equitable distribution of asylum costs across Member States. If this is to avoid generating significant human costs and additional costs to the Member States, it is crucial that this is based on a voluntary relocation of the asylum seeker….”

Click here for the full report.

Click here for EP Press Service article about the Report.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aegean Sea, Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Frontex, Malta, Mediterranean, Reports

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 12 Mar 2010 · 05:26

First Meeting of EU Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security – COSI

The Standing Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security was established by the EU Council pursuant to Council decisions of 27 November 2009 (16515/09) and 5 February 2010 (5949/10) based on the guidelines established by the Treaty of Lisbon. Its stated objective is “to strengthen the co-ordination of the operational actions between EU Member States in relation to internal security.”

COSI met for the first time on 11 March in Brussels.  The Spanish EU Presidency’s web site states: “The Spanish Director General of the Police and Civil Guard, Francisco Javier Velázquez, chaired the first meeting of … COSI …which began the process of designing a joint strategy to deal with global threats. The meeting was attended by directors of police and heads of security forces in Europe, who examined joint measures for tackling terrorism, human trafficking, drug trafficking and cyber crime. …”

“In relation to drug trafficking, [COSI is] studying proposals from Member States, such as a French operational project to deal with trafficking from Africa, or the possibility of creating EU platforms in affected African countries.”

“Other tasks entrusted to COSI include co-ordinating the action of European agencies with responsibilities in areas of justice and home affairs, such as EUROPOL, EUROJUST, FRONTEX and CEPOL. It must also ensure that none of their activities overlap and that there is a real focus on their requirements.”

Click here for article posted on Spanish EU Presidency’s site.

Click here for article.

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, Frontex, News, Spain

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 08 Mar 2010 · 15:41

EU Conference on Space and Security

One of the decisions taken at last month’s meeting of the Council of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) was a decision concerning EUROSUR (the European Surveillance System)  and GMES (Global Monitoring for Environment and Security) where the Council agreed “[…] To invite the Commission to report before the end of 2010 on how the conclusions of the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) border surveillance group on common application of surveillance tools, such as satellites, could be implemented in the EU land and sea borders”.

On 10 and 11 March the Spanish EU Presidency is sponsoring a Conference on Space and Security in Madrid.  “The Conference seeks to facilitate a structured dialogue amongst all actors involved in Security-related Space matters embedded in two main programmes: GMES and SSA…. The aim is to build upon the status of discussions on these two programmes in Space Council Resolutions, in GMES Communications from the European Commission and in GMES-related Conferences of previous EU Presidencies (Graz, Munich, Lisbon, Portoroz, Lille, Prague and Stockholm).”

As noted in a Draft Input Paper posted on the Conference web site, one of the topics under discussion is a focus on the security aspects of space monitoring:  “[S]ince its inception, the security element of GMES focused on environmental applications and, to a much lesser extent, civilian security applications. Reflecting on current political dynamics, GMES stakeholders are now taking initiatives to strengthen the ‘S’ in GMES by creating synergies between civilian and military actors.”

“The 2008 EU Council Conclusions on GMES call on the Commission to foster the implementation of GMES security related services to support the related European Union policies. (Council Conclusions on Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES): “Towards a GMES programme”, 16722/08 of 2 December 2008.)  Border surveillance, maritime surveillance and support to EU External Action have been identified as priority areas for action.”

Click here for the draft EC/ESA Joint Secretariat Input Paper on Space and Security, Feb. 2010.

Click here for ESA GMES page.

Leave a comment

Filed under Colloques / Conferences, European Union, Frontex, News, Spain

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 08 Mar 2010 · 05:50

Malta’s MEP Will Try to Block EP’s Approval of Changes to Frontex Guidelines

“Nationalist MEP Simon Busuttil has told the European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee that the procedure used to draw up new [Frontex] guidelines for anti-immigration patrols are illegal and should not be approved. … The guidelines, recently approved by the EU Council despite the objections of Malta and Italy, need the EP’s consent to enter into force.

