Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions EU Action Plan against migrant smuggling (2021-2025)
Date: 2021-10-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: area of freedom, security and justice



IMMC.Ares%282021%295984413.ENG.xhtml.PART-2021-629398V1.docx










Public consultation on the EU action plan against migrant smuggling (2021-2025)



Factual Summary Report





































Disclaimer: This document should be regarded solely as a summary of the contributions made by citizens and stakeholders on the EU action plan against migrant smuggling (2021-2021). It cannot in any circumstances be regarded as the official position of the Commission or its services.









European Commission


Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs 




Table of Contents


1
   Introduction
   


2
   Background information
   1


3
   Questions concerning actions
   1


3.1
   Types of actions that should be intensified in order to prevent and fight migrant smuggling
   1


3.2
   Open ended questions
   1


3.3
   Importance of stakeholders in preventing and combating migrant smuggling
   2


4
   Conclusion
   2




1Introduction


In the context of the preparation of a renewed EU action plan against migrant smuggling (2021-2025), a public consultation was carried out for all citizens, organisations and stakeholders who wished to contribute to its preparations. The public consultation was available online in all EU official languages and was open for twelve weeks (from 19 March 2021 until 11 June 2021). 




Overall 247 responses were received from citizens and stakeholders in 22 countries, including 16 Member States (AT, BE, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FR, HR, HU, IT, NL, PL, PT, RO and SK).


2Background information


Regarding the profile of the respondents, the majority of the contributors (90% of the total number of respondents) answered the survey as individuals, while the remaining (10% of respondents) answered on behalf of an organisation. The different types of organisations included: non-governmental organisations (5% of the total number of respondents), Member State authorities (2% of respondents) and trade unions (1% of respondents). The remaining 2% of respondents represented “other” categories. Only one respondent answered on behalf of a business association. 


The size of the concerned organisations was the following: ten large (250 or more employees), five medium (50 to 249 employees), five small (10 to 49 employees) and five micro (1 to 9 employees) organisations. Of these organisations, nine are included in the Transparency Register.
1



The majority of the individuals who responded to the public consultation were EU citizens (88% of the total number of respondents), while only 2% were non-EU citizens.


3Questions concerning actions


3.1Types of actions that should be intensified in order to prevent and fight migrant smuggling


Considering the type of actions that should be intensified in order to prevent and fight migrant smuggling, the majority of respondents included the need for exchange of information among law enforcement authorities, cooperation with non-EU countries and international organisations, the development of targeted counter migrant smuggling partnerships between the EU and non-EU countries (e.g. capacity building of law enforcement and judicial authorities, exchange of information, common operations and joint investigation teams).


A lower number of respondents opted for protecting migrant rights and supporting evidence-based research on the nature and span of organised crime groups engaging in migrant smuggling.


3.2Open ended questions


Participants to the public consultation were asked to respond to a list of open ended questions on specific initiatives that could be taken in relation to the following: 


·the exchange of information among law enforcement authorities; 


·police cooperation and judicial cooperation; 


·addressing ‘digital smuggling’; 


·addressing phenomena relating to migrant smuggling (other than ‘digital smuggling’); preventing irregular migration and awareness raising;


·protecting migrants rights;


·actions against document fraud; 


·actions related to financial investigation and asset recovery; 


·the development of targeted counter migrant smuggling partnerships between the EU and non-EU countries as part of broader partnerships with key non-EU countries; 


·establishing and further developing partnerships and cooperation with civil society and the private sector;




·supporting evidence-based research.


Concerning the exchange of information among law enforcement authorities, the majority of the respondents found this to be important, with some of them highlighting the need for the collection of information to comply with data protection rules, while others proposed actions such as the creation of a centralised database among Member States’ authorities. 


Respondents also were of the opinion that social media are increasingly being used to facilitate migrant smuggling, therefore addressing ‘digital smuggling’ is of paramount importance. Many of the respondents were positive about involving the use of social networks in order to break the narrative of migrant smugglers and report or block contents that promote illegal services. 


Awareness raising, for example targeting potential migrants in countries of origin and transit, returnees, and diaspora in the EU on the risks of irregular migration and on relevant alternatives, such as economic, academic or legal opportunities, was also seen positively by the majority of respondents. 


The development of targeted counter migrant smuggling partnerships between the EU and non-EU countries, as part of broader partnerships with key non-EU countries (e.g. capacity building of law enforcement and judicial authorities, exchange of information, common operations and joint investigation teams) was generally seen positively. 


Concerning the main drivers of irregular migration, responses included, among other, protection needs (i.e. as a result of fleeing war, conflict, violence, persecution and oppression due to sex, religion, ethnicity, other characteristics of difference, climate-related disasters), economic reasons and inequalities (hunger, unemployment, fleeing poverty, seeking better livelihoods opportunities).


According to respondents, other areas that should be examined in order to counter migrant smuggling is the promotion of safe and regular pathways to Europe (e.g. resettlement, humanitarian visas, work permits, research visa, etc.). 


Some of the individuals who responded to the public consultation provided similar replies, signalling the possibility of a campaign
2
. In particular, answers showed a clear similarity on the way of answering certain open questions. The main comment referred to the role of non-governmental organisations. The number of these seemingly coordinated responses was however very limited.


The responses to the public consultation included four position papers from Statewatch, Medecins Sans Frontiers (MSF), the Centre for Peace Studies (CPS) and the Association for Human Rights Andalusia, as well as four attached documents in four other answers.


3.3Importance of stakeholders in preventing and combating migrant smuggling


The majority of the respondents supported that EU Member States (national governments and law enforcement and judicial services), national and regional authorities of non-EU countries, civil society organisations at local, national, European and international level, as well as EU agencies (Europol, Frontex, Fundamental Rights Agency, etc.) are important or very important actors in preventing and combating migrant smuggling.


4Conclusion


According to the majority of respondents, there is a need for measures to address the issue of migrant smuggling. Such measures include stronger cooperation with third countries, especially with the countries of origin and the countries along the main migratory routes. Respondents also highlighted the role of EU Agencies, namely Frontex and Europol, in preventing and countering migrant smuggling. Concerning the exchange of information among law enforcement authorities, many of the respondents found that this is important, while at the same time they stressed the need for protecting private data. 


The majority of the respondents were EU-citizens, which highlights the public’s concern about the issue. Among the respondents that participated as organisations were key stakeholders active in the field of migration, stressing the need for further action in this area.






(1)


 The transparency register has been set up to answer core questions, such as what interests are being pursued, by whom and with what budgets. The system is operated jointly by the European Parliament and the European Commission. Available at: 
link.
 




(2)


 Where  respondents  have  responded  to  a  public  consultation  with  the  same  answers  this may  be  coincidence  or  it  may  be a part  of  a  co-ordinated  campaign.