• Verloren in Europas letztem Urwald : Fotos von der polnisch-belarussischen Grenze

    „Der Weg übers Mittelmeer ist gefährlich. Doch die Leute haben gar keine Vorstellung davon, wie gefährlich der Urwald sein kann.“

    An der Grenze zwischen Polen und Belarus liegt der Belowescher Wald, einer der letzten Urwälder Europas. Seit einigen Jahren verstecken sich Flüchtende in diesem Wald vor der Grenzpolizei. Auf dem Weg in die EU durchqueren sie Sümpfe und Flüsse. Sie verirren sich und harren mitunter tagelang im Wald aus. Humanitäre Hilfe hat die polnische Regierung verboten. Trotzdem helfen Freiwillige den Flüchtenden. Die Fotojournalistin Hanna Jarzabek hat sie monatelang begleitet.

    VICE: An der polnischen Grenze zur Ukraine gibt es viel Hilfe für Flüchtende. Menschen aus Deutschland brachten Wasser, Kleidung, Essen und fuhren mit Ukrainerinnen und Ukrainern nach Deutschland. Du hast an einer anderen Grenze Polens recherchiert: die zu Belarus. Warum?
    Hanna Jarzabek: Ich wurde in Polen geboren. Von Anfang an fiel mir auf, wie unterschiedlich die Regierung mit den Flüchtenden aus der Ukraine umgeht und jenen, die Belarus durchqueren. Während es an der ukrainischen Grenze humanitäre Hilfe gibt, müssen Hilfsorganisationen an der belarussischen Grenze ihr Tun geheim halten. Polen wendet dort eine scharfe Einwanderungspolitik an.

    Was bedeutet „scharfe Einwanderungspolitik“?
    Man muss sich klar machen: Aus der Ukraine kamen 1,5 Millionen Menschen nach Polen. Ich finde es großartig, dass sie Hilfe bekommen. Von Belarus kamen etwa 40.000 Menschen. Sie werden auf die belarussische Seite zurückgetrieben und ihre Handys werden zertrümmert. Die polnische Regierung hat dort eine Mauer gebaut.

    Warum wird den einen geholfen und den anderen nicht?
    Ich denke, das hat etwas mit Ethnien, Kultur und religiösem Hintergrund zu tun. Über die belarussische Grenze fliehen Menschen aus afrikanischen Ländern und dem Mittleren Osten.

    Heißt das: Die polnische Regierung handelt rassistisch?
    Ja, das würde ich schon sagen.

    An der Grenze liegt einer der letzten Urwälder Europas: der Belowesche Wald. Du hast viele Monate dort mit Menschen gesprochen und Fotos gemacht. Wem bist du begegnet?
    Ich erinnere mich an eine Frau aus dem Iran. Sie hat an den Demonstrationen für Frauenrechte teilgenommen. Daraufhin hat die iranische Regierung sie auf eine schwarze Liste gesetzt und sie musste fliehen. Eigentlich stünde ihr politisches Asyl zu.

    Das hat sie nicht bekommen?
    Sie wurde von polnischen Grenzbeamten zurück auf die belarussische Seite getrieben. Sie war mit einer Freundin und ihrem Mann unterwegs. Beim zweiten Versuch, nach Polen zu gelangen, schlugen die Beamten die drei Flüchtenden und sprühten mit Tränengas. Die Frau wachte in einem polnischen Krankenhaus auf, aber ihr Mann und ihre Freundin waren weg.

    Wo waren sie?
    Wieder in Belarus. Es dauerte Monate, bis die Frau eine Botschaft an ihren Mann senden konnte und erfuhr, dass er noch lebt.

    Ist sie dann auch zurück nach Belarus gegangen?
    Nein. Als ich mit ihr sprach, hatte jemand sie in Polen bei sich zu Hause aufgenommen. Das ist verboten. Einige machen es trotzdem. Wir haben den Google Übersetzer genutzt, um einander zu verstehen. Ihre Erzählungen waren schlimm. Doch ich erinnere mich vor allem an ihre Augen: Die waren voller Angst.

    Politische Verfolgung ist ein valider Fluchtgrund. Aber wahrscheinlich nicht der einzige, oder?
    Viele fliehen auch vor Krieg oder Armut. Auch das sind meiner Meinung nach sehr nachvollziehbare Gründe. Der Weg übers Mittelmeer ist gefährlich. Doch ich glaube, die Leute haben gar keine Vorstellung davon, wie gefährlich der Urwald sein kann.

    Wie gelangen Menschen vom afrikanischen Kontinent eigentlich nach Belarus?
    Sie fliegen erst nach Russland und dann weiter nach Belarus. Belarus vergibt Visa. Für die Flüchtenden sind diese Visa einfach zu bekommen – und die belarussische Regierung verdient Geld damit. Dann fahren sie von Minsk zur belarussisch-polnischen Grenze und es heißt: Von hier müsst ihr noch zehn Kilometer durch den Wald laufen. Ihr Ziel ist oft gar nicht Polen, sondern Deutschland. Es geht darum, in die Europäische Union zu gelangen und dort einen Asylantrag zu stellen. Doch die polnischen Grenzbeamte halten sie davon ab.

    Wie?
    Die Grenzbeamten fragen gar nicht, ob jemand Asyl beantragen will. Wenn es jemand von sich aus anspricht, ignorieren sie es. Es gibt weder Zeugen, noch Übersetzer. Die Flüchtenden bekommen nie die Chance, einen Antrag zu stellen.

    Sondern?
    Sie werden zurück nach Belarus gedrängt. Die Grenzbeamten trampeln ihre Telefone kaputt. Dann treiben die Beamten die Flüchtenden zurück in den Wald. Ohne GPS ist man dort verloren. Man könnte sagen: Die Grenzpolizei schickt Leute in den Tod.

    Diese Push Backs kennt man vor allem aus dem Mittelmeer.
    An der europäischen Landgrenze passieren sie genauso: Polen schickt Flüchtende nach Belarus und Belarus schickt sie nach Polen. Viele haben mir erzählt, dass sie mehrfach hin und zurück geschickt wurden. Eine Person sagte, sie habe schon 17 Mal die Grenze überqueren müssen. Das verstößt gegen internationales Recht.

    Du sagtest schon, dass Helferinnen und Helfer sich im Geheimen organisieren müssen. Wie machen sie das?
    Ich kann keine Details verraten. Das würde die Helfenden in Gefahr bringen. Nur so viel: Das Rote Kreuz oder andere Organisationen gibt es nicht. Wenn man einen Krankenwagen ruft, kommt auch die Grenzpolizei. Darum gibt es eine Notrufnummer, mit der die Flüchtenden die freiwilligen Helfer erreichen.

    Du bist von August 2022 bis März 2023 mehrmals dorthin gereist. Wie hat sich die Lage verändert?
    Der Winter war schlimm. Einmal bin ich mit zwei Freiwilligen drei Stunden lang durch den Urwald gelaufen. Wir kamen schließlich bei einem syrischen Flüchtenden an, der stark unterkühlt war. Eine Freiwillige war Ärztin. Wir wechselten seine nassen Sachen. Aber es ging ihm immer schlechter. Nach zwei Stunden entschied die Ärztin, einen Krankenwagen zu rufen.

    Obwohl ihr wusstet, dass die Grenzbeamten dann kommen?
    Wir waren nicht sicher, ob er die Nacht überleben würde.

    Und dann?
    Dann warteten wir vier Stunden lang. Es waren minus elf Grad Celsius. Die Rettungsstelle hatte unsere Koordinaten. Als sie endlich ankamen, war kein medizinisches Personal dabei: nur Grenzbeamten und Feuerwehr.

    Kam der Flüchtende trotzdem ins Krankenhaus?
    Sie haben ihn ins Auto gebracht, aber sind nie in ein Krankenhaus gefahren.

    Woher weißt du das?
    Ich war wirklich besorgt und habe ich mich an das Parlament gewandt, um herauszufinden, wo er ist. So ist meine Identität als Fotojournalistin aufgeflogen. Aber ich hatte keine andere Möglichkeit. Immer wenn ich bei der Grenzpolizei anrief, hieß es: Man könne mir nichts sagen – wegen des Datenschutzes.

    Hat er überlebt?
    Ja, die Beamten haben ihn in eine Ausländerunterkunft gebracht.

    Haben dich die Grenzbeamten auch mal aufgegriffen?
    Ja, als ich die Mauer fotografiert habe. Sie steht seit Sommer vergangenen Jahres: 186 Kilometer Stahl und Stacheldraht. Ich kann es gar nicht fassen, dass sich etwa 30 Jahre nach dem Mauerfall wieder eine Mauer durch Europa zieht.

    Hält die Mauer eigentlich Flüchtende auf?
    Nun, sie ist fünfeinhalb Meter hoch und hat eine Krone aus Stacheldraht. Aber die Leute klettern trotzdem drüber. Auf der polnischen Seite fallen sie runter, brechen sich Beine und Füße. Polen hat sich damit mehr Kosten geschaffen. Denn die Menschen müssen ins Krankenhaus.

    Hast du auch Geschichten mit gutem Ende erlebt?
    Ich habe von Menschen gehört, die an sicheren Orten sind. Von Menschen, die es nach Deutschland geschafft haben. Von Menschen, die ihre Verwandten in der EU wiedergefunden haben.

    https://www.vice.com/de/article/xgwwe3/verloren-in-europas-letztem-urwald-fotos-von-der-polnisch-belarussischen-grenz
    #forêt #Pologne #Biélorussie #migrations #réfugiés #asile #frontières #push-backs #refoulements #mourir_aux_frontières #morts_aux_frontières #photographie #murs #barrières_frontalières #GPS #téléphones_portables #smartphone #Bohoniki #cimetière

    voir aussi ce fil de discussion :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/948199

  • Who profits from brutal and muderous Pushbacks?

    The podcast is in English

    Anlässlich des World Refugee Days am 20. Juni hört ihr einen Podcast von unserem Kooperationsradio Radio Mytilini auf Lesvos. Es geht um die brutalen und mörderischen Pushbacks an den Außengrenzen der EU und wer davon finanziell profitiert. Die Menschen die solche Pushbacks durchführen werden dafür bezahlt, wo das Geld herkommt erfahrt ihr in dieser Sendung.

    https://de.cba.fro.at/624115
    #asile #migrations #réfugiés #push-backs #refoulements #frontières #profit #Grèce #responsabilité #mer_Egée #Evros #frontières_terrestres #frontières_maritimes #violence #complexe_militaro-industriel #integrated_border_management_fund #technologie #Thales #Frontex #european_peace_facility #visa #industrie_militaire #consultants #McKinzie #accord_UE-Turquie

    #podcast #audio

    ping @_kg_ @kaparia

  • Dis Seenthis, il m’a semblé brièvement voir passer cette nuit des affirmations selon lesquelles, d’après des témoignages de rescapés, la bateau des migrants avait fait l’objet d’un pushback par les garde-côtes grecs. Mais je ne trouve désormais rien à ce propos.

    Quelqu’un a des choses crédibles là-dessus ?

  • UK provided £3m to Turkish border forces to stop migrants, FOI reveals

    Investigation shows Home Office funds ‘return and reintegration assistance’ and provides equipment and training to Turkish police

    The Home Office has provided more than £3m in funding to Turkish border forces in the last year to prevent migrants reaching the UK, an investigation for the Guardian has found.

    Funding to Turkey’s border force operations has increased substantially from 2019, when £14,000 was given to Turkish police and coastguard for maritime border security training, according to documents obtained through freedom of information (FOI) requests. That figure rose to £425,000 in 2021-22 for training and equipment and up to £3m this year for “return and reintegration assistance”, training and personnel.

    The funding was diverted from the official development assistance (ODA) budget and delivered through Home Office International Operations, part of the department’s Intelligence Directorate.

    In addition to funding, the Home Office has also supplied Turkish border forces, including the National Police and the coastguard, with equipment and training. In June 2022, nine vehicles were handed over by the UK’s deputy high commissioner to the Turkish National Police on the border with Iran.

    Last year Turkey said it “turned back” 238,448 migrants at its eastern border with Iran. Video evidence seen by the Guardian shows cases of extreme violence and force used against Afghan migrants attempting to cross the border into Turkey. This includes the authorities firing live bullet rounds as people flee, including at the feet of children; beatings using rifle butts; robberies; humiliation tactics and pushing people back to the other side of the border.

    Mahmut Kaçan, a Turkish lawyer working on asylum and human rights abuses, said the deaths and pushbacks on the border began escalating two years ago. “The UNHCR never criticises or mentions what Turkey is doing at the border. They are complicit in the deaths of these people, as are the EU and other countries that are giving money to Turkey for border security.”

    A source with knowledge of the Home Office International Operations team said Turkey had become “a country of emerging importance [to the UK government] in the last two to three years and is now seen as strategically crucial to border securitisation”.

    “We offer our expertise and provide officials [locally] with evidence, showing the routes we think illegal migrants or gangs are operating along,” the source said. “It’ll probably be along the lines of: ‘This is a route smugglers and illegal migrants use to get to the UK, we need to do more to stop it.’ The Turkish government will then respond by saying: ‘This is what we need to be able to do that’, and then we fund it, basically.”

    The source added: “We don’t tend to hold local forces to account with any targets but certainly if we say: ‘We need to bolster X area of border security’, Turkey might respond by saying they need Y in order to boost border officer numbers and we’ll help them to do that.”

    Another source familiar with the work of the Home Office International Operations unit said: “Us paying for stuff like that builds our soft power credentials in other areas, such as possible returns agreements. It’s like a mini FCDO [Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office] inside the Home Office.”

    Sources added that Home Office operations overseas involved intelligence gathering through interviews with migrants who had arrived in the UK. Information from those interviews is then passed on to border forces locally to “put an operational plan in place to stop it”.

    Documents obtained through an FOI request also show that the Home Office has increased the number of its staff deployed to work at post, with sources from the FCDO saying Home Office staff now outnumbers diplomats working in Turkey.

    “The Home Office is seen by international partners as quite hostile, quite adversarial,” said a senior government source with knowledge of the department’s operations in Turkey. “The FCDO, on the other hand, is viewed as relatively collegiate and collaborative. In this context, there are obvious tensions in the approach and the culture among staff.”

    The department’s 2025 Border Strategy states that one of its key priorities is to “improve our use of upstream illegal migration countermeasures to prevent irregular entry into the UK”.

    It also stipulates the department will “prevent entry into the UK through improved border security and through work with source and transit countries to support them in addressing irregular migration challenges within their region”.

    Mary Atkinson, campaigns and networks manager at JCWI, said: “This government has shown that it will break international law to prevent people from exercising the fundamental human right to seek safety.

    “Whether on the border between Turkey and Iran, or those of France or Belgium, this government is covertly funding others to do its dirty work, while at the same time ramping up its xenophobic rhetoric against the few that do finally make it here.”

    In response to the findings of the investigation, a spokesperson for the Home Office said: “Like many other European states, the UK works tirelessly at home and abroad on a range of priorities, including tackling illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and modern slavery. This includes mutually beneficial close working with our operational counterparts in a range of partner countries, like Turkey, to tackle these and wider socially damaging issues.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/07/uk-provided-3m-to-turkish-border-forces-to-stop-migrants-foi-reveals

    #externalisation #contrôles_frontaliers #UK #Angleterre #Turquie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #frontières #renvois #réintégration #financement #aide_financière #militarisation_des_frontières #aide_au_développement #développement #coopération_au_développement #refoulements #push-backs #complexe_militaro-industriel #2025 _Border_Strategy #Home_Office

  • Frontex mette a bando un servizio di traghetti per riportare i migranti in Turchia

    A metà maggio l’Agenzia europea ha indetto una gara da due milioni di euro per un servizio di “trasferimento” via mare dalla Grecia di minimo 100 persone alla volta in forza del patto tra Ue e Turchia del 2016. Una fase inedita che segna l’avvio di respingimenti alla luce del sole e ignora le gravi e documentate violazioni dei diritti

    A metà maggio di quest’anno l’Agenzia europea Frontex ha pubblicato un bando dal valore di due milioni di euro per organizzare il trasferimento di “passeggeri via mare”, almeno 100 per volta, dall’isola greca di Lesbo alla località di Dikili, sulle coste turche. La documentazione di gara consultata da Altreconomia segna l’inizio di una nuova fase alla luce del sole per la “strategia” di respingimento dei migranti verso la Turchia, a pochi giorni dalla rielezione del presidente turco Recep Tayyip Erdoğan e dagli inquietanti video pubblicati dal New York Times sulle brutali modalità di respingimento della Guardia costiera greca.

    È in questo contesto dunque che Frontex è pronta a prendere direttamente in mano la questione, assumendo un ruolo centrale nell’ambito del cosiddetto accordo Ue-Turchia del marzo 2016 sotto il quale “formalmente” dovrebbe rientrare questa nuova attività. “L’Agenzia avrà il monopolio della gestione di queste operazioni assumendo un ruolo che, in questi termini, non ha mai avuto in passato”, spiega Martina Tazzioli, ricercatrice al Goldsmiths College di Londra.

    Le operazioni sono parte del meccanismo “1:1” previsto dall’intesa da sei miliardi di euro annunciata tra le istituzioni comunitarie (Consiglio europeo) e il governo di Ankara nel marzo 2016. Con l’obiettivo dichiarato di scoraggiare le persone ad affidarsi ai trafficanti, lo schema prevedeva che per ogni migrante giunto “irregolarmente” in Grecia e perciò respinto in Turchia, un altro sarebbe dovuto essere ricollocato tramite vie legali in un Paese europeo.

    In realtà non è mai stato implementato in modo significativo: dal 2016 al 2022 sarebbero stati respinti “ufficialmente” indietro, dati dell’International rescue committee, 2.140 rifugiati mentre i reinsediati dal territorio turco verso l’Ue ammonterebbero a 36.763, tutti siriani (fonte è il ministero dell’Intero turco). La “sostanza” di quell’accordo era però quella di bloccare le partenze e, soprattutto, puntare tutto sui respingimenti informali: secondo la Ong Agean boat report, dal 2017 al giugno 2023 più di 284mila persone sarebbero state fermate dalla guardia costiera turca e 60mila respinte da quella greca.

    E la citata inchiesta del New York Times di fine maggio ha ricostruito, con tanto di video in alta definizione, le procedure di respingimento messe in atto dalle autorità di Atene che, dopo aver prelevato a forza i naufraghi arrivati sul territorio, li riportano in mare su assetti della Guardia costiera per poi abbandonarli al largo delle coste turche su “barche di fortuna” per l’ultimo tratto. Una procedura definita “assolutamente inaccettabile” da parte della commissaria europea agli Affari interni Ylva Johansson che però in tutta risposta, attraverso Frontex, investe sui nuovi respingimenti alla luce del sole rispolverando lo zoppicante meccanismo del patto Ue-Turchia.

    “Questi ricollocamenti sono stati sospesi nel marzo 2020 prima con la giustificazione della diffusione del Covid-19 poi perché il presidente Erdoğan ha smesso di accettare i ‘respinti’ di fronte al rifiuto delle istituzioni europee di fornire ulteriori finanziamenti -ricorda Tazzioli-. Evidentemente Frontex ha annunciato che presto queste operazioni riprenderanno”.

    L’appalto da due milioni di euro prevede la fornitura di traghetti che devono garantire “la capacità di imbarcare un minimo di cento passeggeri in aree chiuse [a cui si aggiungono] i ponti aperti e sedili al di fuori delle aree chiuse”. Deve essere prevista la possibilità di “limitare l’accesso al ponte esterno della nave” e i sedili dei “passeggeri” devono essere “singoli, fissi (senza panche) e disposti in file”. I bagni, inoltre, devono essere accessibili direttamente dall’area dei passeggeri senza la necessità di attraversare l’area “aperta”. Almeno uno dei traghetti messi a disposizione deve essere “interamente riservato al personale di Frontex”. Sulla nave deve essere poi garantito un servizio catering per tutti i “passeggeri di Frontex”: nello specifico “due panini confezionati senza carne di maiale: vegetariani o halal”, come se fossero “scontate” le nazionalità dei passeggeri, e soft drinks. Inoltre si sottolinea che è necessaria la presenza di un medico che deve disporre di un “kit di rianimazione di base comprendente farmaci di uso comune”. L’Agenzia sottolinea però che “il servizio medico può non essere richiesto in tutti i trasferimenti”. La stessa tipologia di traghetto utilizzata per i trasferimenti deve essere infine messa a disposizione di Frontex nel porto di Mitilene, a Lesbo, per “permettere all’Agenzia di svolgere esercitazioni per gli ufficiali di scorta al fine di prepararli alle operazioni di ritorno in uno scenario di ‘vita reale’”. Queste esercitazioni dureranno fino a due giorni.

    L’Agenzia stima due servizi di trasporto andata e ritorno al mese e un’esercitazione. Ma queste indicazioni “non sono vincolanti” e possono variare durante i due anni di contratto, rinnovabili per un periodo di 12 mesi e per un massimo di due volte. Appena cinque righe vengono dedicate nel bando al “contesto in cui si rende necessario il servizio” e che quindi giustifica la possibilità di svolgere questi “trasferimenti”. Viene specificato come detto che si tratta di operazioni che avvengono sotto il cappello del mai stipulato accordo Ue-Turchia e che “più informazioni sulla dichiarazione congiunta Ue-Turchia e sul piano per porre fine all’immigrazione irregolare sono disponibili nel comunicato stampa siglato il 18 marzo 2016”.

    Viene citato un “comunicato stampa” perché giuridicamente non è stato firmato nulla di vincolante: come ricordato da Chiara Favilli, professoressa di Diritto dell’Unione europea all’Università di Firenze, è il “paradosso di un accordo che viene definito dichiarazione e sul piano materiale svanisce impedendo che sia contestato sul piano giuridico”. Quello che non c’è nella nota stampa, invece, sono i Paesi di provenienza che nel frattempo sono stati aggiunti tra coloro che vengono ricollocati in forza di quell’accordo: Afghanistan, Siria, Somalia, Bangladesh e Pakistan. “Le persone di queste nazionalità che arrivano in Grecia vivono di fatto in un limbo: la loro richiesta d’asilo viene dichiarata inammissibile ma dal marzo 2020 non venivano neanche riportati sulle coste turche. Una sorta di elefante nella stanza per le autorità greche che non sapevano cosa fare con queste persone”. Ora l’indirizzo dato sembra essere chiaro.

    Il modus operandi è sintetizzato al settimo punto del capitolato. Sono infatti previste condizioni molto rigide per il contraente che deve seguire “prontamente e diligentemente le istruzioni di Frontex e delle autorità greche”, “applicare discrezione e riservatezza in relazione all’attività” con l’impossibilità di “documentare o condividere informazioni sull’attività con mezzi quali foto, video, commenti o condivisioni sui social media” e non può consentire “la presenza a bordo di passeggeri che non siano partecipanti alle attività non espressamente autorizzati da Frontex”.

    Il neo direttore esecutivo Hans Leijtens, che si è insediato all’inizio di aprile di quest’anno, sembra così seguire la via tracciata dal suo predecessore, Fabrice Leggeri. A nulla vale il fatto che il 9 marzo di quest’anno l’Agenzia per la prima volta sia stata costretta a comparire dinanzi alla Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea: il caso promosso dall’avvocata tedesca Lisa-Marie Komp riguarda il rimpatrio nel 2016 di una famiglia siriana con quattro bambini piccoli che, pochi giorni dopo aver presentato richiesta d’asilo in Grecia è stata caricata su un aereo e riportata in Turchia su un volo gestito proprio da Frontex sempre nell’ambito dell’accordo Ue-Turchia.

    La stessa “dinamica” che si vorrebbe replicare per mezzo dei traghetti: l’Agenzia, in altri termini, non si fa problemi nel non attendere l’esito di un procedimento che ha come oggetto proprio la stessa attività che verrebbe riproposta con i ferry. Altreconomia ha domandato a Frontex, a seguito dell’inchiesta del New York Times, quali azioni intenda intraprendere in merito alle pratiche della polizia di frontiera greca chiedendo espressamente se sia in discussione l’attivazione dell’articolo 46 del regolamento dell’Agenzia che prevede il ritiro degli agenti da un Paese qualora non vengano rispettati i diritti umani durante le operazioni di “controllo” dei confini. Nessuna risposta anche se il nuovo bando per traghettare centinaia di persone verso la Turchia parla da sé.

    Le offerte per aggiudicarsi la commessa devono giungere a Frontex entro il 29 giugno, il 30 verranno aperte le buste per aggiudicare la gara e assegnare il servizio. I contraenti così come l’affidatario (cioè l’Agenzia) devono garantire che “si comporteranno in conformità con l’ordine pubblico, nel pieno rispetto dei diritti fondamentali sanciti dalla Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea”. Una clausola che sa di farsa.

    https://altreconomia.it/frontex-mette-a-bando-un-servizio-di-traghetti-per-riportare-i-migranti

    #Grèce #Turquie #refoulements #push-backs #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Frontex #Dikili #Lesbos #accord_UE-Turquie #ferry #limbe

  • France sending unaccompanied minors back to Italy, MSF

    France is pushing back even unaccompanied minor migrants at the Italian border at Ventimiglia, the head of the Doctors Without Borders (MSF) mobile clinic assisting migrants in transit between the two countries told ANSA in an interview. This kind of pushback is a violation of regulations in place, Sergio Di Dato noted.

    In recent days, even unaccompanied minors are among the foreigners pushed back to the Italian border town of Ventimiglia by French gendarme, ANSA was told in an interview last week with Sergio Di Dato, the head of the Doctors Without Borders (MSF) mobile clinic assisting migrants in transit between Italy and France.

    French authorities, Di Dato said, “are no longer able to absorb unaccompanied minors into their reception system and so have started to send them back to Italy, something they should not do according to the regulations in place. ... They are obliged to take care of them.”
    Pushbacks may rise after 150 more police sent to borders

    “On average,” MSF’s Di Dato , “there are 20-25 pushbacks of people from France to Italy every day. There is concern that this number may rise after 150 additional border police were sent to the borders.”

    The activities of the mobile clinic were started in the second half of February and, Di Dato said, “unlike in the past, when in the winter months there was a slowdown in pushbacks at the Menton border by the French police, this year a steady stream has been seen.”

    Di Dato underscored that there had been a “reduction at the same time as protests against pension reform, which probably led to a drop in the number of police deployed for border control.However, afterwards the number returned to about 20-25 [pushbacks] per day.”

    The MSF mobile clinic provides assistance to those pushed back from Menton with a “refusal of entry” document and transferred to containers while waiting to be handed over to the Italian police.

    The vulnerable face risks and deprivation

    “Some have told us that they were left without water for several hours. It also happened that young girls are left in containers alone with several men. These are situations that can be difficult,” Di Dato said, adding that the situation is complicated “also in Ventimiglia, where some of the migrants pushed back — women, children and the vulnerable — are taken care of by associations focusing on these things, while others end up under the Roia Bridge in camps without washing facilities and amid rats.”

    The crackdown by French authorities has now raised concern among humanitarian aid workers in the Italian-French border area.

    “If the unaccompanied minors are sent back systematically and in an arbitrary manner, there is the issue of how to protect these individuals - who are the weakest - in an effective manner, especially since [migrant] facilities in Italy are full,” Di Dato said.

    https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/48774/france-sending-unaccompanied-minors-back-to-italy-msf
    #refoulements #push-backs #mineurs #MNA #France #Italie #frontières #frontière_sud-alpine #migrations #réfugiés #France #asile #Italie #Vintimille #Alpes_Maritimes #refus_d'entrée

    –—

    Sur l’annonce du renforcement des contrôles frontaliers dans les Alpes Maritimes :

    Immigration : 150 policiers et gendarmes supplémentaires dès la semaine prochaine à la frontière de #Menton

    https://seenthis.net/messages/1002209#message1002211

    • Migrants : des associations dénoncent les « traitements inadmissibles » des mineurs dans les Alpes-Maritimes

      Une dizaine d’associations co-signent un communiqué ce samedi pour dénoncer « les refoulements, enfermement, et l’absence de prise en charge » des mineurs non-accompagnés à Menton et Nice. Selon elles, la situation se dégrade dans les Alpes-Maritimes.

      Alors que le président du Département des Alpes-Maritimes écrit au gouvernement pour demander des mesures « face à une situation migratoire explosive » à la frontière franco-italienne, les associations dénoncent une dégradation de la situation. Plus de quinze associations co-signent un communiqué ce samedi, pour pointer du doigt les « enfermements, refoulements illégaux et absences de prises en charge » des mineurs non-accompagnés, en particulier à Nice et Menton.

      Selon les signataires, dont Roya citoyenne, et le Secours catholique, de « nombreux·ses jeunes subissent des traitements inadmissibles ». Ces associations demandent « la prise en charge effective de tous les Mineur·es Non Accompagné·es, l’arrêt immédiat des refoulements en Italie sans évaluation préalable et réglementaire par l’ASE, et l’arrêt des enfermements abusifs au poste frontière (...) le respect intégral de la convention internationale des droits de l’enfant dans le département des Alpes-Maritimes ».
      À Menton, « 68 mineurs enfermés » dans les locaux de la PAF

      Selon le communique de presse interassociatif, à Menton "de nombreux·ses jeunes se déclarant mineur·es sont refoulé·es en Italie de façon totalement illégale alors qu’ils et elles doivent être admis·es systématiquement et sans délai sur le territoire français. C’est à l’Aide Sociale à l’Enfance (ASE), service du Département 06, de procéder ensuite à leur évaluation de minorité, et non aux forces de l’ordre. Or ces jeunes sont refoulé·es par la police sans évaluation préalable par l’ASE. De nombreux témoignages font état de fausses dates de naissance enregistrées par les policiers pour justifier ces refoulements. De plus, des mineur·es sont refoulé·es avec une obligation de quitter le territoire français et une interdiction de retour sur le territoire français sans être informé·es de leurs droits, ce qui rend toute contestation très difficile et constitue une atteinte grave à leurs droits.

      « Comme en avril dernier, des mineur·es sont enfermé·es dans les locaux de la police aux frontières (PAF) dans l’attente que le Département 06 vienne les chercher, poursuit le communiqué. 68 mineur·es étaient enfermé·s ce lundi 21 août, dans des locaux totalement inadaptés et dans des conditions sanitaires déplorables : en pleine canicule, entassé·es, dormant à même le sol avec uniquement un lavabo et un WC. Ils et elles étaient jusqu’à 78 le 23 août ! Plusieur·es mineur·es ont été privé·es de liberté durant 3 à 5 jours ce qui constitue une violation manifeste de la convention internationale des droits de l’enfant, dont la France est signataire. »

      « Actuellement de nombreux·ses jeunes seraient encore détenu·es en toute illégalité dans les locaux de la PAF, sans avoir accès ni à un·e avocat·e, ni à un·e traducteur·ice. D’autres sont évacué·es et livré·es à eux·elles-mêmes, sans aucune prise en charge », conclut le communiqué.
      À Nice, les associations pointent du doigt le « traitement des mineurs non accompagnés par les forces de l’ordre »

      À Nice, les associations parlent de mineurs "contraint·es de se rendre au Commissariat Auvare pour demander la protection de l’ASE. Les temps d’attente pour certain·es jeunes au service du « Quart » d’Auvare se sont prolongés jusqu’à 25h sans manger, avant qu’un·e éducateur·ice ne vienne les chercher. Désormais, le commissariat ne laisse même plus entrer les mineur·es : sous prétexte d’être saturé et de ne pouvoir ouvrir de nouveaux locaux, les jeunes sont priés d’attendre dans le jardin public voisin, et de revenir le soir ou le lendemain. Le 23 août, une dizaine d’entre eux·elles attendaient leur prise en charge, certain·es dormant dehors depuis plusieurs jours. Beaucoup partent sans pouvoir faire valoir leur droit à la protection de l’enfance."

