Category: Miscellaneous

I have summarized a lot of important information and contact persons for refugees and helpers and sorted them by federal states below.

In the course of a program of taz Panter Foundation I invited 16 journalists from 15 African countries to Brussels for two days of programming to explore the city, ask questions about the EU, visit the European Parliament, and network with various NGOs. As part of the Foundation's program, the journalists also produced a magazine, which you can download at here and download them.

At the request of the participants, corruption and the fight against corruption in the EU was a central theme, and so the program also began with Transparency International presented her work. This was followed by a lively discussion on corruption in Nigeria, Kenya, Cameroon, South Africa, Somalia, Rwanda and Senegal, in which the participants contributed their different perspectives and expertise. The participants exchanged views on specific problems in the different countries and what difficulties exist both at the level of legislation and enforcement of rules.

How to make development cooperation closer to civil society?

This was followed by Act Alliance and DSW representing the umbrella organization CONCORD a discussion on development cooperation and relations between the EU and the African Union (AU). Another topic was the negative effects of the externalization of European migration and isolation policies in Africa. 

Appropriately, the participants then exchanged their views with ECRE about European migration and asylum policy and the reality at the European external borders, including the numerous pushbacks in various EU member states. Another topic was the plans to deploy Frontex also in African countries like the Senegal to use. It was also about the so-called "Partnership for Migration and Economic Development" between Rwanda and Great Britain, which by relocating asylum seekers from Great Britain to Rwanda goes a considerable step further than previous agreements to outsource European asylum and migration issues to the African continent. For me, the agreement between Great Britain and Rwanda is unacceptable because it de facto undermines the individual right to asylum. 

Exchange about my work as a member of parliament

On Tuesday, I gave the group a brief introduction to my work in the European Parliament's Development and Home Affairs Committee. Here we talked again about the linking of funds for development cooperation and migration prevention, but especially the situation in the Mediterranean. Here we also talked about the cooperation of Frontex with the Libyan coast guard.

Our exchange was again about the fact that the EU, despite a very manageable number of refugees and migrants from the African continent, pursues a very restrictive policy, which unfortunately does not focus on the protection of human rights. This also leads to the fact that an enormous amount of money in the EU is only used for the isolation policy and repatriation, which could be used much more sensibly for the support of refugees in Europe.

Brain Drain 

Another topic was the immense brain drain from Africa to Europe. I was particularly interested in the solutions proposed by the workshop participants and the measures already in place in some African countries to prevent brain drain. 

My colleague Daniel Freund also gave another presentation in which he talked about his work on fighting corruption in the EU and in the subsequent conversation experiences from Africa and Europe were compared, whereby it became clear that the underlying logics of corruption are very similar culturally independent.

Thanks to the experiences and reports of the journalists from 15 African countries, I learned many new perspectives and was able to talk concretely with people who live on the ground about the effects of European asylum and migration policies. It was a very exciting meeting and I hope to stay in contact with some of the journalists in the future.

India, South Africa, the USA and the EU have agreed on a compromise proposal for the TRIPS waiver. In this article, you can find out exactly what the TRIPS agreement is and what the position of the Green Group in the European Parliament is. 

The TRIPS Agreement (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) was adopted in 1994 as part of the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade). The TRIPs Agreement was created at that time to ensure the design of intellectual property rights and their enforceability in the member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The goal of the agreement is to protect intellectual property without placing barriers on legitimate trade. However, the agreement does not create a uniform international substantive law, but is based on the principle of territoriality, which means that the TRIPS Agreement only creates a minimum standard of protection with regard to the granting and enforcement of intellectual property rights, to which the member states must adhere and which also applies in each case only in the member state itself. In addition, the rules from the TRIPS Agreement must be implemented in national laws in order to apply at all.