Intended to act as a new code of engagement for Frontex’s patrol missions, the regulations will place responsibility for rescued immigrants and asylum seekers on the country hosting the mission. … Frontex wants the new rules to come into force before the next anti-migration patrol mission off Malta, scheduled to start in April. However, the new position adopted by Dr Busuttil may derail the process….”

Click here for Times of Malta article.

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, Frontex, Italy, Malta, Mediterranean, News

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | 08 Mar 2010 · 05:43

Commission Staff Working Document Impact Assessment re Proposal to Amend the Frontex Regulation

Click here for full Document.

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT accompanying the Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 establishing a European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (FRONTEX)

Brussels, 24.2.2010, SEC(2010) 149

{COM(2010) 61 final}

{SEC(2010) 150}

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES AND CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES

1.1. Background and political context

1.2. Procedural issues and consultations with interested parties

2. PROBLEM DEFINITION

2.1. The legal framework

2.2. The context

2.3. What are the problems to be addressed?

2.3.1. Insufficient technical equipment put at the disposal by Member States

2.3.2. Insufficient human resources put at the disposal for joint operations by Member States; lack of uniform standards

2.3.3. Inefficient coordination and follow up of joint operations

2.3.4. Insufficient and inefficient cooperation with third countries

2.3.5. Collection, storage and processing of personal data

2.3.6. Return

2.3.7. No use of the expertise of the Agency to evaluate Member States’ performance in the area of border management

2.4. How would the problem evolve, all things being equal?

2.5. Right to act

3. OBJECTIVES

3.1. General objectives (cf Article 1 of the Regulation)

3.2. Specific objectives (cf Article 2 of the Regulation)

3.3. Operational objectives

4. POLICY OPTIONS

4.1. Assessment criteria

5. DESCRIPTION OF SUBOPTIONS AND ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS

5.1. Revising existing provisions on the use of technical equipment in joint operations, including the mechanisms for contributions from the Member States of such equipment

5.1.1. Do the suboptions address the general objectives?

5.1.2. Do the options have an impact on external countries/partners?

5.1.3. Can the involved costs be (or become) part of the FRONTEX budget and how high are they?

5.1.4. What are the possible impacts on fundamental rights?

5.1.5. Comparison of the suboptions

5.2. Mechanisms to improve the availability of border guards in joint operations

5.2.1. Do the suboptions address the general objectives?

5.2.2. Does the option have an impact on external countries/partners?

5.2.3. Can the involved costs be (or become) part of the FRONTEX budget and how high are they?

5.2.4. What are the possible impacts on fundamental rights?

5.2.5. Comparison of the suboptions

5.3. Revising the role of the Agency in preparing, coordinating and implementing operations, including with regard to the sharing of tasks between the Agency and the Member States

5.3.1. Do the suboptions address the general objectives?

5.3.2. Can the involved costs be (or become) part of the FRONTEX budget and how high are they?

5.3.3. What are the possible impacts on fundamental rights?

5.3.4. Comparison of the options

5.4. Expanding the mandate of the Agency in cooperating with third countries on border management

5.4.1. Do the suboptions address the general objectives?

5.4.2. Does the option/recommendation have an impact on external countries/partners?

5.4.3. Can the involved costs be (or become) part of the FRONTEX budget and how high are they?

5.4.4. What are the possible impacts on fundamental rights?

5.4.5. Comparison of the suboptions

5.5. Mandating the Agency to collect and process personal data

5.5.1. Do the suboptions address the general objectives?

5.5.2. Do the options have an impact on external countries/partners?

5.5.3. Can the involved costs be (or become) part of the FRONTEX budget and how high are they?

5.5.4. What are the possible impacts on fundamental rights?

5.5.5. Comparison of the options

5.6. Revising the mandate of the Agency as concerns return operations

5.6.1. Do the suboptions address the general objectives?

5.6.2. Does the option have an impact on external countries/partners?

5.6.3. Can the involved costs be (or become) part of the FRONTEX budget and how high are they?

5.6.4. What are the possible impacts on fundamental rights?

5.6.5. Comparison of the options

5.7. Mandating the Agency to evaluate Member States’ performance in the area of border management

5.7.1. Do the suboptions address the general objectives?

5.7.2. Does the option have an impact on external countries/partners?

5.7.3. Can the involved costs be (or become) part of the FRONTEX budget and how high are they?

5.7.4. What are the possible impacts on fundamental rights?

5.7.5. Comparison of the options

5.8. Subsidiarity and proportionality

6. ASSESSMENT OF THE PREFERRED POLICY OPTION

6.1. Summary of the preferred option

6.2. Overall assessment of impact of the preferred policy option

6.2.1. Subsidiarity and proportionality

6.2.2. Costs

7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Click here for full Document.

