Non-governmental organizations, the United Nations and the media had already alerted public opinion to cases of human rights violations. allowed by the European Commission's funds intended for the fight against migration in North Africa. Now, it is one of the institutions of the European Union (EU) which is clearly exposing these facts and placing the European executive before its responsibilities.
In a report published on Wednesday 25 September, the European Court of Auditors looked into the use of the Emergency Trust Fund (EUF) for Africa, an instrument set up in 2015, at the height of the migration crisis, to try to “addressing the root causes of migration in the Sahel, Horn of Africa and North Africa regions.”
Voluntary repatriation assistance
After a lengthy investigation, the Court concludes that “The risks of human rights violations are not completely controlled” as part of this aid of some 5 billion euros to Africa. In concrete terms, the EU has financed 248 different projects over the last ten years. A large number concern aid for the voluntary repatriation of migrants, which has enabled 73,200 exiles to return to their country of origin, or development aid in remote areas, with a thousand jobs created and 20,000 people trained to help them remain in their region.
However, more than a third of the funded programs concern “improving migration management”In other words, the EU has equipped the law enforcement or customs forces of the countries of the African continent with surveillance tools, cars, buses, ships to help them monitor and block border crossings or departures from the African coasts of the Mediterranean.
However, in this context, “The risks of human rights violations are not completely controlled”write the authors of this study. “The management of these risks is taken very seriously by the Commissionassures a spokesperson for the institution. Respect for human rights is part of our obligations and we have put in place a whole chain of measures to reduce these risks within the framework of the FFU, as with any other programme. In particular, we train the stakeholders in international law and we do not finance anyone subject to sanctions, for example.
Equipment that benefited smugglers
It appears that these measures were not fully followed, according to the Court, which details that “Ten FFU programme managers for Africa who responded confidentially to our survey, across all geographical areas, stated that they had reported human rights abuses to other colleagues. However, at the central level, the Commission had only one file concerning an alleged case…”
You have 31.17% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
Source: Lemonde
