14 Amendments of Annika BRUNA related to 2023/2087(INI)
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas, to prevent the European Union from being submerged by migration, asylum and migration policy needs to be reformed by processing asylum seekers’ files in Member States’ embassies and consulates in the third countries of origin or in the Member States of transit;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the Commission prefers deploying Frontex staff in many of the countries from which the migrants depart rather than funding the physical barriers on the European Union’s external borders that a majority of the Member States are calling for;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Mauritania has no national legal asylum system in place; whereas the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) grants de facto protection with the issuance of refugee cards and certificates on the basis of a memorandum with the authorities; whereas people deemed ineligible for protection are structurally deported by the authorities without further procedure; whereas this has included deportations of people whose cases have not been assessed by the UNHCR; whereas Mauritania’s current legal framework does not allow for effective protection of women and childrone of the actions provided for in the Agreement of 7 July 2002 between Frontex and Mauritania is to propose to the Mauritanian authorities that an informal dialogue on migration and the national asylum system be held between the EU and Mauritania, focusing in particular on combating the trafficking of migrants and on border management, or of LGBTIQ+ persons; whereas same-sex activity is illegal in Mauritania; so as to best determine their needs in this area and identify the possibilities for Frontex support;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Welcomes Mauritania’s initiative to cooperate with Frontex with a view to securing Europe against mass immigration, criminality and terrorism;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Expresses its deep concern about the situation of fundamental rights in Mauritania, particularly for migrants and refugeesin connection with slavery, and considers that the deployment of Frontex executive powers in Mauritania entails a high risk of becoming complicit in serious and most likely persistent violations of fundamental rights or international protection obligationswill make it possible to better assess the risks, in particular for the EU’s security; calls on Frontex to draw up a table of developments and trends in the areas of illegal migration and cross-border criminal activity at the borders and to share that information with the EU Member States and the Commission; recommends that such information be used to plan its future activities in Mauritania;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that if the Model Status Agreement falls short of addressing the above-mentioned concerns, thia tool like the Africa-Frontex Intelligence Community – which was launched in 2010 to provide a framework for the regular sharing of information on migrant-trafficking and border security threats – provides for close cooperation with a certain number of countries, including Mauritania since 20 September 2022; points could lead to accountability gaps in the event of fundamental rights violations committed either by the third country’s authorities and/or by Frontex’s deployed personnelt that this is brought about by means of a series of training activities to develop national and regional strategies on combating cross- border crime and also includes the establishment of integrated border- management systems, as well as improvements in the gathering, sharing and analysis of relevant data; emphasises that all this is taking place in full compliance with fundamental rights;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point -a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point -a (new)
-a. fund physical barriers at the EU’s external borders to dissuade migrants from coming and thereby protect them from any attacks on fundamental rights;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point a
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point a
a. include explicitensure that all existing safeguards allowing deployed officers to disregard orders issued by the third country’s authorities that contradict the Agency’s fundamental rights obligations that derive from EU and international lawobligations;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point b – point ii
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point b – point ii
ii. ensure a Frontex presence in critical areas where the apprehension of migrants is likely to take place, and envisage giving the FRO and Fundamental Rights Monitors full access to the operational area to ensure that the issue of migration can be managed as well as possible on the spot;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point b – point iii
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point b – point iii
iii. work closely with the UNHCR during operationauthorities in Mauritania in order to guarantee the right to asylumidentify any threats, such as mass immigration, criminality and terrorism, and thereby protect the EU Member States and, where necessary, respond to those threats;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point c
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point c
c. adoptcomply with guidelines on the mandatory waiving of immunity for deployed staff, specifying how requests from the third -country authorities will be dealt with, as well as enshrining a strong role for the FRO; make the deployment of standing corps officers conditional on these guidelinesnd bearing in mind that immunity should only be granted with the utmost prudence and proportionality given the major implications for Mauritania’s sovereignty;