![]() Internal controls without actual powerĬonversely, the input of mechanisms such as the Consultative Forum and the Fundamental Rights Office has been ignored when inconvenient for the preferred course of action by Frontex. Yet, this flawed system was used as evidence to claims by Frontex and EU actors to dismiss or deny concerns of violations and violence at European borders. We know now there was a culture of discouraging the submission of SIRs. When submitted they were sometimes misclassified in categories other than human rights violations. Yet, within Frontex, it was known for years that very few Incident Reports (SIRs) on human rights violations were submitted by Frontex officers. In 2020, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen responded to a letter by MEPs raising concerns about shootings and deaths at the Greek- Turkish borders by citing the absence of any Serious Incident Reports. Greece or Hungary) have cited the absence of reported violations by Frontex to deny illegal practices at their borders. In 2017, Executive Director Fabrice Leggeri rejected the recommendations of the Consultative Forum and the Fundamental Rights Officer, citing that there were only three serious incident reports concerning human right violations. Rather than preventing violence – assuming this is possible since the institution of the border is inherently violent and racist – they have been used to exonerate Frontex from any wrongdoing and to legitimatize the violence and violations perpetrated by the EU and its member states.Ī first example of how this happens is that the information produced by mechanisms such as the Serious Incident Reporting system has been used to underplay violence and violations of human rights. Rather than documenting violations and violence at the borders of the European Union, it conceals them. The effectiveness of the Frontex human rights record and accountability regime has always been questioned (e.g.: report by Human Rights Watch, investigative report by Correctiv, study by Migreurop), but in the course of the investigations into Frontex that have taken place in the last year, it has become clearer than ever that the accountability regime acts as a fig leaf. In addition to these internal administrative mechanisms Frontex is accountable to other institutions, such as the European Parliament, the Council and courts. The collective function of the six accountability mechanisms is to monitor and report fundamental rights violations in the context of Frontex’s operations and strengthen compliance with fundamental rights obligations. and since 2019 the Fundamental Rights Monitors (FRMs). ![]() since 2016 the Individual Complaints mechanism.since 2011 the Serious Incident Reporting system.Since 2011, Frontex has established several accountability mechanisms to address the widespread concerns about the Agency’s human rights record.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |