9 Amendments of Damian BOESELAGER related to 2020/2167(DEC)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with deep concern the findings of the Court of Auditors’ (the Court) in its special report1 ; takes the view; deeply regrets that Frontex’s activities regarding the respect for and the protection of fundamental rights were not included in the scope of the audit; requests that any future special report by the Court on the Agency's activities should includes an analysis about Frontex’s activities regarding respect for and the protection of fundamental rights; _________________ 1 https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocu ments/SR21_08/SR_Frontex_EN.pdf
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with regret the weaknesseshortcomings detected with respect to the Agency’s primary activities in support of the fight against irregular immigration and the fight against cross-border crime which are caused by an incomplete implemlisted by the Court, which are: situation monitoring, risk analysis, vulnerability assessment, joint operations and rapid border interventation of the 2016 mandate ands, return operations and Frontex's training; regrets the failure of the Agency to take the measures necessary to adapt its organisation to fully implement thate 2016 mandate; notes with concern that the Court identifies a significant risk that the Agency will struggle to carry out the mandate given to it by Regulation (EU) 2019/18962 ; acknowledges the gaps and inconsistencies of the information exchange network and further acknowledges the weaknesses in Member States’ implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013 establishing the European border surveillance system (EUROSUR)recalls that Frontex's budget skyrocketed from EUR 118 million in 2011 to EUR 460 million in 2020, and to an annual average of EUR 900 million for the 2021-2027 period; notes with concern that the Court identifies several risks related to Frontex's 2019 mandate2; acknowledges the gaps and inconsistencies of the information exchange network; _________________ 2Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624 (OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned that the Agency did not provide information about the performance, real impact orand cost of its activities, more particularly about the real cost of its joint operations, either aggregated or disaggregated by operation (maritime and aerial) and type of costs (e.g. human resources and light equipment, or heavy equipment), as well as the Member States’ actual contribution to the joint operations; notes that the Agency only presents costs based on estimates that can reveal significant differences; is disappointextremely concerned that the Agency’s operationalinsufficient reporting means that decision makers are not adequately informed;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines the Court's finding that Frontex has not attributed sufficient importance to the role of cultural mediator, who is required to understand cultural differences and the social norms of different cultures, while inspiring confidence in those who have recently arrived at the border;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the partial recruitment of the fundamental rights officer, who took office on 1 June 2021, and the appointment of 20 fundamental rights monitors; regrets that 15 of those appointments were made at AST level which is not in keeping with the Agency’s mandate under Regulation (EU) 2019/1896; reiterates that Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 provides for the recruitment of at least 40 fundamental rights monitors by 5 December 2020; insists thaturges the Agency to swiftly recruits the remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors and to does so in AD positions;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. UDeeply deplores that despite repeated calls of Parliament and a significant overall staff increase for the Agency, the Fundamental Rights Officer still lacks adequate human resources and is therefore clearly hampered to properly conduct the tasks that he is entrusted to; urges the Agency to provide its Fundamental Rights Officer with adequate resources and staff, in particular in relation to further developing and implementing the Agency’s strategy to monitor and ensure the protection of fundamental rights; urges the Agency’s management board to swiftly adopt the action plan to implement the updated fundamental rights strategy and improve the mechanisms for monitoring and reporting fundamental rights violations and complaints in the Agency; reminds the Agency of the importance of adhering to the Staff Regulations;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the OLAF investigation into Frontex over allegations of harassment, misconduct and migrants pushbacks is still ongoing; notes also that the European Ombudsman’s inquiry with respect to the Agency’s complaints mechanismindependence, effectiveness and transparency of the complaints mechanism and the role of the Fundamental Rights Officer, case OI/5/2020/MHZ, was closed on 15 June 2021, finding, among other things, a regrettable lack of transparency; notes that according to the European Ombudsman, between 2016 and January 2021 the FRO had received 69 complaints of which 22 were admissible, and that this may be explained by the lack of awareness and understanding of the complaints mechanism, the fear of negative repercussions, coupled with the fact that it is not possible to submit anonymous complaints, the stressful situation in which potential victims find themselves, and the lack of engagement by Frontex deployed officers who could play a more active role in receiving and transmitting complaints to the FRO; takes note of the European Ombudsman recommendation to improve complaints handling and follow up and the accessibility of the complaints mechanism to potential victims; notes in addition that the Agency’s management board has closed its investigation on 13 incidents in the Aegean Sea; recalls that Parliament’s Frontex Scrutiny Working Group has not yet completed its, which was established to monitor and investigate the management and operations of Frontex, and is working on a report on the allegations of violations of fundamental rights by the Agency;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Recalls that the Progress Lawyers Network, Front-LEX and the Greek Helsinki Monitor have submitted a legal action against Frontex at the CJEU on behalf of two asylum seekers who had been victims of pushbacks operations during their attempts to seek protection in the EU; underlines that this is the first time that Frontex is being taken to the CJEU over human rights violations;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Concludes that the increased competences and budget for the Agency need to be accompanied by a corresponding increase in accountability and transparency, as well as full respect for and protection of fundamental rights; stresses that discharge for the Agency is conditional on such accountability and, transparency and fundamental rights compliance, especially on the Agency's commitment to Union law; stresses in this context the need for a full clarification of the alleged violations of fundamental rights at the external borders and of the steps taken to avoid potential fundamental rights violations, including the measures to ensure non-repetition of such violations; deeply regrets the lack of impact assessments and evaluation before reform of the mandates of the Agency was proposed by the European Commission;