Pandemic and the vaccine kept under lock and key

A vaccine falls under the scope of the TRIPS Agreement or the national law of the member states because it is intellectual property and a patent has been issued. However, this also ensures that certain medicines are kept under lock and key and are accessible to fewer people. For this reason, India and South Africa joined forces back in October 2020 to call for a waiver. In the meantime, more than 100 countries have joined, and the European Parliament also supported this demand with a resolution adopted last summer. Resolution. The aim is to obtain an exemption in the TRIPS Agreement for the Covid 19 vaccine and other medical products and technologies for pandemic control. At present, the situation is such that worldwide only 10 states 75% of the vaccine produced. have kept for themselves. 17 months after the proposal for a waiver, in March 2022, the EU, USA, India and South Africa (the "Quad") agreed on a possible compromise, which has now also been published. The preliminary text of the law in its current form, however, does not even come close to the waiver originally proposed.

Our criticism and position

We Greens in the European Parliament welcome in principle that progress has been made in drafting a waiver, but we still have considerable points to criticize about the text. It is too narrow, has significant limitations and will probably ultimately provide less legal certainty due to ambiguous interpretations. In addition, we fear that the text as currently drafted will set a negative precedent for future global health crises.

Our main criticisms of the current version:

1. the text makes the interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement time-bound, applicable only to Covid-19 vaccines, and applicable only to certain WTO member states that classify themselves as "developing" countries

2. therapeutics and diagnostics are not affected by the patent suspension

3. the problematic eligibility criteria and the total disregard of the situation of importing countries may exclude many low- and middle-income countries from the production, supply, export and import of vaccines and legitimize division and exclusion, limiting access for all people

4. existing TRIPS flexibilities may be undermined and restricted, and additional previously non-existent "TRIPS+" requirements may also be introduced

Recent developments

On May 10, at the last General Council Meeting WTO members agreed that the preliminary legislative text, which emerged from the informal process with the "Quad" (U.S., EU, India and South Africa), opens the prospect of negotiations on a response on intellectual property and COVID-19 vaccines. Members welcomed the proposal as a positive development. However, for reasons mentioned above, we as the Green Group in the EU Parliament are skeptical about the developments. In addition, we fear renewed difficulties and material for negotiations if new variants of Covid-19 emerge. It is unclear what the further steps within the WTO will be, but the final text usually has to be adopted by the WTO Council by consensus (but at least ¾ majority) before it can enter into force. In this context, as Green MEPs, we call for the EU to support the granting of a temporary waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for COVID-19 to improve timely global access to affordable COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics by addressing global production constraints and supply shortages.

We want to bring together those who have to flee from Putin's terror with people, organizations and initiatives in solidarity. At the Homepage of LeaveNoOneBehind you can register and learn what you can do. 

There are many ways, depending on how you want to help and what your capacities are: You can donate, you can volunteer, your environment inform or register your charity directly on the homepage. 

We don't know how long the war in Ukraine will last, but we do know that it is already causing unimaginable suffering. LeaveNoOneBehind will of course keep you informed on the Running about what to do with the donations happens. 

In the coming weeks, thousands of refugees will reach Germany and other European countries, and Ukraine will also need a lot of humanitarian aid. There are many ways to get actively involved: When arriving, with translations, visits to authorities, sponsorships or offering rooms and apartments. In order to give you an overview of the different possibilities, you can present yourselves and your offers of help at the Homepage enter

We also want to support organizations and initiatives that are involved in the Ukraine crisis and connect them with people who show solidarity. If you know an organization or are part of one that offers help and support to the people in Ukraine, please register it at the Homepage.

At the end of February, I was in Lebanon as head of a delegation of five members of the Development Committee to get an overview of the situation on the ground. The socio-economic crisis in Lebanon has come to a head – many people do not have sufficient access to medical care, electricity and water. Children have stopped going to school for months in order to be able to financially support their parents through work. 74 % of people are affected by poverty, although Lebanon is not a poor country. Of the 1.5 million Syrian refugees the small country has taken in, 90 % live in poverty. The population in Lebanon must be better supported in this crisis, sustainable solutions are needed. 