      "À Nice, c’est désormais la police qui empêche les mineurs non accompagnés d’être placé·es : en ne les laissant pas entrer, les signalements de « mineur·es en danger » ne sont pas envoyés au procureur et à l’ASE qui ne sont même pas informés de leurs situations. Le traitement des MNA par les forces de l’ordre dans les Alpes-Maritimes est inadmissible. La police manque à ses obligations légales envers ces personnes vulnérables, tout comme le Département 06 qui ne vient pas les chercher dans les locaux de la police dans des délais suffisamment rapides pour une mise à l’abri. Les délaissements de mineur·es et la non-assistance à personne en danger sont manifestes."

      https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/societe/immigration-des-associations-denoncent-des-traitement-inadmissibles-de-mi

  • La frontera infinita

    La mayoría de inmigrantes que quieren viajar a otros países de Europa utilizan el paso fronterizo de #Irún con Francia para hacerlo. Es un tránsito que no es fácil, porque la policía francesa los intercepta y los devuelve a España. Diferentes asociaciones lo califican de controles racistas, porque solo interceptan a las personas que provienen del continente africano.
    En el programa Repor hemos acompañado a diferentes emigrantes en su paso hacia la frontera francesa y hemos sido testigo de diferentes devoluciones por parte de las autoridades francesas.

    https://www.rtve.es/play/videos/repor/frontera-infinita/6884457
    #frontières #Espagne #France #migrations #réfugiés #asile #refoulements #push-backs #racisme #contrôles_au_faciès #reportage #vidéo

  • “Like We Were Just Animals”. Pushbacks of People Seeking Protection from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Laila R. fled Afghanistan with her parents and her two brothers in 2016, when she was 11 or 12 years old. They sought international protection in Iran, then Turkey, and then Greece. Increasingly desperate for stability, they travelled through North Macedonia and arrived in Bosnia and Herzegovina in early 2021. When Laila first spoke to Human Rights Watch in November 2021, she and her family had tried to enter Croatia dozens of times. Croatian police apprehended her and her family each time, ignored their repeated requests for asylum, drove them to the border, and forced them to return to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    When Croatian police carry out such pushbacks—broadly meaning official operations intended to physically prevent people from reaching, entering, or remaining in a territory and which either lack any screening for protection needs or employ summary screening—they do not contact authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina to arrange for people’s formal return. Instead, Croatian police simply order people to wade across one of the rivers that mark the international border.

    Laila and many others interviewed by Human Rights Watch said Croatian authorities frequently pushed them back to Bosnia and Herzegovina in the middle of the night. She and others told Human Rights Watch Croatian police sometimes pushed them back near Velika Kladuša or other towns in Bosnia and Herzegovina. But on many occasions, the Croatian police took them somewhere far from populated areas.

    Describing the first pushback she experienced, Laila said, “We had no idea where we were. It was the middle of the night, and the police ordered us to go straight ahead until we crossed the river to Bosnia. We spent that night in the forest.”

    Croatian police had destroyed the family’s phones, so they had no easy way of navigating to safety. The next morning, she and her family eventually came across a road. They walked some 30 kilometers to reach Velika Kladuša.

    As with Laila and her family, many of the people who spoke to Human Rights Watch told us they had first sought asylum in Greece as well as in countries outside the European Union before they attempted to enter Croatia. Laila and her family spent one month in Iran, six months in Turkey, and more than three years in Greece, leaving each country after concluding that authorities in each did not intend to respond to their requests for international protection. They did not seek international protection in Bosnia and Herzegovina because they had heard that the country’s authorities rarely granted asylum.

    Croatia became an increasingly important point of entry to the European Union in 2016, after Hungary effectively closed its borders to people seeking asylum. Croatian police have responded to the increase in the number of people entering Croatia irregularly—without visas and at points other than official border crossings—by pushing them back without considering international protection needs or other individual circumstances. In April 2023, for instance, Farooz D. and Hadi A., both 15 years old, told Human Rights Watch Croatian police had apprehended them the night before, driven them to the border, and ordered them to walk into Bosnia and Herzegovina, disregarding their request for protection and their statements that they were under the age of 18.

    Pushbacks from Croatia to the non-European Union countries it borders are now common. Between January 2020 and December 2022, the Danish Refugee Council recorded nearly 30,000 pushbacks from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina, almost certainly an underestimate. Approximately 13 percent of pushbacks recorded in 2022 were of children, alone or with families. Human rights groups have also recorded pushbacks from Croatia to Serbia and to Montenegro.

    Croatian pushbacks have often included violent police responses, including physical harm and deliberate humiliation. Video images captured by Lighthouse Reports, an investigative journalism group, for a 2021 investigation it conducted in collaboration with Der Spiegel, the Guardian, Libération, and other news outlets showed a group of men in balaclavas forcing a group of people into Bosnia and Herzegovina. Although the men did not wear name tags or police badges, the investigation identified them as Croatian police based on characteristic clothing items, the gear they carried, and the corroboration of other police officers. Der Spiegel recounted, “One of the masked men repeatedly lashes out with his baton, letting it fly at the people’s legs so that they stumble into the border river, where the water is chest-high. Finally, he raises his arm threateningly and shouts, ‘Go! Go to Bosnia!’”[1]

    In most of the accounts Human Rights Watch heard, Croatian police wore uniforms, drove marked police vans, and identified themselves as police, leaving no doubt that they were operating in an official capacity.

    Men and teenage boys have told Human Rights Watch and other groups that Croatian police made them walk back to Bosnia and Herzegovina barefoot and shirtless. In some cases, Croatian police forced them to strip down to their underwear or, in a few cases, to remove their clothing completely. In one particularly egregious case documented by the Danish Refugee Council, a group of men arrived at a refugee camp in Bosnia and Herzegovina with orange crosses spray-painted on their heads by Croatian police, an instance of humiliating and degrading treatment the Croatian ombudswoman concluded was an act of religious hatred.

    Younger children have seen their fathers, older brothers, and other relatives punched, struck with batons, kicked, and shoved. Croatian border police have also discharged firearms close to children or pointed firearms at children. In some cases, Croatian police have also shoved or struck children as young as six.

    Croatian police commonly take or destroy mobile phones. Human Rights Watch also heard frequent reports that Croatian police had burned, scattered, or otherwise disposed of people’s backpacks and their contents. In some cases, people reported that police had taken money from them. “The last time we went to Croatia, the police took everyone’s money and all our telephones. Why are they like this?” asked Amira H., a 29-year-old Kurdish woman from Iraq travelling with her husband and 9-year-old son.[2]

    Pushbacks inflict abuse on everyone. In particular, many people said pushbacks took a toll on their mental well-being. Hakim F., a 35-year-old Algerian man who said Croatian police had pushed him back four times between December 2022 and January 2023, commented, “These pushbacks are so stressful, so very, very stressful.”[3] Stephanie M., a 35-year-old Cameroonian woman, told Human Rights Watch in May 2022, “These pushbacks have been so traumatizing. I find I cannot sleep. I am always thinking of the things that have happened, replaying them in my head. There are days I cry, when I ask myself why I am even living. I find myself thinking, ‘Let everything just end. Let the world just end.’”[4]

    For children and their families, who frequently cannot travel as fast on foot as single adults can, pushbacks may add considerably to the time spent in difficult, often squalid, and potentially unsafe conditions before they are able to make a claim for asylum in an EU country. They increase the time children spend without access to formal schooling. For unaccompanied children in particular, pushbacks can increase the risk that they will be subject to trafficking. Family separation may also result from pushbacks: the nongovernmental organization Are You Syrious has reported cases of women allowed to seek asylum in Croatia with their children while their husbands are pushed back to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    Croatian police continued to carry out pushbacks throughout 2022, although in the second half of the year police increasingly employed an alternative tactic of issuing summary expulsion orders directing people to leave the European Economic Area within seven days. These summary expulsion orders did not consider protection needs and did not afford due process protections. By late March 2023, Croatian police appeared to have abandoned this practice and resumed their reliance on pushbacks.

    Croatian authorities regularly deny the overwhelming evidence that Croatian police have regularly carried out pushbacks, sometimes inflicting serious injuries, frequently destroying or seizing phones, and nearly always subjecting people to humiliating treatment in the process. The Croatian government did not respond to Human Rights Watch’s request for comment on this report.

    On the initiative of and with funding from the European Union, Croatia has established a border monitoring mechanism, with the ostensible purpose of preventing and addressing pushbacks and other abuses at the border. The mechanism’s parameters and track record have so far not been promising. Its members cannot make unannounced visits and cannot go to unofficial border crossing points. It is not clear how the members are appointed and how the mechanism’s priorities are defined. It has had its reports revised to remove criticism of Croatian police and the Croatian Ministry of the Interior.

    Croatia’s consistent and persistent use of pushbacks violates several international legal norms, including the prohibitions of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, collective expulsion, and refoulement—the sending of people to places where they would face ill-treatment or other irreparable harm or would be at risk of return to harm. Pushbacks of children violate the international norm that states take children’s best interests into account, including by taking particular care to ensure that returns of children are in their best interests. Excessive force, other ill-treatment, family separation, and other rights violations may also accompany pushback operations.

    Slovenia and other European Union member states are also implicated in the human rights violations committed by Croatian authorities against people transferred to Croatia under “readmission agreements”—arrangements under which states return people to the neighbouring countries through which they have transited, with few, if any, procedural safeguards. For instance, under Slovenia’s readmission agreement with Croatia, Slovenian police summarily transferred irregular migrants to Croatia if they have entered Slovenia from Croatia, regardless of whether they requested asylum in Slovenia. In turn, Croatian authorities generally immediately pushed them on to Bosnia and Herzegovina or to Serbia.

    EU institutions have effectively disregarded the human rights violations committed by Croatian border authorities. The European Union has contributed substantial funds to Croatian border management without securing meaningful guarantees that Croatia’s border management practices will adhere to international human rights norms and comply with EU law.

    Moreover, the European Union’s decision in December 2022 to permit Croatia to join the Schengen area, the 27-country zone where internal border controls have generally been removed, sends a strong signal that it tolerates pushbacks and other abusive practices.

    Croatia should immediately end pushbacks to Bosnia and Herzegovina and to Serbia and instead afford everybody who expresses an intention to seek international protection the opportunity to do so. Croatia should also reform its border monitoring mechanism to ensure that it is a robust and independent safeguard against pushbacks and other official abuse.

    Until such time as Croatia definitively ends pushbacks and other collective expulsions, ensures that people in need of international protection are given access to asylum, and protects the rights of children, Slovenia should not seek to carry out returns under its readmission agreement with Croatia. Austria, Italy, and Switzerland, in turn, should not send people to Slovenia under their readmission agreements as long as Slovenia continues to apply its readmission agreement with Croatia.

    Through enforcement of EU law and as a condition of funding, the European Commission should require Croatian authorities to end pushbacks and other human rights violations at the border and provide concrete, verifiable information on steps taken to investigate reports of pushbacks and other human rights violations against migrants and asylum seekers.

    The European Union and its member states should also fundamentally reorient their migration policy to create pathways for safe, orderly, and regular migration.

    https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/05/03/we-were-just-animals/pushbacks-people-seeking-protection-croatia-bosnia-and
    #renvois #expulsions #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Balkans #route_des_Balkans #frontières #push-backs #refoulements #expulsions_de_masse #Croatie #Bosnie #Bosnie-Herzégovine

    • Migrants’ Mass Expulsions from Croatia Raise Legal Doubts

      Croatia and Bosnia say the expulsion of hundreds of migrants and refugees from the first to the second country are regulated by a bilateral agreement – but NGOs, rights groups and a legal expert question its legality.

      Since the end of March 2023, hundreds of migrants and refugees have been returned from Croatia back to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

      Differently from the illegal pushbacks that saw thousands of people being violently sent back from Croatia to Bosnia between 2018 and 2022, these recent operations are happening with cooperation between the two countries and with the open approval of European institutions.

      NGOs and rights groups were the first to condemn this new phenomenon, referring to it as “mass expulsions” implemented by Croatia. With information gathered by direct testimonies and documents collected from the expelled people, they have voiced concerns regarding alleged degrading treatments and human rights violations by Croatian police.

      Besides such abuses, experts also say the procedure could be illegal. “There are some doubts over the legality of what we are seeing happening between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina in terms of European law,” Italian jurist and migration expert Gianfranco Schiavone told BIRN.
      Not allowed to seek asylum

      A few weeks after the first migrants and refugees were returned to Bosnia’s northwest Una-Sana Canton, Mustafa Ruznic, the canton’s Prime Minister, sent an open letter to Bosnia’s state security and foreign ministers, as well as to the head of the Foreigners Affairs Service, SPS, demanding an explanation for the increased number of migrants and refugees reportedly returned from Croatia to Bosnia based on a bilateral readmission agreement.

      Ruznic said a significant number of them were unknown to the authorities and might present security risks, and complained of not being informed about the ongoing construction of a detention centre in the Lipa Temporary Reception Centre, situated in the Canton’s administrative centre, Bihac.

      Croatian and Bosnian authorities later explained that the mass returns were taking place on the basis of a bilateral agreement between the two states signed in 2002 and annexed again in September 2011 with a specific plan for its implementation, but never actually put into use.

      Nenad Nesic, Bosnia’s Minister of Security, denied a new possible crisis in Bosnia’s parliament on April 19, a day after he met Ruznic in Bihac.

      Presenting data for the first three months of 2023, he stated that a total of 768 foreign citizens had been accepted back under the Readmission Agreement between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia.

      He added that, during the same period, 1,816 requests for the admission of foreigners under readmission were rejected because Croatian authorities couldn’t prove they came from Bosnia.

      “This clearly shows that our Foreigners Service is responsibly doing its job and there is no influx of migrants into Bosnia and Herzegovina. Migrants are evenly distributed and currently most of them are in the Sarajevo Canton, where 630 migrants are accommodated,” Nesic stated.

      Sara Kekus, from the Zagreb-based Center for Peace Studies, CMS, who has been monitoring the situation with migrants, told BIRN that they do not have specific data on readmissions, but that the number is clearly increasing.

      “According to the testimonies of our associates, organisations, volunteers, and activists who are present in BiH, the persons returned from Croatia testified that they tried to seek asylum [there], but they were not allowed to do so, or they did not even know who to ask for asylum,” Kekus said.

      According to Kekus, people reported not having access to translators and that they were issued documents mostly in Croatian, which they signed without knowing what they were signing.

      “Complaints are that persons were kept in detention for several days and that the meals were rather meagre, one a day, bread and cheese and water,” he said.

      Among the expelled people, Kekus notes, there were not only adults but also unaccompanied children and families with small children, which is “especially problematic”.

      The Border Violence Monitoring Network, a grassroot watchdog network of NGOs and rights groups, collected testimonies from people subjected to the pushbacks and denounced the lack of translations and the fact that the internationally guaranteed right to ask for asylum was not respected by the Croatian authorities.

      “The police there [in Croatia] asked us to pay for accommodation, food and transport to the border, as if we were in a hotel and not in a prison. We didn’t ask to be taken there. We feel as if we were robbed,” one of the men expelled from Croatia told them. Documents collected by BVMN support this last claim.

      In a written response to BIRN’s inquiry, the Croatian Ministry of Interior, MUP, said that “the BVMN report is not based on information about actual treatment”.

      It said that “every illegal migrant caught by the Croatian police has the right and is adequately informed about the possibility of expressing an intention to seek international protection. If he/she expresses such an intention, an appropriate procedure is initiated.”
      Expulsions or ‘returns’?

      In the same letter, the Croatian MUP stated that implementation of the bilateral agreement had been discussed at several meetings prior to this, and that at the Joint EU-BiH Readmission Committee meeting on March 28 in Brussels, the European Commission reminded Bosnia’s authorities of their obligation to implement the agreement.

      The MUP also said these procedures cannot be called expulsions, but are instead returns of persons as regulated by the bilateral agreement.

      Italian jurist and migration expert Gianfranco Schiavone has a different opinion. “This type of procedure needs to be verified carefully because the notion of readmission applies currently in light of a directive, 115 of 2008, that regulates readmissions, but only among member countries of the European Union.”

      That is not the case for the two countries in question. Croatia is a European Union member since 2015, and it joined the visa-free Schengen zone at the start of 2023. Bosnia, on the other hand, has only recently been granted the status of EU candidate country.

      “This is de facto an expulsion of an alien citizen who irregularly arrived in a European country and should happen under the guarantee of the same European directive,” stated Schiavone.

      Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch published a report on May 3, saying “Croatian police regularly and often violently push back refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants to Bosnia and Herzegovina without assessing their asylum requests or protection needs”. The 94-page report, titled “‘Like We Were Just Animals’: Pushbacks of People Seeking Protection from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina,” finds that Croatian authorities engage in pushbacks, including of unaccompanied children and families with young children.

      “The practice is ongoing despite official denials, purported monitoring efforts, and repeated – and unfulfilled – commitments to respect the right to seek asylum and other human rights norms. Border police frequently steal or destroy phones, money, identity documents, and other personal property, and often subject children and adults to humiliating and degrading treatment, sometimes in ways that are explicitly racist,” the report says.

      “Pushbacks have long been standard operating procedure for Croatia’s border police, and the Croatian government has bamboozled European Union institutions through deflection and empty promises,” said Michael Garcia Bochenek, senior children’s rights counsel at Human Rights Watch and the author of the report. “These abhorrent abuses – and the official duplicity that facilitates them – should end.”

      Croatian authorities have mostly disclaimed responsibility for pushbacks, and the Croatian Ministry of the Interior did not respond to Human Rights Watch’s requests for a meeting or for comment on its findings, it says in the report.

      https://balkaninsight.com/2023/05/05/migrants-mass-expulsions-from-croatia-raise-legal-doubts

    • Croatia accused of new mass expulsions of migrants to Bosnia

      The investigative journalism project BIRN reports that Croatia has been carrying out mass expulsions of migrants to its neighbor, Bosnia. The two countries claim the returns are lawful under a bilateral agreement.

      Migrants are being expelled from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina under a formal agreement between the two countries, rights groups say. Their claims are based on testimonies from migrants who said they were pushed back over the border by Croatian police, sometimes violently.

      In a recent report, the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN) says these alleged pushbacks are a “new phonemenon” and are not the same as the expulsions that took place from Croatia to Bosnia between 2018 and 2022, which have already been documented.

      According to the BIRN report, Croatian authorities have been sending migrants back across the border to Bosnia, which is outside EU territory, under a revived bilateral agreement between the two countries. This was only discovered by the premier of the canton of Una-Sana, in Bosnia’s northwest, after more than 760 migrants returned under the deal had already arrived in his canton.

      Bosnia’s security minister, Nenad Nesic, has denied that there is an influx of migrants into the country. But Sara Kekus, from the Center for Peace Studies in Zagreb, told BIRN that the number is increasing. He also said that those returned from Croatia had testified that they had tried to seek asylum there but had not been allowed to do so, or had not known who to ask. In some cases they had been given documents mostly in Croatian which they signed without understanding what they were.

      According to Kekus, some of the migrants, who included unaccompanied minors and families with young children, said they had been mistreated by Croatian authorities: “Complaints are that persons were kept in detention for several days and that the meals were rather meagre, one a day, bread and cheese and water,” he is quoted as saying.
      ’Illegal practice’

      The pushbacks were also confirmed by the Border Violence Monitoring Networ (BVMN), another NGO, which condemned the fact that Croatian authorities had acted in breach of the internationally guaranteed right to request asylum.

      The Croatian interior ministry denied this, telling BIRN, “every illegal migrant caught by the Croatian police has the right and is adequately informed about the possibility of expressing an intention to seek international protection.” The ministry also said its operations were not “expulsions” but returns, carried out under the bilateral agreement.

      But all returns of migrants from EU countries to ’third countries’ outside the bloc have to happen according to an EU law, Directive 2008/115. As Bosnia is not yet in the EU, these procedures need to be followed for returns from Croatia, as Italian lawyer and migration expert Gianfranco Schiavone told BIRN. “This is de facto an expulsion of an alien citizen who irregularly arrived in a European country and should happen under the guarantee of the same European directive.”

      Migrants ’treated like animals’

      The BIRN investigation into illegal practices being carried out by an EU member state at the bloc’s external border follows a report by Human Rights Watch (HRW), which includes very recent testimonies of migrants who were pushed back from Croatia. In April, 2023, according to the report, two 15-year-old boys, Farooz D. and Hadi A., said Croatian police had caught them, driven them to the border and ordered them to walk into Bosnia, “disregarding their request for protection and their statements that they were under the age of 18.”

      HRW claims that in continuing to expel migrants, often using violent tactics, Croatia is acting in violation of international laws, including the prohibition against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, and against refoulement – sending people to places where they would face harm. The Croatian government did not respond to HRW’s request for comment.

      https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/48806/croatia-accused-of-new-mass-expulsions-of-migrants-to-bosnia

    • Croazia: manganelli anche contro i bambini migranti

      La Croazia respinge i migranti, tra i quali molti minori non accompagnati e famiglie con bambini, e rende impossibile l’accesso all’asilo. È ciò che emerge dall’ultimo rapporto di Human Rights Watch, mentre il ministro dell’Interno Božinović continua a smentire.

      A distanza di meno di un mese dalla conferenza stampa in cui il ministro dell’Interno croato Davor Božinović – cercando di giustificare se stesso e i suoi sottoposti di fronte alle prove di violazioni della polizia croata nei confronti dei migranti emerse nell’ambito di un’inchiesta giornalistica – ha dichiarato che la Croazia rispetta i diritti umani e che la polizia croata non effettuai respingimenti di migranti, il titolare del dicastero dell’Interno per l’ennesima volta è stato smentito dalla realtà, nella fattispecie da un rapporto di Human Rights Watch (HRW) che riporta le testimonianze dei migranti e dei rifugiati respinti dalla Croazia verso la Bosnia Erzegovina.

      Il rapporto intitolato “Come se fossimo animali: respingimenti di persone in cerca di protezione”, pubblicato lo scorso 3 maggio, conferma che negli ultimi anni le autorità croate hanno partecipato a respingimenti violenti dei migranti, compresi i minori non accompagnati e intere famiglie con bambini piccoli. Dal rapporto emerge chiaramente che i respingimenti continuano, nonostante le costanti smentite da parte degli alti funzionari dello stato e le ripetute promesse (mai mantenute) di voler garantire l’accesso all’asilo.

      “Da tempo ormai i respingimenti sono diventati una prassi consueta della polizia di frontiera croata, e il governo croato continua a ingannare le istituzioni europee distogliendo l’attenzione dalla questione e facendo vane promesse. Questi deplorevoli abusi, così come l’ambiguità istituzionale che li facilita, devono cessare”, ha dichiarato Michael Garcia Bochenek, consulente senior di Human Rights Watch per i diritti dei bambini e autore del rapporto.

      Nel periodo compreso tra novembre 2021 e aprile 2023 i ricercatori di HRW hanno intervistato oltre cento rifugiati e richiedenti asilo perlopiù provenienti da Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran e Pakistan. La maggior parte delle persone intervistate sostiene di aver subito respingimenti violenti – anche decine di volte – da parte della polizia croata, che ha sempre ignorato le loro richieste di asilo. Ad esempio, il diciassettenne Rozad N., proveniente dal Kurdistan iracheno, racconta che negli ultimi due anni lui e la sua famiglia, compreso suo fratello di sette anni e sua sorella di nove anni, sono stati respinti 45-50 volte. Un ragazzo iraniano, Darius M., oggi diciottenne, tra il 2020 e il 2021, quindi quando era ancora minorenne, è stato rimandato dalla Croazia verso la Bosnia Erzegovina ben 33 volte, mentre un suo connazionale, Farhad K., ventuno anni, insieme ai genitori e alla sorella di quattordici anni, è stato respinto dalla polizia croata più di 20 volte.

      Il Danish Refugee Council solo nel periodo tra gennaio 2020 e dicembre 2022 ha registrato quasi trentamila respingimenti dalla Croazia verso la Bosnia Erzegovina. In molti casi (12% nel 2020, 13% nel 2021) tra i bersagli della polizia croata c’erano anche bambini.

      Nel rapporto di HRW si sottolinea che il numero effettivo di persone respinte dalla Croazia è indubbiamente superiore a quello stimato, soprattutto considerando che gli agenti croati, con il sostegno dell’agenzia Frontex, pattugliano anche il confine con la Serbia e quello con il Montenegro.

      Il copione è quasi sempre lo stesso: quando intercetta i migranti la polizia croata li riporta verso luoghi difficilmente raggiungibili lungo il confine, ordinando loro di allontanarsi dal territorio croato. Nel loro ritorno verso i paesi confinanti, i migranti respinti spesso si trovano costretti ad attraversare fiumi e torrenti, a inerpicarsi sulle rocce e camminare tra fitti boschi. Gli agenti croati non di rado costringono i migranti a ritornare in Bosnia Erzegovina scalzi, indossando solo biancheria intima, o persino completamente spogliati. Secondo la stragrande maggioranza delle testimonianze, ad effettuare i respingimenti sono persone in divisa che guidano veicoli della polizia e si identificano come agenti, lasciando così chiaramente intendere di agire in veste di pubblici ufficiali.

      Quasi tutti i migranti respinti affermano di essere stati picchiati almeno una volta dagli agenti croati o di aver assistito a scene di violenza perpetrate dalla polizia croata. “Ti guardano come se non fossi un essere umano, la violenza semplicemente è parte integrante della procedura”, racconta Zafran R., ventotto anni, descrivendo le percosse che gli sono state inflitte dagli agenti croati. “La prima volta che la mia famiglia ha cercato di attraversare il confine, nell’ottobre 2020, la polizia ci ha catturati, prendendo a botte me e mio padre. Ho detto agli agenti che mia madre era molto malata e che doveva andare in ospedale. Uno di loro ha risposto duramente: ‘Siamo poliziotti, non medici. Vattene in Bosnia, pezzo di merda! Perché siete venuti in Croazia?!’”, racconta un altro giovane migrante. “Alcune persone sono state brutalmente picchiate. La polizia croata si è impossessata dei loro cellulari, per poi distruggerli. Hanno bruciato i nostri effetti personali davanti ai nostri occhi, gridando: ‘Non vi vogliamo nel nostro paese, ritornate in Bosnia!’”, ricorda Laila, sedici anni, fuggita dall’Afghanistan.

      I racconti dei migranti respinti sono corroborati da testimonianze di molti operatori umanitari. Un volontario dell’associazione italiana Strada SiCura spiega che nella primavera del 2022, durante una visita in Bosnia Erzegovina, ha visto molte ferite che corrispondevano ai racconti che aveva sentito in precedenza. “Ho visto costole fratturate, diverse ferite alle gambe, lividi sul viso e altre parti della testa corrispondenti alle testimonianze delle vittime. Una persona riportava un’ustione sul petto che sembrava essere stata causata da un dispositivo elettrico”.

      I ricercatori di HRW hanno raccolto anche numerose testimonianze dei migranti che sono finiti in ospedale dopo essere stati picchiati dalla polizia croata affrontando poi un lungo periodo di convalescenza. Così il diciannovenne Ibrahim F., proveniente dal Camerun, ha spiegato che alla fine del 2021 gli agenti croati lo avevano picchiato così fortemente che non poteva camminare per due mesi.

      “Abbiamo sentito anche alcune testimonianze secondo cui le donne migranti avrebbero subito molestie e abusi sessuali da parte degli agenti croati. Così ad esempio un migrante ghanese, Emmanuel J., ha raccontato che quando, nel maggio 2022, la polizia croata aveva intercettato un grande gruppo di migranti con cui lui viaggiava e tra i quali c’erano anche otto donne, alcuni agenti avevano ‘molestato le donne’ palpeggiandole nelle parti intime”, scrive HRW, ricordando che anche in precedenza alcuni rifugiati avevano riferito di essere stati stuprati con rami e costretti dalla polizia croata a spogliarsi completamente e sdraiarsi l’uno sopra l’altro.

      I ricercatori sono venuti a conoscenza anche di diversi episodi di violenza nei confronti dei bambini. “Molti bambini piccoli sono stati costretti ad assistere a scene in cui i loro padri, fratelli maggiori e cugini venivano pestati a pugni e calci e presi a manganellate. Gli agenti della polizia di frontiera croata più volte hanno sparato vicino ai bambini e puntato le armi contro di loro. Sono stati registrati anche alcuni episodi che hanno visto gli agenti croati spintonare e picchiare bambini di sei anni”.

      Nel suo rapporto, HRW riporta anche la testimonianza di una donna proveniente dall’Afghanistan che nel febbraio del 2021 è stata respinta dalla Croazia insieme alla sua famiglia. “Ad un certo punto [gli agenti croati] hanno iniziato a prendere a schiaffi e picchiare i bambini. Poi hanno ordinato loro di addentrarsi in un bosco. Quando poi li ho raggiunti, i bambini erano sdraiati a terra. Un agente ha detto loro di alzarsi e togliersi i vestiti. La polizia li picchiava con manganelli mentre si spogliavano”, ha raccontato la donna, spiegando che dopo le prime violenze e umiliazioni gli agenti hanno ordinato alla sua famiglia di ritornare a piedi in Bosnia Erzegovina. “Per tutto il percorso ci colpivano con bastoni alla schiena e alle gambe, scagliandosi in particolare contro i bambini”.

      Lorena Fornasir, medico in pensione e una delle fondatrici dell’organizzazione umanitaria Linea d’Ombra di Trieste, conferma che simili violenze comportano conseguenze psicologiche incommensurabili per le vittime, conseguenze che di solito si manifestano come disturbo da stress post-traumatico. Le osservazioni di Lorena Fornasir corroborano i dati emersi da una recente ricerca sulla situazione dei rifugiati in Serbia, secondo cui le persone respinte dalla Croazia mostrano sintomi più pronunciati di depressione, ansia e stress post-traumatico rispetto ad altri migranti.

      Nel frattempo, come si sottolinea anche nel rapporto di HRW, le autorità croate continuano a negare qualsiasi responsabilità dei respingimenti alle frontiere, sforzandosi di confutare le prove, ormai indiscutibili, di violenze della polizia che spesso infligge gravi lesioni ai migranti, confisca e distrugge i loro effetti personali e li sottopone a trattamenti umilianti e degradanti. Michael Garcia Bochenek ha confermato a Novosti, che il governo croato non ha voluto commentare i dati emersi dal rapporto, né tanto meno ha voluto rispondere alle domande di HRW che ha chiesto un incontro con i rappresentanti del governo per discutere anche del controverso meccanismo indipendente di monitoraggio dell’operato della polizia.

      Si tratta di uno strumento creato su iniziativa della Commissione europea nell’ambito del nuovo Patto sulla migrazione e l’asilo. Pur trattandosi formalmente di un meccanismo indipendente, è stato il ministero dell’Interno croato a decidere a chi affidare il monitoraggio e quali metodi utilizzare. Il primo rapporto, pubblicato nel 2022, ha confermato i dubbi sull’effettiva indipendenza del meccanismo creato dal governo croato. È infatti emerso che l’unico scopo di questo strumento, peraltro finanziato con risorse europee, è quello di legittimare l’attuale stato delle cose alle frontiere esterne dell’UE, completamente ignorando le violenze nei confronti dei migranti.

      Che anche l’UE continui a chiudere un occhio di fronte alle violazioni dei diritti umani alle sue frontiere esterne, lo conferma il fatto che nel dicembre 2022 gli stati membri hanno dato il via libera all’ingresso di Zagabria nell’area Schengen, inviando così un forte messaggio che l’Europa tollera respingimenti e altri abusi. C’è però ancora tempo per invertire la tendenza. HRW ritiene infatti che la Commissione europea debba sollecitare le autorità croate affinché pongano fine ai respingimenti e forniscano informazioni attendibili sulle azioni intraprese per indagare sulle violazioni dei diritti dei migranti.

      “I respingimenti non devono diventare una consuetudine. Le istituzioni europee devono dimostrare fermezza nel chiedere alla Croazia di assumersi la propria responsabilità delle sistematiche violazioni del diritto dell’UE e delle norme internazionali”, conclude HRW.

      https://www.balcanicaucaso.org/aree/Croazia/Croazia-manganelli-anche-contro-i-bambini-migranti-225073

      aussi ici:
      https://seenthis.net/messages/1002500

  • Respingimenti alla frontiera con la Slovenia: i dati che smontano gli annunci del governo

    A fine 2022 il Viminale aveva prefigurato la ripresa delle riammissioni dei migranti, già dichiarate illegittime. Lubiana si è però rifiutata di accettarle nel 90% dei casi. Le autorità di frontiera hanno dovuto perciò virare sui provvedimenti di espulsione: oltre 650 in pochi mesi, di cui 500 a carico di cittadini afghani tecnicamente inespellibili

    Le “riammissioni” dei migranti verso la Slovenia annunciate dal governo italiano a fine 2022 sono state un flop. Dati inediti trasmessi dal Viminale ad Altreconomia mostrano infatti che quasi tutte quelle “proposte” dall’Italia tra dicembre 2022 e metà marzo 2023 sono state rifiutate da Lubiana: ben 167 sulle 190 “tentate” dalle autorità di frontiera italiane.
    “L’annuncio trionfale delle riammissioni rivela la sua autentica natura -commenta Gianfranco Schiavone, presidente del Consorzio italiano di solidarietà di Trieste e membro della rete RiVolti ai Balcani-: un annuncio politico volutamente vago che celava la consapevolezza che quelle pratiche erano e restano illegali”.

    Per comprendere ragioni e proporzioni della bolla propagandistica “esplosa” alla frontiera orientale occorre fare un passo indietro al dicembre del 2022, quando cioè il Viminale diffonde tramite agenzie la notizia di una nuova direttiva finalizzata al “rafforzamento dei controlli sui flussi della rotta balcanica”. Viene prefigurata la ripresa delle riammissioni -cioè dei respingimenti- verso la Slovenia, con tanto di invito rivolto ai prefetti di Trieste, Gorizia e Udine di “adottare iniziative volte a dare ulteriore impulso all’attività di vigilanza sulla fascia di confine”.

    Non è il ministro Piantedosi a firmare quella “direttiva” ma la sua capa di gabinetto, la prefetta Maria Teresa Sempreviva. Lo schema sembra voler replicare quanto già visto nella primavera 2020, quando al Viminale c’era Luciana Lamorgese, il suo capo di gabinetto era Piantedosi e il prefetto di Trieste si chiamava Valerio Valenti, appena nominato Commissario governativo “all’emergenza migranti”. Sappiamo come è andata a finire: quasi 1.300 persone riammesse “informalmente” (https://altreconomia.it/rotta-balcanica-nel-2020-record-di-respingimenti-dallitalia-verso-la-sl), cioè senza avere in mano alcun provvedimento scritto, tra maggio e dicembre di quell’anno, in forza di una circolare ministeriale a firma di Piantedosi -mai resa pubblica- che si richiamava al contestato accordo bilaterale tra Italia e il Paese di confine datato 1996, mai ratificato dal Parlamento, in contrasto con la Costituzione. Dietro l’espressione burocratica delle “riammissioni” c’erano in realtà veri e propri respingimenti a catena, con le persone, richiedenti asilo inclusi, spostate come pacchi tra le polizie di frontiera, per finire poi scaricate nell’arco di poche ore in Bosnia ed Erzegovina. Nel gennaio 2021, con un’ordinanza di capitale importanza, il tribunale di Roma, per mano della giudice Silvia Albano e sulla base di un ricorso presentato dalle avvocate e socie Asgi Caterina Bove e Anna Brambilla, dichiarò la grave illegittimità di quelle riammissioni-respingimenti (https://altreconomia.it/i-respingimenti-italiani-in-slovenia-sono-illegittimi-condannato-il-min), costringendo il Viminale a fare un’imbarazzata marcia indietro: l’Italia aveva consapevolmente esposto le persone a “trattamenti inumani e degradanti” lungo la rotta balcanica e a “torture” in Croazia. E nessuno dei governi che si sono succeduti da allora ha mai riconosciuto il carattere illegale di quelle procedure, come ben racconta anche il film “Trieste è bella di notte” dei registi Andrea Segre, Stefano Collizzolli e Matteo Calore.

    Trascorsi nemmeno due anni dall’ordinanza di Roma, a dicembre 2022 arriva come detto l’annuncio della nuova “circolare Sempreviva”, tanto pubblicizzata a bocconi e virgolettati estratti sui media quanto sottratta nella sua interezza all’opinione pubblica. L’accesso civico presentato da Altreconomia nei mesi scorsi è stato infatti negato dal gabinetto del ministro dell’Interno per presunte ragioni di cooperazione di polizia e del “concreto pregiudizio” alla “integrità dei rapporti internazionali” con Slovenia e Austria. Ancora una volta rifacendosi al decreto ministeriale Lamorgese del marzo 2022 che ha dato un colpo durissimo alla trasparenza lungo le frontiere.

    I dati ottenuti oggi chiariscono la natura propagandistica di quegli annunci. Ma c’è di più. In questo scenario prossimo alla farsa si inserisce infatti anche Lubiana. Interpellata sulle ragioni del “no” opposto alle riammissioni tentate dall’Italia, la polizia slovena, per bocca del rappresentante Drago Menegalija, ci ha fatto sapere che il “motivo principale del rifiuto di riammissione […] è la mancanza di prove presentate nella richiesta di riammissione alla polizia slovena in relazione al fatto che i migranti avrebbero (precedentemente) soggiornato nel territorio della Slovenia”. Aggiungendo poi che “in base all’accordo tra i Paesi, i rimpatri avvengono continuamente” e che “l’accordo definisce chiaramente i criteri in base ai quali possiamo accogliere solo i migranti che sono entrati in Italia attraverso la Slovenia, che sono stati fermati nella fascia di confine e che non hanno fatto richiesta di protezione internazionale in Italia”.

    L’avvocata Caterina Bove aiuta a capire le ragioni del mutato atteggiamento della Slovenia: “Quel Paese non ha alcun interesse a riammettere sul proprio territorio coloro che sono giunti in Italia -spiega-. Il cambio di governo da un lato e l’ingresso della Croazia nell’area Schengen (avvenuto il primo gennaio 2023) dall’altro, consentono ora alla Slovenia di ricoprire un ruolo più ‘leggero’ nel contrasto ai flussi, ricevendo una minore pressione dall’Europa. Questo escamotage le consente di tenere anche i buoni rapporti con l’Italia, senza troppo colpo ferire. Tanto sa che le persone non intendono fermarsi lì”.

    La risposta della polizia slovena, pur orientata a preservare le relazioni diplomatiche con l’Italia (“The relations between the police forces of both countries are very good”, si legge nella risposta), fa però trasparire alcuni aspetti importanti. Il primo, secondo Gianfranco Schiavone, è l’”evidente preoccupazione rispetto all’operato della polizia italiana”. “La nota slovena evidenzia infatti come le riammissioni, secondo il diritto interno di quello Stato, non possono avere seguito quando non sia stata provata la provenienza degli stranieri dal territorio sloveno né soprattutto quando gli stranieri abbiano manifestato l’intenzione di chiedere protezione internazionale in Italia. Con tale risposta le autorità slovene mettono una pietra tombale sulla questione, lampante dal punto di vista giuridico, ma mai ammessa formalmente dalle autorità italiane, che è tassativamente proibita la riammissione degli stranieri che intendono chiedere asilo in Italia. L’abnorme numero delle tentate riammissioni chieste da parte italiana, pressoché tutte rigettate, fa emergere un quadro oscuro sull’operato italiano poiché, a seconda degli ordini politici del momento, stranieri che si trovano nella medesima condizione giuridica finiscono per subire trattamenti completamente diversi; così al medesimo cittadino afghano può accadere di accedere alla domanda di asilo oppure di vedersi oggetto di una tentata la riammissione illegittima in Slovenia, o infine essere espulso dall’Unione europea con provvedimento delle autorità italiane benché inespellibile”.

    Quella di Schiavone non è una forzatura. Non potendo compiere le riammissioni ordinate dall’alto perché palesemente illegali ma essendo costrette al contempo a dar l’idea del “pugno duro”, le autorità di frontiera hanno dovuto così virare sui provvedimenti di espulsione. Lo dimostrano i dati relativi ai provvedimenti di espulsione e allontanamento trasmessi ad Altreconomia dalla prefettura di Trieste: tra la fine del 2022 e il primo trimestre 2023 ne sono stati adottati oltre 650, di cui oltre 500 a carico di persone in fuga dall’Afghanistan e giunte a Trieste dalla “rotta balcanica”. Un numero impressionante se confrontato con i mesi precedenti e che risponde appunto alla necessità di dar seguito, anche solo sulla carta, alle indicazioni governative. Indicazioni disposte a tutto, anche a negare l’evidente bisogno di protezione di persone tecnicamente inespellibili, e che sollevano forti dubbi sulla corretta attività informativa in tema di diritto d’asilo condotta dalle autorità di frontiera.

    Schiavone parla di una dinamica “sconcertante”. “In primo luogo va evidenziata la radicale illegittimità dei provvedimenti di espulsione che sono stati emanati”. Il Testo unico sull’immigrazione prevede infatti che “in nessun caso può disporsi l’espulsione o il respingimento verso uno Stato in cui lo straniero possa essere oggetto di persecuzione per motivi di razza, di sesso, di lingua, di cittadinanza, di religione, di opinioni politiche, di condizioni personali o sociali, ovvero possa rischiare di essere rinviato verso un altro Stato nel quale non sia protetto dalla persecuzione”. Di più: la norma aggiunge che “Non sono ammessi il respingimento o l’espulsione o l’estradizione di una persona verso uno Stato qualora esistano fondati motivi di ritenere che essa rischi di essere sottoposta a tortura o a trattamenti inumani o degradanti”. “Questa disposizione è di inequivoca interpretazione dal momento che l’espressione ‘in nessun caso’ rappresenta un divieto assoluto che non ammette eccezioni di sorta -chiarisce Schiavone-. L’indiscutibile condizione di estremo pericolo in cui si trova oggi qualsiasi cittadino afghano che sia fuggito dal suo Paese configura l’assoluta proibizione di emettere nei suoi confronti un provvedimento di espulsione verso il suo Paese. Tutto ciò era pienamente noto alla prefettura di Trieste che però ha agito in contrasto con la normativa e alla quale andrebbe dunque chiesto di fornire precise spiegazioni di tale condotta”.

    “Una motivazione che immagino potrebbe essere avanzata da quella amministrazione al fine di sostenere le proprie scelte -non si nasconde Schiavone- è che i cittadini afghani, pur essendo palesemente persone con chiaro bisogno di protezione, non avevano manifestato alle autorità di frontiera la loro volontà di chiedere protezione internazionale in Italia e che, fallita la loro tentata riammissione in Slovenia, l’unica ‘via d’uscita’ per le autorità italiane era stata quella di emettere nei confronti di questi stranieri un provvedimento di espulsione confidando che tutti gli interessati si sarebbero dispersi, come in effetti è accaduto. Una simile motivazione è radicalmente infondata e semmai solleva ulteriori gravi interrogativi su che cosa sia accaduto ancora una volta alla sempre inquieta frontiera italo-slovena nell’inverno 2022-2023. Oltre ai già evidenziati profili di illegittimità dei provvedimenti per inespellibilità degli stranieri verso il loro Paese appare necessario sapere se a quegli stranieri sia stata fornita o no l’assistenza e l’informazione sull’esercizio dei loro diritti che il diritto dell’Unione europea prevede”.

    Il presidente dell’Ics di Trieste si rifà al “Manuale comune ad uso delle autorità competenti degli Stati membri per lo svolgimento del controllo di frontiera sulle persone” diramato dalla Commissione europea. È lì dentro, nel cosiddetto Manuale Schengen, che si evidenzia come “un cittadino di Paese terzo deve essere considerato un richiedente asilo/protezione internazionale se esprime in un qualsiasi modo il timore di subire persecuzioni o danni gravi facendo ritorno al proprio Paese di origine o nel paese in cui aveva precedentemente la dimora abituale”. È una sottolineatura importante perché “l’intenzione di chiedere protezione internazionale non deve essere manifestata in una forma particolare”. Non occorre dunque che la parola “asilo” sia pronunciata espressamente: “l’elemento determinante è l’espressione del timore di quanto potrebbe accadere in caso di ritorno”.

    Non si può strumentalmente fraintendere l’eventuale silenzio delle persone in transito: “L’attività della polizia di frontiera deve essere orientata perciò a escludere ogni ragionevole dubbio sull’esistenza di una situazione di pericolo verso persone che potrebbero non formulare in modo esplicito la domanda di protezione in modo diretto, perché vogliono ad esempio proseguire il viaggio per raggiungere famigliari o parenti in altri Paesi, come è noto accade per gran parte dei rifugiati che entrano in Italia”, aggiunge ancora Schiavone.

    Affinché sia effettivo il diritto di chiedere asilo o protezione alla frontiera (dovrebbe valere via terra così come via mare) e di presentare la relativa domanda il prima possibile, continua il Manuale Schengen, “le autorità di frontiera devono informare i richiedenti, in una lingua che possa essere da loro sufficientemente compresa, delle procedure da seguire (come e dove presentare la domanda), nonché dei loro diritti e doveri, incluse le conseguenze possibili dell’inosservanza dei loro obblighi e di una mancata collaborazione con le autorità”.

    Gli fa eco l’avvocata Anna Brambilla: “Che tipo di informativa legale viene fatta a queste persone in arrivo dalla Slovenia e per le quali è adottato un provvedimento di espulsione? Dai dati ottenuti possiamo concludere che delle due l’una: o le autorità italiane non fanno un’informativa adeguata oppure tentano di riammettere nell’altro territorio persone che non dovrebbero essere espulse”.

    “Il riferimento all’obbligo di informare gli stranieri delle possibili conseguenze dell’inosservanza dei loro obblighi di cooperazione con le autorità è un elemento cruciale per valutare la corretta condotta delle forze di polizia di frontiera -riprende Schiavone-. Ci sono chiari motivi per ritenere che la condotta della polizia di frontiera terrestre a Trieste nella gestione dell’ammissione al territorio degli stranieri con chiaro bisogno di protezione sia stata impostata su un modus operandi assai lontano rispetto a quello prescritto dalle indicazioni sopra riportate. Non sappiamo come sono stati condotti i colloqui con gli stranieri, se e quanti erano i mediatori in servizio nelle diverse lingue e quale informazione sia stata fornita agli stranieri. Ciò che sappiamo è che nessun osservatore terzo indipendente è mai stato ammesso a quella frontiera e che anche la presenza di funzionari dell’Alto commissariato delle Nazioni Unite per i rifugiati è stata, almeno in alcuni periodi, assai intermittente”.

    Quello che è certo è che centinaia di persone alla frontiera hanno affrontato in questi mesi le sorti più diverse. Ma non per l’applicazione di norme -e delle loro relative garanzie- quanto per l’obbedienza a ordini e umori del governo: “La certezza del diritto è totalmente assente -denuncia Schiavone-. Siamo in una sorta di terra di nessuno dove ogni irregolarità diviene sempre possibile e l’arbitrio diventa l’unica certezza”.

    https://altreconomia.it/respingimenti-alla-frontiera-con-la-slovenia-i-dati-che-smontano-gli-an
    #asile #migrations #frontières #frontière_sud-alpine #Alpes #Slovénie #Italie #push-backs #refoulements #chiffres #statistiques #réadmissions #réfugiés_afghans #Maria_Teresa_Sempreviva #refoulements_en_chaîne #circolare_Sempreviva

  • Lithuania: Legalizing illegal pushbacks gives green-light to torture

    Responding to the passing of amendments to the Lithuanian Law on the State Border and its Protection which effectively enshrine in domestic legislation the ongoing practice of border pushbacks, Amnesty International’s Europe Director, Nils Muižnieks, said:

    “Today is a dark day for justice as Lithuania’s Parliament has voted to enshrine in law illegal and abusive practices. By codifying what is illegal and forcibly returning refugees and migrants to places where they face a risk of torture and other ill-treatment, the government is trampling on their rights and on Lithuania’s own international obligations.

    “Rather than taking the urgent steps necessary to stop these unlawful returns to widespread violence, intimidation and ill-treatment in Belarus, this law effectively green-lights pushing people back to torture.

    “By passing this law, Lithuania has set itself on a collision course with EU law and the EU Court of Justice, which has already censured the member state over previous legislation. Lithuania cannot claim to be a rights-abiding country when it circumvents the rule of law.”

    Background

    The amendment was passed 69 votes to 7 with 24 abstentions. There will be a final formal approval given by the Parliament next Tuesday.

    The vote comes just weeks after Europe’s top anti-torture body, the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture, published a report that found that authorities in countries across Europe have used practices that amount to torture when targeting refugees and migrants who tried to cross Europe’s borders.

    Research by Amnesty International published in June 2022 found that Lithuanian border guards subjected non-European refugees and migrants arriving from Belarus to thousands of violent pushbacks to Belarus, despite the risk of torture and other ill-treatment by Belarusian authorities, as well as to arbitrary detention and other violations.

    International law prohibits collective expulsions and the return of anyone to a country where they could face serious human rights violations.

    https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/04/lithuania-legalizing-illegal-pushbacks-gives-green-light-to-torture
    #Lituanie #frontières #push-backs #frontières #refoulements #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Biélorussie

    • Lithuania law to allow ’volunteer’ border guards to use violence

      Lithuania’s parliament passed a controversial new law allowing volunteers from around Europe to join its national border guard force — while giving them the right to use violence against asylum seekers and migrants crossing in from Belarus.

      https://euobserver.com/migration/156944
      #volontaires #bénévoles #milices

    • La Lituanie s’apprête à légaliser les refoulements de migrants

      Le projet d’amendement à la loi sur les frontières prévoit d’expulser les demandeurs d’asile arrivés illégalement sur le territoire, et de créer une force civile en soutien des gardes-frontières.

      Selon le ministère de l’intérieur à Vilnius, le texte qui devrait être adopté définitivement par les députés lituaniens, mardi 25 avril, a pour but de garantir la sécurité du petit Etat balte contre d’éventuelles tentatives de déstabilisation menées par son voisin biélorusse. Les ONG y voient surtout un moyen de pérenniser les « pushbacks », qui consistent à refouler illégalement les migrants sans leur donner la possibilité de déposer une demande d’asile, pratiqués par la Lituanie depuis l’été 2021.

      Voté en seconde lecture par une grosse majorité des parlementaires, jeudi 20 avril, l’amendement à la loi sur les frontières de l’Etat prévoit qu’en « situation d’urgence », face à l’afflux massif de ressortissants étrangers aux frontières du pays, le gouvernement pourra limiter l’accès au territoire. Les gardes-frontières seront alors autorisés à expulser les migrants entrés illégalement et se trouvant dans une zone large de 5 kilomètres depuis la frontière. Une exception a été ajoutée par les députés pour les personnes fuyant un conflit armé, des persécutions, ou nécessitant une assistance humanitaire.

      « A première vue, la proposition semble assez équilibrée et inclut même des garanties », note Viktor Ostrovnoj, en charge de l’asile et de l’immigration à la Croix-Rouge lituanienne. Il rappelle cependant que l’état d’urgence − le premier décret déclarant l’urgence à la frontière avec la Biélorussie est entré en vigueur le 3 août 2021 − est toujours en place. Avec le vote des députés, « ce qui était censé être une mesure temporaire, permettant de faire face à des crises de courte durée, risque de devenir un nouveau statu quo », remarque Viktor Ostrovnoj.

      Plus de 20 000 « pushbacks »

      Directrice du bureau du Défenseur des droits au Parlement, à Vilnius, Erika Leonaite critique elle aussi le texte. Celui-ci crée, selon elle, « l’illusion » que la Lituanie pourra continuer de garantir le droit d’asile. Or, objecte-t-elle, « c’est un service de l’immigration et non pas les gardes-frontières dans la forêt qui est compétent pour déterminer si une personne fuit des persécutions, telles qu’elles sont définies par la Convention relative au statut des réfugiés ».

      A titre d’exemple, Mme Leonaite mentionne le cas de quatre ressortissants cubains, refoulés en avril 2022 alors qu’ils tentaient d’entrer en Lituanie. Ils ont finalement obtenu l’asile en mars, après l’intervention de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme. « C’est la preuve que le système ne fonctionne pas », affirme la Défenseure des droits.

      Selon les statistiques officielles, les gardes-frontières ont mené 20 150 « pushbacks » depuis le 3 août 2021 et le premier décret ministériel autorisant les refoulements. Des chiffres difficiles à vérifier car peu d’observateurs sont autorisés sur place. En août 2022, la Lituanie a achevé la construction d’une barrière d’environ 550 kilomètres sur sa frontière commune avec la Biélorussie, longue de 700 kilomètres. Les demandeurs d’asile ne peuvent entrer qu’aux postes-frontières, à condition de disposer de papiers d’identité.

      « De très gros risques de dérapage »

      A plusieurs occasions, les ONG ont dénoncé les conditions désastreuses dans lesquelles vivent les migrants. Plusieurs ont dû être amputés à cause du froid. Le 6 avril, les gardes-frontières lituaniens ont découvert le corps sans vie d’un Indien d’une quarantaine d’années près de la ligne de séparation avec la Biélorussie. En août 2022, un homme originaire du Sri Lanka avait déjà été trouvé mort à la frontière.

      La violence et les mauvais traitements risquent aussi de s’intensifier avec la nouvelle loi, qui prévoit d’embaucher des civils pour venir en aide aux gardes-frontières, sur le modèle des « chasseurs frontaliers » recrutés par la Hongrie en 2017. « Il y a de très gros risques de dérapage car ces personnes, qui ne sont pas bien formées, ni entraînées, devraient être armées », révèle Lina Vosyliute, de l’association Global Lithuanian Leaders.

      Depuis le 18 avril, plus d’une trentaine d’organisations européennes et 140 universitaires originaires du monde entier ont signé une lettre ouverte, adressée aux députés lituaniens et à la première ministre, Ingrida Simonyte. Ils dénoncent une loi qui « viole non seulement le droit à une procédure d’asile équitable et efficace et le principe de non-refoulement, mais restreint également l’aide humanitaire et les activités indépendantes de surveillance des droits de l’homme par les ONG ».

      https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2023/04/21/la-lituanie-s-apprete-a-legaliser-les-refoulements-de-migrants_6170474_3210.

    • Lithuania’s border protection law to allow ‘volunteer’ patrols to use violence against asylum seekers

      A controversial law on border protection, which is making its way in the Lithuanian parliament, may allow volunteers from around Europe to join border guard service and use violence against migrants, EUObserver reports.

      The bill, which legalises the controversial practise of forcing irregular migrants back into Belarus, passed the first reading on Thursday with 69 votes in favour, seven against and 24 abstentions. The legislation is being pushed via a fast-track procedure and is scheduled for the final vote on April 25.

      Among other things, it institutes border guard service “sponsors” – volunteers who can patrol and use coercion against migrants and asylum seekers, help make arrests, and perform other patrol guard-like duties.

      “There is no restriction for people from abroad to come,” Emilija Švobaitė, a lawyer and rights campaigner at the Sienos Grupė (Border Group) NGO, told EUobserver ahead of Thursday’s vote.

      She said it means that, for example, radical right-wing groups from Germany could come and patrol alongside national border guards.

      Meanwhile, journalists and independent monitors will be banned from the border, she said.

      Sponsors can be citizens of any EU member state so long as they speak some Lithuanian and have declared their residence in the country, are at least 18 years old, and are not currently serving as a border guard somewhere else.

      Rights groups have also criticised the practice of Lithuanian border guard service to force people back into Belarus. The policy was performed under a decree by the Interior Ministry, but is now being transposed into law.

      “Basically they are legalising the pushbacks at the border,” EUObserver quotes Monika Guliakaitė-Danisevičienė of the Lithuanian Human Rights Centre NGO.

      Similar comments were made by Amnesty International earlier this week, which described the Lithuanian bill as a green-light to torture.

      According to EUObserver, the European Commission said it was not yet able to comment on the draft law.

      https://www.lrt.lt/en/news-in-english/19/1968329/lithuania-s-border-protection-law-to-allow-volunteer-patrols-to-use-violence-aga

    • Le texte légal :

      Projektas Nr. XIVP-2383(2)

      LIETUVOS RESPUBLIKOS

      VALSTYBĖS SIENOS IR JOS APSAUGOS ĮSTATYMo Nr.VIII-1666 1, 2, 4, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 18, 23, 26 straipsnių pakeitimo ir ĮSTATYMO PAPILDYMO 231 straipsniu ir NAUJU IX SKYRIUMI

      įstatymas

      2023 m. d. Nr.

      Vilnius

      1 straipsnis. 1 straipsnio pakeitimas

      Pakeisti 1 straipsnio 1 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „1. Šis įstatymas nustato Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės sienos ir pasienio teisinius režimus, pasienio kontrolės punktų veiklą, valstybės sienos apsaugos organizavimą, Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos prie Lietuvos Respublikos vidaus reikalų ministerijos (toliau – Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba) struktūrą, jos organizavimo pagrindus, finansavimą, funkcijas, bendradarbiavimą su kitomis valstybės ir savivaldybių institucijomis ir įstaigomis bei visuomene, pareigūnų teises ir pareigas, taip pat prievartos panaudojimo teisėtumo sąlygas, Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos rėmėjų veiklos teisinius pagrindus.“

      2 straipsnis. 2 straipsnio pakeitimas

      1. Pakeisti 2 straipsnio 8 dalies nuostatą iki dvitaškio ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „8. Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės sienos apsauga (toliau – valstybės sienos apsauga) –veikla, kuria siekiama :“.

      2. Pakeisti 2 straipsnio 20 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „20. Prievarta – veiklos metodas, kuris taikomas, kai nevykdomi Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūno ar Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos rėmėjo reikalavimai ar nurodymai arba siekiama išvengti pavojaus, ir kuriuo siekiama įgyvendinti Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai pavestas funkcijas.“

      3. Papildyti 2 straipsnį 221 dalimi :

      „221. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos rėmėjas (toliau – rėmėjas) – šiame įstatyme nustatytus reikalavimus atitinkantis fizinis asmuo, savo noru padedantis Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai vykdyti šiame įstatyme jai nustatytas funkcijas.“

      4. Pakeisti 2 straipsnio 26 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „26. Kitos šiame įstatyme vartojamos sąvokos suprantamos taip, kaip jos apibrėžiamos Lietuvos Respublikos asmens duomenų, tvarkomų nusikalstamų veikų prevencijos, tyrimo, atskleidimo ar baudžiamojo persekiojimo už jas, bausmių vykdymo arba nacionalinio saugumo ar gynybos tikslais, teisinės apsaugos įstatyme (toliau – Asmens duomenų, tvarkomų teisėsaugos ar nacionalinio saugumo tikslais, įstatymas), Lietuvos Respublikos civiliniame kodekse, Lietuvos Respublikos atliekų tvarkymo įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos aviacijos įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos cheminių medžiagų ir preparatų įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos krizių valdymo ir civilinės saugos įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos ginklų ir šaudmenų kontrolės įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos įstatyme „Dėl užsieniečių teisinės padėties“, Lietuvos Respublikos jūros aplinkos apsaugos įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos krašto apsaugos sistemos organizavimo ir karo tarnybos įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos narkotinių ir psichotropinių medžiagų kontrolės įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos nuodingųjų medžiagų priežiūros įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos policijos įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos sprogmenų apyvartos kontrolės įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos saugios laivybos įstatyme, Lietuvos Respublikos vidaus tarnybos statute, Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės ir savivaldybių turto valdymo, naudojimo ir disponavimo juo įstatyme ir Reglamente (ES) Nr. 2016/399, 2016 m. balandžio 27 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamente (ES) 2016/679 dėl fizinių asmenų apsaugos tvarkant asmens duomenis ir dėl laisvo tokių duomenų judėjimo ir kuriuo panaikinama Direktyva 95/46/EB (Bendrasis duomenų apsaugos reglamentas), 1951 m. Konvencijoje dėl pabėgėlių statuso, 1982 m. Jungtinių Tautų jūrų teisės konvencijoje.“

      3 straipsnis. 4 straipsnio pakeitimas

      1. Pakeisti 4 straipsnio 6 dalies 2 punktą ir jį išdėstyti taip :

      „2) Vyriausybės nustatyta tvarka laikinai atnaujinus patikrinimus prie vidaus sienos siekiant užtikrinti viešąją tvarką, Lietuvos Respublikos nacionalinį saugumą.“

      2. Papildyti 4 straipsnį 13 dalimi :

      „13. Esant paskelbtai valstybės lygio ekstremaliajai situacijai dėl masinio užsieniečių antplūdžio ir siekiant užtikrinti Lietuvos Respublikos nacionalinį saugumą ir viešąją tvarką, Vyriausybė Nacionalinio saugumo komisijos pasiūlymu gali priimti sprendimą, kad užsieniečiai, ketinantys kirsti ar kirtę valstybės sieną tam nenustatytose vietose arba tam nustatytose vietose, tačiau pažeidę valstybės sienos kirtimo tvarką, ir esantys pasienio ruože, į Lietuvos Respublikos teritoriją neįleidžiami. Ši nuostata taikoma individualiai kiekvienam minėtam užsieniečiui. Jeigu nustatoma, kad užsienietis traukiasi nuo Vyriausybės sprendime nurodytų ginkluotų konfliktų, taip pat persekiojimo, kaip jis apibrėžtas Konvencijoje dėl pabėgėlių statuso, arba siekia patekti į Lietuvos Respublikos teritoriją humanitariniais tikslais, nuostata dėl užsieniečių neįleidimo į Lietuvos Respubliką netaikoma. Užsieniečių, kirtusių valstybės sieną tam nenustatytose vietose arba tam nustatytose vietose, tačiau pažeidusių valstybės sienos kirtimo tvarką, buvimas pasienio ruože nelaikomas buvimu Lietuvos Respublikos teritorijoje. Į Lietuvos Respublikos teritoriją neįleidžiamiems užsieniečiams turi būti atliktas pagalbos poreikio įvertinimas ir, esant pagalbos poreikiui, šiems užsieniečiams suteikiama reikalinga neatidėliotina medicinos ar humanitarinė pagalba. Šioje dalyje nurodyto Vyriausybės sprendimo neįleisti užsieniečių į Lietuvos Respublikos teritoriją vykdymo ir pagalbos poreikio įvertinimo tvarką nustato Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas.“