Leave a comment

Filed under Analysis, European Union, Frontex

Tagged as , , , ,

by | 07 Mar 2010 · 16:56

Apdha: Nuevo Informe “Derechos Humanos en la Frontera Sur 2009”

“La Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos de Andalucía viene realizando desde 1997 un seguimiento de la evolución de los flujos migratorios referidos a España y de las políticas desarrolladas por la Unión Europea y los sucesivos gobiernos españoles para abordarlos y en general reprimirlos y contenerlos….

Según los datos de la APDHA [Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos de Andalucía] viene, 8.728 personas han sido detenidas al llegar a las costas españolas durante el año 2009, trescientas más que las que recuenta el Ministerio del Interior. En todo caso, ello supone un descenso en las llegadas por esta vía de más del 45% con respecto a 2008, cuando las detenciones alcanzaron la cifra de 15.572 personas….

Sobre un 30% de las personas que intentan llegar a nuestro país, finalmente lo consiguen… Por tanto, las cifras de personas interceptadas sólo reflejan una parte de la realidad. … [L]as cifras aportadas por el Ministerio del Interior no se reflejan el número de personas interceptadas en las costas africanas. Estas son, cada vez más, otro de los resultados del control de los flujos migratorios que la política de externalización ha trasladado a los países africanos. Resulta difícil concluir cuántas personas son interceptadas en la aplicación de estas políticas de externalización en las costas africanas o aledaños.

La APDHA, con muchas dificultades, ha seguido informes de la operativa Frontex, de la Marina Nacional Argelina, de la Gendarmería marroquí y de su Gobierno, o de la policía costera mauritana. Pocas cifras proporciona la guardia costera de Senegal, por no referirnos a Guinea, Gambia o Cabo Verde. Pero de todo ello, desde la APDHA hemos llegado a la conclusión que no menos de 11.000 personas han sido detenidas en las costas africanas a lo largo de 2009, alcanzando así la cifra de 19.728 personas detenidas intentando llegar a España durante el 2009.

Insistimos en que todas estas cifras no son sino un reflejo de la realidad, que ponen de manifiesto dos cuestiones: un acusado descenso de los flujos migratorios que, paradójicamente, se solapan con un acusado incremento de las razones que obligan a la emigración….

La vigilancia de las costas es cada vez más férrea por parte de Mauritania, Senegal o Marruecos. Pero a ello hay que añadir el efecto de la implementación de crecientes y férreos controles en las fronteras que cercan el Sahel que tienen sin duda, a nuestro modesto entender, mayor importancia que los propios controles en las costas y aguas por parte de España y el Frontex….

En todo caso, no está de más resaltar aquí que esos procesos de externalización y creciente militarización de las fronteras africanas están provocando graves sufrimientos y violaciones de derechos en las mismas. La APDHA reivindica que el respeto a los derechos humanos, también en las fronteras, no puede obviarse por razones de control de las migraciones. Y entre ellos, sin duda, se encuentra el derecho a salir y regresar al propio país, tal como recoge el art. 13.2 de la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos….”

Click here for full Report.

Click here for article about the Report.

Leave a comment

Filed under Data / Stats, Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Frontex, Gambia, Mauritania, Mediterranean, Morocco, Reports, Senegal, Spain

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

by | 05 Mar 2010 · 04:02

Conférence-Débat: Frontex : guerre aux migrants, 24 mars, Bruxelles

La Ligue des droits de l’Homme en collaboration avec Progress Lawyers Network présentent, conférence-débat Frontex : guerre aux migrants.

