Activities of Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN related to 2014/2215(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
Special report of the European Ombudsman in own-initiative inquiry concerning Frontex (debate) ES
Special report of the European Ombudsman in own-initiative inquiry concerning Frontex (A8-0343/2015 - Roberta Metsola, Ska Keller) ES
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the Special Report of the European Ombudsman in own-initiative inquiry OI/5/2012/BEH-MHZ concerning Frontex PDF (183 KB) DOC (131 KB)
Amendments (38)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas Regulation (EU) No 1168/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 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 (hereinafter the Frontex regulation) requires that the Agency ensures full respect for fundamental rights and for the rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas different NGOs and international organizations have denounced fundamental rights violations and systematic breach of other international legislation, such as the principle of non-refoulement and the principles regarding asylum laid down in the Geneva Conventions, during Frontex operations;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas LGBTi and women migrants are particularly exposed to verbal, physical, and sexual violence, together with other human right violations, during their travels and at the borders, also by Frontex staff and Member State officials;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in 2012 the European Ombudsman opened an own-initiative inquiry into the implementation by Frontex of its fundamental rights obligations which showed Frontex was failing to respect fundamental rights;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas no single Frontex operation has been suspended, in whole or in part, by Frontex Executive Director, despite various reports made to the Fundamental Rights Officer of human rights violations which have allegedly occurred during Frontex operations;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the draft recommendations of the European Ombudsman, which were ignored by the relevant authorities, include implementing an individual complaints mechanism;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas there are no objective grounds to militarize the surveillance of the external or internal borders of the EU;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas individual complaints mechanisms already exist at European level within the structures of the European Investment Bank, the European Agency for Fundamental Rights and the European Network of Ombudsmen; whereas these mechanisms aim at addressing maladministration and do not deal with breaches of fundamental rights;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)
Recital N a (new)
N a. whereas an independent complaint mechanism outside of Frontex should be explored;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 a (new)
Subheading 1 a (new)
Stresses that to have a border policy which fully respects fundamental rights Frontex should be dismantled;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Special Report of the European Ombudsman in the framework of the own-initiative inquiry concerning Frontex; supports Frontex’s efforts in taking on board the Ombudsman’s recommendations; acknowledges Frontex’s current fundamental rights safeguards in the form of, but not limited to, the setting-up of an incident reporting system as well as devising codes of conduct, creating a Consultative Forum on fundamental rights and establishing a Fundamental Rights Officecondemns the fact that none of the recommendations have been implemented;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Expresses grave concerns at the legal vacuum that surrounds the deployment of third country officers during joint return operations as pointed out by the European Ombudsman's report and the lack of accountability which would thus prevail in the case of human rights violations involving third country officers;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that in view of the ever- growing humanitarian and legal challenges at the EU’s external borders, Frontex is in need of a mechanism that is capable of processing individual complaints about alleged breaches of fundamental rights occurring in the course of its oper created by the EU's agressive border policies based on their militarizations, thus becoming a first-instance body for complaintsFrontex should be dismantled;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that in view of the ever- growing humanitarian and legal challenges at the EU’s external borders, Frontex is in need of an independent mechanism that is capable of processing individual complaints about alleged breaches of fundamental rights occurring in the course of its operations, thus becoming a first- instance body for complaintsincluding the risk of refoulement and the risks involved in the processing of personal data;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that under the Frontex regulation there are no legal obstacles to the introduction of an individual complaints mechanism; notes that the lack of such a mechanism is non-compliant with the principle of good administration and undermines the effective implementation of the Agency’s fundamental rights strategy; believes that the capacity of Frontex to deal with possible violations of fundamental rights should be strengthened in the context of expanding the Agency’s role under EU law, in particular its participation in Migration Management Support Teams working in ‘hotspot’ areas, which has, up to date, not been effective;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Takes the view there is a legitimate expectation on the part of all to believe that the actions of those involved in Frontex operations are attributable to Frontex and more generally to the EU; stresses that the complex legal relations and the distinct yet shared responsibilities between Frontex and the Member States shouldmust not undermine the safeguarding of fundamental rights; notes that being a central point for individual complaints does not make Frontex responsible for every complaint received; believes that due consideration should therefore be given to the competences of Frontex and those of the EU Member States;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the need for an official central structure within Frontex for the processing of individual complaints; recommends that the office of the Frontex Fundamental Rights Officer should play a crucial role in handling complaints; considers that, in particular, the office should check the admissibility of complaints, filter them, pass them on to the authorities responsible, and follow up on them thoroughlyfollow up in a way which makes the complaints public and the follow-up accountable for relevant NGOs, MEPs, and all European citizens without compromising the privacy of those making the complaint;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the need for an official central structure within Frontexthe establishment of an independent body for the processing of individual complaints; recommends that the office of the Frontex Fundamental Rights Officer should play a crucial role in handlreceiving complaints; considers that, in particular, the office should check the admissibility of complaints, filter them, pass them on to the authoritiesindependent body responsible, and follow up on them thoroughly;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the fact that Frontex has already set up a thorough procedure for handling internal reports by Frontex staff and guest officers on serious fundamental rights violations; points out that this procedure is already used for handling complaints by third parties not directly involved in a Frontex operation, and recommends building further on this procedure aiming at establishing a full and accessible individual complaints mechanism; eEmphasises that Frontex should ensure that the mechanism respects the criteria of accessibility, independence, effectiveness and, transparency, democratic control and accountability;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Emphasises that third parties, including NGOs and international organisations should have the right to submit a complaint on behalf of an individual and to represent him or her during the whole procedure allowing the complainant to remain anonymous; emphasises the need to ensure the safety of the complainant;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Acknowledges that safeguards are needed to prevent misuse of the complaints mechanism; recommends, therefore, that anonymous complaints should not be accepted; suggests further that only complaints of concrete fundamental rights violations should be admitted; considers that this should not prevent Frontex from takingconsiders that Frontex should take into account of other information sources on alleged fundamental rights violations, including general reports, beyond the complaints procedure; emphasises the need for clear criteria for the admissibility of complaintsy NGOs, international organisations and other relevant stakeholders, beyond the complaints procedure; recommends the provision of a standardised form for complaints requiring detailed information such as date and place of the incident, since this would facilitate decisions on admissibility;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that the above form should be accessible in the most common languages spoken by migrants and asylum seekers and that it should include all necessary information on how to submit a complaint; is of the opinion that the possibility to submit a complaint orally to a person wearing the Frontex emblem should be ensured, which complaint would be duly transcribed by the officer involved; urges Frontex to ensure that third parties are present during the whole process, independently from the person or people making the complaint, urges Frontex to make the complaints form available both in electronic format on its website and in hard-copy format, in the Member States’ screening centres as well as from Frontex staff and guest officers participating in any Frontex operation;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Calls for regular reporting by Frontex on complaints received and their follow-up with due consideration to data protection concerns of the complainants;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Takes note that Member States handle complaints against guest officers in very different ways; is concerned that alleged fundamental rights violations might not be followed up effectively by some Member States; calls on Frontex and the Member States toto ensure the proper follow-up of complaints against guest officers, and report to the coomperate closely in order to ensure the proper follow-up of complaints against guest officerstent authorities in the cases in which the fundamental rights violations are not being effectively followed up; stresses that this information must be made public;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Recommends that the office of the Fundamental Rights Officer transfers a complaint against a guest officer via a well-defined referral system to the competent national authority; considers it crucial to involve national ombudsmen or any other relevant bodies competent for fundamental rights that have the responsibility to investigate national authorities and officials, whereas the Fundamental Rights Officer does not have the right to do so; stresses the need to make the information about the breach of fundamental rights public;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that Frontex should closely follow up on complaints by formally requesting feedback from the respective Member State and, if necessary, by sending a public letter of warning recalling the possible action which Frontex can take if no follow up to the letter concerned is received; recalls that Frontex has the right to receive information on fundamental rights violations by guest officers in the context of its obligation to monitor respect for fundamental rights in all of its activities;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recommends that aStresses the need that a public justification should be provided to the complainant should no follow-up procedure be initiated by Frontex;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that the Frontex Disciplinary Procedure mayust also apply to seconded guest officers and seconded national experts if the relevant Member State agrees; recalls that Frontex may request the Member State to immediately remove the guest officer or seconded national expert concerned from the Frontex activity if the Member State does not allow the disciplinary procedure to take place, and, if necessary, to remove the person from the pool of guest officers;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Frontex Executive Director to consider the exclusion ofexclude any officer who has been found to be in breach of fundamental rights from participating in any Frontex operation or pilot project;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that the possibility of withdrawing financial support from Member States for joint operations as well as the suspension and ultimately the termination of an operation in case of serious and persistent fundamental rights violations should be explored, without prejudice to the overall aim of the Frontex mission whereby the saving of lives is envisagoperations where fundamental rights violations have been found must be immediately terminated;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. considers that the European Parliament should be regularly informed of the number of incidents reported through the incident referral mechanism; therefore calls on Frontex Fundamental Rights Officer to inform every six months the European Parliament of the number of incidents reported and the measures and decisions taken as a result;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Takes the view that an individual complaints mechanism can only be effective if potential complainants, as well as the officers taking part in Frontex operations, are made aware of the individuals’ right to complain through an effective information campaign; believes it should be possible for the number of potential inadmissible complaints to be limited substantially through such an information campaign and a well- structured admissibility check;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Takes note that an individual complaints mechanism should be bothindependent, efficient and cost-effective; calls on Frontex to provide the necessary resources to the Fundamental Rights Office for handling the complaints received;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Welcomes the readiness of the European Ombudsman, and the members of the European Network of Ombudsmen with competence on fundamental rights and the Frontex Consultative Forum to support Frontex in setting up and implementing an individual complaints mechanism; calls on Frontex to follow the good practice of other European bodies, such as the European Investment Bank, in close cooperation with the European Ombudsmanregrets Frontex and the competent political authorities' lack of will to make Frontex accountable and transparent;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Recommends the inclusiondismantling of pFrovisionsntex in view onf the individual complaints mechanism in the forthcoming review of the Frontex Regupersistent violation of fundamental rights; stresses that the mechanism proposed is not enough to end these violations;