      4 straipsnis. 10 straipsnio pakeitimas

      Pakeisti 10 straipsnį ir jį išdėstyti taip :

      „10 straipsnis. Valstybės sienos kirtimo laikinas apribojimas arba nutraukimas

      Vyriausybė, užtikrindama Lietuvos Respublikos nacionalinį saugumą, visuomenės rimtį, siekdama apsaugoti gyventojus ir aplinką nuo pavojingų ir ypač pavojingų užkrečiamųjų ligų ar jų sukėlėjų įvežimo ir išplitimo, esant paskelbtai ekstremaliajai situacijai, taip pat gretimos valstybės prašymu gali laikinai apriboti arba nutraukti vykimą per valstybės sieną ar tam tikrus pasienio kontrolės punktus.“

      5 straipsnis. 11 straipsnio pakeitimas

      1. Pakeisti 11 straipsnio 3 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „3. Pasienio ruožas nustatomas iki 5 km pločio į Lietuvos Respublikos teritorijos gilumą nuo valstybės sienos, einančios sausuma, pasienio vandenimis. Pasienio ruožo ribas tvirtina Vyriausybė vidaus reikalų ministro teikimu.“

      2. Papildyti 11 straipsnį 10 dalimi :

      „10. Esant paskelbtai valstybės lygio ekstremaliajai situacijai dėl masinio užsieniečių antplūdžio, asmenys į pasienio ruožą gali patekti tik turėdami Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos išduotą leidimą. Šis leidimas išduodamas Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado nustatytais atvejais. Reikalavimas turėti Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos išduotą leidimą netaikomas asmenims :

      1) gyvenantiems pasienio ruože ir (ar) esantiems nekilnojamojo turto, kuris yra pasienio ruože, savininkais ar naudotojais ;

      2) dirbantiems ar besimokantiems pasienio ruože ;

      3) vykdantiems ūkinę, komercinę veiklą ar kelių, ryšio linijų ir kitų viešojo intereso objektų priežiūros veiklą pasienio ruože ;

      4) vykstantiems magistraliniais, krašto ar rajoniniais keliais arba geležinkeliais, esančiais pasienio ruože ar kertančiais pasienio ruožą ;

      5) kertantiems valstybės sieną per pasienio kontrolės punktus ar vykstantiems į darbo vietą, esančią pasienio kontrolės punkte ;

      6) vykdantiems valstybės sienos apsaugos objektų ir įrenginių statybą, įrengimą ir (ar) priežiūrą.“

      6 straipsnis. 14 straipsnio pakeitimas

      1. Pakeisti 14 straipsnio 2 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „2. Sąrašas sudaromas Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado nustatyta tvarka. Į sąrašą gali būti įrašyti motyvuotą prašymą pateikę fiziniai ir juridiniai asmenys, juridinių asmenų filialai, atstovybės bei juridinio asmens statuso neturintys asmenys. Šioje dalyje nurodyti subjektai į sąrašą negali būti įrašyti, jeigu :

      1) fizinis asmuo, juridinio asmens, juridinio asmens filialo, atstovybės ar juridinio asmens statuso neturinčio asmens vadovas arba kitas atsakingas asmuo turi neišnykusį ar nepanaikintą teistumą už tyčinį nusikaltimą ;

      2) nėra praėję vieneri metai nuo fiziniam asmeniui, juridinio asmens, juridinio asmens filialo, atstovybės ar juridinio asmens statuso neturinčio asmens vadovui arba kitam atsakingam asmeniui paskirtos administracinės nuobaudos ar administracinio poveikio priemonės už teisės aktų, reglamentuojančių valstybės sienos kirtimą ir patikrinimą arba pasienio teisinį režimą, pažeidimą, kontrabandą arba akcizais apmokestinamų prekių įsigijimą, laikymą, gabenimą, naudojimą ar realizavimą pažeidžiant nustatytą tvarką, neteisėtą valstybės sienos perėjimą dėl neatsargumo įvykdymo dienos ;

      3) juridiniam asmeniui yra įsiteisėjęs apkaltinamasis teismo nuosprendis dėl tyčinio nusikaltimo ir yra bent viena iš šių sąlygų :

      a) po bausmės atlikimo nėra praėję treji metai, kai padarytas nusikaltimas pagal Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamąjį kodeksą priskiriamas nesunkiems arba apysunkiams nusikaltimams ;

      b) po bausmės atlikimo nėra praėję penkeri metai, kai padarytas nusikaltimas pagal Baudžiamąjį kodeksą priskiriamas sunkiems nusikaltimams ;

      c) po bausmės atlikimo nėra praėję aštuoneri metai, kai padarytas nusikaltimas pagal Baudžiamąjį kodeksą priskiriamas labai sunkiems nusikaltimams.“

      2. Pakeisti 14 straipsnio 3 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „3. Sprendimas atsisakyti įrašyti fizinius ir juridinius asmenis, juridinių asmenų filialus, atstovybes bei juridinio asmens statuso neturinčius asmenis į sąrašą gali būti priimamas, kai :

      1) fizinis ir juridinis asmuo, juridinio asmens filialas, atstovybė bei juridinio asmens statuso neturintis asmuo, pateikdamas prašymą, jame ar kartu su prašymu pateiktuose dokumentuose sąmoningai nurodė tikrovės neatitinkančius duomenis ;

      2) fizinis ir juridinis asmuo, juridinio asmens filialas, atstovybė bei juridinio asmens statuso neturintis asmuo pateikė ne visus reikiamus dokumentus, nurodytus sąrašo sudarymo tvarkos apraše ;

      3) fizinis ir juridinis asmuo, juridinio asmens filialas, atstovybė bei juridinio asmens statuso neturintis asmuo kartu su prašymu pateikė negaliojančius dokumentus ;

      4) nustatomos šio straipsnio 2 dalyje nurodytos aplinkybės, dėl kurių fizinis asmuo, juridinis asmuo, juridinio asmens filialas, atstovybė ar juridinio asmens statuso neturintis asmuo negali būti įrašytas į sąrašą ;

      5) asmuo, kurio buvimas valstybės sienos apsaugos zonoje, pasienio juostoje, pasienio vandenyse, kurių vandenimis arba krantais eina išorės siena, gali kelti grėsmę viešajai tvarkai ar visuomenės saugumui ;

      6) fizinio ir juridinio asmens, juridinio asmens filialo, atstovybės bei juridinio asmens statuso neturinčio asmens vykdoma veikla pasienio juostos dalyje, kuri yra sausumoje, nesusijusi su valstybės sienos apsaugos objektų bei įrenginių statyba, įrengimu ir (ar) priežiūra.“

      3. Pakeisti 14 straipsnio 5 dalies 1 punktą ir jį išdėstyti taip :

      „1) paaiškėja šio straipsnio 3 dalies 1, 3, 4 ir 5 punktuose nurodytos aplinkybės arba, kad fizinis ir juridinis asmuo, juridinio asmens filialas, atstovybė bei juridinio asmens statuso neturintis asmuo kartu su prašymu pateikė suklastotus dokumentus ;“

      4. Papildyti 14 straipsnio 5 dalį 6 punktu :

      „6) paaiškėja, kad nebevykdoma veikla pasienio juostos dalyje, kuri yra sausumoje, susijusi su valstybės sienos apsaugos objektų bei įrenginių statyba, įrengimu ir (ar) priežiūra.“

      7 straipsnis. 15 straipsnio pakeitimas

      Pakeisti 15 straipsnio 3 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „3. Draudžiama gadinti, naikinti valstybės sienos ženklus, kitus valstybės sienos apsaugos objektus ir įrenginius ar kitaip daryti žalą pasienio juostai. Valstybės sienos apsaugos objektų ir įrenginių apsaugos zonos ir jose taikomos specialiosios žemės naudojimo sąlygos nustatytos Lietuvos Respublikos specialiųjų žemės naudojimo sąlygų įstatyme.“

      8 straipsnis. 16 straipsnio pakeitimas

      1. Pakeisti 16 straipsnio 4 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „4. Juridiniai asmenys, juridinių asmenų filialai, atstovybės ar juridinio asmens statuso neturintys asmenys, kurių teritorijoje yra steigiamas ar įsteigtas pasienio kontrolės punktas, privalo patikrinimų įstaigoms suteikti patikrinimams atlikti reikalingą infrastruktūrą. Už naudojimąsi juridiniams asmenims, juridinių asmenų filialams, atstovybėms ar juridinio asmens statuso neturintiems asmenims priklausančia infrastruktūra, išskyrus šio straipsnio 41 dalyje nurodytą infrastruktūrą, atlyginama Vyriausybės nustatytomis sąlygomis ir tvarka.“

      2. Papildyti 16 straipsnį 41 dalimi :

      „41. Jeigu valstybės ir savivaldybių institucijų ir įstaigų, valstybės ir savivaldybės valdomų įmonių, valstybės ir savivaldybės valdomų bendrovių dukterinių akcinių ir uždarųjų akcinių bendrovių, kaip šios bendrovės suprantamos Lietuvos Respublikos akcinių bendrovių įstatyme, kurių teritorijoje yra steigiamas ar įsteigtas pasienio kontrolės punktas, patikėjimo teise valdomos, naudojamos ir disponuojamos valstybės infrastruktūros ar jos dalies reikia patikrinimų įstaigoms patikrinimams atlikti, tokia valstybės infrastruktūra ar jos dalis atitinkamų patikrinimų įstaigų prašymu ir vadovaujantis Valstybės ir savivaldybių turto valdymo, naudojimo ir disponavimo juo įstatymu perduodama panaudos pagrindais neatlygintinai valdyti ir naudotis patikrinimų įstaigoms patikrinimams atlikti.“

      3. Pakeisti 16 straipsnio 6 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „6. Pasienio kontrolės punkto teritorijos schemą ir pasienio kontrolės punkto darbo nuostatus tvirtina Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas ir Muitinės departamento generalinis direktorius. Pasienio kontrolės punkto, kuriame nėra muitinės įstaigos, teritorijos schemą ir darbo nuostatus tvirtina Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas.“

      9 straipsnis. 18 straipsnio pakeitimas

      Pakeisti 18 straipsnį ir jį išdėstyti taip :

      „18 straipsnis. Valstybės sienos apsaugos subjektai, kitų subjektų pasitelkimas, valstybės sienos apsauga ginkluoto užpuolimo, karo, nepaprastosios padėties ar ekstremaliosios situacijos atveju

      1. Valstybės sienos apsaugą atlieka Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba.

      2. Valstybės sienos apsauga sustiprinama vadovaujantis valstybės sienos apsaugos priedangos planu, kurį tvirtina Vyriausybė.

      3. Siekiant sustiprinti valstybės sienos apsaugą, į pagalbą Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai pasitelkiami :

      1) vidaus reikalų ministro nustatyta tvarka – vidaus reikalų ministro valdymo srities statutinių įstaigų vidaus tarnybos sistemos pareigūnai ;

      2) Krašto apsaugos sistemos organizavimo ir karo tarnybos įstatymo nustatyta tvarka – Lietuvos kariuomenė ;

      3) Lietuvos Respublikos Lietuvos šaulių sąjungos įstatymo nustatyta tvarka – Lietuvos šaulių sąjunga ;

      4) valstybės sienos apsaugos priedangos plane nustatyta tvarka – patikrinimų įstaigos, Aplinkos apsaugos departamentas prie Aplinkos ministerijos ir kiti subjektai.

      4. Ginkluoto užpuolimo, karo ar nepaprastosios padėties atveju valstybės siena saugoma šio įstatymo, Lietuvos Respublikos karo padėties įstatymo, Lietuvos Respublikos ginkluotos gynybos ir pasipriešinimo agresijai įstatymo, Lietuvos Respublikos nepaprastosios padėties įstatymo nustatyta tvarka.“

      10 straipsnis. 23 straipsnio pakeitimas

      1. Pripažinti netekusia galios 23 straipsnio 5 dalį.

      2. Pakeisti 23 straipsnio 6 dalį ir ją išdėstyti taip :

      „6. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba vidaus reikalų ministro valdymo srities centrinių statutinių įstaigų vadovų prašymu padeda atlikti vidaus reikalų ministro valdymo srities statutinėms įstaigoms pavestas funkcijas. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūnų pasitelkimo tvarką ir konkrečias užduotis nustato vidaus reikalų ministras.“

      11 straipsnis. Įstatymo papildymas 231 straipsniu

      Papildyti Įstatymo VI skyrių 231 straipsniu :

      „231 straipsnis. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos bendradarbiavimas su kitomis valstybės ir savivaldybių institucijomis ir įstaigomis bei visuomene

      1. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba, įgyvendindama šio įstatymo 23 straipsnyje nustatytas funkcijas, bendradarbiauja su kitomis valstybės ir savivaldybių institucijomis ir įstaigomis, asociacijomis bei kitais asmenimis.

      2. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba bendradarbiauja su viešosios informacijos rengėjais ir skleidėjais. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba gali rengti ir leisti visuomenės informavimo priemones, kuriose teikiama informacija apie valstybės sienos apsaugai užtikrinti skirtas priemones, nusikalstamų veikų ir administracinių nusižengimų prevencijos priemonių, Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos funkcijų įgyvendinimą ir skelbiama kita su Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos veikla susijusi informacija.

      3. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba remia ir inicijuoja prevencines ir teisinio švietimo programas, skleidžia teisines, ekspertines, profesines žinias mokymo įstaigose, visuomenės informavimo priemonėse.“

      12 straipsnis. 26 straipsnio pakeitimas

      Pakeisti 26 straipsnio 1 dalies 12 punktą ir jį išdėstyti taip :

      „12) vidaus reikalų ministro nustatyta tvarka konvojuoti sulaikytus ir suimtus asmenis.“

      13 straipsnis. Įstatymo papildymas nauju IX skyriumi

      Papildyti Įstatymą nauju IX skyriumi :

      „IX SKYRIUS

      RĖMĖJŲ VEIKLOS TEISINIAI PAGRINDAI

      31 straipsnis. Rėmėjų veiklos organizavimas

      1. Rėmėjų veikla organizuojama vadovaujantis šiuo įstatymu ir Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado patvirtintais Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos rėmėjų nuostatais.

      2. Rėmėjui išduodamas pažymėjimas, atpažinimo ženklas, liemenė su užrašu „Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos rėmėjas“. Jų išdavimo, nešiojimo ir grąžinimo tvarką, pažymėjimo blanko ir atpažinimo ženklo pavyzdį bei liemenės su užrašu „Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos rėmėjas“ formą nustato Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas.

      3. Rėmėjų veikla finansuojama iš Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės biudžete Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai skirtų lėšų.

      32 straipsnis. Priėmimas į rėmėjus

      1. Rėmėju gali tapti ne jaunesnis kaip 18 metų mokantis lietuvių kalbą Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyboje netarnaujantis ir neatliekantis tikrosios karo tarnybos Lietuvos Respublikos pilietis ar Lietuvos Respublikoje nuolat gyvenantis kitos Europos Sąjungos valstybės narės pilietis, turintis ne žemesnį kaip vidurinį ar jam prilygintą išsilavinimą. Europos Sąjungos valstybės narės pilietis yra laikomas nuolat gyvenančiu Lietuvos Respublikoje, jeigu jis deklaravo gyvenamąją vietą Lietuvos Respublikoje ir kurio duomenys apie gyvenamąją vietą Lietuvos Respublikoje įrašyti į Lietuvos Respublikos gyventojų registrą.

      2. Norintis tapti rėmėju asmuo pateikia prašymą Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai. Lietuvos šaulių sąjungos, kitų asociacijų, kurių įstatuose viena iš funkcijų numatytas viešojo saugumo užtikrinimas, vadovai gali pateikti Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai rekomenduojamų būti rėmėjais asmenų sąrašus kartu su šiuose sąrašuose esančių asmenų prašymais tapti rėmėjais.

      3. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba, gavusi šio straipsnio 2 dalyje nurodytus prašymus, tikrina, ar norintis tapti rėmėju asmuo atitinka šio straipsnio 1 dalyje nustatytus reikalavimus ir ar nėra šio straipsnio 4 dalyje nustatytų aplinkybių. Jeigu norintis tapti rėmėju asmuo atitinka šio straipsnio 1 dalyje nustatytus reikalavimus ir nėra šio straipsnio 4 dalyje nustatytų aplinkybių, jam Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba organizuoja mokymą, kurį baigęs, šis asmuo laiko egzaminą. Reikalavimas dėl mokymo baigimo ir egzamino laikymo netaikomas buvusiems Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūnams, kitiems einantiems pareigas ir buvusiems vidaus tarnybos sistemos pareigūnams, šauliams ir buvusiems tikrosios karo tarnybos kariams. Norintis tapti rėmėju asmuo, išlaikęs šioje dalyje nurodytą egzaminą, Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado ar jo įgalioto asmens sprendimu įrašomas į rėmėjų sąrašą. Jeigu norintis tapti rėmėju asmuo neatitinka šio straipsnio 1 dalyje nustatytų reikalavimų arba yra šio straipsnio 4 dalyje nustatytų aplinkybių arba neišlaikomas šioje dalyje nurodytas egzaminas, asmens prašymas tapti rėmėju netenkinamas. Rėmėjų mokymo organizavimo tvarką, mokymo programai taikomus reikalavimus ir egzamino organizavimo, laikymo, vertinimo tvarką nustato Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas.

      4. Rėmėju negali būti :

      1) asmuo, turintis teistumą už nusikaltimą, taip pat už baudžiamąjį nusižengimą nuteistas asmuo, jeigu nuo teismo nuosprendžio įsiteisėjimo dienos nepraėjo 1 metai, taip pat asmuo, kuriam Lietuvos Respublikos organizuoto nusikalstamumo prevencijos įstatymo nustatyta tvarka taikomi teismo įpareigojimai ;

      2) asmuo, kuris anksčiau dirbo statutiniu valstybės tarnautoju, teisėju, notaru, prokuroru, advokatu, antstoliu ar atliko tikrąją karo tarnybą ir buvo atleistas atitinkamai už pareigūno vardo pažeminimą, teisėjo vardą žeminantį poelgį, notarų profesinės etikos ir tarnybinius nusižengimus, prokuroro vardą žeminantį poelgį, advokato profesinės etikos bei profesinės veiklos pažeidimus, antstolio profesinės ar tarnybinės veiklos pažeidimus ar kario vardą žeminančias arba krašto apsaugos sistemos institucijas diskredituojančias veikas ir nuo šio atleidimo dienos nepraėjo 5 metai ;

      3) asmuo, kuris yra įstatymų nustatyta tvarka uždraustos organizacijos narys.

      5. Į rėmėjų sąrašą įrašytas asmuo pasirašo 3 metų sutartį su Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba, kurioje įsipareigoja neatlygintinai padėti Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai vykdyti šio įstatymo 23 straipsnio 1 dalies 1–5 punktuose nustatytas funkcijas (toliau – sutartis). Praėjus 3 metų laikotarpiui, jeigu rėmėjas be pažeidimų vykdė jam keliamas užduotis, sutarties galiojimas šalių sutarimu pratęsiamas tam pačiam laikotarpiui. Sutarties sudarymo tvarką ir sutarties sąlygas nustato Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas.

      6. Apie nepatenkintą asmens prašymą tapti rėmėju, šio sprendimo apskundimo galimybę ir asmens įrašymą į rėmėjų sąrašą Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba informuoja prašymą pateikusį asmenį ir jį rekomendavusią asociaciją Viešojo administravimo įstatymo nustatyta tvarka. Sprendimas netenkinti asmens prašymo tapti rėmėju gali būti Lietuvos Respublikos administracinių bylų teisenos įstatymo nustatyta tvarka skundžiamas apygardos administraciniam teismui.

      33 straipsnis. Išbraukimas iš rėmėjų sąrašo ir sutarties su rėmėju nutraukimas

      1. Rėmėjas Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado ar jo įgalioto asmens sprendimu išbraukiamas iš rėmėjų sąrašo ir su juo nutraukiama sutartis :

      1) rėmėjo prašymu ;

      2) dėl rėmėjo vardo diskreditavimo ;

      3) jei rėmėjas nebeatitinka šio įstatymo 32 straipsnio 1 dalyje nustatytų reikalavimų arba atsiranda, paaiškėja šio įstatymo 32 straipsnio 4 dalyje nustatytos aplinkybės ;

      4) jei rėmėjas ilgiau negu 6 mėnesius iš eilės nedalyvauja rėmėjų veikloje.

      2. Šio straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodytas Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado ar jo įgalioto asmens sprendimas gali būti Administracinių bylų teisenos įstatymo nustatyta tvarka skundžiamas apygardos administraciniam teismui.

      34 straipsnis. Rėmėjų funkcijos, teisės ir pareigos

      1. Rėmėjai padeda Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybai vykdyti šio įstatymo 23 straipsnio 1 dalies 1–5 punktuose nustatytas funkcijas, kurias atlieka kartu su Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūnais.

      2. Rėmėjai, atlikdami jiems pavestas funkcijas, turi teisę :

      1) šio įstatymo nustatyta tvarka ir atvejais panaudoti prievartą bei specialiąsias priemones ;

      2) nustatyti pažeidėjo asmens tapatybę ;

      3) padėti sulaikyti asmenį, įtariamą padariusį pažeidimą ;

      4) padėti stabdyti transporto priemones, kai įtariama, kad yra daroma ar padaryta nusikalstama veika ;

      5) padėti atlikti asmens apžiūrą ir daiktų, krovinių, dokumentų, patalpų patikrinimą ;

      6) siekiant užkirsti kelią daromiems nusikaltimams, persekiojant ir sulaikant teisės pažeidėjus, įeiti į fiziniams ir juridiniams asmenims, juridinių asmenų filialams, atstovybėms bei juridinio asmens statuso neturintiems asmenims priklausiančias gyvenamąsias ir negyvenamąsias patalpas, teritorijas ;

      7) padėti pristatyti administracinėn atsakomybėn traukiamą asmenį šio sutikimu į Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos, policijos tarnybines patalpas ar seniūnijos patalpas kaimo gyvenamosiose vietovėse ;

      8) reikalauti, kad asmenys vykdytų teisėtus reikalavimus ir nurodymus.

      3. Rėmėjai, atlikdami jiems pavestas funkcijas, privalo :

      1) gerbti ir ginti žmogaus orumą, užtikrinti ir saugoti žmogaus teises ir laisves ;

      2) suteikti nukentėjusiems asmenims, taip pat į Lietuvos Respublikos teritoriją neįleidžiamiems užsieniečiams neatidėliotiną medicinos ar kitą būtinąją pagalbą ;

      3) imtis priemonių asmenų, valstybės ir savivaldybės turtui gelbėti įvykių, ekstremaliųjų įvykių ar ekstremaliųjų situacijų atvejais ;

      4) saugoti jiems patikėtas ar sužinotas valstybės, tarnybos ar komercines paslaptis ;

      5) nešioti atpažinimo ženklą, liemenę su užrašu „Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos rėmėjas“, prisistatyti, parodyti rėmėjo pažymėjimą ;

      6) gavę pranešimą apie rengiamą ar daromą teisės pažeidimą, pastebėję rengiamą ar daromą teisės pažeidimą, imtis neatidėliotinų priemonių užkirsti kelią rengiamam arba daromam teisės pažeidimui ;

      7) gavę pranešimą apie padarytą teisės pažeidimą, nedelsdami pranešti apie tai policijai arba kitai kompetentingai institucijai ar įstaigai, imtis neatidėliotinų priemonių įvykio vietai apsaugoti, liudytojams nustatyti ;

      8) vadovautis teisės aktais, pavestas užduotis atlikti laiku ir tiksliai.

      35 straipsnis. Rėmėjų įgaliojimai

      1. Rėmėjai, atlikdami jiems pavestas funkcijas, vadovaujasi Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucija, šiuo ir kitais įstatymais.

      2. Teisėti rėmėjų reikalavimai ir nurodymai yra privalomi asmenims.

      3. Už rėmėjų teisėtų reikalavimų ir nurodymų nevykdymą asmenys atsako įstatymų, reglamentuojančių teisinę atsakomybę, nustatyta tvarka.

      36 straipsnis. Rėmėjų socialinės ir kitos garantijos

      1. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba išmoka vienkartinę išmoką rėmėjui, jeigu atliekant jam pavestas funkcijas rėmėjas buvo sužalotas ir dėl šio sužalojimo nustatytas :

      1) sunkus sveikatos sutrikdymo mastas − 60 bazinių socialinių išmokų dydžio ;

      2) nesunkus ar nežymus sveikatos sutrikdymo mastas − 40 bazinių socialinių išmokų dydžio.

      2. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba 120 bazinių socialinių išmokų dydžio vienkartinę išmoką lygiomis dalimis išmoka :

      1) rėmėjo, kuris žuvo atlikdamas jam pavestas funkcijas, šeimos nariams – vaikams (įvaikiams) (įskaitant vaikus, gimusius po rėmėjo mirties), ne vyresniems kaip 18 metų, taip pat vyresniems vaikams (įvaikiams), kurie mokosi įregistruotose bendrojo ugdymo mokyklose ir statutinėse profesinio mokymo įstaigose pagal bendrojo ugdymo ir profesinio mokymo programas grupinio mokymosi forma kasdieniu, neakivaizdiniu ir nuotoliniu mokymo proceso organizavimo būdais ar pavienio mokymosi forma savarankišku ir nuotoliniu mokymo proceso organizavimo būdais arba studijuoja Lietuvos aukštojoje mokykloje pagal nuolatinės formos studijų programas, ne vyresniems kaip 24 metai, sutuoktiniui, sugyventiniui (partneriui), tėvui (įtėviui), motinai (įmotei) ;

      2) asmenims, kuriems nustatytas neįgalumo lygis, 0–25 procentų darbingumo lygis arba senatvės pensijos amžių sukakusiems asmenims, kuriems nustatytas didelių specialiųjų poreikių lygis, jeigu jie buvo rėmėjo, kuris žuvo atlikdamas jam pavestas funkcijas, išlaikomi ar jo žuvimo dieną turėjo teisę gauti jo išlaikymą.

      3. Šiame straipsnyje nustatytos išmokos nemokamos, jeigu :

      1) rėmėjas žuvo ar susižalojo darydamas tyčinę nusikalstamą veiką ;

      2) rėmėjo žuvimo ar susižalojimo priežastis buvo apsvaigimas nuo alkoholio, narkotinių ir kitų psichiką veikiančių medžiagų ;

      3) rėmėjas nusižudė, kėsinosi nusižudyti ar tyčia susižalojo ;

      4) rėmėjo žuvimo ar susižalojimo priežastis buvo transporto priemonės vairavimas neturint teisės ją vairuoti arba perdavimas vairuoti transporto priemonę asmeniui, apsvaigusiam nuo alkoholio, narkotinių ir kitų psichiką veikiančių medžiagų arba neturinčiam teisės ją vairuoti ;

      5) rėmėjo sveikata sutriko ar jis mirė dėl ligos ar karo veiksmų ir tai nesusiję su rėmėjų funkcijų atlikimu.

      4. Šiame straipsnyje nustatytų išmokų mokėjimo rėmėjams tvarką nustato Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas.

      5. Kai dėl teisės pažeidėjo veikos rėmėjas sužalojamas, Lietuvos Respublikos civilinio kodekso nustatyta tvarka jam atlyginama turtinė ir neturtinė žala.

      6. Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado nustatyta tvarka ir sąlygomis rėmėjams gali būti atlygintos transporto, ryšių ir kitos išlaidos, patirtos atliekant jiems pavestas funkcijas.

      37 straipsnis. Prievartos naudojimo sąlygos

      1. Rėmėjai, atlikdami jiems pavestas funkcijas, kartu su Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūnais turi teisę panaudoti prievartą šio įstatymo nustatytais atvejais ir tvarka. Rėmėjai turi teisę panaudoti prievartą tik tarnybinio būtinumo atveju ir tik tiek, kiek to reikia jiems pavestoms funkcijoms atlikti. Rėmėjai naudoti prievartą privalo adekvačiai esamoms aplinkybėms ir proporcingai esamam pavojui, atsižvelgdami į konkrečią situaciją, teisės pažeidimo pobūdį, intensyvumą ir individualias teisės pažeidėjo savybes. Fizinė prievarta naudojama tik tada, kai psichinė prievarta buvo neveiksminga arba kai bet koks delsimas kelia pavojų rėmėjo ar kito asmens gyvybei ar sveikatai.

      2. Psichinę ar fizinę prievartą rėmėjas turi teisę panaudoti šiais atvejais :

      1) apsisaugodamas ar apsaugodamas kitus asmenis nuo gresiančio pavojaus gyvybei ar sveikatai ;

      2) asmenims vengiant vykdyti rėmėjo ar Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūno reikalavimus ir nurodymus (siekdamas priversti asmenis paklusti) ;

      3) padėdamas sulaikyti asmenis (jeigu jie priešinasi) ;

      4) atremdamas kėsinimąsi į Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūno šaunamąjį ginklą, sprogmenis, specialiąsias bei ryšio priemones ir siekiamas šiuos objektus susigrąžinti ;

      5) atremdamas statinių (įskaitant patalpas), transporto priemonių ar kito turto, teritorijų užpuolimą ;

      6) padėdamas stabdyti transporto priemonę ;

      7) užkirsdamas kelią administraciniams nusižengimams ar nusikalstamoms veikoms.

      3. Rėmėjas turi teisę naudoti antrankius ir surišimo priemones šio įstatymo 28 straipsnio 4 dalyje nustatytais atvejais.

      4. Specialiąsias priemones (išskyrus antrankius ir surišimo priemones) naudoti draudžiama šio įstatymo 28 straipsnio 7 dalyje nustatytais atvejais.

      5. Rėmėjas, panaudojęs psichinę ar fizinę prievartą ir taip sukėlęs pavojų asmens gyvybei ar sveikatai, turi suteikti asmeniui reikalingą neatidėliotiną medicinos ar kitą būtinąją pagalbą ir imtis kitų reikalingų priemonių pavojingiems savo veiksmų padariniams pašalinti. Apie rėmėjo panaudotą psichinę ar fizinę prievartą, jei tai lėmė asmens mirtį arba gyvybei pavojingą sveikatos sutrikdymą, nedelsiant pranešama prokurorui.

      6. Rėmėjai turi būti specialiai parengti ir reguliariai tikrinami, ar jie geba veikti situacijomis, susijusiomis su psichinės ar fizinės prievartos panaudojimu. Specialiosios priemonės gali būti išduodamos rėmėjams atlikti jiems pavestas funkcijas tik kartu su Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos pareigūnais. Rėmėjų parengimo, tikrinimo bei specialiųjų priemonių išdavimo rėmėjams tvarką nustato Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vadas.

      38 straipsnis. Rėmėjų skatinimas ir atsakomybė

      1. Rėmėjai, pasižymėję saugant valstybės sieną, gali būti Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos vado ar kitų institucijų paskatinti (apdovanoti).

      2. Rėmėjai gali būti teikiami valstybiniam apdovanojimui Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės apdovanojimų įstatymo nustatyta tvarka.

      3. Rėmėjai už neteisėtas veikas atsako įstatymų, reglamentuojančių teisinę atsakomybę, nustatyta tvarka.“

      14 straipsnis. Buvusio IX skyriaus ir 31 straipsnio pernumeravimas

      1. Buvusį IX skyrių laikyti X skyriumi.

      2. Buvusį 31 straipsnį laikyti 39 straipsniu.

      15 straipsnis. Įstatymo įsigaliojimas, įgyvendinimas ir taikymas

      1. Šis įstatymas, išskyrus šio straipsnio 2 dalį, įsigalioja 2023 m. gegužės 3 d.