But the situation of refugees from the Syrian civil war is also on the agenda. The vast majority of refugees are not in Europe. These people deserve that we do not only think about their fate when they have to flee further to Europe out of need and desperation. The goal of the Development Committee's trip is to speak with Syrian refugees and get a picture of their current situation. In addition, ways to find a way out of the socio-economic crisis will be discussed and what contribution the EU should make to this.

The committees of the European Parliament organize regular trips ("missions") within and outside the EU to learn about a specific topic or to attend, for example, an international conference. Suspended for a long time by the pandemic, there are now finally more opportunities again to take part in this important level of parliamentary work.

Buffeted by the economic crisis

Lebanon has been hit by a profound economic crisis, which can be illustrated by the currency collapse, among other things. Within a very short time, 1,500 Lebanese pounds to one dollar were devalued to 20,000 Lebanese pounds to one dollar. This led to a huge loss of purchasing power for the population and significant problems for the state in providing basic services. Electricity supply, which the government can provide for only one hour per day (the rest depends on individual diesel generators), is particularly problematic because it affects all sectors of society.

Healthcare and education particularly affected

Health and education are two of the sectors most affected by the crisis. Many people have to switch from private to public services due to the crisis, and at the same time there is no capacity for this increased demand: no electricity, lack of medicines and equipment, demotivated staff due to salary cuts. For example, the salary of a nurse has dropped from $600 to $40, while the cost of basic needs has increased tenfold. Emigration is increasingly seen as the only solution for young professionals.

Meetings with various aid organizations and other stakeholders

We met with a wide range of actors, starting with the EU and member states, who are supporting the Lebanese people and Syrian refugees in the country. We also met with organizations that are implementing this assistance, both UN agencies and civil society organizations. Their message was concerning: the crisis in Syria is ongoing, and Lebanon is facing its own severe crisis. There is a clear need for continued support, but also for harmonization and coordination of the many relief efforts that have been undertaken as the situation deteriorates. A multi-sectoral needs assessment is currently underway to provide as complete and up-to-date a picture as possible of existing needs. It should be completed soon and its results should lead to better coordinated actions.

Visiting projects for Syrian refugees

The delegation also visited concrete projects that provide this much-needed assistance to Syrian refugees and needy Lebanese. We traveled to Marj, Zahle and Ghazze in the Bekaa Valley, a region where a large number of Syrian refugees live. There, we visited EU-funded projects (from both ECHO and the Madad Trust Fund) implemented by local and international NGOs. These included a social development center where the NGO Medair provides health services to Syrian and Lebanese people. We also visited projects where the Danish Refugee Council and local partners provide various services and support to Syrian refugees (informal tent settlement, legal counseling) and locals, who can, for example, participate in a project to create employment opportunities for Syrians:and Lebanese:people. We also visited a center for non-formal education, where the NGO AVSI and a local NGO support the needs of Syrian children.

Meeting with Lebanese interlocutors

We also met with the Ministers of Health, Education and Social Affairs, as well as members of the National Assembly, the Governor and municipal authorities in the Bekaa Valley. In our meetings with Lebanese interlocutors and international actors, we reiterated our appreciation for the solidarity of the Lebanese people, who have been hosting some 1.5 million refugees from Syria for over a decade, representing a quarter of Lebanon's population. This has put an enormous strain on the country's infrastructure and resources. We have underscored the EU's commitment to continue supporting Syrians and Lebanese host communities, but this is not enough; the need for sustainable solutions is clear.

Far-reaching reforms are necessary

These can only be found for the displaced Syrians:inside when the situation allows for a safe and voluntary return to Syria – a condition that remains unfulfilled. For the Lebanese people, the solution to the current crisis does not require humanitarian aid, but profound reforms that can promote sustainable development in the country. The EU stands ready to accompany and support these, but the first step must come from the Lebanese leadership, which is committed to agreeing with the international community on a comprehensive reform package and implementing it.

May elections

It was not the focus of our trip – as a special election observation mission will be sent - but during our exchanges it became clear that the upcoming parliamentary (in May) and presidential (in October) elections require such a commitment to reform to alleviate the needs of a population that has shown solidarity with its neighbors and is suffering greatly from the current crisis.