“Bien qu’opérationnelle depuis 2005, Frontex, dont les compétences et capacités sont sans cesse renforcées, reste pourtant méconnue du public. L’objectif de la conférence-débat tend dès lors à mettre en lumière son existence, ses compétences et les conséquences de ses opérations en termes de violation des droits fondamentaux des migrants.  Pour aller au-delà du simple constat, différentes pistes seront abordées, tant d’un point de vue juridique que politique, afin de mettre sur pied un plan d’action contre ce dispositif des plus inquiétants.

Une conférence-débat avec Selma Benkhelifa, avocate chez Progress Lawyers Network, Hélène Flautre, parlementaire européenne et membre de la Commission LIBE, Violeta Moreno Lax, chercheuse et doctorante à l’UCL et Claire Rodier, GISTI (France) et vice-présidente de Migreurop.”

Cliquez ici pour infos.

Leave a comment

Filed under Belgium, Colloques / Conferences, Frontex

Tagged as

by | 27 Feb 2010 · 17:06

“Harraga: La menace de la prison n’a rien changé”

El Watan: “Un an après la loi du 25 février 2009 criminalisant la harga [en Algérie], ils sont nombreux à ne plus vouloir partir. Mais pas par crainte de finir en prison dans leur pays. …  Les passeurs exigent des sommes énormes ! Les prix pratiqués aujourd’hui peuvent atteindre les 400 000 DA pour l’Espagne à partir de Ghazaouet.”

“Hocine Zehouane, président de la Ligue algérienne des droits de l’homme, a publié, en 2009, un rapport accablant relatif à cette tragédie : 36 000 jeunes harraga et environ 4 000 Algériens croupiraient dans les prisons espagnoles. Sans parler des 600 corps dans les morgues d’Almeria (Espagne). … « Les Européens ont mis beaucoup d’argent dans le programme Frontex (agence dotée de moyens de détection, de surveillance de toute migration par terre, par mer et même par air) et ont financé les régimes autoritaires du Sud (Libye, Tunisie, Algérie, Maroc) pour bloquer ce type d’émigration clandestine. Je crois que si les jeunes ont furieusement envie d’émigrer, ils n’ont pas envie de mourir en mer, ils n’ont pas envie de traîner misérablement dans les centres de détention s’ils arrivent en vie, ils n’ont pas envie d’être ensuite expulsés vers leur pays. »”

“Kamel Belabed, porte-parole du collectif des familles de harraga disparus, est du même avis : « Les jeunes s’informent, lisent la presse et ont accès à Internet. Ils savent, pour la plupart, qu’il y a maintenant une ‘coopération’ avec l’Union européenne pour l’interception des barques de nos harraga. Nous savons que le programme MEDA [NF – Règlement (CE) n° 1488/96 du Conseil du 23 juillet 1996] décidé, semble-t-il, pour ‘un partenariat euromediterranéen afin de garantir la paix, la stabilité et la prospérité’ du bassin, cachait mal une finalité qui ne disait pas son nom : l’externalisation des frontières de l’Europe ! Le programme MEDA a porté le montant de l’aide à l’Algérie à 10 millions d’euros. Le principal bénéficiaire de cette aide a été la police algérienne des frontières… Ceci en 2005.”

“L’Union européenne est devenue une des sources des projets de loi au Maghreb jusqu’en Egypte. C’est sous sa houlette que la loi 09-01 a été adoptée comme ont été adoptées les mêmes lois dans chacun des pays sud-méditerranéens. »

“[D]’autres réfléchissent à de nouvelles pistes pour atteindre l’eldorado. A leurs yeux, moins coûteuses et moins risquées. Comme la Turquie, plus précisément Izmir, la luxueuse station balnéaire. « Pour moins de 150 000 DA, vous êtes en Italie ! confie Mourad, … refoulé d’Italie y a quelques mois. Le procédé est simple : on prend l’avion pour la Turquie, ensuite le train ou un ferry pour Izmir, où des passeurs nous attendent. Le coût de la traversée entre la Turquie et la Grèce est de 500 euros environ. Pour atteindre l’Italie, avec l’aide du même baron de l’immigration clandestine, vous devez payer 1000 euros environ. »”

Cliquez ici pour l’article complet.