      2. Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausybė, Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnybos prie Lietuvos Respublikos vidaus reikalų ministerijos vadas ir Muitinės departamento prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos generalinis direktorius iki 2023 m. gegužės 2 d. priima šio įstatymo įgyvendinamuosius teisės aktus.

      3. Šio įstatymo 8 straipsnio 2 dalyje išdėstyto Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės sienos ir jos apsaugos įstatymo 16 straipsnio 41 dalies nuostatos taikomos valstybės infrastruktūrai ar jos daliai, kuri toje dalyje nurodytiems juridiniams asmenims perduota patikėjimo teise valdyti, naudoti ir disponuoti pagal sutartis, sudarytas iki šio įstatymo įsigaliojimo dienos.

      4. 2024 m. sausio 1 d. įsigalioja tokia šio įstatymo 13 straipsnyje išdėstyto Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės sienos ir jos apsaugos įstatymo 36 straipsnio 2 dalies 2 punkto redakcija :

      „2) asmenims, kuriems nustatytas neįgalumo lygis, 0–25 procentų dalyvumo lygis arba senatvės pensijos amžių sukakusiems asmenims, kuriems nustatytas 15 procentų dalyvumo lygis, jeigu jie buvo rėmėjo, kuris žuvo atlikdamas jam pavestas funkcijas, išlaikomi ar jo žuvimo dieną turėjo teisę gauti jo išlaikymą.“

      Skelbiu šį Lietuvos Respublikos Seimo priimtą įstatymą.

      Respublikos Prezidentas

      https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAP/69c45250dd1c11eda305cb3bdf2af4d8

  • Les mineurs isolés doivent être protégés, pas refoulés !
    ALERTE PRESSE

    Vendredi 21 avril 2023

    Les mineurs isolés doivent être protégés, pas refoulés !

    Depuis le 17 avril, l’Anafé, Médecins du Monde, Amnesty International France, La Cimade et Médecins sans Frontières suivent avec attention la situation à la frontière franco-italienne entre #Vintimille et #Menton, et notamment en ce qui concerne la protection des #mineurs_isolés.

    Au moins une cinquantaine d’entre eux ont rejoint un gymnase à Menton en fin de matinée le 19 avril dans l’attente d’une prise en charge par le département. Avant d’y être transférés, ces mineurs avaient été enfermés (de quelques heures à 2 jours) dans des locaux privatifs de liberté attenants au poste de la #police_aux_frontières de Menton pont Saint-Louis. Cet #enfermement est contraire à la Convention internationale des #droits_de_l’enfant. Nous avons été informés qu’au moins 5 mineurs ont été refoulés vers l’Italie jeudi matin en toute illégalité car ils auraient dû être protégés par l’Aide sociale à l’enfance. Nos associations demandent aux autorités de respecter la Convention internationale des droits de l’enfant, dont la France est signataire, et d’appliquer les procédures prévues dans l’accueil provisoire d’urgence.

    Les mineurs isolés doivent être admis systématiquement et sans délai sur le territoire français. Les autorités compétentes à la frontière doivent donc prendre toutes les mesures et garanties spécifiques pour assurer l’effectivité de leurs droits, leur protection, en particulier la conduite d’un entretien individuel, la notification des droits dans une langue comprise par l’enfant, la désignation sans délai d’un administrateur ad hoc et la possibilité de formuler une demande d’asile.

    Nous rappelons que ces mineurs sont des enfants en danger qu’il faut protéger.

    Signataires :
    Amnesty International France
    Anafé
    La Cimade
    Médecins du Monde
    Médecins sans frontières

    Complément d’informations

    Tous les jours, des dizaines de personnes exilées sont interpellées, privées illégalement de liberté et refoulées à Menton. Parmi elles se trouvent des mineurs isolés, mais également des familles et des demandeurs d’asile. Nos organisations dénoncent des procédures expéditives, qui ne respectent pas les droits de ces personnes, notamment le droit de demander l’asile, d’avoir accès à un interprète, à un avocat et à un médecin. Ces personnes sont enfermées avant d’être refoulées sans examen de leurs situations individuelles - ce qui est illégal. D’après les chiffres transmis par les autorités, 30 146 personnes ont ainsi été refoulées à Menton pont Saint-Louis suite à un refus d’entrée en 2021, parmi lesquelles 1 108 mineurs isolés.

    http://www.anafe.org/spip.php?article673
    #MNA #mineurs #enfants #enfance #frontière_sud-alpine #asile #migrations #réfugiés #PAF #France #Italie #push-backs #refoulements #chiffres #statistiques

  • Reportage tra i “nuovi” respinti dalla Croazia verso i campi della Bosnia ed Erzegovina

    Da fine marzo la polizia croata ha attivato una “inedita” pratica di rintraccio, detenzione ed espulsione collettiva delle persone in movimento verso la Bosnia, trasportandole in bus alla frontiera o ai centri di detenzione. Il tutto con una parvenza di formalità. Le Ong ne denunciano la palese illegittimità. E la complicità europea

    Con l’inizio del Ramadan, Riaz (nome di fantasia) ha interrotto i tentativi di attraversare il confine verso la Croazia. Si trova nel campo di Lipa, centro di transito ma soprattutto di detenzione nel Nord-Ovest della Bosnia ed Erzegovina, nel Cantone di Una-sana. Si è svegliato tardi, fa freddo e ha una sciarpa nuova con i colori della vecchia bandiera afghana. “Qui hanno riportato tante persone dalla Croazia. Stanno arrivando autobus pieni”, dice.

    Da marzo, infatti, le autorità del cantone bosniaco confermano che i campi di Borici e Lipa stanno ricevendo persone espulse collettivamente dalla Croazia sulla base di accordi bilaterali stipulati proprio con la Bosnia. Rintracciate sul territorio croato, le persone in movimento vengono detenute per poi essere trasportate in autobus al confine e consegnate alla polizia bosniaca (l’ha denunciato il Border violence monitoring network, ripreso in Italia dalla rete RiVolti ai Balcani).

    “Abbiamo parlato con una famiglia curda riammessa nel campo per famiglie di Borici, a Bihać: fermati vicino Slavonski Brod, in Croazia, sono stati portati in un seminterrato e poi dopo qualche giorno in un magazzino dove hanno ricevuto un foglio di espulsione di un anno dall’area economica europea, con la minaccia di 18 mesi di detenzione”, racconta Marta Aranguren, dell’organizzazione No Name Kitchen. Anche Ines dell’associazione locale Kompas 071 descrive dinamiche simili: “Diversi testimoni riferiscono di aver dormito a terra su cartoni per giorni, senza cibo e poca acqua, alcuni minacciati con cani in caso di lamentele”. Esprime la sua preoccupazione: “Improvvisamente è apparso un foglio che legalizza ogni sopruso: uno per far pagare il trasporto della riammissione o le notti in detenzione e uno che giustifica la confisca di telefoni o oggetti personali”.

    Si tratta di riammissioni dalla parvenza solo formale che a differenza dei respingimenti praticati per anni (e ancora oggi) cercano di presentarsi con una base legale. Milena Zajović Milka, attivista dell’organizzazione Are you syrious? e del Border violence monitoring network spiega che “l’ordine di espulsione dall’area economica fa riferimento alla legge sugli stranieri della Croazia, mentre la riammissione si basa su un accordo bilaterale tra due Paesi, che non può prevalere sulla Convenzione di Ginevra e su altre dichiarazioni internazionali”.

    Le criticità sono diverse. Non sempre è stata fornita una copia dei documenti di riammissione nella lingua delle persone espulse, né sarebbero stati presenti traduttori. In più non è chiaro come venga dimostrato che le persone riammesse siano entrate dalla Bosnia ed Erzegovina. “Dalle testimonianze sembra che non abbiano avuto opportunità di chiedere asilo, né di poter far ricorso alla decisione di riammissione, come previsto invece dalla stessa Legge sugli stranieri croata”, spiega Silvia Maraone operatrice di Ipsia Acli, organizzazione che opera dentro il campo di Lipa.

    “In sintesi sono tre le fasi che hanno portato alla nuova pratica delle riammissioni collettive a cui stiamo assistendo da fine marzo”, riprende Zajović Milka. “Dopo anni di respingimenti illegali, a fine del 2021 numerose prove hanno costretto la Croazia a cambiare per la prima volta il suo modus operandi. Poi, l’anno scorso, è stato introdotto un foglio di espulsione di sette giorni, un primo tentativo di regolarizzare l’allontanamento delle persone dal Paese”.

    Non solo la Croazia ma anche la Commissione europea, che ha finanziato e finanzia il Paese per la gestione delle frontiere europee (così come la Bosnia ed Erzegovina, si veda anche il caso di Lipa), si sono trovate nell’imbarazzante situazione di dover rispondere delle illegalità commesse alle frontiere. “Con questo foglio è diventato più facile passare attraverso la Croazia -prosegue Zajović Milka-. Nel frattempo, dall’inizio di quest’anno, centinaia di persone vengono rimpatriate in Croazia per via del regolamento di Dublino, che prevede il ritorno nel primo Paese di ingresso nell’Unione europea”. La Croazia, entrata questo gennaio nell’area Schengen, deve gestire le persone in arrivo nell’Ue, provando a evitare (o a tentare di celare) le violenze per cui è stata sanzionata. D’altra parte, la Bosnia, recentemente promossa a candidata nell’Ue, è disponibile ad accogliere le persone riammesse, non senza tensioni interne.

    Nonostante negli scorsi anni diversi tribunali, in Italia, Austria e Slovenia, si siano pronunciati contro le riammissioni basate su accordi bilaterali, la Commissione europea incoraggia questa pratica. Il Patto sulla migrazione e asilo proposto nel settembre 2020 pone l’enfasi sugli accordi bilaterali tra Paesi per implementare le procedure di ritorno e riammissione in Paesi terzi o di origine. “Stiamo vedendo un rafforzamento di Frontex, la creazione di nuovi centri di detenzione alle frontiere esterne europee e a maggiori finanziamenti per nuovi database volti a facilitare le deportazioni da Bosnia e Serbia, incoraggiate a firmare accordi di ritorno con i Paesi di origine”, riflette Zajović Milka. Il campo di Lipa, finanziato dall’Unione europea, ne è la prova, come aveva pronosticato anche la rete RiVolti ai Balcani.

    Secondo i dati dell’Organizzazione internazionale per le migrazioni, inoltre, nel periodo tra il 6 e il 19 marzo 2023 solo 132 persone sono state registrate a Lipa, su un totale di 1.512 posti.

    Riaz cammina tra i container vuoti con il telefono in mano mentre sistema la sua felpa verde militare. Gli piace perché gli ricorda la sua uniforme da poliziotto che indossava prima del ritorno al potere dei Talebani. Abbandonato da tutti gli eserciti internazionali, non ha avuto altra scelta se non intraprendere il viaggio in forma forzatamente irregolare dall’Afghanistan fino alla Bosnia ed Erzegovina.

    “La maggior parte delle persone deportate se ne va subito. Alcuni sono deportati con gli autobus, altri lasciati nella foresta”, spiega. Usa erroneamente il termine “deportazione” per descrivere pratiche diverse che ai suoi occhi hanno lo stesso effetto. Le recenti riammissioni non hanno infatti fermato i respingimenti illegali. Mentre viaggia verso il confine sloveno Suleyman (nome di fantasia), ragazzo afghano, racconta al telefono l’esperienza di qualche giorno prima. “Sono stato sette giorni in detenzione senza cibo e da bere solo acqua sporca. Ci hanno preso i telefoni, i soldi; hanno bruciato i vestiti e gli zaini”. Lasciato in un bosco sul confine bosniaco è tornato a piedi a Lipa, per ripartire tre giorni dopo verso la Croazia. Il racconto si interrompe, chiude la chiamata. “Ci ha fermato la polizia, non so che cosa ci succederà”, scrive in un messaggio.

    “Tutto sembra lasciato al caso -osserva Zajović Milka-: alcune persone saranno riammesse in Bosnia, altre respinte illegalmente, altre potranno chiedere asilo e altre otterranno il documento di espulsione di sette giorni. Secondo Ines di Kompas 071 l’effetto è chiaro: “La Bosnia è una sorta di purgatorio per le persone in transito, continuamente respinte. È un gioco che va avanti da anni ma ora stanno cercando di rendere questa pratica legale”.

    https://altreconomia.it/reportage-tra-i-nuovi-respinti-dalla-croazia-verso-i-campi-della-bosnia

    #Croatie #refoulements #push-backs #Bosnie #Bosnie-Herzégovine #Balkans #route_des_Balkans #Lipa #réadmissions #accords_de_réadmission

    –—

    ajouté à la liste métaliste sur les accords de réadmission en Europe :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/736091

  • Inside Croatia’s Secret WhatsApp Group

    How high-ranking Croatian officials presided over clandestine communications about border operations

    When Lighthouse Reports filmed and published (https://www.lighthousereports.com/investigation/unmasking-europes-shadow-armies) footage in 2021 of Croatian police officers in black balaclavas beating refugees while illegally forcing them back across the border into Bosnia and Herzegovina, the victims’ sharp screams echoing through the forest, the Croatian government was quick to evade responsibility.

    The illegal treatment, Croatian Interior Minister Davor Božinović assured, was an isolated case. The police officers responsible had not acted on the instructions of the government, and neither ministers nor police chiefs had known anything about it, he claimed.

    Migration experts, asylum lawyers and human rights activists were sceptical. They suspected that high-ranking Croatian officials knew about the pushbacks, which took place under a police operation known as ‘Korridor’ – which is partially financed by the EU – and that perhaps they even ordered them.

    Now we, in collaboration with Der Spiegel, Nova TV, Novosti weekly, Telegram news portal and ORF, have obtained evidence indicating that these suspicions were correct – in the form of leaked WhatsApp communications.

    Screenshots leaked to Lighthouse Reports and partners reveal that top Croatian officials have presided over a clandestine WhatsApp group called ‘OA Koridor II- Zapad’, in which Croatian border police shared sensitive information about apprehensions of foreign nationals, including disturbing photographs, between August 2019 and February 2020.

    According to government reports (www.sabor.hr/sites/default/files/uploads/sabor/2020-11-26/143106/IZVJ_POLICIJA_2018_2019.pdf), OA Koridor II Zapad was or is one of several sibling operational actions in Croatia “related to combating irregular migration and crimes related to smuggling of people”. Police sources said the violent pushbacks we filmed in 2021 took place under another one of these operations.

    The WhatsApp group sat outside any official means of communication and away from the usual monitoring procedures, and there are strong indications that the foreign nationals referenced in the messages went on to be subject to illegal pushbacks.
    METHODS

    An analysis of the 60 screenshots we received found that there were 33 participants in the WhatsApp group, and we were able to establish the identity of just over two-thirds of them, partly by using digital forensics software such as Pipl and Maltego, which enable the search of various websites where these numbers were used for registration.

    We found that among them were Croatian high-ranking officials including the head of border police Zoran Ničeno and head of the public relations department Jelena Bikić, who reports directly to Minister of Interior Božinović.

    The WhatsApp group was used to exchange information about apprehensions of more than 1,300 people of mostly Afghan, Pakistani and Syrian nationality. These messages were often accompanied by photos of the individuals, their faces clearly visible, in some cases being forced to lie face down on the ground or remove their shoes.

    Experts and police sources told us that sharing such information on a privately-owned platform such as WhatsApp breaches multiple police regulations. They also said they believed the group was likely used to unofficially document the apprehension of migrants who were systematically pushed back across the border in breach of Croatian and European law, in order that there was no trace of this action.
    STORYLINES

    In one WhatsApp message, the head of border control in Zagreb police administration can be seen saying he had asked on the evening of 13 February 2020 for five police vans to carry out “odvraćanje” after apprehending a group of 80 migrants. Odvraćanje is the Croatian word for “rejection” or “deterrence”, which is said to have become a code word for pushbacks in recent years. Police sources and experts are clear in saying that this message indicates that an illegal pushback was taking place.

    We spoke to a Pakistani man who gave testimony of a pushback to a volunteer from the Border Violence Monitoring Network, a grassroots coalition, back in 2019. We were able to match this, with a high degree of confidence, to a message in the WhatsApp group from August 2019 describing the apprehension of 85 foreign nationals. In his testimony, taken the day after the arrest, the man reported that the group was pushed back, with violence used against some of them, and not given the chance to claim asylum. We spoke with him last month and while he said he couldn’t remember the exact date, he recognised the scenario and one of the individuals seen in the photo.

    On multiple occasions, the WhatsApp group also was used to exchange information about journalists visiting the border area. In one case, the group’s members were informed that Bernt Koshuch, a journalist from Austrian broadcaster ORF, had been spotted in the wider area of Cetingrad, and a photo was shared of him and a colleague. Mr Koschuch confirmed to us that he had been in the area at that time. He later joined our investigation.

    Croatia’s Korridor operations benefit from European funding, with millions of euros flowing to Zagreb each year and EU states paying for overtime, accommodation and food for Croatian border guards – yet to date, the EU has not initiated any infringement proceedings against the country. “The current silence, impunity and even implicit encouragement by the Commission and other member states, only fuel these gross violations against vulnerable people in search of protection,” says MEP Tineke Strik.

    Bodo Weber, senior associate at the Democratisation Policy Council in Berlin, said: “Overall, this group confirms what I have been researching for several years and other observers have long suspected: The Croatian police’s well-documented pushback campaign is clearly being directed from within the Ministry of Interior.”

    https://www.lighthousereports.com/investigation/inside-croatias-secret-whatsapp-group

    #Croatie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #frontières #whatsapp #groupe_whatsapp #contrôles_frontaliers #Balkans #route_des_Balkans #violence #violences_policières #Korridor #opération_Korridor #push-backs #refoulements #OA_Koridor_II_Zapad #preuves #photographies #Zoran_Ničeno #Zoran_Niceno #Jelena_Bikić #Jelena_Bikic #odvraćanje #odvracanje

  • Principio di non-refoulement è solo un articolo che non viene rispettato

    Quello che emerge dal quinto rapporto del network Protecting Rights at Borders (PRAB) “Picchiati, puniti e respinti” 1, è l’ennesima immagine drammatica di quanto accade alle porte esterne dell’Unione Europea, alla porte di quella comunità che ha tra i suoi principi fondativi (e fondamentali) la protezione e il rispetto dei diritti dell’uomo.

    Stando dunque alla pubblicazione di PRAB, nel 2022 sono state raccolte segnalazioni di pushback da oltre 5.756 persone. Le pratiche di respingimento, messe in atto dalle forze dell’ordine dei Paesi d’ingresso all’Europa, sono pratiche sistematiche ed estremamente violente che violano la normativa internazionale ed europea.


    Inoltre, per ribadire quanto le pratiche di respingimento vadano contro i diritti i diritti dell’uomo, la Convenzione di Ginevra del 1951, con l’articolo 33, stabilisce il principio di non-refoulement (non respingimento).

    «1. Nessuno Stato Contraente espellerà o respingerà, in qualsiasi modo, un rifugiato verso i confini di territori in cui la sua vita o la sua libertà sarebbero minacciate a motivo della sua razza, della sua religione, della sua cittadinanza, della sua appartenenza a un gruppo sociale o delle sue opinioni politiche.

    2. La presente disposizione non può tuttavia essere fatta valere da un rifugiato se per motivi seri egli debba essere considerato un pericolo per la sicurezza del paese in cui risiede oppure costituisca, a causa di una condanna definitiva per un crimine o un delitto particolarmente grave, una minaccia per la collettività di detto paese»

    Si tratta di un principio fondamentale del diritto internazionale. È importate sottolineare che per effetto della giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, tale principio si applica indipendentemente dal fatto che la persona sia stata riconosciuta rifugiata e/o dall’aver formalizzato o meno una diretta domanda di protezione.

    Le pratiche messe in atto dalle forze dell’ordine alle frontiere della cosiddetta fortezza europea e al proprio interno, sono in violazione del diritto della stessa Europa. Ricordiamo l’articolo 19 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione Europea:

    «Protezione in caso di allontanamento, di espulsione e di estradizione.
    1. Le espulsioni collettive sono vietate.
    2. Nessuno può essere allontanato, espulso o estradato verso uno Stato in cui esiste un rischio serio di essere sottoposto alla pena di morte, alla tortura o ad altre pene o trattamenti inumani o degradanti»

    È evidente come ancora una volta l’obbligo nel quadro giuridico contraddice la realtà.

    Dal lavoro di PRAB emerge che vi è un sistematico uso di respingimenti. Il report ne riporta quasi 6mila, ma i numeri complessivi sono sicuramente più alti dal momento che questi sono solamente dati raccolti da testimonianze dirette. Nelle due zone di confine dove è più alto il transito di persone migranti tra Italia e Francia (Oulx e Ventimiglia), i respingimenti sono una pratica sempre più comune.

    Ad esempio, se si guarda il numero di serie presente sulla documentazione ufficiale (Refus d’entree) consegnata alle persone respinte dalla polizia di frontiera francese nel 2022, emerge che i numeri sono estremamente più elevati: a Ventimiglia sono 17.749 le persone respinte e a Oulx oltre 3.600. Questi dati sono importanti in quanto sottolineano come le pratiche di respingimento e le barriere d’accesso siano molto più diffuse e si verificano su scala molto più ampia di quella registrata da PRAB.

    Anche in altri territori italiani l’uso sistematico dei respingimenti è in aumento. “Assistiamo a continue riammissioni lungo i porti adriatici dall’Italia alla Grecia e a respingimenti verso l’Albania. Si tratta di trattamenti inumani, come la confisca e la distruzione degli effetti personali, la svestizione forzata e l’esposizione a temperature estreme. Il governo italiano cerca di negare che ciò avvenga. Ma la situazione sembra peggiorare“, conferma Erminia Rizzi di ASGI.

    Nella maggior parte dei casi i respingimenti avvengono in maniera violenta. Sono tantissime le testimonianze che raccontano come la polizia di frontiera si sia comportata in modo brutale: manganellando le persone migranti, confiscando tutti i loro effetti personali per poi distruggerli, negando loro acqua e cibo, obbligandoli a restare svestiti a temperature estreme.

    Uno dei confini in cui le violenze sono all’ordine del giorno è ancora quello che separa la Croazia dalla Bosnia. Ma le numerose violazioni dei diritti umani che erano state denunciate e riportate dalle persone solidali che lottano quotidianamente contro tali pratiche, sono state messe da parte nel momento in cui la Croazia è entrata ufficialmente nella zona Schengen. Per l’ennesima volta le istituzioni Europee hanno chiuso gli occhi di fronte alle molteplici violazioni e violenze: ancora una volta i diritti umani sono stati sacrificati per raggiungere compromessi politici ed economici.

    Il 2022 è stata un anno di grandi contrasti per quanto riguarda la solidarietà e l’accoglienza: le persone che fuggivano dalla guerra in Ucraina sono state accolte mentre le persone migranti provenienti da paesi africani e/o mediorientali sono stati respinte: vi sono due pesi e due misure basate sul profilo etnico, cosa che viola la Dichiarazione Universale dei Diritti Umani. Nel 2022 l’Unione Europea ha applicato per la prima volta una direttiva speciale per concedere un permesso temporaneo da chi scappa dalla guerra. Non si tratta di una nuova direttiva poiché risale al 2001 ma prima di quest’anno non era mai stata applicata. Il rapporto PRAB dichiara che l’attivazione di tale direttiva è una decisione storica ma basata su un doppio standard: benvenuti a un confine, respinti ad un altro. Questa è la realtà ai confini della fortezza Europa.

    Charlotte Slente, Segretaria generale della Danish Refugee Council, afferma che «la pratica di chiudere un occhio sulle violazioni dei diritti umani alle frontiere dell’UE deve essere interrotta. È giunto il momento di sostenere, rispettare e far rispettare i diritti di coloro che si trovano alle porte dell’Europa, indipendentemente dal loro Paese di appartenenza. Per anni sono state raccolte prove sulle pratiche di respingimento. Le prove sono innegabili. Questo schema non deve essere visto in modo isolato. Fa parte di una più ampia crisi dello Stato di diritto. La crisi alle frontiere dell’UE non è una crisi di numeri. È invece una crisi di dignità umana e di volontà politica, dovuta alla mancata attuazione dei quadri giuridici esistenti e all’applicazione delle sentenze giudiziarie».

    Con il 2023 è giunto il momento di porre fine alla pratica illecita e discriminatoria di chiudere gli occhi sulle violazioni dei diritti umani alle frontiere dell’Unione Europea. Il rapporto si conclude con cinque richieste: rispetto diritti umani e dignità umana a tutte le frontiere; porre fine all’uso sistematico dei respingimenti; introduzione di meccanismi di monitoraggio indipendenti alle frontiere; prevalenza di una cultura dei diritti rafforzata dal coraggio politico per sostenere le persone bisognose di protezione; apertura di percorsi d’entrata sicuri e legali.

    Sono tutte richieste più che lecite che dovrebbero esser già applicate. Ma il 2023 è veramente l’anno in cui tali richieste verranno accettate?

    Nell’anno in cui, solo per rimanere in Italia, il governo Meloni rivendica come legittimi i respingimenti al confine con la Slovenia, gli accordi con la Libia e ha deciso di stanziare oltre 40 milioni di euro per costruire nuovi CPR, è veramente l’anno in cui i governi degli Stati UE smetteranno di sacrificare i diritti umani per scopi politici ed economici?

    https://www.meltingpot.org/2023/03/principio-di-non-refoulement-e-solo-un-articolo-che-non-viene-rispettato

    #refoulements #push-backs #migrations #asile #réfugiés #frontières #frontière_sud-alpine #2022 #rapport #Balkans #route_des_Balkans #chiffres #statistiques #violence #droits_humains

    • #Protecting_Rights_at_Borders: Beaten, punished and pushed back

      The fifth Protecting Rights at Borders report (#PRAB) reconfirms a pattern of a systematic use of pushbacks at EU Borders. The study recorded incidents involving 5.756 persons between 1 January and 31 December 2022.

      It appears evident that EU Member States continue making access to international protection as difficult as possible. These practises are systemic and integrated into countries’ border control mechanisms although they are in strict violation of EU law. The newly released PRAB report shows that many of those victims who were pushed back were not merely prevented from crossing a border. The data collected outlines that they were “welcomed” at the EU with a denial of access to asylum procedures, arbitrary arrest or detention, physical abuse or mistreatment, theft or destruction of property.

      Nationals from Afghanistan, Syria and Pakistan reported most frequently being the victim of pushbacks and in 12% of the recorded incidents children were involved. This data is unfortunately only the top of the iceberg.

      “The practice of turning a blind eye to human rights violations at EU borders must be stopped. It is high time to uphold, respect and enforce the rights of those at Europe’s doorstep, irrespective of their country of nationality. All people have the right to ask for international protection in the EU. For years, DRC jointly with its PRAB partners and many other actors, has been recording evidence on pushback practices. The evidence is undeniable,” says Secretary General of DRC, Charlotte Slente.

      Access to international protection, within the EU, is far from safeguarded - not merely due to a systematic use of pushbacks across EU borders or the unwillingness to let boats disembark, but also due to other policy developments.

      “This pattern should not be seen in isolation. It is part of a wider Rule of Law crisis. The crisis at the EU’s borders is not one of numbers. Instead, it is a crisis of human dignity and political will, created due to failure to implement existing legal frameworks and enforce judicial rulings”, says Charlotte Slente.

      Preventing access to territory with all means

      “In Greece, pushbacks at land and sea borders remain a de facto general policy, as widely reported including by UN bodies. However, instead of effectively investigating such allegations, Greek Authorities have put in place a new mechanism which does not ensure the guarantees of impartiality and effectiveness. At the same time, NGOs and human rights defenders supporting victims of alleged pushback remain under pressure and find themselves increasingly targeted", says Konstantinos Vlachopoulos of GCR.

      In Italy the systematic use of pushbacks is increasing.

      "We are witnessing continuous readmissions along the Adriatic ports from Italy to Greece and rejections to Albania. What we hear about is inhuman treatment, such as confiscation and destruction of personal belongings, forced undressing, and exposure to extreme temperatures. The Italian government tries to deny that this is happening. But the situation seems to be getting worse”, says Erminia Rizzi of ASGI.

      Welcome at one border, pushed back at another

      The situation is not equal at all EU borders. There are double standards based on ethnic profiling and they violate international human rights law. 2022 was the year that the EU provided protection – at least on paper – to 4.9 million people who entered the EU from Ukraine. The triggering of the Temporary Protection Directive was a historic decision.

      “In February 2022, Poland has opened its borders to admit large numbers of Ukrainian nationals fleeing war. Temporary protection was given to numerous persons seeking protection from the war in Ukraine. This welcoming approach of the Polish authorities did not affect the situation at the Polish-Belarusian border, where a humanitarian crisis continues since August 2021. There, third-country nationals are everyday violently pushed back, irrespective of their vulnerability or asylum claims”, says Maja Łysienia, SIP Strategic Litigation Expert.

      More information on the pushback data recorded by PRAB partners, the litigation cases brought to national and European courts related to border violence, as well as an analysis of current policy dimensions, can be found in PRAB V here: https://pro.drc.ngo/resources/news/prab-beaten-punished-and-pushed-back

      https://reliefweb.int/report/world/protecting-rights-borders-beaten-punished-and-pushed-back

    • Les chiffres à la #frontière_sud-alpine (#Italie / #France) :

      The number of pushbacks from France to Italy recorded through the PRAB project, for instance, also represents a fraction of the overall number of persons reporting pushbacks to Diaconia Valdese’s outreach teams. In Ventimiglia and Oulx in Italy, Diaconia Valdese has records of as many as 2,703 persons, and 2,583 persons, respectively, who reported experiencing pushbacks. If compared to other available statistics, even higher pushback numbers were recorded at the borders between Italy and France in 2022: In Ventimiglia, Italy, at least 17,7491 persons were pushed back by French Authorities, while in Oulx, Italy, it was at least 3,6902 persons.

      (p.4)

      #Ventimille #Oulx #Hautes-Alpes #Alpes_maritimes #Briançon

    • Le sistematiche violazioni dei diritti umani ai confini europei: VI report della rete #PRAB

      Recentemente, un video pubblicato dal New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/19/world/europe/greece-migrants-abandoned.html) ha rivelato respingimenti illegali di persone migranti dalla Grecia, sollevando un’ampia eco mediatica. La gravità delle accuse ha suscitato la reazione di Ylva Johansson (https://www.politico.eu/article/commission-ylva-johansson-greece-migrant-deportation), Commissaria europea agli Affari interni, che ha definito tali pratiche come “deportazioni”, e del primo ministro greco, Mitsotakis, che le ha giudicate “inaccettabili” (https://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2023/05/23/amanpour-greek-prime-minister-kyriakos-mitsotakis.cnn). Tuttavia, organizzazioni non governative e grassroots denunciano da anni la sistematicità delle violazioni dei diritti umani delle persone migranti ai confini europei.

      Nel Report What we do in the shadows, il VI report del network PRAB, sono state raccolte migliaia di testimonianze riguardanti le azioni compiute dalle forze di frontiera nei confronti dei potenziali richiedenti asilo, tra cui respingimenti, aggressioni e furti. In alcuni casi, tali azioni mettono a rischio la vita delle persone coinvolte, e ci sono anche situazioni in cui queste azioni si sono tradotte in tragiche perdite umane, come nei respingimenti dalla Polonia alla Bielorussia o nel caso di Fatima, una giovane ragazza di 23 anni uccisa dalla polizia macedone al confine tra la Macedonia del Nord e la Grecia a metà aprile, il giorno in cui l’Agenzia Europea Frontex ha iniziato la propria missione operativa nel paese balcanico.