You can also read my debriefing on the trip here listen (from 14:49:00), there will also be an official parliamentary report.

Status: turn of the year 2021/22

At the moment there are officially 3.544 asylum seekers on the Greek islands Lesbos, Chios, Samos, Kos and Leros. Here you get an overview of the current situation on the islands. All figures are taken from the official statistics of the Greek Ministry of Migration, which you can download here. can view here. Under „National Situation: Migrant and Refugee Issue“ you will find the daily updated figures. 

Declining numbers on the islands

Many people have been brought to the mainland in the past six months. Most of them are recognized refugees, but then often end up in precarious living conditions or homelessness. WDR captured the situation from the perspective of the affected children back in May. 

Another reason for the steadily declining numbers is the acceleration of asylum procedures on the islands, which is accompanied by a high degree of legal uncertainty. First, the Greek government declared Turkey a safe third country. Not because Turkey is a safe third country, but because most protection seekers enter via Turkey. Thus, there is no longer any substantive examination of applications from people from Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Somalia. 

At the same time, NGOs report glaring deficiencies in the asylum interviews: untrained staff, poor translation, hardly any follow-up questions. In the end, a lot of negative decisions are made in a short time. While in the last years the situation on Lesbos was always explained with a huge backlog, and people sometimes had to wait two years for their first interview with the authorities, today it is common that the second (final) decision is made after 6-8 weeks. If possible, people then come to so-called "Pre-Removal Detention Centers", in German Deportation Prisonswhere conditions are disastrous. Most of them don't even know when they will be deported, since deportation flights are mostly suspended due to the pandemic. 

Pushbacks between Greece and Turkey

Another reason for the decreasing numbers is the decreasing arrivals on the Greek islands. This is due to the pushbacks that are carried out at sea and on land by the Greek police. 

The Turkish Ministry of the Interior, whose command also includes the sea rescue in the Aegean Sea, has meanwhile set up its own website (Pushback Incidents), on which the cases are recorded in detail and partly with videos and photos. Never before such a number of unmaneuverable boats or life rafts have been recorded in the Aegean. It is clear here that people do not set off in boats without engines, nor in life rafts on the Turkish side. The NGO Aegan Boat Report, has here in the archive detailed the pushbacks totaled and archived. Behind each number is a person who was deprived of their right to apply for asylum – and put in a life-threatening situation at sea. 

MPCRIS open

A key development of European migration policy in Greece is the opening of the Multi-Purpose Reception and Identification Centers (MPRICS), built on the Aegean Islands with EU funding. The idea behind this is that those seeking protection, sealed off from cities and unseen by the general public, can behind walls and barbed wire be housed. To get in, you have to give a chip card and also fingerprints, at night people are locked in there. The press only gets in in exceptional cases.  On Samos and Kos, these camps have now been opened; on the other islands, some of the planning has stalled and is expected to be completed next year. Another point I have in a letter with my group colleague Alexandra Geese themed in November: The camps are fully equipped with video surveillance. In some cases, employees of the Ministry in Athens can look into the private rooms of those seeking protection with cameras. This was also paid for with money from the EU Corona reconstruction funds, although the money is not earmarked for this at all. 

The new camp on Lesvos is not yet completed, which means that the people in the temporary camp Mavrovouni, contrary to all promises, still have to spend a winter. Although some containers have been put up in the meantime and not all people live in tents anymore. But quite a few still do. The situation on Lesvos is described in the monthly "Lesvos Bulletin" by Oxfam and the Greek Refugee Council, which also explains why detention for those seeking protection is now a very common practice in Greece. 

Criminalization 

The criminalization of aid and restriction of press freedom on the islands is frightening. There have been and still are several cases against aid workers and NGOs, against whom absurd accusations are made. In November, on Lesbos, a Proceedings opened against 24 activistsThey are accused of bringing people seeking protection into the country illegally. They simply rescued people from distress at sea. The central piece of evidence is said to be the passing on of information about active sea rescue cases via messenger services such as WhatsApp. Help was coordinated here in a group set up by the UNHCR for this purpose, in which the accused persons were members. The Guardian broke the story here. 

