University of Trento School of International Studies MORE THAN CONSULTATION Civil society organisations mainstreaming fundamental rights in EU border management policies: The case of Frontex and its Consultative Forum PhD candidate: Leila Giannetto Supervisor: Carlo Ruzza Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in International Studies Trento, 28 May 2018 1 Contents CHAPTER 1 One empirical case, three theoretical puzzles ...................................................... 4 1.1. “Nothing but consultation”? .......................................................................................... 10 1.2. Holding independent agencies accountable? ................................................................. 15 1.3. Human rights vs. security? ............................................................................................ 18 1.4. Structure......................................................................................................................... 26 CHAPTER 2 Civil society organisations’ participation into the EU governance system ....... 30 2.1. On the role of civil society in the EU governance system............................................. 30 2.2. The influence of civil society organsations on EU actors ............................................. 54 2.3. Concluding remarks ....................................................................................................... 76 CHAPTER 3 Methodology and methods ................................................................................. 79 3.1. Using interpretive methods ............................................................................................ 79 3.2. Interpretive methodology .............................................................................................. 82 3.3. Framing in the literature ................................................................................................ 85 3.4. Methods ......................................................................................................................... 88 3.5. Limitations and concluding remarks ............................................................................. 95 CHAPTER 4 Frontex (Border and Coast Guard Agency) and its Consultative Forum on fundamental rights .................................................................................................................... 97 4.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 97 4.2. Frontex history and legal bases ................................................................................... 100 4.3. Frontex reloaded: the re-birth of a EU agency ............................................................ 116 4.4. Contesting Frontex for its accountability on the respect and promotion of fundamental rights ................................................................................................................................... 124 4.5. Frontex Consultative Forum on fundamental rights .................................................... 130 4.6. Concluding remarks: Consultative Fora in the EU Agencies of the AFSJ .................. 134 CHAPTER 5 Fundamental rights’ advocacy in the EU border management policy field: what role for CSOs? ........................................................................................................................ 141 2 5.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 141 5.2. The EU fundamental rights’ regime ............................................................................ 143 5.3. CSOs in the EU fundamental rights regime: the case of CSOs within Frontex Consultative Forum ............................................................................................................ 153 5.4. Independence of CSOs and CF from Frontex ............................................................. 178 5.5. Who got in and who remains out and why? ................................................................ 180 5.6. Concluding remarks ..................................................................................................... 189 CHAPTER 6 Influence and accountability: CSOs and Frontex ............................................ 191 6.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 191 6.2. A tale of influence? ...................................................................................................... 192 6.3. A tale of accountability? .............................................................................................. 206 6.4. Effective social accountability? ................................................................................... 221 6.5. Concluding remarks ..................................................................................................... 231 CHAPTER 7 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 236 7.1 Borders schizophrenia: CSOs and the governance of crossings in the EU .................. 236 7.2 Three theoretical puzzles .............................................................................................. 238 7.3. Future implications for CF and CSOs represented in it............................................... 249 7.4 Limitations of this study and potential avenues for future research ............................. 252 Annex 1: Interviewees ............................................................................................................ 254 Annex 2: List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................... 255 Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 258 List of Official Documents and Reports ................................................................................ 283 3 CHAPTER 1 One empirical case, three theoretical puzzles “Facts, facts, facts” used to say Sergio Fabbrini to his students during his “European and International Politics classes" at the University of Trento in 2010, quoting his teacher, Karl Popper. The facts from which this research departs are first, the tragedies and, allegedly, human rights violations that are taking place almost every day at the borders of the European Union, second, the national and European security concerns regarding migration, voiced by a number of populist and nationalistic parties of EU member states, and, third, the controversial role of the EU external borders agency (i.e., Frontex or EBCG agency). In 2015, during the week between April 13 and 19 alone, at least a thousand drowned in the Mediterranean Sea among migrants and people seeking international protection1 and the number of deaths during the year arrived at 3,775. In 2016 the overall number of deaths in the Mediterranean rose even further, reaching 5,141 deaths, and did not diminish significantly in 2017, according to IOM2, notwithstanding the unrelenting solidarity efforts of Civil Society Organisations (henceforth CSOs) that decided to engage in Search and Rescue operations in the Mediterranean (SAR). Indeed, the external borders of the European Union (EU) have been described as the deadliest frontiers of the world3 and human rights abuses (e.g., refoulement and inhuman and degrading treatment) have been reported by international, European and local 1 For further reference on the shipwrecks that took place in April 2015 see: http://www.hrw.org/news/2015/04/19/eu-mediterranean-deaths-warrant-crisis-response (accessed 19 April 2015); http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/world/europe/italy-migrants-capsized-boat-off- libya.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top- news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 (accessed 20 April 2015); https://www.amnesty.org/en/articles/news/2015/04/mediterranean-crisis-50-fold-increase-in-deats-amid- european-inaction/ (accessed 19 April 2015). 2 IOM, “Missing Migrants” database, available at: https://missingmigrants.iom.int/region/mediterranean (accessed 20 June 2017) 3 Martin Schulz, EP President, on 16 April 2015 said: “The Mediterranean is Europe's frontier and to this day it is the deadliest border in the world”. Available at: https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/news/eu- policymakers-blamed-refugee-deaths-mediterranean (accessed 17 April 2015). UN Secretary-General Ban Ki- moon also said, on 20 April 2015, that the Mediterranean has become “the world's deadliest route used by asylum seekers and migrants”. Available at: http://www.france24.com/en/20150420-eu-mediterranean-boat- response-migration/ (accessed 20 April 2015). 4 organisations in the last decade or so (Human Rights Watch, 2011; ProAsyl, 2013; Amnesty International, 2014; FIDH, Migreurop and EMHRN, 2014). As Steve Peers, one of the leading EU law scholars on migration issues, points out in his blog: “The escalating tragedy of thousands of migrants’ lives being lost every year during attempted Mediterranean crossings is one of the most difficult issues facing the EU’s immigration policy”4. On the other hand, the prolonged crisis of the EU, coupled with the fear of new terrorist attacks reignited after the Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris (January 7, 2015), has given rise to xenophobic