      Migliaia di testimonianze raccolte nel VI report di PRAB

      Durante il periodo gennaio-aprile 2023, sono stati registrati un totale di 10.691 casi individuali di persone respinte alle frontiere europee. Di questi, 1.611 hanno partecipato a interviste approfondite da parte di uno dei partner PRAB per registrare i dati demografici, le rotte migratorie e le violazioni dei diritti a cui sono stati esposti.

      - Abusi fisici e aggressioni: Il 62% delle persone ha denunciato abusi fisici e/o aggressioni al confine tra Ungheria e Serbia, mentre il 54% ha segnalato lo stesso al confine tra Grecia e Turchia.

      - Coinvolgimento dei minori: Il 16% dei respingimenti riguardava minori, di cui il 9% viaggiava con la famiglia e il 7% era costituito da minori non accompagnati o separati dalla famiglia.

      - Mancato accesso alle procedure di asilo: Nel 44% dei casi registrati al confine tra Croazia e Bosnia-Erzegovina, nell’88% dei casi al confine tra Ungheria e Serbia e nell’85% dei casi al confine tra Italia e Francia, è stato segnalata la impossibilità di accesso alle procedure di asilo.

      Questo rapporto, insieme a molti altri, evidenzia ancora una volta le violazioni dei diritti che si verificano quotidianamente alle frontiere europee.

      I respingimenti e la brutalità della polizia sono di fatto uno strumento per la gestione delle frontiere, l’impunità è la norma e le vie della giustizia per le vittime sono scarse o inesistenti.

      Sulla base di un imperativo umanitario – che mira a salvare vite umane – negli ultimi anni, molte persone e organizzazioni umanitarie hanno sostenuto le persone in movimento. Mentre alcuni hanno contribuito a fornire l’accesso ai servizi di base, tra cui cibo, alloggio e assistenza medica, altri hanno intrapreso azioni legali per contestare le violazioni dei diritti alle frontiere dell’UE. Alcuni Stati membri europei hanno iniziato o continuano a criminalizzare coloro che forniscono assistenza, con l’obiettivo di porre fine alla solidarietà con le persone in movimento. In alcuni Paesi europei questa situazione si è ulteriormente aggravata, prendendo di fatto di mira i difensori dei diritti umani. Salvare vite umane non è solo un dovere morale, è un obbligo legale nel diritto internazionale dei diritti umani.

      https://www.asgi.it/primo-piano/le-sistematiche-violazioni-dei-diritti-umani-ai-confini-europei-vi-report-della

      #Protecting_Right_At_Border

  • Mass deportations from Croatia and Hungary: Organisations complain of human rights violations

    More than 130,000 people were deported from Hungary to neighbouring Serbia without an asylum application being registered. Now Croatia is returning refugees on a large scale to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    Croatian police are currently carrying out mass deportations of refugees to Bosnia and Herzegovina. According to media reports on Monday (https://fena.ba/article/1525329/nastavljeno-organizirano-vracanje-migranata-iz-republike-hrvatske-u-centar-lipa), people from the Republic of Croatia are being taken by bus across the border and from there to the notorious Lipa men’s camp or the Borići reception centre. Both facilities are located in the border area near the town of Bihać.

    The Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN), which is active in the Balkans, had already pointed out the noticeable increase in deportations to Bosnia and Herzegovina last week (https://borderviolence.eu/reports/press-release-croatia-carries-out-mass-deportations-of-people-on-the-). According to the report, people are being intercepted by the police all over Croatia and sometimes taken away in unmarked vehicles. The people concerned were held for hours in prison-like basement rooms without access to food and water. There, the police issued them with deportation notices to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    The refugees had to sign the documents even though they did not understand their content. Appeals against the procedure were not possible, the report says. This also violated international law, BVMN complains. The groups were then transferred to other detention centres. The deportees were even forced to pay for accommodation, food and transport to the border.

    The BVMN suspects that the methods described are the implementation of compensatory measures announced by the Croatian Minister of the Interior, Davor Božinović, after the country’s accession to Schengen at the beginning of this year. In this context, 742 police officers were to be withdrawn from other border crossings with Slovenia and Hungary and pick up refugees in mobile teams in the border area with Bosnia and Herzegovina, according to the announcement.

    By receiving the deported of refugees, the government in Bosnia and Herzegovina is also following EU Commission guidelines. The country has adopted implementing protocols for readmission agreements with 16 EU states, which Brussels considers „overall satisfactory“. However, accelerated readmission procedures with neighbouring countries must be „fully and effectively implemented“, according to an October report (https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-10/Bosnia%20and%20Herzegovina%20Report%202022.pdf). In 2021, the number of third-country nationals returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina under various readmission agreements amounted to 570, which is significantly lower than in previous years.

    For the implementation of EU requirements, Bosnia and Herzegovina cooperates with the Commission in a „Joint Readmission Committee“. In December, the country adopted a „Strategy on Migration and Asylum“ for the period 2021 to 2025 (https://balkaninsight.com/2022/12/09/bosnia-to-tighten-border-controls-in-line-with-eu-demands) and committed itself to following hundreds of new measures. In return, the country beckons the status of an EU accession candidate.

    Hungary is also deporting refugees en masse to neighbouring Serbia. According to information from „nd“, this now affects around 130,000 people who have not been given the opportunity to apply for asylum by the Serbian authorities in so-called fast-track procedures. The persons concerned have therefore not been entered in the Eurodac file in Hungary with their fingerprints and facial image. With such an entry, a country declares itself responsible for processing the asylum application.

    Bilateral readmissions without verification of a claim for international protection constitute a violation of the international principle of non-refoulement and EU law, the European Court of Justice had ruled. The EU border agency Frontex therefore stopped its activities on the Hungarian side of the border with Serbia two years ago. However, the agency subsequently launched a mission on the Serbian side.

    https://digit.site36.net/2023/04/04/mass-deportations-from-croatia-and-hungary-organisations-complain-of-h

    #refoulements #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Croatie #Hongrie #Balkans #route_des_Balkans #push-backs #Bosnie-Herzégovine #Bosnie

    • L’article original (en allemand):
      Massenabschiebungen aus EU-Balkanstaaten

      Betroffene und Organisationen beklagen Verletzungen der Menschenrechte

      Die kroatische Polizei führt derzeit massenhafte Abschiebungen von Geflüchteten nach Bosnien und Herzegowina durch. Laut Medienberichten vom Montag werden Menschen aus der Republik Kroatien mit Bussen über die Grenze und von dort in das berüchtigte Männerlager Lipa oder in das Aufnahmezentrum Borići gebracht. Beide Einrichtungen befinden sich im Grenzgebiet in der Nähe der Stadt Bihać.

      Auf die auffällig stark gestiegenen Abschiebungen nach Bosnien und Herzegowina hatte das in Balkanstaaten tätige Netzwerk Border Violence Monitoring (BVMN) bereits vergangene Woche hingewiesen. Demnach werden in ganz Kroatien Menschen von der Polizei abgefangen und teilweise in nicht gekennzeichneten Fahrzeugen weggebracht. Die Betroffenen seien stundenlang in gefängnisähnlichen Kellerräumen ohne Zugang zu Nahrung und Wasser festgehalten worden. Dort habe ihnen die Polizei einen Abschiebebescheid nach Bosnien und Herzegowina ausgestellt.

      Die Geflüchteten hätten die Dokumente unterschreiben müssen, obwohl sie deren Inhalt nicht verstanden. Rechtsmittel gegen das Verfahren seien nicht möglich gewesen, heißt es in dem Bericht. Damit werde auch internationales Recht verletzt. Anschließend seien die Gruppen zunächst in andere Hafteinrichtungen verlegt worden. Für die Unterkunft, Verpflegung und den Transport zur Grenze hätten die Abzuschiebenden sogar noch bezahlen sollen.

      Das BVMN vermutet hinter den beschriebenen Methoden die Umsetzung von Ausgleichsmaßnahmen, die der kroatische Innenminister Davor Božinović nach dem Schengen-Beitritt zu Beginn dieses Jahres angekündigt hatte. 742 Polizeibeamte sollten in diesem Zusammenhang von anderen Grenzübergängen zu Slowenien und Ungarn abgezogen und in mobilen Teams Geflüchtete im Grenzgebiet zu Bosnien und Herzegowina aufgreifen, so die Ankündigung.

      Auch die Regierung in Bosnien und Herzegowina befolgt mit der Erlaubnis, die Geflüchteten zurückzubringen, Vorgaben der EU-Kommission. Das Land hat für Rückübernahmeabkommen mit 16 EU-Staaten Durchführungsprotokolle verabschiedet, was Brüssel zwar als »insgesamt zufriedenstellend« bewertet. Jedoch müssten beschleunigte Rückübernahmeverfahren mit den Nachbarländern »vollständig und wirksam umgesetzt werden«, heißt es in einem Bericht vom Oktober. Die Zahl der Drittstaatsangehörigen, die im Jahr 2021 im Rahmen verschiedener Rückübernahmeabkommen nach Bosnien und Herzegowina zurückgebracht wurden, belief sich demnach auf 570 und war damit deutlich niedriger als in den Vorjahren.

      Für die Umsetzung der EU-Forderungen arbeitet Bosnien und Herzegowina in einem »Gemischten Rückübernahmeausschuss« mit der Kommission zusammen. Im Dezember hat das Land für den Zeitraum 2021 bis 2025 eine »Strategie für Migration und Asyl« verabschiedet und sich zur Befolgung von Hunderten neuer Maßnahmen verpflichtet. Im Gegenzug winkt der Status eines EU-Beitrittskandidaten.

      Auch Ungarn schiebt Geflüchtete massenhaft ins Nachbarland Serbien ab. Nach Informationen des »nd« betrifft dies mittlerweile rund 130 000 Personen, denen die serbischen Behörden in sogenannten Schnellverfahren keine Möglichkeit für einen Asylantrag eingeräumt haben. Die Betroffenen sind deshalb auch nicht in Ungarn mit ihren Fingerabdrücken und Gesichtsbild in der Eurodac-Datei eingetragen worden. Mit einem solchen Eintrag erklärt sich ein Land für zuständig zur Bearbeitung des Asylantrages.

      Die bilateralen Rückübernahmen ohne Prüfung eines Anspruchs auf internationalen Schutz stellen einen Verstoß gegen den internationalen Grundsatz der Nichtzurückweisung und EU-Recht dar, hatte der Europäische Gerichtshof festgestellt. Die EU-Grenzagentur Frontex hat deshalb ihre Tätigkeit auf der ungarischen Seite der Grenze zu Serbien vor zwei Jahren eingestellt. Anschließend hat die Agentur jedoch eine Mission auf serbischer Seite gestartet.

      https://www.nd-aktuell.de/artikel/1172220.migrationsabwehr-massenabschiebungen-aus-eu-balkanstaaten.html

    • Press Release: Croatia carries out mass deportations of people on the move to Bosnia and Herzegovina

      This week, the Croatian police began a new and alarming practice of interception, detention and deportation of people on the move to Bosnia and Herzegovina en masse, transporting them by buses to the border crossings, where they are handed over to Bosnian authorities.

      According to the testimonies of the victims of the expulsion, which were confirmed yesterday by the authorities of the Una-Sana Canton, the Croatian police intercept people on the move across the entire territory of the Republic of Croatia, after which they are often escorted to police stations in unmarked vehicles.

      BVMN expresses great concern about this new practice and calls on the Ministry of Interior of the Republic of Croatia to make an immediate clarification of the matter, and provide all rights guaranteed by law, including the right to international protection, access to appeals procedures, information regarding rights afforded by law, translation throughout proceedings and free legal assistance to all people on the move found in the territory of the Republic of Croatia.

      https://borderviolence.eu/reports/press-release-croatia-carries-out-mass-deportations-of-people-on-the-

  • Al Brennero profilazione razziale e respingimenti, mentre l’Austria ripropone la costruzione di una barriera

    Il passo del Brennero, 1372 metri sul livello del mare, è una delle località più fredde del territorio altoatesino, ma già da settimane è quasi sgombro di neve, segnale inequivocabile del repentino cambiamento climatico in atto.

    La zona di confine, sebbene possa sembrare una frontiera come tante in Europa, non lo è. Da ormai diversi anni, il passaggio di persone è altamente monitorato. Ogni treno che transita per il confine viene fermato per almeno 20 minuti e ispezionato da cima a fondo da forze di polizia in uniforme, in borghese e da militari, sia austriache e sia italiane a seconda della provenienza del treno, in cerca degli “irregolari”. Diverse testimonianze confermano che anche altri mezzi pubblici, come gli autobus delle compagnie private tipo Flixbus, vengono controllati regolarmente. Una vera e propria caccia all’essere umano svolta con un solo criterio: la profilazione razziale.

    Questo modus operandi vietato dalle convenzioni internazionali, ma ben radicato nelle prassi quotidiane di controllo dei confini, costringe le persone a scegliere percorsi sempre più impervi per riuscire a oltrepassarlo: ricordiamo quanto accaduto il 18 dicembre del 2021 a Mohamed Basser e Mostapha Zahrakame, morti travolti lungi i binari del treno mentre cercavano di evitare a piedi questo imponente dispiegamento di forze. Nel 2022 sono state fermate 949 persone migranti in posizione irregolare tra il valico del Tarvisio e del Brennero. Il numero delle persone controllate, secondo i dati della polizia ferroviaria, è di 4.474.

    Difficile avere i numeri di quanti sono stati complessivamente i respingimenti nell’uno e nell’altro verso perché è ormai appurato che la buona parte di questi avvengono senza il rilascio di un provvedimento scritto, in modo del tutto illegittimo. Dopo un’istanza di accesso civico di Altreconomia 1, il ministero dell’Interno ha comunicato alla rivista le cifre riguardanti il periodo gennaio-metà novembre 2022. “In questo lasso di tempo – secondo i parziali dati ottenuti, privi di qualsiasi dettaglio rispetto allo specifico punto di frontiera – l’Italia avrebbe “riammesso” attivamente 2.418 persone: 1.080 verso la Francia, 883 in Austria, 410 in Svizzera e 45 in Slovenia. I dieci Paesi di provenienza più rappresentativi (che sommati superano il 50% dei casi a fronte di 77 nazionalità registrate) sono Pakistan, Marocco, Tunisia, Egitto, Nigeria, Algeria, Afghanistan, India e Bangladesh”.

    Il giornalista Duccio Facchini spiega poi che è stato negato l’accesso agli accordi di riammissione “per via del possibile “pregiudizio” alla “integrità dei rapporti internazionali del nostro Paese con la Slovenia e con l’Austria. La cortina fumogena fa parte della strategia”. Sulle “riammissioni passive”, l’Austria ha riammesso solo 497 persone, con “dati talmente bassi – sottolinea Facchini – da farli apparire quasi delle comparse inerti. In realtà anche questi numeri, come quelli delle riammissioni attive, vanno letti con estrema attenzione”.

    Al Brennero, oltre alle forze di polizia, è ancora presente un presidio permanente di Volontarius, una organizzazione di volontariato finanziata dalla Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano. Gli operatori e i mediatori offrono informazioni basilari e, quando necessario, indirizzano le persone respinte verso l’Italia alle strutture di accoglienza a Bolzano. L’organizzazione gestisce una struttura al confine relativamente grande, che è dedicata all’accoglienza di famiglie e minori. Il personale cerca di assicurarsi che nessuno dorma fuori la notte, anche se la struttura viene chiusa alle ore 23 e durante le ore notturne non ci sono possibilità di venire accolti. Assente qualsiasi attività di consulenza legale e di prevenzione di prassi illegittime.

    In questi mesi abbiamo notato come la celerità delle forze di Polizia nella localizzazione di persone sul treno sia aumentata. La cosa è talmente evidente che presumiamo una possibile collaborazione del personale ferroviario nell’identificazione degli “irregolari”. Un altro elemento di novità, che però nel biennio 2016-2017 era considerato una normalità, è la presenza di forze di polizia austriache in Italia. Sembra che in quest’ultimo periodo sia ricominciata una “collaborazione” tra le due forze di polizie, ma potrebbe essere che quella austriaca controlli l’operato di quella italiana, un po’ come successo anni addietro 2. Una situazione alquanto paradossale considerata la retorica sovranista di chi siede al governo a Roma. Non sembra invece esserci una presenza rilevata, almeno nelle nostre azioni di monitoraggio, di polizia Italiana nel primo tratto di confine austriaco o alla stazione di Gries am Brenner.

    Del resto il dibattito in Austria sta assumendo toni nuovamente allarmistici: “Abbiamo bisogno di barriere efficaci che devono essere molto alte, andare in profondità nel terreno ed essere costantemente monitorate, tecnicamente e personalmente. Solo così si può contenere l’immigrazione clandestina“. Sono infatti queste le frasi ad effetto del cancelliere austriaco Karl Nehammer in un’intervista al quotidiano tedesco ‘Bild’ del 18 marzo.

    Nehammer ha detto che vuole una recinzione simile a quella tra Stati Uniti e Messico aggiungendo che il capo della polizia federale si è recato su quel confine per “vedere quali misure stanno funzionando. Il nostro obiettivo è condividere questa conoscenza con altri Paesi dell’Ue come la Bulgaria al fine di migliorare la nostra protezione delle frontiere dell’Ue“. Chissà se il capo della polizia austriaca avrà anche chiesto come funzionano i centri detentivi negli Stati messicani a ridosso del confine?

    Ha poi sostenuto che lo sviluppo dell’immigrazione è “decisamente drammatico, solo in Iran ci sono tre milioni di afgani che vogliono andare in Europa e a questo si aggiunge la situazione nell’area terremotata in Turchia e nel nord della Siria, dove vivono più di un milione di profughi siriani che ora hanno perso di nuovo tutto“. Infine, parlando delle procedure di asilo, ha detto che “l’Ue è sinonimo di rispetto dei diritti umani ma bisogna evitare che si attraversino più Paesi sicuri per poi chiedere asilo nei Paesi con i migliori sistemi sociali“.

    Seppur contenuto, quello del Brennero è un transito costante, inesorabile, che viene percorso nei due sensi da diverse tipologie di persone. Dall’Italia all’Austria, abbiamo conosciuto persone provenienti dalla Rotta balcanica, che vogliono proseguire il loro viaggio verso i Paesi nord europei; persone registrate al primo ingresso in Italia, ma che vorrebbero raggiungere amici, parenti o semplicemente vivere in altri paesi nordeuropei, i cosiddetti “dublinati”.

    Ci sono persone che hanno una vita stabile soprattutto in Paesi scandinavi e che cercano di tornare in Italia solo per rinnovare i documenti, ma che spesso si ritrovano bloccati nell’impossibilità di fare rientro in Italia, oppure nel viaggio di ritorno, a causa di un respingimento.

    Ci sono persone che dall’Austria o dalla Germania vengono in Italia a causa di richieste d’asilo negate. Molti afgani o iraniani raccontano questa storia, per esempio. Ci dicono che nemmeno con l’arrivo dei talebani i due Paesi hanno cambiato la loro politica in materia di asilo e che non sempre rinnovano la protezione. Dopo una permanenza più o meno lunga, sono costretti ad andarsene e una volta arrivati in Italia si stabiliscono in Alto Adige sapendo già il tedesco.

    Persone che vengono continuamente criminalizzate dalle politiche europee, i cui basilari diritti e l’accesso a una vita dignitosa vengono costantemente calpestati e negati. Non è sufficiente che a Vienna, Berlino o Bruxelles si indignino di fronte ai regimi autoritari e alle condizioni di repressione e assenza dei diritti umani, se poi non viene data protezione e libertà di muoversi a chi scappa da quei paesi. Dobbiamo prendere atto che questa indignazione e questo sgomento serve solo a dare una parvenza di umanità e democrazia alla comunità Europea e ai paesi che ne fanno parte, che sempre meno si traduce in fatti.

    Persone che versano in condizioni di estrema repressione, spesso private di diritti umani nei loro paesi di origine, arrivano in una Unione europea che invece di conferire loro dignità, le criminalizza e le priva dei diritti fondamentali attuando percorsi burocratici impossibili e regole ingiuste.

    Le parole del cancelliere austriaco sono di fatto quello che pensano gli altri leader europei: siamo solidali purché poi non veniate qua, e se proprio non siete affogati o respinti dalle polizie che lautamente finanziamo nei paesi extra Ue, potete rimanere purché stiate nel paese limitrofo al mio!

    1. Dati riportati nel numero di febbraio 2023 di Altreconomia.
    2. https://www.aduc.it/articolo/scorta+trilaterale+poliziotti+al+brennero_24356.php

    https://www.meltingpot.org/2023/03/al-brennero-profilazione-razziale-e-respingimenti-mentre-laustria-riprop

    #frontière_sud-alpine #Alpes #frontières #migrations #Autriche #Italie #Brenner #profilage_racial #asile #réfugiés #push-backs #refoulements #chiffres #statistiques #réadmissions #réadmissions_passives #Volontarius #patrouilles_mixtes #murs #barrières_frontalières

  • New GCR report reveals violence against refugees at the Greek-Turkish borders and criminalization of legal aid organizations

    Pushbacks and intimidation of human rights defenders are a systematic part of an unofficial but carefully planned migration and border policy

    A new report by the Greek Council for Refugees (GCR) documents extreme violence against people seeking asylum at Europe’s external border. Pushbacks of refugees to Turkey are widespread, and involve humiliation, illegal detention, intimidation, physical and sexual violence, and arbitrary confiscation of personal belongings.

    Pushback cases before ECtHR and/or Greek Public Prosecutor

    This report contributes to an existing body of extensive evidence of the Greek state’s illegal pushbacks practice, by providing particularly detailed descriptions of 11 pushback cases at the Evros border region and the Aegean islands, and 2 cases of pullbacks by the Turkish authorities in Evros.

    Illegal detention in official and unofficial detention sites

    In all cases detailed in the report, asylum seekers were arbitrarily held in official or unofficial detention sites, for periods ranging from a few hours to a full day before eventually being pushed back. In three cases, people identified their place of detention as the Neo Cheimonio Border Guard Station.

    Sexual Violence

    In all the reported cases, asylum seekers were subjected to strip search during their unofficial detention. In at least three cases, people reported incidents of sexual violence, ranging from humiliation to sexual assault and rape.

    Pushback of two Palestinian recognized refugees

    In June 2022, two Palestinians recognised by the Greek authorities as refugees and legally residing in the island of Kos were illegally apprehended in the middle of the street. They were brought to a small storage room with other people, body searched and then raped. Twelve hours later, the guards tied their legs, put them in a van and boarded them in a boat. They threw them in the sea on a half-deflated raft until the Turkish coast guard rescued them.

    Criminalization of legal aid organizations

    Evidence from the report also shows how human rights defenders supporting refugees, including NGOs like the Greek Council for Refugees, are increasingly intimidated and obstructed in their work by the Greek authorities. Instead of stopping these rights violations, the Greek government is targeting those who support refugees, framing them as enemies of the state and smugglers in an attempt to silence them and hinder their human rights work.

    Alkistis Agrafioti Chatzigianni, Advocacy Officer at the Greek Council for Refugees, said:

    “This research shows that unless the EU and Greek authorities finally put an end to these illegal border policies, they will only become more violent and widespread. The government must immediately cease all violations at its borders and allow human rights defenders to do their important work of supporting people seeking asylum.”

    Kleio Nikolopoulou, Advocacy Officer at the Greek Council for Refugees, said:

    “Pushbacks and border violence have become the rule rather than the exception in Greece. They are an unacceptable symptom of a broken European asylum policy and what is even more alarming is the EU standing by as these rights violations become a common trend throughout European borders. The EU needs to put in place a migration system that upholds asylum rights.”

    https://www.gcr.gr/en/news/press-releases-announcements/item/2111-new-gcr-report-reveals-violence-against-refugees-at-the-greek-turkish-borde

    Pour télécharger le rapport:
    https://www.gcr.gr/media/k2/attachments/GCR_Pushback_Criminalization_Report.pdf

    #rapport #GCR #Grèce #Turquie #frontières #asile #migrations #réfugiés #push-backs #refoulements #criminalisation_de_la_solidarité #violence #humiliation #détention_illégale #enfermement #violence_sexuelle #frontières_extérieures #Evros #îles #Thrace

  • Non si fermano le riammissioni al confine tra Italia e Austria

    Scarsa informativa legale, assenza di mediatori, mancanza di provvedimenti scritti: al Brennero l’attività delle polizie dei due Paesi nega i diritti alle persone in transito. Le Ong denunciano le violazioni e chiedono la fine dei controlli

    Brennero, primi giorni dell’anno 2023. Un operatore del servizio Assistenza umanitaria al Brennero -gestito dal Gruppo Volontarius in collaborazione con la Caritas di Bolzano-Bressanone- attende l’arrivo del treno regionale da Innsbruck al binario tronco Nord. Di solito, quando incontra un migrante in transito gli si avvicina per un primo orientamento legale sulle normative riguardo l’iter di protezione internazionale e la regolare permanenza sul territorio. Ma in presenza delle forze dell’ordine la sua possibilità di intervento è più limitata. “In quel caso è molto difficile avvicinarsi attivamente alle persone per dare informazioni. La possibilità di presentare richiesta d’asilo non viene menzionata dalle forze dell’ordine, che si limitano a far salire le persone intercettate sul primo treno regionale diretto in Austria, se la persona proviene da lì, o in Italia se sta tentando il percorso inverso”, spiega l’operatore.

    È quello che accade dopo la perquisizione dell’Eurocity 81 delle dieci, proveniente da Monaco di Baviera e diretto a Bologna. All’arrivo del treno le forze dell’ordine italiane operano secondo una prassi ben consolidata, con l’impiego di sette agenti di polizia e tre militari. In otto salgono a bordo del treno e procedono con il controllo delle carrozze, mentre due militari restano sul binario seguendo il percorso dei loro colleghi all’interno. L’operazione dura meno di dieci minuti. Due cittadini pakistani vengono fatti scendere. Senza un servizio di mediazione che permetta loro di comprendere quanto stia accadendo, né la consegna di alcun provvedimento, i due vengono scortati al binario tronco Nord. Qui sono sorvegliati a vista da due agenti di polizia e due militari. All’arrivo del regionale proveniente da Innsbruck vengono caricati sul convoglio che dopo cinque minuti riparte in direzione Nord.

    Ogni giorno al Brennero circolano dieci Eurocity della compagnia austriaca ÖBB: cinque percorrono la tratta Bologna-Monaco, gli altri viaggiano in direzione opposta. Al Brennero rimangono fermi quindici minuti. In questo lasso di tempo le forze dell’ordine italiane entrano in azione. Sui treni Eurocity diretti a Monaco, inoltre, tre agenti della polizia austriaca salgono sul convoglio già al Brennero. Si posizionano in coda e procedono con i controlli appena varcato il confine. Le persone sprovviste di un regolare titolo di soggiorno sul territorio austriaco vengono fatte scendere alla prima stazione, Gries am Brenner, e lì, dopo una rapida perquisizione -e in alcuni casi una multa da cento a mille euro che si traduce nel sequestro di soldi e spesso del telefono cellulare, una pratica consentita dalla normativa sull’immigrazione austriaca (articolo 120, par. 1 e 1a del Fremdenpolizeigesetz)- vengono caricate sui furgoni della gendarmeria e riportati subito in Italia.

    Le modalità di controllo sistematiche mostrano che le polizie italiana e austriaca sono particolarmente attente nel colpire i movimenti secondari dei migranti su questa striscia di confine. “Nei mesi invernali le persone soggette a riammissione dall’Italia verso l’Austria e nella direzione opposta sono in media dieci al giorno”, spiega Manocher Moqimi, referente del servizio Assistenza umanitaria al Brennero. Mentre il “Consuntivo della Polizia ferroviaria 2022” rivela che lo scorso anno “le attività svolte in forma congiunta con le polizie austriaca e tedesca lungo le fasce confinarie di Brennero e Tarvisio, hanno permesso di controllare 4.474 stranieri, di cui 949 rintracciati in posizione irregolare”.

    Le riammissioni lungo il confine del Brennero avvengono sulla base dell’accordo bilaterale sottoscritto da Italia e Austria il 7 novembre 1997. Matteo Astuti, operatore legale dell’Associazione per gli studi giuridici sull’Immigrazione (Asgi), spiega che “le riammissioni dovrebbero essere effettuate secondo le procedure previste dall’accordo tra i due Paesi, che comprendono sempre la notifica di un provvedimento scritto alle persone soggette a riammissione, il diritto all’informazione e a poter manifestare la volontà di richiedere protezione internazionale”. Quando questi diritti non vengono rispettati la procedura di riammissione si configura come illegittima. Come sottolineato dal report “Lungo la rotta del Brennero”, pubblicato da Antenne migranti, Fondazione Langer e Asgi già nel 2017, le riammissioni informali al Brennero avvengono in contrasto con l’articolo 13 della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo, perché attuate “sulla base di decisioni delle autorità di frontiera non scritte, in nessun modo formalmente notificate […] e in alcun modo contestabili e impugnabili di fronte alle autorità giurisdizionali astrattamente competenti”.

    Particolarmente problematico poi è il tema dei controlli effettuati dalle forze di polizia. Italia e Austria hanno ripristinato formalmente quelli sulle rispettive frontiere solo nel periodo tra novembre 2015 e maggio 2016, e pertanto “la presenza di controlli sistematici alle frontiere interne viola l’articolo 22 del Codice Schengen che non prevede ‘verifiche’ per chi attraversa la frontiera qualunque sia la sua nazionalità”, chiarisce Astuti. Al Brennero, inoltre, il diritto all’informazione viene costantemente leso. Il servizio di mediazione, che dovrebbe essere garantito dagli accordi tra il governo italiano l’Organizzazione internazionale per le migrazioni (Oim) è assente. A volte gli operatori di Assistenza umanitaria al Brennero sono chiamati dalle forze di polizia a svolgere la mediazione, visto che alcuni collaboratori del servizio conoscono lingue quali l’arabo e il farsi. Limitandosi a raccogliere informazioni da tradurre, però, gli enti di tutela corrono il rischio di essere strumentalizzati dalla pubblica autorità per giustificare una pratica eseguita in maniera illegittima.

    Per ovviare a situazioni come queste Asgi ha iniziato un ciclo di formazioni per gli operatori del servizio del Brennero. “In questo modo possono disporre di più strumenti per comprendere quando la polizia di frontiera agisce in maniera illegittima”, spiega l’operatore legale che auspica anche il ripristino di un’attività di monitoraggio indipendente, nel solco delle precedenti esperienze “Brenner/o border monitoring” e “Antenne migranti” -operative rispettivamente dal 2014 al 2016 e dal 2016 al 2020- per testimoniare quanto accade su questa frontiera e denunciare le violazioni dei diritti delle persone migranti. “Le persone cercheranno sempre di passare: chi non ce la fa la prima volta spesso ci riprova ancora e ancora -afferma l’operatore del Gruppo Volontarius-. Forse all’ennesimo tentativo riuscirà a varcare la frontiera. Ma in che modo e a quale prezzo?”.

    https://altreconomia.it/non-si-fermano-le-riammissioni-al-confine-tra-italia-e-austria

    #frontière_sud-alpine #Brenner #Italie #Autriche #réadmission #push-backs #refoulements #Alpes #migrations #asile #réfugiés

  • Entre la #Grèce et la #Turquie, une frontière de plus en plus meurtrière

    Athènes continue de renforcer la surveillance de la région de l’Evros, qui sépare le pays de son voisin. Les exilés passant par les terres militarisées de la région sont instrumentalisés, au détriment de leur droit d’asile, comme le montrent les dérives et les drames rapportés en 2022.