There are also massive restrictions on the press in Greece. There are repeated arrests on the Greek islands. A few weeks ago, photojournalist Tim Lüddemann was arrested while photographing a camp from the outside and interrogated for several hours. Afterwards, Stavros Maliuchidis made public that his phone was demonstrably tapped by the secret services. Stavros is a member of the Journalists' Collective "We Are Solomonthat researches in Greece mainly on migration and asylum. 

„I work at the [name redacted] border patrol station and have been in border patrol for a long time. Some of us no longer have the will or the strength to watch what is being done to these people. We send them back to Bosnia and Herzegovina every day, without papers, without processing, no matter who it is, women, children, it doesn't matter. There is no asylum, it does not exist – except in exceptional situations, when journalists are there.“

A Croatian border guard

Our Green Group in the European Parliament has produced a study on the education and training programmes of border guards. The study examined the programmes in Italy, Greece, Hungary and Croatia, as well as those of Frontex and CEPOL (European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training). The author of the study is the social psychologist Helena Bakic. The aim of the study was to find out whether the trainings provide sufficient knowledge about human rights and their relevance for the work at the borders and how the trainings can be improved.

Unfortunately, massive human rights violations regularly occur at the EU's external borders: there is no end to the reports of pushbacks and repatriations of people to places where they are threatened with torture, violence and death. This is contrary to international law. But do all border officials even know which orders they are allowed to carry out and when human rights are being violated?

In order for human rights to be respected at the borders, border police officers must be familiar with the law and their particular responsibilities. They are in daily contact with people in need of protection and are often the first contact of protection seekers with the EU at all. Knowledge of their own work and its legal basis is a prerequisite for the performance of their duties. Officers must know whether orders or their actions are unlawful. In order to protect people from violence, clear tasks and a sound knowledge of human rights are needed. This is especially true in the field of asylum and migration, which is directly related to human rights. 

Are we teaching them right? Results of the study

Short training periods for border guards of six months or less make it difficult to provide adequate training. Some countries also recruit volunteers without special qualifications. Others use riot police at the border. Nor is any knowledge of human rights required of trainees. 

The subject is often taught in a dry and theoretical way. But pedagogy is important for a good education. Content must be taught in such a way that it can be implemented and applied. Six months of weapons training with minimal training on the legal framework within which this work operates is not enough. 

Human rights are only marginally addressed in the educational programmes of border guards: The proportion varies between 0.4 and 2.5 % of the total training. In some Member States, human rights are not part of the training at all. Although there have been over 50,000 pushbacks and numerous reports of inhumane treatment of protection seekers, human rights violations such as mass deportations at the external borders have hardly been a topic in the trainings so far. Racism and diversity as well as communication at the borders are hardly or not at all addressed. 

NGOs are involved only sporadically or not at all. Yet they could also contribute to an effective and human rights-oriented migration policy at the borders. They have important knowledge and could contribute new approaches.

Despite this bitter record, many training programmes have improved in recent years. The Common Core Curriculum (CCC) for border and coast guard training in the EU was developed by Frontex in 2003 and last revised in 2017. It sets minimum standards for the training of border guards. In addition, there are good guidelines and manuals for their training, such as the UN Manual of 1997 and the UNHCR's Protection Training Manual for European Border Guards. The latter was developed in particular with a view to protecting the rights of persons seeking protection in the context of mixed migratory movements. In addition, a comprehensive fundamental rights-based police training has been drafted. 

Unfortunately, these programmes are hardly used and only a small percentage of border guards participate in them. The annual CEPOL course for law enforcement officers on police ethics and diversity management, for example, aims to improve respect for fundamental rights in law enforcement work. Two [!] border guards have taken part in this course in the last four years.

What next?

