Activities of Jan-Christoph OETJEN related to 2023/2087(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on a European Parliament recommendation concerning negotiations on a status agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania on operational activities carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) in the Islamic Republic of Mauritania
Opinions (1)
OPINION on the ongoing negotiations on a status agreement on operational activities carried out by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) in Mauritania
Amendments (56)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. Whereas the Commission is in negotiations with the government of Mauritania with a view to conclude a status agreement for Frontex in order to perform executive tasks on the territory of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, on the basis of Council Decision (EU) 2022/1168
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Supports the ongoing negotiations between the EU and Mauritania on the establishment of a status agreement that provides for Frontex deployment in Mauritania; notes, however, that a status agreement can only be established under the condition that it enshrines and adheres to strict fundamental human rights guarantees; and with the inclusion of a clear human rights clause and guarantees of accountability in Mauritania and reporting of human rights violations by Frontex of all their activities concerning migration and asylum in Mauritania;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. Whereas the Model Status Agreement referred to in Article 76(1) of Regulation 2019/1896 is to serve as the basis for the Commission’s negotiations with Mauritania; whereas the status agreement provides that it shall ensure that fundamental rights are fully respected during operations and shall provide for a complaints mechanism;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls for the inclusion of an adequate human rights monitoring mechanism of Frontex activities in all Frontex missions through the deployment of Frontex’s Fundamental Rights Monitors in third countries and clear commitments to transparency and information sharing of Frontex activities;
Amendment 17 #
Ca. Whereas Article 218 (10) TFEU obliges the Commission to immediately and fully inform the Parliament during all stages of the procedure of conclusion a Status Agreement;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D – introductory part
Recital D – introductory part
D. whereas, according to the Model Status Agreement referred to in Article 76(1) of Regulation 2019/1896 :
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission and the Fundamental Rights Officer to conduct an independent assessment of the human rights situation in Mauritania as regards the treatment of migrants and refugees and inform the European Parliament without delay;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. Whereas in February 2023, UNHCR reported the presence of 136,350 refugees and asylum seekers in Mauritania;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Maintains that the launch of Frontex operational activities under a status agreement should promote fundamental human rights and EU values; considers that any status agreement providing for Frontex operations in third countries should integrate this aspect into their mission;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas despite having signed the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, its 1967 Protocol and the 1969 OAU Refugee Convention 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 mMemorandum of Understanding with the authorities; whereas people deemed ineligible for protection are structurally deported to the Malinian and Senegalese border 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 children, or of LGBTIQ+ persons; whereas same-sex activity is illegal in Mauritania;
Amendment 29 #
E. whereas Mauritania despite having signed the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 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 children, or of LGBTIQ+ persons; whereas same-sex activity is illegal in Mauritania;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that Frontex staff who are granted immunity for their activities in Mauritania must continue to be held accountable under EU or Member State law; considers that Frontex staff should not only avoid complicity in human rights violations by Mauritanian security forces, but should actively denounce such actions;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for clear guidelines and training to be provided to Frontex staff deployed in Mauritania including the establishment of a better understanding of and sensibility for the regional and Mauritanian human rights situation and legal framework as well as of international human rights and humanitarian laws and standards;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to provide training to Mauritanian authorities on fundamental rights and the rights and obligations of Mauritanian staff in search and rescue operations, asylum processing and management;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas Mauritania only formally abolished slavery in 1981 by the adoption of Law 2015-031, and was the last country in the world to do so; whereas slavery has only been criminalised since 2015; whereas the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery concluded in 2022 that the country had taken significant steps but the continued existence of slavery and slavery-like practices, including practices of forced labour, remains a concern and has an impact on both migrants and Mauritanian citizens;
Amendment 45 #
Ga. Whereas the Mauritanian authorities are receiving bilateral border management support by the Spanish authorities since 2006 in an advisory capacity only, including through physical deployment of the Guardia civil and Spanish Gendarmerie; whereas Frontex would be the first non-Mauritanian actor performing executive mandate at the border of the country;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for the establishment of a robust complaint mechanism that is publicly accessible and for an incident reporting mechanism for Frontex activities; considers that this incident reporting mechanism should guarantee the anonymity and confidentiality of individuals reporting on Frontex activities, that infringe on international humanitarian law or violate human rights;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the EU to provide additional capacity building support to Mauritanian national and civil society human rights organisations; calls on Mauritania to ensure the independence of its judicial and human rights institutions;
Amendment 53 #
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 refugees, and considers that, due to a high standard of operation, the deployment of Frontex executive powers in Mauritania entails a high risk of becoming complicit can contribute to avoiding serious and most likely persistent violations of fundamental rights or international protection obligations;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Is of the opinion that any Frontex deployment of personnel to Mauritania and the conduct of operational activities with Mauritanian security forces can only take place where guarantees for adequate human rights protection can be ensured for migrants and asylum seekers throughout the entire process of their application or return;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Deplores and strongly condemns the repeated practice by Mauritanian border guards and security staff of pushbacks and refoulement of migrants and asylum seekers;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Reiterates and underlines that Frontex should not take part in any form of pushbacks and should publicly denounce such practices when observed or made aware;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Emphasises that any human rights violations by Frontex staff in Mauritania are cause for drawing into question the presence of Frontex personnel and should trigger a re-evaluation or suspension of the deployment of Frontex in Mauritania;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on Frontex not only to avoid all complicity in human rights violations by Mauritanian security forces, but also to denounce any such actions;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the EU and Frontex should suspend their activities on migration and asylum carried out in cooperation with the Mauritanian authorities in the event of persistent human rights violations, as set out under ICC standards;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that iprovisions