    AlexandroupoliAlexandroupoli, Orestiada, Poros (Grèce).– Dans le ciel plombé de ce matin de décembre, le vent frappe le drapeau grec à l’entrée de Poros. Un chien errant détale sur la route abîmée qui longe l’église orthodoxe. Il laisse filer les voitures de police, rares véhicules à traverser ce village des confins de l’Evros, un nome (division administrative) du nord-est de la Grèce. Au nord, au loin, s’élèvent les collines de la Bulgarie ; à l’est s’étend la campagne turque.

    Les patrouilles s’avancent jusqu’à un long mur. Séparant la Grèce de la Turquie, ce serpent d’acier tranche des plaines vides sur 27 kilomètres. Ses poteaux de cinq mètres de haut épousent les courbes de l’Evros. Le fleuve, appelé Meriç en turc et Maritsa en bulgare, délimite la frontière gréco-turque, d’une longueur totale d’environ 200 kilomètres.

    Objectif de ce mur, « obstacle technique » comme le nomment les autorités grecques : « Dissuader les migrants de venir et affecter le commerce des passeurs. » Il bouche les points d’accès fréquentés de cette rivière boueuse au lit étroit que les personnes exilées franchissent à la rame. Athènes a investi 63 millions d’euros, selon la presse locale, pour construire cet édifice en 2021.

    Depuis plus de trente ans, les migrants d’Afrique ou d’Asie qui veulent trouver refuge dans l’Union européenne traversent cette frontière entre la Turquie et la Grèce, deux pays membres de l’Otan en désaccord sur la délimitation de leurs frontières maritimes. En 2022, 5 000 personnes sont officiellement parvenues à traverser le fleuve, majoritairement venues de Turquie, de Syrie ou d’Afghanistan, fuyant des conflits ou des tensions politiques. À l’ombre des regards, car personne ne pénètre ce coin de nature : c’est une zone militaire grecque inaccessible sans l’autorisation d’Athènes. Seuls les drones, les caméras thermiques, l’armée et la police ont un œil sur cette frontière.

    Tout est fait pour la rendre hermétique. « Il est illégal de venir sur le territoire grec clandestinement, nous faisons en sorte que les migrants ne rentrent pas, c’est notre travail », précise Giorgos Tournakis, le major de police du département du nord de l’Evros. « Nous détectons les migrants de l’autre côté, grâce à notre matériel, explique un autre agent de police anonyme, en désignant, à quelques mètres, la rive turque hérissée de roseaux. Nous montrons notre présence. Nous utilisons les sirènes, les haut-parleurs, etc. Souvent cela fonctionne, les migrants rebroussent chemin. »

    Il n’existe pourtant aucune entrée pour les exilé·es voulant requérir l’asile en Grèce. « Pour cela, ils doivent aller formuler cette demande à l’ambassade d’Athènes en Turquie », répond le ministère grec de l’immigration.

    Ce mur en pleine nature n’est qu’un aperçu de la frontière gréco-turque que les forces de l’ordre grecques quadrillent. La police et l’armée sont les recruteuses principales du secteur, confirment les habitant·es, même si les autorités ne donnent aucun chiffre global. 400 renforts de police sont arrivés en 2022, 250 arriveront en 2023, selon le major Tournakis.

    Les villages isolés qui constellent les collines rousses et les sous-bois d’arbres nus sont fantomatiques, loin de l’image des îles grecques touristiques. Ici, les grappes d’oiseaux survolent les maisons trapues, boulangeries ou stations d’essence à l’abandon. En dix ans, 8 % de la population a déserté les champs de tournesol, de blé, de coton, principale activité devenue peu rentable, pour se diriger vers des villes grecques ou européennes. Nombre de celles et ceux qui restent s’engagent pour ou avec l’État.

    Le gouvernement grec de droite de la Nouvelle Démocratie justifie cette surveillance accrue de la frontière par l’épisode de mars 2020. Le président turc, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, avait annoncé son ouverture, provoquant l’afflux de milliers de réfugié·es. En alerte, Athènes avait bloqué leur venue et massé ses soldats.

    La présidente de la Commission européenne, Ursula von der Leyen, déclarait alors que la Grèce était le « bouclier de l’Europe ». L’expression est toujours appréciée par Manos Logothetis, le secrétaire d’État grec à l’immigration, qui nous reçoit dans son bureau à Athènes. « Nous préférons être le bouclier plutôt que l’idiot de l’Europe ! », s’emballe ce politicien volubile, entre deux bouffées de cigarette et gorgées de café froid. Ce langage martial utilisé par l’UE pour contrer la migration semble aussi avoir fait office de blanc-seing à Athènes pour la fortification de sa frontière.

    « Nous construisons des barrières à nos frais pour arrêter les traversées illégales de migrants. Mais l’UE ne paie pas, car sinon d’autres pays, comme la Pologne, par exemple, pourraient aussi demander à ce que l’on paye leurs murs frontaliers », précise Manos Logothetis. Le gouvernement grec va d’ailleurs prolonger en 2023 les murs antimigrants dans l’Evros jusqu’à 80 kilomètres, annonce-t-il. L’UE octroie à Athènes d’autres aides parallèles pour la gestion de l’immigration. Depuis 2018, environ 1,9 milliard d’euros ont été alloués à la Grèce. Quatre-vingt-six agents et experts de l’agence européenne Frontex sont ainsi présents dans l’Evros.

    À entendre Manos Logothetis, la politique migratoire grecque semble parfois se confondre avec sa politique de défense, elle-même liée à la Turquie. « La migration est politique, dix fois plus qu’il y a vingt ans, l’instrumentalisation des migrants [par Ankara – ndlr] est incomparable aujourd’hui, s’exclame le secrétaire d’État grec. En mars 2020, la Turquie a manipulé les réfugiés pour nous mettre sous pression. Elle pourrait très bien recommencer en 2023, par exemple. Car cette année est importante politiquement. Nous avons des élections législatives et la Turquie a une élection présidentielle. » Dans les deux pays, les scrutins devraient se tenir au printemps. Malgré nos sollicitations, Ankara n’a pas répondu à nos demandes d’interview.

    Les réfugié·es en quête d’Europe se retrouvent au cœur de ce conflit larvé entre les deux pays. Au fur et à mesure que les tensions entre Athènes et Ankara s’accentuent, ces migrant·es sont perçu·es comme des « armes », au détriment de leur droit d’asile, estiment plusieurs organisations des droits humains.

    Alarm Phone, une ONG basée à l’étranger, reçoit des appels d’exilé·es en détresse, bloqué·es aux frontières. « Nous avons de plus en plus d’appels à l’aide de l’Evros depuis 2020, relate son directeur, qui reste anonyme. Des gouvernements comme ceux de la Grèce, de la Turquie ou d’autres “militarisent” la migration et présentent les personnes en déplacement comme une menace militaire. Nous condamnons ce discours déshumanisant. Nous exigeons la liberté de circulation pour tous et le droit de demander l’asile. »

    De son côté, Styliani Nanou, représentante du Haut-Commissariat aux réfugiés des Nations unies (HCR), se dit « profondément préoccupée par le nombre croissant de signalements d’incidents de retours forcés, qui s’apparentent dans certains cas à des refoulements [soit des push back, démentis par Athènes – ndlr]. Nous en avons compté 540 en Grèce en 2020 et 2021. Ils sont souvent accompagnés de violences et de violations des droits de l’homme à diverses frontières européennes ».
    Des drames à huis clos

    Le HCR a des équipes dans la ville d’Orestiada, commune érigée il y a cent ans par des Grecs chassés de Turquie, dans le nord-est de l’Evros. Peu d’associations et organisations de défense des réfugié·es sont toutefois présentes dans cette ville de 25 000 habitant·es. Outre le HCR, une poignée de personnes d’organisations comme Human Rights 360, Greek Council for Refugees et Arsis sont présentes dans l’Evros. « Il est difficile pour les ONG de travailler. Nous manquons d’autorisations d’accès à la frontière », explique un responsable humanitaire à Athènes.

    Les drames se déroulent à huis clos. De fait, outre les « push back », la liste des dérives inhumaines rapportées par la presse ou les associations dans l’Evros en 2022 est longue. En février, 12 migrants ont été retrouvés morts de froid côté turc. Athènes et Ankara se rejettent fréquemment la responsabilité de nombreux sauvetages d’exilé·es bloqué·es sur les îlots de la rivière Evros, entourés d’un flou juridique.

    Trente-huit personnes, majoritairement syriennes, sont ainsi restées coincées des jours en août, pendant que les pays voisins se renvoyaient la balle pour leur venir en aide. Une fillette est morte, selon sa famille, piquée par un scorpion, et a été enterrée sur l’île. Pour le secrétaire d’État grec à la migration, « il n’y a pas de petite fille morte : les autorités ne trouvent pas de corps ». Une enquête grecque et une de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme sont en cours.

    Certains drames deviennent l’argument des joutes verbales entre Grèce et Turquie. Mi-octobre, 92 migrants ont été retrouvés nus, en pleine nature, à la frontière côté grec. Le ministre grec de l’immigration, Nótis Mitarákis, a rapidement publié un tweet contre la Turquie, en diffusant la photo de ces hommes humiliés. « Le comportement de la Turquie envers ses 92 migrants que nous [la Grèce] avons sauvés à cette frontière est une honte pour la civilisation », s’est indigné le ministre. La Turquie a réfuté ces accusations.

    Dans ce système, les migrants finissent par être criminalisés. Christiana Kavvadia, avocate pour l’organisation Greek Council for Refugees dans l’Evros, compte parmi ses clients des personnes poursuivies par la justice pour « entrée illégale » sur le territoire. Ils risquent jusqu’à cinq ans de prison et une amende de 1 500 euros. « Du 1er au 31 mars 2020, un texte législatif interdisant la demande d’asile est entré en vigueur pour cette période, l’ensemble des migrants arrivés à ces dates ont été accusés d’entrée illégale et nombre d’entre eux ont été envoyés en prison pour une longue période. Depuis, cette pratique consistant à sanctionner l’entrée illégale existe toujours mais avec des peines moins sévères, explique-t-elle. La pénalisation des demandeurs d’asile n’est pas conforme à la convention de Genève et vise à être une mesure dissuasive. »
    Record de décès en 2022

    Dans l’Evros, il est aussi rare d’assister à des situations dramatiques que d’entendre des voix locales qui les commentent. « Nous sommes peu nombreux à défendre les droits des réfugiés dans le coin… C’est un système contre lequel on ne peut pas lutter : 90 % des gens à Orestiada travaillent avec la police », regrette Dimitrios Zeferiades, le gérant d’un bar alternatif de cette ville. « Il y a cent ans, nos ancêtres (grecs) sont passés par cette frontière par milliers, ils étaient réfugiés. Maintenant, il existe des milices dans les villages pour faire fuir les migrants : les habitants ont oublié leurs racines », dénonce-t-il.

    En 2020, des villageois de la frontière avaient exhibé leur « chasse » aux migrants face à la presse. Pour Dimitrios Zeferiades, plus que des outils « politiques », « les migrants sont devenus des produits sur lesquels la Grèce se fait de l’argent. Les autorités demandent des financements pour acheter tout un arsenal [drones, caméras – ndlr] qui ne sert à rien : personne ne peut surveiller cette rivière de 200 kilomètres ».

    Entre les murs saumon de la morgue de l’hôpital de la ville d’Alexandroupoli, la plus grande ville de l’Evros, Pavlos Pavlidis approuve. « Les murs n’empêchent rien », déclare, grave, ce médecin légiste. Il montre sur son téléphone la photo d’un homme inerte. Le froid de décembre a emporté dans son sommeil ce jeune adulte d’une vingtaine d’années, dans un cabanon au pied d’une montagne enneigée de l’Evros. « Hypothermie. Il y a environ deux jours, le 10 décembre », a conclu Pavlos Pavlidis. Dans son bureau au sous-sol, où règne une odeur de cigarette, le médecin méticuleux expose deux cartes bleues et deux bagues ayant appartenu à la victime, « probablement d’Afrique du Nord ». Ces indices permettront peut-être de l’identifier, espère-t-il.

    « 2022 constitue un record, je n’avais jamais autopsié autant de personnes [exilées] », annonce Pavlos Pavlidis. En poste depuis 2000, l’expert a vu plus de 660 cadavres d’étrangers, dont 63 cette année. Derrière sa fenêtre s’élèvent deux conteneurs renfermant depuis des mois 30 corps d’exilés : « Je n’ai plus de place dans les frigos. »

    Le fleuve est le premier à faucher les réfugiés. L’hypothermie est la deuxième cause de mortalité. Les réfugiés se perdent, trempés, dans la nature. « Ils évitent les villages. Ils savent que les habitants ne les aident plus comme avant », explique Pavlos Pavlidis. Les accidents de la route sont enfin la troisième cause des décès de migrants. « Certains s’entassent dans des véhicules et tentent de fuir les autorités », dit-il.

    Le portable de Pavlos Pavlidis vibre pendant qu’il parle : « Mon numéro a fuité. » Il reçoit des messages de détresse d’inconnu·es : des mères, des frères, à la recherche de leurs proches. Si 5 000 migrants sont officiellement arrivés dans l’Evros en 2022, combien sont-ils à s’être égarés dans ses collines ?

    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/200123/entre-la-grece-et-la-turquie-une-frontiere-de-plus-en-plus-meurtriere

    Dans cet article, l’annonce d’une ultérieure #extension du mur :

    Le gouvernement grec va d’ailleurs prolonger en 2023 les murs antimigrants dans l’Evros jusqu’à 80 kilomètres, annonce-t-il.

    Première extension (passage de 12,5 km en 2012 à 12,5 km + 35 km en 2020/2021) :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/830355
    https://seenthis.net/messages/935658

    #frontières #migrations #réfugiés #barrières_frontalières #murs #barrières_frontalières #mourir_aux_frontières #morts_aux_frontières #Evros #Thrace #obstacle_technique #dissuasion #surveillance #instrumentalisation_de_la_migration #refoulements #push-backs #retours_forcés #violence #décès #milices #chasse_aux_migrants

    • Some updates on the #Evros wall from earlier this week. N. Mitarakis, now Minister of Citizen Protection, stated that a further extension of the wall will be tendered in 2024, to be completed in 2027.

      –—
      Φράχτης στον Έβρο : Πότε ολοκληρώνεται το έργο (vid)

      Προτεραιότητα για τη νέα κυβέρνηση χαρακτήρισε την ολοκλήρωση του φράχτη στον Έβρο ο Υπουργός Προστασίας του Πολίτη, Νότης Μηταράκης.

      Αναλυτικότερα, μιλώντας στην ΕΡΤ και την εκπομπή « Συνδέσεις », ο κ. Μηταράκης επεσήμανε ότι ο φράχτης του Έβρου αποτελεί πρώτη προτεραιότητα τόσο για την κυβέρνηση όσο και προσωπικά για τον ίδιο και το Υπουργείο Προστασίας του Πολίτη.

      « Η Ελλάδα θα εξακολουθήσει να εφαρμόζει την ίδια αυστηρή αλλά δίκαιη πολιτική », τόνισε.

      Μάλιστα, όπως τόνισε, ο φράχτης του Έβρου συνεχίζει να προχωρά με γρήγορα βήματα προς την ολοκλήρωσή του, η οποία αναμένεται στα μέσα του 2027.

      « Έχουμε εξασφαλίσει 100 εκατομμύρια ευρώ – απ΄όταν ήμουν στο προηγούμενο χαρτοφυλάκιο της Μετανάστευσης από την Ε.Ε – γι΄αυτό που ονομάζουμε συνοδά έργα του Φράχτη (έργα υποδομής και τεχνολογίας που συνδυάζονται με τον Φράχτη (π.χ τα φυλάκια χρηματοδοτούνται από τα ευρωπαϊκά κονδύλια).

      Από τα 72 χιλιόμετρα του Φράχτη σήμερα μελετάμε την τελική του φάση επέκτασης. Δεν θα χρειαστεί να καλύψουμε όλα τα 200 χιλιόμετρα.

      Προχωράμε στην τελική φάση επέκτασης με το μεικτό σύστημα χρηματοδότησης με κρατικά και ευρωπαϊκά κονδύλια. Ο καινούριος Φράχτης θα προκηρυχθεί για να κατασκευαστεί μέσα στο 2024, ώστε να είναι έτοιμος μέσα στο 2027 », σχολίασε.

      « Χρήση καμερών από τους αστυνομικούς »

      Κληθείς να σχολιάσει το πρόσφατο περιστατικό στη Λάρισα, που στοίχισε τη ζωή σε έναν 20χρονο, ο κ. Μηταράκης επεσήμανε ότι θα προχωρήσει η χρήση καμερών στους αστυνομικούς.

      « Για να αποφευχθούν φαινόμενα αστυνομικής αυθαιρεσίας θα προχωρήσουν οι κάμερες στους αστυνομικούς. […]

      « Θέλουμε και την συνεργασία των ανεξάρτητων αρχών, να μην τεθούν εμπόδια στη χρήση αυτών των καμερών.

      Αυτές είναι εκεί για να προστατεύσουν τον πολίτη, στην όποια περίπτωση κρατικής αυθαιρεσίας, αλλά και για να καταγράφουν με κάποιον ισχυρά αποτρεπτικό τρόπο το οποιοδήποτε αδίκημα μπορεί να τελείται, για να μην υπάρχουν αμφιβολίες για το εάν κάποιος συμμετείχε ή όχι σε μια παράνομη δράση.

      Είτε είναι αστυνομικός που δεν έκανε σωστά τη δουλειά του και δεν ακολούθησε το πρωτόκολλο εμπλοκής, είτε είναι ένας πολίτης ο οποίος παρανόμησε », υποστήριξε.

      https://twitter.com/lk2015r/status/1680548700077129729

      https://www.mynews.gr/frachtis-ston-evro-pote-oloklironetai-to-ergo-vid

  • Detained below deck

    How asylum seekers are held in secret prisons on commercial ships to facilitate illegal pushbacks from Italy to Greece.

    As holidaymakers sip on cold beer and cocktails on the deck of a passenger ferry, a buzz of excitement in the air, a very different situation is playing out below deck. In the bowels of this vessel there are people, including children, chained and locked up in dark places against their will.

    This is Europe’s lesser known pushback practice, where secret prisons on private ships are used to illegally return asylum seekers back to where they came from.

    The systematic denial of the right to seek asylum at the EU’s land borders has been well-documented in recent years. Last year, Lighthouse Reports and partners revealed the existence of “black sites” – clandestine places of detention – where refugees and migrants are denied the right to seek asylum and illegally imprisoned prior to being forced back.

    What has received less attention is the unlawful denial of the opportunity to claim asylum at borders within the EU, and the brutal pushbacks that take place between member states – namely from Italy to Greece – at sea.

    We’ve found that asylum seekers, including children, are being detained in unofficial jails – in the form of metal boxes and dark rooms – for sometimes more than a day at a time in the bowels of passenger ships headed from Italy to Greece, as part of illegal pushbacks by the Italian authorities.

    In 2014, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Italy had unlawfully returned asylum seekers to Greece in this way, denying them the opportunity to lodge a claim for protection. Eight years on, despite the Italian authorities having repeatedly claimed this practice has not stopped, we’ve found that it continues in full force.
    METHODS

    Lighthouse Reports, in collaboration with SRF, ARD Monitor, Al Jazeera, Il Domani and Solomon, has obtained photographs, video footage and testimony revealing that people who risk their lives stowing away on ferries bound for the Italian Adriatic ports of Venice, Ancona, Bari and Brindisi in the hope of claiming asylum are being denied the opportunity to do so.

    Instead, they are detained at the port before being locked up on the vessels they arrived on and sent back to Greece.

    In the first visual evidence of its kind, obtained during numerous reporting trips between Italy and Greece on commercial ships owned by Greek ferry giant Attica Group, we captured images of the sites that are used to detain asylum seekers on these vessels, sometimes handcuffed to metal shelves, as they are illegally deported.

    We found that on one ferry, named the Asterion II, people are locked in a former bathroom with broken showers and toilets, along with two mattresses. Names and dates of detainees are scribbled on the walls in different languages. We have visual evidence of this room, obtained with a small camera through a keyhole, which matches descriptions given by asylum seekers.

    On another commercial ship, named Superfast I, people are held in a metal box with a caged roof in the garage room on one of the lower decks. It gets extremely hot here during the summer months. We visited the room and captured footage and stills. It matches the descriptions from asylum seekers. There is only a piece of cardboard on the floor. People appear to have tried to write words in the dust on the metal wall.

    According to an Afghan asylum seeker who says he was held in this place: “It is a room the length of 2 metres and the width of 1.2 metres. It’s a small room […] You have only a small bottle of water and no food at all […] We had to stay in that small room inside the ship and accept the difficulties.”

    On a third ferry, the Superfast II, asylum seekers are kept in a room where luggage is collected. One Afghan man managed to take a selfie while he was handcuffed to metal pipes. We went to the same spot and took footage, which matches the surroundings in the selfie image.

    Among those detained are children. We have verified three cases where under-18s have been returned via ferry from Italy to Greece in this way. One 17-year-old Afghan named Baloosh told us: “They sent me back to Greece by boat, illegally. They didn’t ask me at all about my asylum claim or anything else.”

    As well as testimony and visual evidence, we got confirmation from a number of crew members that these places were being used to detain asylum seekers being returned to Greece. They referred to the sites as “prisons”. Legal experts and NGOs further corroborated the findings, saying they have heard large numbers of reports of these practices taking place in recent years.
    STORYLINES

    Under a bilateral “readmissions” agreement between the Italian and the Greek government – which has been in place since 1999 despite not having been ratified by the Italian parliament – Italy is able to return undocumented migrants who have arrived from Greece back to the country. However, this cannot be applied to those seeking asylum.

    But we found that asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq have been subject to this treatment in the last 12 months. Data provided by the Greek authorities shows that hundreds have been affected in the last two years, with 157 people returned from Italy to Greece in 2021, and 74 in 2022 – although experts believe that not all cases are documented.

    Since the ECHR judgement in 2014, Italy has repeatedly claimed that this practice has stopped, and has pushed for official monitoring of its border processes at the port – which were put in place following the ECHR judgement – to be stopped on the basis that the violations are no longer occurring.

    Italian immigration lawyer Erminia Rizzi said these forced returns take place “frequently” and see asylum seekers, including minors, “prevented from accessing the territory, in violation of all the rules and with informal procedures”.

    Wenzel Michalski, director of Human Rights Watch Germany, raised the question of EU complicity, saying the findings showed how “Europe has allowed itself to tolerate such circumstances”.

    https://www.lighthousereports.nl/investigation/detained-below-deck

    #push-backs #emprisonnement #ferry #ferries #bateaux_de_croisière #Italie #Grèce #mer_Adriatique #Adriatique #mer_Méditerranée #Méditerranée #asile #migrations #réfugiés #détention #mer #bateau #réadmission #Superfast

    –-

    Ajouté à la métaliste sur les liens entre migrations et #tourisme :
    ajouté à la métaliste #migrations et #tourisme :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/770799
    et plus précisément ici :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/770799#message927668

    • While tourists on ferries are sipping from their sundowners, people - including children - are chained & locked up below decks in dark places

      Refugees from Afghanistan, Syria & Iraq risk their lives stowing away on ferries bound for the Italian ports in the hope of claiming asylum

      Instead, when caught by authorities, they are locked up on ferries & sent back to Greece without any procedure, in breach of interntnl law

      Last month, @LHreports & partners revealed the existence of “black sites” – clandestine places of detention – where refugees are denied the right to seek asylum & illegally imprisoned on EU land borders before being forced back
      https://seenthis.net/messages/984470

      Now, we have captured images of unofficial “prisons” that are used to detain asylum seekers on 3 passenger ships travelling Greece and Italy, sometimes handcuffed to metal shelves, as they are illegally deported

      @saracreta interviewed a refugee from Afghanistan who managed to take a selfie while being handcuffed to metal shelves on the @SuperfastF(ast) II

      The vessel runs between the Italian port of Bari & the Greek ports of Igoumenitsa & Patras - a journey that takes around 12 hours

      “I couldn’t lie down because of the handcuffs,” the man, named Abdulmanan, said

      “Once they brought me something to eat & drink. They took off my handcuffs. After that, they chained me again.”

      He said he was put there after being denied the right to apply for asylum in Italy

      On the Superfast I ferry, refugees are locked up in a metal box with just a piece of cardboard & sheet

      Some left messages on the walls, while others appear to have tried to escape by climbing the walls

      The secret detention sites on the Superfast ferries are located next to where lorries are parked - an area that is considered unsafe for passengers to be during the journey

      Yet asylum seekers are locked up there for the duration of the trip

      A small room with a broken toilet & ceiling on the 7th floor of the Asterion II has been made into a makeshift prison

      Refugees have scribbled their names & dates of detention on the wall while tourists enjoyed hot meals just metres away

      Italy has justified these “readmissions” under a bilateral agreement with Greece - an agreement that was never ratified by the Italian parliament

      The return of asylum seekers under this agreement was ruled unlawful by @ECHR_CEDH in 2014

      https://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en/content/ecthr-sharifi-and-others-v-italy-and-greece-application-no-1664309

      Italy has since repeatedly claimed that this practice has stopped, & has pushed for official monitoring of its border processes at the port - which were put in place following the ECHR judgement - to be stopped on the basis that the violations are no longer occurring

      But @LHreports @AJEnglish @ARD_Presse
      #Monitor @srfnews @DomaniGiornale @we_are_solomon can reveal that the practices are still ongoing

      More than a dozen people from Afghanistan, Syria & Iraq told us they have been subject to this treatment in the last 12 months

      Among them are children. We have verified 3 cases where under-18 have been returned via ferry from Italy to Greece in this way

      One 16-yo Afghan named Baloosh said: “They sent me back to Greece by boat, illegally. They didn’t ask me at all about my asylum claim or anything else."

      Personnel on board of the ferries, all owned by the Greek company Attica, confirmed to us that they are detaining asylum seekers & directed us to the locations where people are being detained

      A number of crew members referred to the detention places as “prisons”

      Hundreds of these illegal returns have taken place in the last 2 years

      The Greek authorities confirmed that 157 people were returned from Italy to Greece in 2021, and 74 in 2022 - although experts believe that not all cases are documented

      Italy can assess whether an asylum seeker can be returned to Greece under the Dublin Regulation, which enables returns of people who have already lodged a claim in another EU state

      But this process usually takes at least 1 month, during which they cannot remove the individual

      https://twitter.com/LHreports/status/1615743769604722689

    • Angekettet auf der Fähre

      Wie Italien illegal Flüchtlinge abschiebt
      Inhalt

      Fährschiffe transportieren tausende Touristen zwischen Italien und Griechenland. Unter Deck passiert gleichzeitig Unmenschliches: Flüchtlinge werden angekettet und in Schächten oder defekten Toiletten eingesperrt.

      SRF Investigativ: «Haben Sie ein Gefängnis auf dem Schiff?»

      Fährschiff-Mitarbeiter: «Ja»

      «Ist das hier, wo die Passagiere sind?»

      «Nein, es ist in der Garage vier, dort ist das Gefängnis.»

      Italien schiebt die Flüchtlinge illegal ab, das heisst ohne die nötigen Abklärungen. Pushback nennt sich das. Die italienischen Behörden verstossen dabei gegen Verfahrensregeln und es wird teilweise auch Gewalt angewandt.

      Das zeigt eine Recherche, die SRF in Kooperation mit Lighthouse Reports, Al Jazeera,ARD Monitor und Domani durchgeführt hat. Das Rechercheteam hat mit gut einem Dutzend Pushback-Opfern gesprochen, mit Schiffsmitarbeitenden, Grenzpolizistinnen und Experten. Erstmals gibt es auch Bilder und Videos von geheimen Gefängnissen auf Passagierfähren im Adriatischen Meer.

      Die Illustrationen in diesem Artikel sind anhand zahlreicher Schilderungen von Flüchtlingen nachgezeichnet.

      https://www.srf.ch/news/pushbacks-eingesperrt-auf-der-touristenfaehre-im-mittelmeer

  • Qu’est-ce que l’entrée de la #Croatie dans #Schengen peut changer à la route migratoire des Balkans ?

    La Croatie a fait son entrée, le 1er janvier 2023, dans l’espace Schengen. L’intégration de ce pays des Balkans dans la zone de libre circulation pourrait changer la donne à la frontière croate, où les #refoulements de migrants sont fréquents, observe la chercheuse Camille Le Coz. Par un effet de dominos, la situation en Bosnie voisine pourrait se durcir.

    La Croatie a fait son entrée, le 1er janvier 2023, dans l’espace de libre circulation européen Schengen alors que la route migratoire des Balkans connaît une forte hausse de fréquentation depuis l’été. Zagreb a enregistré 30 000 migrants irréguliers dans le pays au cours des dix premiers mois de 2022, soit une augmentation de 150% par rapport à la même période de l’année précédente.

    Pour Camille Le Coz, analyste au Migration policy institute, l’entrée de la Croatie dans Schengen permet d’"acter quelque chose qui était déjà en place sur le terrain". « La Croatie a été récompensée pour ses bons et loyaux services en faisant en sorte de limiter les arrivées de migrants [dans l’UE] », affirme-t-elle.

    Depuis son intégration dans l’Union européenne en 2013, la Croatie est chargée de protéger les frontières extérieures de l’UE, dont la majeure partie est partagée avec la Bosnie. Si les chiffres n’ont rien à voir aujourd’hui avec ceux de 2015, des milliers d’exilés tentent encore chaque année ce passage par la route des Balkans, via la Serbie ou la Bosnie.

    Depuis 2018, le nord de la Bosnie, à la frontière croate, s’est transformé en cul-de-sac pour ces migrants. Voulant montrer à Bruxelles sa capacité à protéger les frontières de l’Union, la Croatie a en effet déployé de nombreux garde-frontières sur la zone. Les refoulements se sont multipliés et, dans la plupart des cas, ils se sont accompagnés de graves violences, tortures et vols, régulièrement dénoncés. Depuis des années, les rapports d’ONG se multiplient sur les exactions commises contre les exilés à la frontière bosno-croate.
    Vers davantage de respect des droits humains ?

    Mais cela pourrait changer à la faveur de cette nouvelle situation, explique la chercheuse Camille Le Coz. « Le respect des droits de l’Homme fait partie des obligations liées à l’entrée dans Schengen. Il est donc possible que l’entrée de la Croatie mette plus de pression sur les policiers et les garde-frontières croates », pointe-t-elle. Les cas de non-respect des droits humains pourraient ainsi être davantage contrôlés.

    Cette entrée pourrait aussi s’accompagner d’aides pour améliorer le système d’asile dans le pays et d’une coopération sur les retours volontaires de migrants. À condition que les garde-frontières ne refoulent pas systématiquement les exilés qui entrent dans le pays pour demander une protection internationale.