Existing programmes need to be evaluated and revised. EU Member States, Frontex and CEPOL should give human rights a greater place in their training programmes. Emphasis should be placed on anti-discrimination, proportionality of measures and protection of fundamental rights. Training should be provided by experts. 

Teaching methods should also be revised and the expertise and perspectives of NGOs should be included in the training. Improving human rights education in training protects officers from committing crimes in legal grey areas and becoming targets of prosecution themselves. 

The importance of this is demonstrated by the study's numerous reports of human rights violations by border officials. The suspicion is that these are taking place systematically. The fact that Frontex does not hire human rights experts, although the agency is obliged to do so, illustrates the importance attributed to this. Frontex is the largest agency in the EU and is constantly being expanded. In a Union that sees itself as a democratic community and that claims to defend human rights, it must be ensured that this also happens in practice. 

Outlook

Close analysis of the various programmes of the Member States and agencies offers specific opportunities for improvement, adapted to each situation and based on the CCC. As border policy is increasingly coordinated at European level, we need to examine it more closely in Parliament. The debate on border policy and respect for human rights must be stepped up in order to prevent and stop further pushback scandals and further illegal behaviour at the borders.

Excursion to Germany: Racism remains a structural problem

It is not only among border police officers that there is a lack of awareness about discrimination and non-discriminatory practice. Many police students report a dominant right-wing and authoritarian culture within the training structures. There are numerous "individual cases" of fascist chat groups within the German police, countless cases of racial profiling, right-wing terrorist networks in German security agencies, unresolved Deaths in German cells and more. The Minister of the Interior refuses to conduct a study on racism in the police. Because he is afraid of the result and because he knows that racism is a structural problem is. 

Rafael Behr, professor of police science at the Academy of Police in Hamburg, argues for more political education in the police and a more attentive environment. Also police researcher Hans-Gert Jaschke Calls for an open culture with more training opportunities within the police. 

Poor training cannot be compensated for by extended monitoring. Monitoring is important in order to learn about violations of fundamental rights. However, the first step is to ensure that there are no violations of fundamental rights. Therefore, one should start with education. Acting against prejudice helps to deal with it actively, especially within the education and training programmes. 

You can read the whole study here on German and English read about it. The summary and the most important chapters of the study are also available on French available.

Further links can be found here:

• Talking about structural racism in the police Aiko Kempen with Net Policy. 
• Heike Kleffner and Matthias Meissner write about right-wing radicals in German security agencies. 
• Right country documents right-wing violence in Germany in an interactive map.
• Death in Custody documents cases in which people died in German police custody. 

With the so-called "Emergency Trust Fund for Africa" the EU created an instrument in 2015 to "address the root causes of instability, displacement and irregular migration and to contribute to better migration management". This fund, which is outside the EU budget and therefore hardly subject to parliamentary control, has been repeatedly criticised by the European Parliament – also because of the use of funds to finance the Libyan coast guard.

EU-funded road construction uses forced labourers

The New York Times reported in a Article from January 2020how 20 million euros from the fund for a forced labor related Road construction project in Eritrea were spent. Although the funds were used exclusively for the procurement of materials and equipment for the reconstruction of roads, the Eritrean government conscripted workers through national service for the construction work related to the project. Compulsory, indefinite national service (military service), to which all Eritreans can be conscripted, can be classified as forced labour or a modern form of slavery. Immediately after the article was published, I posted a written question to the Commission for comment on the fact that EU funding indirectly finances forced labour.

Evasion by the Commission

As is often the case, the Reply very evasive. On the one hand, reference was made to strict monitoring and evaluation procedures, and it was stated that the EU Delegation and UNOPS (United Nations Office for Project Services, which was in charge of implementation) made regular visits to the site to "verify the materials supplied, obtain information from the contractor on the implementation of the project and discuss similar relevant issues". At the same time, responsibility was shifted away, with the statement that the EU-funded project was only paying for the procurement and supply of materials and equipment; but the EU was not paying for labour – which, ironically, is exactly the problem.

