Frontex: Successful Blame Shifting of the Member States?

Frontex has been often criticised for failing to take action against the deaths of asylum seekers and migrants trying to reach Europe by crossing the sea. The EU’s border agency Frontex is an easy target for criticism regarding the way in which the EU’s southern maritime borders are controlled. However, a closer look at the Agency’s tasks reveals that its powers are limited and that the responsibility for operational activity at sea continues to lie largely with the Member States. The EU should speak out against Member States’ practices that are in breach of international refugee law and use Frontex as a tool to increase the awareness of protection issues amongst national border-guard authorities

Building Borders : the regulatory framework for the management of the external borders of the European Union

Defence date: 23 November 2009Examining Board: Marise Cremona (EUI, Supervisor), Bruno de Witte (EUI), Jörg Monar (College of Europe), Steve Peers (University of Essex)First made available online 30 April 2021This thesis, starting from the premise that territorial borders retain their importance in public international law, examines in detail the EU's regulatory framework for the management of its external borders. It will argue that there are in fact two sets of external borders: those of the area in which the rules on the free movement of persons apply, and those of the Schengen area. The border crossing rights under the two corresponding sets of rules will be examined in detail. The focus will then shift to the broader Schengen rules for the management of the external borders. The thesis will discuss the rationale of the EU's interest in borders, the legislative acquis adopted, and the relation between legislation and executive action. An elaborate discussion on the organisation and functioning of the "European Border Agency" (Frontex) serves to illustrate the importance of operational cooperation in this area. A final chapter will look at the external dimension of this policy field. A distinction is made between the relations with third countries for the purpose of managing the external borders and the exportation of Community standards. Also in the external sphere, the objective of controlling irregular migration and the operational nature of EU action are prominent. It is concluded that the management of the external borders takes places in a much more complex and uncertain legal framework than is often assumed. Whilst border management should be a part or rather complement to a Common European Asylum and Migration policy if now risks to become a substitute for it. Even where legislation is adopted, it has a strong operational character, which carries risks in terms of accountability and legitimacy. The legislation in this area is both far-reaching and ill thought-through at the same time. From this lessons could be drawn for the broader cooperation between law enforcement authorities

The Extra-Territorialisation of EU Migration Policies and the Rule of Law

This paper takes a closer look at one of the EU’s foundational values, the rule of law, and relates it to the external dimension of the EU’s migration policy. It examines how the EU’s powers in migration management have been put to use in order to project EU migration policies beyond the EU legal order, or more precisely to locate the physical control of migration outside EU territory. It categorises different types of extra-territorialisation, ranging from autonomous action by the Community, including Community action which requires third country cooperation, to action by way of international agreements and cases where third countries undertake to align their domestic law with the Community acquis. Starting from the prominence accorded to the rule of law in the EU’s external policy, this paper examines an external dimension of the rule of law which goes beyond the desire to promote this value outside EU territory, and its application to the external dimension of the EU’s migration policy. It highlights challenges for the rule of law posed by the increasing phenomenon of extraterritorialisation in EU migration policy. Practical examples taken from the EU’s visa policy and operational cooperation in the field of external border control serve to support the argument that if the EU is to continue the use of extra-territorialisation as an instrument of its migration policy it must address seriously the issue of ensuring a concomitant extra-territorialisation of the rule of law, in particular the effective judicial review of administrative action