Leave a comment

Filed under Algeria, European Union, Frontex, Italy, Mediterranean, News, Spain, Turkey

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | 26 Feb 2010 · 04:31

JHA Council Conclusions on 29 measures for Reinforcing External Borders and Combating Illegal Immigration

Here are excerpts from the Justice and Home Affairs Council conclusions adopted on 25 February 2010:

“Council conclusions on 29 measures for reinforcing the protection of the external borders and combating illegal immigration

2998th JUSTICE and HOME AFFAIRS Council meeting – Brussels, 25 and 26 February 2010

The Council adopted the following conclusions:

The Council:

a) Taking into account the momentum created for the further development of the area of freedom, security and justice represented by the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and by the political priorities included in the Stockholm Programme, the European Pact on Immigration and Asylum, the Global Approach to Migration and the European Council Conclusions of June and October 2009; [***]

d) Stressing the need to share and assess analysis of the continuing illegal arrivals of migrants at the southern maritime borders, as well as the eastern land borders, as shown in particular by recent events in the Mediterranean area, and of the smuggling of migrants and trafficking in human beings, which often have tragic consequences; and to take a series of measures immediately, in the short term and medium term, in order to address the challenges;

e) Underlining that all measures and actions taken as a consequence of these conclusions shall fully respect human rights, the protection of persons in need of international protection and the principle of non-refoulement; [***]

Concerning the activities of FRONTEX, the Council has agreed:

1. To seek agreement as a matter of urgency on the Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending the FRONTEX Regulation, in order to reinforce the capabilities of the FRONTEX Agency. [***]

4. To improve operational cooperation with third countries of origin and transit, in order to improve joint patrolling on land and at sea, upon consent of the Member State concerned, return, and collection and exchange of relevant information within the applicable legal framework, and other effective preventive measures in the field of border management and illegal immigration.

5. To underline the importance of the role of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) in developing methods to better identify those who are in need of international protection in mixed flows and in cooperating with FRONTEX where ever possible, and to welcome the development of the regional protection programs and the enhancement of the dialogue and cooperation on international protection with third countries. [***]

9. To invite FRONTEX to implement its decision to carry out a pilot project for the creation of an operational office in the eastern Mediterranean, in Piraeus, as soon as possible in 2010. The Council takes note that Frontex has agreed that, on the basis of an independent external evaluation, it may decide whether to pursue the pilot project and/or establish other Frontex operational offices as appropriate, and invites FRONTEX to report to Council on the matter.

Concerning the development of the European Surveillance System – EUROSUR, the Council has agreed:

10. To call on the Member States to implement the phases and steps laid down for the development of EUROSUR as soon as possible, in order to reinforce cooperation and Member States’ border surveillance capabilities. The Council invites the European Commission to report on EUROSUR progress on mid-2010.

11. To urge relevant Member States to establish or further develop a single national border surveillance system and a single national Coordination Centre. A network of national Coordination Centres, compatible with the FRONTEX Information System, and available on a 24/7 basis in real time, should be fully operational on a pilot basis as of 2011, involving as many Member States of the southern and eastern external borders as possible. The Commission is invited to present legislative proposals if necessary to consolidate the network of Member States by 2013.

12. To create a Common pre-frontier intelligence picture in order to provide the Coordination Centres with pre-frontier information provided by Member States, Frontex and third countries. To this end, the Council invites Frontex, in close cooperation with the Commission and the Member States to take the necessary measures to implement the study carried out by the Commission in 2009.

13. To encourage cooperation by neighbouring third countries in border surveillance. It is essential that within the territorial scope of EUROSUR and in the current financial framework, financial and logistic support from the European Union and its Member States be made available to the third countries whose cooperation could significantly contribute to controlling illegal immigration flows, in order to improve their capacity to manage their own borders.