Reallocation of funds earmarked for other projects

I also continued to draw attention to the issue at various committee meetings, while Commission representatives provided excuses. For this reason, we Green MEPs from the Committee on Development also proposed a committee trip to Eritrea, partly in order to see the situation for ourselves on the ground. Unfortunately, the trip was cancelled because of the corona pandemic. I was all the more surprised when the Commissioner for International Partnerships, Jutta Urpilainen, informed the committee in April of this year that the money earmarked for the second tranche of the project, as well as all the other funds earmarked for Eritrea, were to be reallocated to other priorities in the Horn of Africa. This was officially justified by the Eritrean Government's lack of interest in the funding projects.

Lack of information rights of the European Parliament

The decision was taken in the May 2021 confirmed by the operational committee. Since the European Parliament does not have a seat on the committee and is not informed of its decisions, a fact which we MEPs have also recently reiterated in the Implementation Report on the Trust Funds and the Turkey Facility have criticized – I could bring this confirmation only some months later in experience. However, I expressly welcome the development.

In order to deter, Greece sentences those seeking protection to long prison terms – covered by the Commission, which refuses to intervene and does not declare itself competent. For example, Hanad Abdi Mohammad was sentenced to a total of 142 years' imprisonment for taking the wheel of a boat and saved 31 people in the process. With other Members, I have asked whether the EU Commission will ensure that Greece complies with international law and will intervene here. This question was not answered by the Commission, white means that the Commission does not intend to do anything.

My complete question on the situation in Greece and the Commission's reply can be found here. here:

My request

Subject: Criminalisation of migrants in Greece

On June 25, 2021, the New York Times published an article titled "He Saved 31 People at Sea. Then Got a 142-Year Prison Sentence." It describes how Hanad Abdi Mohammad took the helm of a boat carrying 33 people who were trying to get to Greece from Turkey and made it to safety. He was then sentenced to 142 years imprisonment for people smuggling, of which he has to serve 20 years, the maximum sentence allowed under the Greek penal code.

The newspaper article points out that asylum seekers who take the wheel after smugglers have left a boat are increasingly being found guilty and sentenced by a court for the purpose of deterrence and intimidation. The non-governmental organisation Border Monitoring has identified at least 48 cases of this kind in Chios and Lesvos alone. Add to this the criminalisation of irregular entry in 2020, when dozens of migrants were sentenced to prison terms at the Greek-Turkish land border instead of being taken to reception centres to establish their identity. Guilty verdicts against refugees as smugglers violate EU asylum rules, according to which refugees are granted the right to apply for asylum.

How will the Commission ensure that Greece complies with EU and international law in such cases?

Answer given by Ylva Johansson on behalf of the European Commission on 18.10.2021:

The facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence is covered by the Smuggling Directive.[1]. Under the Treaties, it is the national authorities, not the Commission, that are responsible for investigating and prosecuting cases of people smuggling.

In the Commission Guidelines on the implementation of the Smuggling Directive[2] clarify that Member States may waive sanctions if the purpose of the activity is to provide humanitarian assistance. Furthermore, the guidelines clarify that legally required humanitarian assistance should never be criminalised. The Commission will continue to be in close contact with Member States' authorities to gather information on the implementation of the smuggling package and, where appropriate, to launch infringement procedures in case of breaches of EU law.[3] It will also report on the implementation of the smuggling package, including the above-mentioned guidelines, in the context of the implementation of the new EU Anti-Smuggling Action Plan (2021-2025).

The Asylum Procedures Directive[4] provides that Member States may not detain a person solely because he or she has applied for international protection. Detained persons should be informed of the possibility to apply for international protection. Furthermore, Member States must provide detainees with timely access to the asylum procedure in accordance with Article18 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

---

^{[1] Directive2002/90/EC (OJ L328, 5.12.2002, p.17).}

^{[2] C(2020)6470 of 23 September 2020.}

^{[3] Communication from the Commission "EU law: better outcomes through better implementation" (C(2016)8600, OJ C18, 19.1.2017, p.10).}

^{[4] Directive2013/32/EU (OJ L180, 29.6.2013, p.60).}