    A contrario, et par un effet de dominos, la situation en Bosnie voisine, qui a récemment obtenu le statut de candidat à l’entrée dans l’Union européenne, pourrait se durcir.
    « Éviter à la Croatie d’avoir à pratiquer des pushbacks »

    Le 28 novembre, le commissaire européen Olivér Várhelyi a annoncé le financement d’un protocole d’accord entre l’Organisation internationale pour les migrations (OIM) et le ministère bosnien de la Sécurité à hauteur de 500 000 euros. Cette somme doit servir à augmenter le nombre de « retours volontaires et forcés » des migrants vers leur pays d’origine. Le commissaire a également indiqué que le camp de Lipa, situé dans le nord de la Bosnie serait amené à devenir un centre de détention. « Les faux demandeurs d’asile doivent être détenus jusqu’à leur retour dans leur pays », a-t-il déclaré.

    Barbara Becares, chargée des relations avec la presse de l’ONG No Name Kitchen, qui vient en aide aux exilés en Bosnie et en Serbie, voit dans ce projet la volonté de Bruxelles d’"éviter à la Croatie d’avoir à pratiquer des pushbacks […] en gardant les personnes en Bosnie".

    Sur le terrain, les polices bosniennes et serbes œuvrent déjà à retenir les personnes le plus loin possible des frontières de l’UE, selon elle. « Les expulsions sont très courantes, autant en Bosnie qu’en Serbie, observe-t-elle. La police va chercher très tôt le matin les personnes qui dorment à l’extérieur des camps et les emmène dans des endroits éloignés des frontières ». En Bosnie, elles sont généralement emmenées dans le camp de Lipa, alors qu’en Serbie, elles sont conduites dans le sud du pays.

    Pour freiner les arrivées via la route des Balkans, Bruxelles compte aussi sur l’aide de la Serbie. Le pays est, lui aussi, candidat à l’adhésion à l’Union européenne et son intégration dépendra sans doute largement, comme pour la Bosnie, de sa capacité à montrer à Bruxelles qu’il contrôle ses frontières.

    En octobre, Belgrade a déjà, à la demande de Bruxelles, mis fin à l’exemption de visas pour les ressortissants tunisiens et burundais. L’obligation de détenir un visa pour entrer dans le pays a été étendue, le 1er janvier, aux ressortissants d’Inde et de Guinée-Bissau.

    #espace_Schengen #migrations #asile #réfugiés #frontières #route_des_Balkans #Balkans #Bosnie #Bosnie-Herzégovine #refoulements_en_chaîne #récompense #frontières_extérieures #soutien_financier #accord #protocole_d'accord #OIM #IOM #retours_volontaires #retours_forcés #Lipa #rétention #détention_administrative #expulsions #push-backs #visas #Serbie

  • Europe’s Black Sites

    How refugees are being arbitrarily detained and tortured at secret facilities along EU borders before being illegally forced back across borders

    Despite government denials and technical arguments, the campaign of illegal pushbacks at Europe’s borders has been repeatedly shown by Lighthouse Reports and other investigative journalists to be real. And yet it continues regardless.

    The full extent of the human cost and the damage to the rule of law that this campaign inflicts is still being uncovered. Hundreds of witnesses have testified to the existence of “black sites” – clandestine detention centres – where refugees and migrants are denied the right to seek asylum and held prior to being forced back.

    Lighthouse Reports and partners can reveal that security forces along EU borders – specifically in Bulgaria, Hungary and Croatia – are using secret facilities to systematically detain people seeking refuge before illegally deporting them, in what has been denounced as a clear violation of international law.

    We have obtained visual evidence that refugees have been held in a derelict, cage-like structure in Bulgaria, sometimes for days at a time, held for hours in overcrowded and dangerously hot vans in Croatia, and held in containers and at an isolated petrol station in Hungary.

    Because they operate outside of formal detention or reception systems, they are excluded from independent scrutiny or public access.

    The existence of these sites has long been rumoured, there was no visual evidence or location data until now. During the last 11 months, we have gathered footage and collected testimonies from people who have been held in them.

    Our investigation demonstrates that these are not isolated sites, rather they are part of a system – some of which is funded by the EU and operated in plain sight of officers from Frontex, the EU border agency.

    METHODS

    In Bulgaria, we documented how asylum seekers who cross from Turkey are routinely locked in a small, cage-like structure next to a border police station in Sredets, a town around 40 kilometres from the Turkish border. They are held there for anything from several hours to up to three days. The structure resembles a disused dog kennel, with bars on one side. It has been described by asylum seekers as a “cage”. We visited the site on five separate days in the space of six weeks. Each time, we observed and recorded that people were detained.

    We gathered witness testimony from asylum seekers who had been held in the cage, who said they were denied food or water. One man can be heard in GoPro footage we captured saying his shoes had been confiscated by the police.

    During our visits to the site, we photographed Frontex branded cars parked within a few metres of the cage on three occasions. We obtained internal documents showing there are ten Frontex officers based in Sredets as part of Operation Terra, the agency’s largest land operation.

    In Hungary, we have gathered testimony indicating that refugees have been held overnight in shipping containers with no food or water, and sometimes attacked with pepper spray, before they are driven in prison buses and pushed back across the border to Serbia. We heard evidence from a medical charity (MSF) in Serbia that has documented numerous reports of people being detained in the container. We captured footage of a group being taken to a container by masked officers with batons.

    Also in Hungary, we captured photographs of asylum seekers being caught and escorted to a petrol station by civilian police officers holding batons, then forced to sit on the ground for hours, before being passed onto the official police and pushed back. We captured drone footage of routine illegal pushbacks from Hungary to Serbia.

    In Croatia, we found that people have been crowded into the back of police vans and left to bake in the sun before being pushed back to Bosnia. Video footage shows them crushed inside police vans with many other asylum seekers. In one video people are dripping with sweat from the heat. One Afghan woman told us she was held with more than 20 people, including small children, in a vehicle with capacity for eight.

    One Croatian border police officer who is active in the border region admitted that detaining people in stand-still vans in the heat could be happening, though according to him this would only occur in the event of vans getting flat tyres.
    STORYLINES

    The EU has expressed concern over illegal treatment of people crossing borders to claim asylum, but this has not stopped it from providing money to the border authorities responsible: Bulgaria has received €320m in recent years, Croatia €163m and Hungary €144m.

    By following the money trails we can link EU funding directly to the secret detention and pushbacks we have documented. The Bulgarian border forces used approximately €170,000 in EU funds to renovate Sredets police station, where the cage-like shed is located, in 2017. Two Hungarian border police prison buses, used to facilitate pushbacks, were acquired in 2017 with €1.8m from EU funds. The roads on which the Croatian vans drive the refugees to the border, apparently designed especially to facilitate pushbacks, were also financed by European taxpayers.

    On December 9, 2022 the EU Council was due to vote on accepting Croatia and Bulgaria into the Schengen area. The Commission has made clear its support for this to happen, lauding the two countries in a recent report for having “effective structures in place to guarantee access to international protection respecting the principle of non-refoulement”.

    The men and women we spoke to who have been held at black sites appeared to be traumatised by their experiences and felt that their rights had been breached. Most said they still planned to attempt to cross again, or had already succeeded in doing so, indicating that the brutal treatment does not constitute a deterrence.

    Experts told us the secret detention sites this reporting exposes are clearly illegal because they operate outside any official and legal framework and that the treatment of detainees amounts to torture. “It’s being done to punish, deter and intimidate and therefore it meets the widely recognised UN definition of torture,” said Liz Bates, lead doctor at Freedom from Torture.

    https://www.lighthousereports.nl/investigation/europes-black-sites

    #migrations #asile #réfugiés #détention_arbitraire #torture #push-backs #refoulements #black_sites #trous_noirs #frontières #Bulgarie #Hongrie #Croatie #Frontex #Sredets #Operation_Terra

  • Sulla sconcertante ripresa delle “riammissioni informali” al confine italo-sloveno

    La riattivazione da parte del governo dei respingimenti dei cittadini stranieri che giungono alla frontiera orientale lascia un senso di afflizione e sconcerto, osserva l’avvocata Caterina Bove. E non solo sul piano umano quanto su quello giuridico. Solo un anno fa, infatti, quelle procedure erano state “demolite” dal Tribunale di Roma

    La notizia della ripresa delle operazioni di “riammissione informale” dei cittadini stranieri che giungono alla frontiera orientale italiana ci ha lasciato un senso di afflizione e sconcerto. Questo perché ci è noto -come è noto al governo- il destino che attende le persone riconsegnate alla rotta balcanica. Un destino che le vedrà con ogni probabilità divenire soggetti o meglio oggetti di riammissioni a catena dall’Italia alla Slovenia e dalla Slovenia alla Croazia e poi di un respingimento alle porte dell’Unione europea in Bosnia ed Erzegovina o Serbia.

    Ma soprattutto un destino che li costringerà ad affrontare -di nuovo- la violenza di questa rotta e in particolare le violenze perpetrate ai confini croati nonostante le denunce espresse e pubblicate in questi anni dai media, dalle Ong ma anche da alcuni organismi europei. Penso ad esempio al report del Cpt, cioè del Comitato del Consiglio d’Europa per la prevenzione della tortura e dei trattamenti inumani e degradanti.

    Dunque su un piano umano ancor prima che giuridico la notizia ci desta afflizione per ciò che di nuovo accadrà partendo dal territorio italiano. Ma lo sconcerto è anche e per quanto ci compete di tipo strettamente tecnico giuridico. Solo un anno fa il Tribunale di Roma ha dato conforto a ciò che come Asgi avevamo sostenuto e scritto circa l’illegittimità di queste procedure.

    Il Tribunale –con ordinanza del 18 gennaio 2021– ha chiarito come queste operazioni fondavano la propria base giuridica su un accordo -quello siglato tra il governo italiano e quello sloveno nel 1996, che non è mai stato ratificato dal Parlamento, come prevede l’art. 80 della Costituzione- che in quanto tale non poteva e non può derogare alle leggi vigenti interne, europee ed internazionali e che invece vi derogava drasticamente. Il Tribunale aveva appurato e sancito che si trattava di operazioni che, per il modo in cui venivano espletate, violavano apertamente e per esplicita ammissione scritta del governo, il diritto interno ed europeo sull’accesso alle procedure di asilo.

    Inoltre che violavano anche tutte le garanzie e le procedure previste dal Regolamento Dublino sull’attribuzione a uno Stato membro della responsabilità sull’esame di una determinata domanda di asilo e quindi sul trasferimento di una determinata persona verso quello Stato. Persona che prima di essere trasferita verso lo Stato astrattamente competente a esaminare la propria domanda di asilo deve avere la possibilità di interpellare un giudice e rappresentare le ragioni di insicurezza del trasferimento e dello stato di destinazione.

    Il Tribunale aveva anche appurato che le operazioni avvenivano senza la consegna agli interessati di alcun provvedimento scritto e anche senza alcuna informazione su ciò che stava accadendo loro, cioè sulla decisione di riconsegna alle autorità slovene. Le persone di fatto attendevano inermi in una condizione di detenzione de facto, in caserma, per poi venire coattivamente fatte salire su un furgone e consegnate appunto alle autorità slovene.

    Questo, secondo il Tribunale, era due o anzi tre volte illegittimo: perché violava il diritto di difesa di queste persone non mettendole in condizione di presentare un ricorso effettivo contro una decisione che ledeva fortemente i loro diritti, perché violava il procedimento amministrativo interno che prevede vengano informati i destinatari di una decisione amministrativa dell’esito di una certa decisione e delle motivazioni che la sorreggono, e perché violava l’art. 13 della Costituzione perché comportava una limitazione della libertà personale e un respingimento coattivo in uno Stato estero senza alcuna previa convalida giudiziaria.

    Ma ancora più in generale, dunque, a prescindere dallo status giuridico delle persone interessate, cioè indipendentemente dalla circostanza si trattasse di richiedenti asilo, e dalle modalità in cui le riammissioni avvenivano, il Tribunale ravvisava che queste operazioni violassero il principio di non respingimento, l’art 3 della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo e l’art. 4 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea, norme che impongono agli Stati di non respingere qualcuno verso un contesto dove rischi di essere sottoposto a trattamenti inumani e degradanti. E questo in considerazione della violenza esistente lunga la rotta balcanica e alla quale queste persone venivano riconsegnate.

    Dopo il pronunciamento del Tribunale di Roma, ragionevolmente mi viene da dire, il governo ha sospeso le riammissioni -almeno al confine orientale- e questo fino ad ora. Eppure a oggi le ragioni -e anche le circostanze- che avevano motivato questa dura pronuncia di illegittimità nel 2021 non sono cambiate. Quella decisione del Tribunale è stata oggetto di reclamo e in pochi mesi è stata annullata perché il Tribunale ha ritenuto non provata la legittimazione attiva del ricorrente (cioè la prova del suo effettivo coinvolgimento nell’operazione di riammissione riferita) ma la seconda decisione (di pochi mesi successiva, maggio 2021) in nessun modo –neanche tra le righe– ha inteso o sottinteso svilire la ricostruzione giuridica e i profili di illegittimità enucleati dalla prima decisione e non lo ha fatto perché sono profili di illegittimità chiari e incontestabili.

    A nostro modo di vedere, a prescindere dalle modalità concrete con cui le riammissioni informali sono state riprese e verranno espletate, queste procedure sono illegittime e non c’è modo di renderle o anche solo di farle apparire il contrario. Per questo chiediamo -come Asgi- che le procedure vengano bloccate ancor prima che un nuovo giudice debba pronunciarsi sulla loro illegittimità già così lucidamente evidenziata.

    https://altreconomia.it/sulla-sconcertante-ripresa-delle-riammissioni-informali-al-confine-ital

    #Trieste #Italie #frontière_sud-alpine #Slovénie #push-backs #refoulement #refoulements #réfugiés #asile #migrations #réadmissions_informelles #refoulements_en_chaîne #Balkans #route_des_Balkans

    –—

    Fil de discussion commencé en 2018 sur les réadmissions entre Italie et Slovénie :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/733273

  • Des appareils de #surveillance de #Frontex sont utilisés par les #gardes-côtes_libyens pour intercepter illégalement des migrants

    « Le Monde » a identifié l’origine de sept images aériennes publiées par les gardes-côtes libyens sur leurs pages Facebook. Elles ont été réalisées par des appareils de surveillance de Frontex, et démontrent comment les activités de l’agence européenne facilitent des interceptions illicites par les Libyens en Méditerranée. Frontex a toujours soutenu ne pas collaborer avec les garde-côtes libyens.

    « Le patrouilleur Fezzan a porté secours à un chalutier en feu et a sauvé son équipage de huit personnes. » Le 24 août 2021, la page Facebook « Gardes-côtes et sécurité portuaire » publie le bilan d’une opération de sauvetage menée au cours de la journée par les gardes-côtes libyens.

    La présence d’informations temporelles et de localisations sur l’image indique qu’il s’agit d’une prise de vue réalisée par un appareil de surveillance aérienne, et non par un simple appareil photo. Ce genre d’images, entre 2018 et 2022, les gardes-côtes libyens en ont publié une douzaine, sur différents comptes et réseaux. Sauf que la Libye n’est pas dotée d’appareils capables de réaliser ces images. Qui en est à l’origine ?

    Pour identifier leur source, Le Monde a recoupé les informations qu’elles contiennent avec des données ADS-B, un signal émis par les avions en vol, ainsi qu’avec les journaux de bord de plusieurs ONG actives en Méditerranée, dans les airs ou en mer. Dans le cas du 24 août 2021, par exemple, les informations présentes sur l’image indiquent les coordonnées, l’altitude et l’heure précise à laquelle l’appareil se trouvait lorsqu’il a réalisé cette image. Elles donnent aussi la position approximative du chalutier observé par l’appareil.

    Nous avons reconstitué le trafic aérien au-dessus de la Méditerranée dans la matinée du 24 août 2021. En comparant les parcours des différents appareils avec les données disponibles sur l’image, nous avons ainsi pu identifier un appareil qui se trouvait précisément aux coordonnées et à l’altitude à laquelle la photo a été prise, lorsqu’elle a été réalisée : le drone AS2132, opéré par Frontex.

    Pour d’autres images, nous avons eu accès aux observations d’ONG, comme SeaWatch ou SOS Méditerranée, consignées dans des journaux de bord. Ceux-ci sont librement accessibles ici. Au total, ce travail nous permet d’affirmer que sur cinq dates différentes les images publiées par les gardes-côtes libyens ont été réalisées par des appareils de Frontex. Au moins une autre l’a été par un appareil de l’EunavforMed, la force navale européenne en Méditerranée, qui collabore avec Frontex.

    Des interceptions impossibles sans renseignements extérieurs

    Sollicitée, l’agence de garde-frontière l’assure : « il n’y a pas de collaboration entre Frontex et les gardes-côtes libyens », ce qu’affirmait déjà en mars 2021 son ex-directeur Fabrice Leggeri.

    L’agence précise, en revanche : « Chaque fois qu’un avion de Frontex découvre une embarcation en détresse, une alerte – et une image, le cas échéant – est immédiatement envoyée au centre de coordination des sauvetages régional. L’information envoyée inclut notamment la position, la navigabilité du navire et la probabilité qu’il n’atteigne pas sa destination finale. »

    De fait, dans les cinq cas identifiés par Le Monde, les images de Frontex ont pourtant bien fini entre les mains des gardes-côtes libyens. Et certaines ont vraisemblablement rendu possible l’interception d’embarcations, autrement impossibles à localiser pour les Libyens. Dans le cas du 8 mai 2019, par exemple, l’avion de Frontex découvre une embarcation en route pour l’Europe en Méditerranée centrale. Un contact est établi entre les autorités libyennes et l’agence, mais il n’émet pas de Mayday. Ce message d’urgence aurait pu être capté par tous les avions et navires à proximité à ce moment-là, dont le Mare Jonio, de l’ONG Mediterranea Saving Humans, spécialisé dans le sauvetage. Frontex dit n’envoyer des Maydays que « lorsqu’il existe un danger imminent pour la vie des occupants ».

    Les gardes-côtes libyens retrouvent finalement sans difficulté l’embarcation, pourtant située à plus d’une centaine de kilomètres de leurs côtes. A 17 heures, ils font monter les migrants à bord de leur patrouilleur avant de les rapatrier en Libye. Une interception que les informations de Frontex ont vraisemblablement facilitée, voire rendue possible. Pendant toute la durée de l’opération, l’avion de Frontex continue de survoler la zone, et de filmer la scène. Des images auxquelles les gardes-côtes ont aussi eu accès.

    Frontex souligne que, conformément au règlement européen relatif à la surveillance des frontières maritimes extérieures, ses alertes ne sont pas adressées aux gardes-côtes libyens, mais au « centre régional de coordination des sauvetages (#RCC) [libyen] (…) internationalement reconnu ». Une fois l’alerte envoyée, « Frontex ne coordonne pas les opérations de recherche et de sauvetage (...), c’est la responsabilité des centres de secours régionaux« . Reste à savoir si ce RCC existe réellement. Frontex s’en tient à la position de l’Organisation maritime internationale (OMI), qui a reconnu officiellement l’existence d’un RCC en 2018.

    Plusieurs enquêtes ont pourtant mis en doute l’existence d’un tel RCC libyen. Derrière les adresses e-mail et les numéros de téléphone du RCC se trouvent en réalité les gardes-côtes, selon les différentes ONG impliquées dans des opérations de sauvetage en mer Méditerranée. Et le 8 novembre 2022, le vice-président de la commission européenne, Josep Borrell, lui-même affirmait : « Le centre de coordination des secours maritime n’est pas encore opérationnel. »

    Parmi les règles européennes, que Frontex dit respecter, figure le principe du non-refoulement : « Nul ne peut être (…) débarqué, forcé à entrer, conduit dans un pays ou autrement remis aux autorités d’un pays où il existe (…) un risque sérieux qu’il soit soumis à la peine de mort, à la torture, à la persécution ou à d’autres peines ou traitements inhumains ou dégradants. » Des situations courantes en Libye, de sorte qu’en 2020 la Commission européenne affirmait que le pays n’était pas un « lieu sûr » vers lequel il serait possible de renvoyer des migrants. Dans un rapport de 2018, l’ONU constatait que « les migrants subissent des horreurs inimaginables en Libye (…). Ils s’exposent à des meurtres extrajudiciaires, à la torture et à des mauvais traitements, à la détention arbitraire (…), au viol (…), à l’esclavage et au travail forcé, à l’extorsion et à l’exploitation ».

    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2022/11/23/enquete-comment-des-appareils-de-surveillance-de-frontex-sont-utilises-par-l
    #frontières #migrations #asile #réfugiés #Méditerranée #Libye #mer_Méditerranée #pull-backs #pull-back #push-backs

    • Airborne Complicity – Frontex Aerial Surveillance Enables Abuse

      Over the last year, we have partnered with Human Rights Watch to investigate the use by the EU’s border agency, Frontex, of aerial surveillance in the central Mediterranean. The aircraft, several planes and a drone operated by private companies, transmit video feeds and other information to a situation centre in Frontex headquarters in Warsaw, where operational decisions are taken about when and whom to alert about migrants’ boats. Frontex aerial surveillance is key in enabling the Libyan Coast Guard to intercept migrant boatsand return their passengers to Libya, knowing full well that they will face systematic and widespread abuse when forcibly returned there.

      To circumvent Frontex’s lack of transparency on these issues (in processing 27 of 30 freedom of information requests we submitted – the others are pending – Frontex identified thousands of relevant documents but released only 86 of them, most of which were heavily redacted) we cross-referenced official and open-source data, including drone and plane flight tracks, together with information collected by Sea-Watch (through its various search and rescue ships and planes operating in the area), the Alarm Phone, as well as the testimony of survivors who courageously shared their stories with us. 

      Overall, contrary to Frontex claim that its aerial surveillance saves lives, the evidence gathered by Human Rights Watch and Border Forensics demonstrates it is in service of interceptions by Libyan forces, rather than rescue. While the presence of Frontex aircraft has not had a meaningful impact on the death rate at sea, we found a moderate and statistically significant correlation between its aerial assets flights and the number of interceptions performed by the Libyan Coast Guard. On days when the assets fly more hours over its area of operation, the Libyan Coast Guard tends to intercept more vessels.

      Our reconstruction of the events of July 30, 2021, when several boats carrying migrants were intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard in the area where the drone was patrolling, is a good demonstration of this. The evidence we collected strongly suggests that the droneplayed a key role in facilitating the interception of potentially hundreds of people. 

      The analysis of available data supports the conclusion that the Frontex aerial surveillance forms a central plank of the EU’s strategy to prevent migrants and asylum seekers from reaching Europe by boat and to knowingly return them to unspeakable abuse in Libya. It should be understood in continuity with the progressive withdrawal of EU ships from the central Mediterranean, the handover of responsibility to Libyan forces, and the obstruction of nongovernmental rescue groups which we have been investigating in the frame of the Forensic Oceanography project since several years. 

      The retreat of rescue vessels from the central Mediterranean and the simultaneous increase of surveillance aircraft in the sky is yet another attempt by the EU to further remove itself spatially, physically, and legally from its responsibilities: it allows the EU to maintain a distance from boats in distress, while keeping a close eye from the sky that enables Libyan forces to carry out what we have previously referred to as “refoulement by proxy”. Our investigation seeks to re-establish the connection between Frontex aerial surveillance and the violence captured migrants face at sea and in Libya thereafter.
      Reconstructing 30 July 2021 

      Since the beginning of our research, we have been looking into a number of specific cases of interceptions that involved European aerial assets. Thanks to the relentless effort of documentation by civil society organisations active in the central Mediterranean, in particular the Alarm Phone and Sea Watch, we were able to put together an extensive list of such cases. 

      We eventually decided to focus on the events of July 30, 2021 as a case study. In order to reconstruct what happened on that day, we have combined witness testimonies, data and footage collected by Alarm Phone and Sea Watch, tracks of aerial and naval assets, open-source information and data about disembarkation in Libya as well as two separate databases of interceptions (Frontex’ own JORA database and information from two European Union External Action Service classified documents). 

      Frontex drone’s tracks that day indicate it most likely detected at least two boats later intercepted by the Libyan Coast Guard. The rescue ship Sea-Watch 3 witnessed by chance the interception of one of them that took place within the Maltese Search and Rescue Area. The Sea-Watch 3 had not received any distress alert via Frontex despite being in the immediate vicinity of the boat and ready to assist its passengers. 

      Frontex’ own database admits that its aerial surveillance program detected a total of 5 boats on that day. While only further disclosure by Frontex would allow to ultimately assess its impact on each specific interception that took place on that day, the precise geographical coordinates for the five interceptions reported in the classified EEAS documents seem to match at least three peculiar flight patterns of the Frontex drone.
      Analysing Frontex aerial surveillance
      Flight tracking

      In parallel to case reconstructions, we have been tracking the overall activities of Frontex aircraft in the central Mediterranean. Since these planes and drone are chartered from private companies such as DEA Aviation and ADAS, a subsidiary of Airbus, there is no publicly available official list of such assets. The first task was to understand which were the aerial assets patrolling the central Mediterranean on behalf of Frontex. Cross-referencing various identification information (hexcodes, callsigns, etc.) of these planes with those that had been already identified by Sea Watch airborne team and various journalists allowed us to establish a dependable list of Frontex aerial assets operating in the area. 

      Once that was established, we acquired from ADS-B Exchange (the only flight tracking platform that does not block any aircraft for which data is received by their feeders) a large dataset of flight tracking data covering a period of several months (May 2020 to September 2022) for all these aircraft. While the low number of data feeders near our area of interest means that coverage of the recorded data is at times inconsistent, ADS-B flight tracking data (which include latitude, longitude, altitude, and several other parameters) provide an exceptional insight into aerial activities performed by these assets and became a key element in our investigation.

      Thanks to these data, we were able to visualize the extend of each assets operational area over time. Each of these aircraft monitors a specific area of the central Mediterranean. What emerged were also a series of clearly identifiable and consistent search patters that Frontex aircraft are flying off the coast of Libya. More generally, these visualisations have allowed to grasp the extensive, yet tightly knit web of surveillance that results from aerial operations. 

      Pattern analysis

      When observed closely, flight tracks can provide further precious insights into Frontex surveillance activities. Several loops, U-turns, perfect circles, and sharp corners starts to emerge against the strict geometry of standard search patterns. These deviations indicate an aircraft is taking a closer look at something, thus testifying to potential sightings of migrant boats. Inspired by similar projects by John Wiseman, Emmanuel Freundenthal and others, we then started to isolate and taxonomise such search patterns and then wrote code to automatically identify similar patterns across the whole flight tracking dataset we had acquired. While this aspect of the research is still ongoing, it was already very useful in reconstructing the events of July 30, 2021, as detailed in the following section.

      Statistical analysis

      In order to assess the overall impact of aerial surveillance, we also conducted statistical analysis exploring the relation between interceptions carried out by Libyan forces and the presence of Frontex’s aerial assets in the 2021-2022 timeframe. 

      We first compiled several statistical data sources (data from the IOM, the UNHCR, the Maltese government as well as Frontex’ JORA database and a classified report by the European External Action Service) which, despite inconsistencies, have allowed us to measure migrant crossings and deaths, Libyan Coast Guard interceptions, and Frontex aerial presence. 

      The data gathered shows that Frontex aerial surveillance activities have intensified over time, and that they have been increasingly related to interception events. Our analysis reveals that almost one third of the 32,400 people Libyan forces captured at sea and forced back to Libya in 2021 were intercepted thanks to intelligence gathered by Frontex through aerial surveillance. Frontex incident database also shows that while Frontex’s role is very significant in enabling interception to Libya, it has very little impact on detecting boats whose passengers are eventually disembarked in Italy and Malta. 

      We then tested the correlation between Frontex aerial presence and Libyan Coast Guard interceptions over time and in space. The results show a moderate-to-strong and statistically significant correlation between the number of interceptions and the hours of flight flown by Frontex aerial assets. Said otherwise, on days when the assets fly more hours over its area of operation, the Libyan Coast Guard tends to intercept more vessels. A spatial approach showed that interceptions and flight tracks are autocorrelated in space. At the same time, contrary to Frontex claims that aerial surveillance saves lives at sea, the analysis shows that there is no correlation between death rate and the flight time.

      Read the full statistical analysis here
      Conclusion

      Ultimately these different methods have allowed us to demonstrate how Frontex aerial surveillance (and in particular, because of its wider operational range, its drone) has become a key cog in the “pushback machine” that forces thousands of people back to abuse in Libya. 

      The publication of our findings with Human Rights Watch is the first stage of our ongoing investigation into the impact of European aerial surveillance on the lives and rights of migrants. We plan to continue deepening this investigation over the coming months.

       

      https://www.borderforensics.org/investigations/airborne-complicity
      #surveillance_aérienne #drones

  • Frontex enquête sur la police bulgare, accusée d’avoir mis en cage des réfugiés
    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2022/12/08/frontex-enquete-sur-la-police-bulgare-accusee-d-avoir-mis-en-cage-des-refugi

    Frontex enquête sur la police bulgare, accusée d’avoir mis en cage des réfugiés
    L’agence européenne des gardes-frontières (Frontex) a annoncé, jeudi 8 décembre, qu’elle allait examiner des informations selon lesquelles des policiers bulgares auraient enfermé des migrants dans une cage. Des faits pour lesquels l’ONU a fait part de sa « préoccupation ». Une enquête, réalisée Le Monde, le collectif de journalistes Lighthouse Reports et plusieurs médias européens, révèle que des réfugiés ont été enfermés dans une cage de fortune à la frontière bulgare avec la Turquie « sous le regard » des agents de Frontex. « Frontex traite avec sérieux tout signalement de violations présumées des droits fondamentaux », a déclaré à l’Agence France-Presse (AFP) l’agence basée à Varsovie. « Les informations que vous nous avez communiquées ont été transmises au bureau des droits fondamentaux de Frontex, qui examinera les allégations », a ajouté Frontex dans son courriel.
    A cinq reprises, entre le 15 octobre et le 25 novembre, les partenaires du Monde ont filmé la cage, visible depuis la rue, constituée de barreaux en fer et jonchée de détritus. A chaque fois, une petite dizaine d’hommes y étaient détenus. Le Monde a interrogé quatre hommes – des Syriens et des Afghans – qui expliquent « avoir été enfermés à la suite de leur tentative d’entrée en Bulgarie ». Toujours selon l’enquête, des séquences vidéo montrent une voiture Frontex visible près de la cage, dans la ville bulgare de Srédéts. L’agence européenne a indiqué à l’AFP que depuis l’année dernière, son bureau des droits avait enregistré dix « incidents graves » qui se seraient produits à la frontière bulgaro-turque. « L’un fait référence à la zone de Srédéts mais n’est pas du tout lié aux conditions au poste des gardes-frontières », souligne Frontex. L’agence des Nations unies pour les réfugiés, le HCR, a de son côté indiqué à l’AFP que ses représentants n’avaient pas vu les images en question et ne pouvaient pas les commenter, mais qu’ils étaient « profondément préoccupés par ces allégations ». « Nous exhortons les Etats concernés à enquêter sur toutes les allégations de violations et d’abus », a indiqué le Haut-Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés. « Le HCR est prêt à apporter son soutien aux Etats et à la Commission européenne dans la mise en place de mécanismes de surveillance indépendants pour le suivi et l’investigation de tels incidents », a-t-il souligné.

    #Covid-19#migrant#migration#postocovid#bugarie#UE#pushback#politiquemigratoire#frontex#turquie#migrationirreguliere#droit