of the Model Status Agreement falls short of addressing the above-mentioned concerns, this and 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 personnel;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that if the Model Status Agreement falls short of addressing the above-mentioned concerns, this could lead toshould properly address any potential accountability gaps in the event of fundamental rights violations committed either by the third country’s authorities and/or by Frontex’s deployed personnel;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for the inclusion of clear safeguards mechanisms in the Status Agreement to avoid the misuse of EU material support for migration control purposes by Mauritanian security forces;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Expresses concern on the impact of a status agreement on the freedom of movement in West Africa, most notably in Mauritania and the ECOWAS protocol on free movement in its neighbouring countries;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is highly concerned about Mauritania’s and their security forces’ human rights track record, most notably its violations committed between 2020 and 2023 while enforcing migration and border controls, including documented cases of violence and some of torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, prolonged pre-trial detention of people accused of migrant smuggling, abusive detention conditions, extortion and theft, abusive collective expulsions and trafficking into slavery;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Is concerned by the reported misuse of EU material support by the Mauritanian security forces for migration control purposes; calls for the comprehensive monitoring of the use of material support to Mauritanian authorities and that Frontex funding or material support do not contribute to human rights violations in Mauritania;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point b
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point b
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 – point b
Paragraph 10 – point b
(b) Interrogations will only occur where deemed necessary; torture under any form is actively prosecuted and heavily punished;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point c a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point c a (new)
ca. Include clear guidelines and mechanisms on combatting corruption in all areas of cooperation between officers of the Agency and Mauritanian authorities and security forces;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point d
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point d
d. include provisions aboutnd guarantees for adequate human rights protection and the Mauritanian authorities respecting fundamental rights during operations, in the status agreement, including sound options that will ensure accountability in the event of violations;
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 10 – point e a (new)
(ea) Frontex activities will be documented in a transparent manner;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point d a (new)
da. To provide assistance and capacity to Mauritanian authorities to develop a comprehensive legal asylum system based on fundamental rights and in line with the practices of the UNHCR;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Maintains that development cooperation and efforts to tackle the root causes of migration should remain a priority in EU-Mauritania cooperation on migration;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e
e. perform ex ante fundamental rights impact assessments before engaging in negotiations with third countries on the conclusion of Status Agreements, in order to be able to fully consider the impact of potential cooperation and to negotiate the necessary safeguards; make this impact assessment publicly available or at least share it with co-legislators;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e
e. perform, in cooperation with the Fundamental Rights Officer (FRO), ex ante fundamental rights impact assessments before engaging in negotiations with third countries on the conclusion of Status Agreements, in order to be able to fully consider the impact of potential cooperation and to negotiate the necessary safeguards;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e a (new)
ea. Keep the European Parliament fully and regularly informed of all steps of the negotiations;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e a (new)
ea. Share regular assessments of joint operational activities with focus on fundamental rights;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e b (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e b (new)
eb. For the Commission and the Agency to at all times uphold the highest standards of humanitarian law and fundamental rights its negotiations and communications on the status agreement with Mauritanian authorities;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e b (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.1 – point e b (new)
eb. In case of the signing of a Status Agreement and the establishment of an Operational Plan, ensure independent monitoring of the cooperation in relation to the fundamental rights situation;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a
a. formalise the consultation role of the Fundamental Rights Officer (FRO) when deciding whether to launch a joint operation in the third country covered by the Status Agreement, and treat the FRO’s opinion as binding;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a
a. formalise the role of the Fundamental Rights Officer (FRO) when deciding whether to launch a joint operation in the third country covered by the Status Agreement, and treat the FRO’s opinion as binding;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point a a (new)
aa. Include an adequate human rights monitoring mechanism of Frontex activities in the final Status Agreement;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point b – point ii
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point b – point ii
ii. ensureseek, in cooperation with the Mauritanian authorities, 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, in line with the FROs standard operating procedure;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point c
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point c
c. adopt guidelines on the mandatoryensure adherence to Frontex rules regarding 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 guidelines;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point d a (new)
da. Sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the third country concerned in order to align complaint mechanisms;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point d b (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point d b (new)
db. Make any material support to the border authorities of a third country conditional upon full respect for fundamental rights and ensure monitoring to be in place;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point d c (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point d c (new)
dc. Ensure permanent deployment of a Fundamental Rights Monitor to operations in Mauritania in accordance with Regulation 2019/1896;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point e a (new)
ea. Include special guidelines for the processing of migrants and asylum seekers of especially vulnerable groups, most notably children, unaccompanied minors, women, LGBTQI+ persons and communities that face targeted violence or discriminatory prosecution in their country of origin;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 3 – point 3.2 – point e a (new)
ea. Share periodical evaluations of joint operations in third countries with the European Parliament and Council, including in Mauritania, with a focus on fundamental rights;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Requests the European Court of Justice to formally assess whether the Status Agreement as negotiated is compatible with the Treaties, as enshrined in Article 218 (11) TFEU, especially related to accountability of the Agency for actions performed on the territory of Mauritania, in light of the significant differences between the legal framework of the EU and Mauritania;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Instructs its President to forward this recommendation to the Council, the Commission, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, the signatories to the Cotonou Agreement between the European Union (EU) and the group of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and to the Government of Mauritania.