14. To invite the Commission to report before the end of 2010 on how the conclusions of the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) border surveillance group on common application of surveillance tools, such as satellites, could be implemented in the EU land and sea borders. [***]

Concerning solidarity and the integrated management of external borders by the Member States, the Council has agreed:

17. To request Frontex and the Member States concerned to further develop the European Patrols Network (EPN) in order to generalize bilateral joint maritime patrols, in particular between neighbouring Member States at the southern and eastern maritime borders, taking into account the experience gained on joint police patrols in the context of the Prüm Decision, and to ensure the full integration of the EPN in the EUROSUR network. [***]

Concerning the cooperation with third countries, the Council has agreed:

22. To ensure that the migration policy objectives are at the centre of the political dialogue with relevant third countries of origin and transit, with a view to the strategic, evidence based and systematic implementation of the Global Approach to Migration in all its dimensions, i.e. legal migration, illegal immigration and migration and development. This also requires, as a matter of principle, that all parties concerned assume their responsibilities in terms of return and readmission of migrants entering or staying illegally, including those migrants who have entered or tried to enter the European Union illegally from their territory. [***]

24. To enhance in particular the implementation of the Global Approach in the dialogue on migration with the main countries of origin and transit, such as, in accordance with the Stockholm Programme, those of the Mediterranean area, the East and South-Eastern Europe and Africa. This process may cover, on a case by case basis, all aspects of migration, including also cooperation on and support of border management, return and readmission, and, where appropriate, mobility issues. In doing so, the EU will promote human rights and the full respect for relevant international obligations. Dialogue and cooperation should be further developed also with other countries and regions such as those in Asia and Latin America on the basis of the identification of common interests and challenges.

25. To implement actively the European Council Conclusions of June and October 2009, including in particular by taking forward the dialogue on migration with Libya, with a view to setting up in the short term an effective cooperation. The Commission is invited to explore, as a matter of urgency, a cooperation agenda between the European Union and Libya with a view to including initiatives on maritime cooperation, border management (including possibilities for the development of an integrated surveillance system), international protection, effective return and readmission of irregular migrants and issues of mobility of persons.

26. To welcome the constructive resumption of the formal negotiations on a EU/Turkey readmission agreement, which makes provision for the return of third country nationals, and to call for its conclusion as a matter of urgency, and to stress that adequate implementation of already existing bilateral readmission agreements remains a priority. Building on the dialogue now under way with Turkey, the Council invites the Commission, the Member States and Turkey to further develop cooperation on migration, international protection and mobility issues. The Commission is also invited, in the context of the existing Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) financial framework, to explore possibilities to provide adequate financial means to improve Turkish capacity to tackle illegal migration, including support to the implementation of the Turkish integrated border management system.

27. To underline the importance of swift finalisation of the negotiation of Article 13 of the Cotonou Agreement, the revision of which should seek to reinforce the three dimensions of the Global Approach, and in particular the effectiveness of readmission obligations.

28. To invite the Commission to identify the necessary means to support enhanced capacity building and infrastructures in relevant third countries, so that they can control efficiently their external borders and tackle illegal immigration, taking also into account the assessments made by FRONTEX.

29. To invite the Commission to report on the implementation of these Conclusions by the end of 2010.”

Click here for full Document.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aegean Sea, Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Frontex, Libya, Mediterranean, News, Turkey

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | 25 Feb 2010 · 05:37

NGOs Urge EU to Respect Refugee Rights

ECRE, CEAR, and Amnesty International have released a joint statement urging EU governments to respect refugee rights as efforts are made to strengthen Frontex.

“Bjarte Vandvik, ECRE Secretary General said: ‘States have a legitimate right to control their borders, but this is not an excuse to ignore the fact that persons fleeing war or persecution are entitled to protection under international, European and national laws. As Frontex is being strengthened, its operations need to be monitored to ensure that human rights are respected’.”

“Regardless of where border controls take place and of who implements them, methods to prevent unauthorized entry must leave room for the identification of persons in need of international protection so they are not returned to any country where they will face persecution. Member States’ obligations under international and European refugee and human rights law do not stop at the physical boundaries of the EU. This responsibility is not only moral and political but also legal. EU Member States cannot abdicate their principles, values and commitments by doing outside their borders what would not be permissible in their territories.”

Click here for full statement.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aegean Sea, Eastern Atlantic, European Union, Frontex, Mediterranean, Statements

Tagged as , , , , ,