SES FRONTEX                                       - Warsaw, 21 January 2015 Reg.Nr. : FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 Operations Division Joint Operations Unit Land Border Sector Approved at Warsaw .. / .. /2015 Signature Gil Arias Deputy Executive Director - E uropean Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union www.frontex.europa .eu Plac Europejski 6, 00-844 Warsaw , Poland Tel. +48 22 205 95 00 Fax +48 22 205 95 01

LIMITED                                                                     Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 INDEX Contents 1.      Background information                                                                          4 1 .1 .     Brief risk assessment                                                                         4 1.2.      Operational aim                                                                                5 1.3.       Period of implementation and operational areas                                                5 1.4.       Participants                                                                                  5 1.5 .      Financial information                                                                         5 2.      Achievement of objectives                                                                       6 3.      Link to other Frontex activities and best practices                                             6 4.      Assessment of joint operational activities                                                      7 4.1 .     Supporting Response                                                                            7 4. 1. 1.   Operational concept                                                                   7 4.1 .2.    Operational results                                                                   7 4.1.3.     Operational coordination structures                                                   8 4.1.4.     Resources deployed                                                                    8 4.2.      Situational Awareness                                                                          8 4.2.1 .    Threat s and Risks, modus operandi and trends identified                              8 4.2. 2.    Information gathering and exchange                                                  11 4.3.       Development                                                                                 12 4. 3. 1.   Operational cooperation                                                             12 4.3 .2.    Operational briefing / debriefin g                                                  13 5.      Main conclusions and recommendations                                                          13 FACT SHEETS - STATISTICS                                                                              15 1.      Time schedule                                                                                 15 2.      Participation                                                                                 15 3.      Financial information                                                                         16 4.      Statistics                                                                                    16 2/ 21

LIMITED                                                                                Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 ANNEX: Observation of Fundamental Rights Officer Operational activity number: ....................................................... . Prepared by: ............................................................ . Presented at Directorate Meeting on ...................... . □        Circulation Directorate Approved by ED/ DED: Date Director of Operations Division: Klaus Rosier 3/21

LIMITED                                                                                                       Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 1.      Background information 1. 1. Brief risk assessment The JO Coordination Points 2014 represents a continuation of the operational activities implemented within the Project Coordination Points 2013 and it was implemented with the aim of establishing a system for collecting and exchanging information between third countries, EU member states and Frontex, which enables the early detection of irregular migration flows that might have an effect upon the EU / SAC external borders. In this regard, operational activities were implemented !a LI:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __                                                  Commented [Al]: The blanked out parts contain detailed information regarding the operational area. Its disclosure would expose law enforcement officials' patrolling the area and harm the course of future and ongoing operations in the same area, and thus facilitate irregular migration. Therefore, public security will be affected. In light of the above, the text is not disclosed pursuant to the exception laid down in the first indent of Article 4(1 )(a) of Regulation No 1049/ 2001 relating to the protection of the public interest as regards public security. At the Albanian-Montenegrin border during the period under review, 23 persons were reported within the operational area of the JO Coordination Points 2014 in 18 incidents. Most of these persons were linked to refusal of entry incidents (13 incidents/ 15 persons). The number of incidents related to irregular migration was very low (i.e. one illegal border-crossing incident involving the apprehension of two Syrian migrants); in addition , the number of cross-border crime related incidents was also very low (i.e. one smuggling of goods incident and one stolen vehicle incident). At the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonian-Serbian border during the reporting period, 583 persons were reported 1111111■ in 276 incidents. Nearly 78% of these persons were linked to refusal of entry incidents (456 persons), followed by persons reported for overstay (31 persons) and persons reported fo r falsification of documents (22 persons). Serbi an nat ionals were chiefly reported fo r refusal of entry and overst ay, while the incidents relat ed t o the falsification of documents were primarily linked to nationals f rom Syri a, Kosovo' and Albania. Nearly 60% of the migrants apprehended within the operational area of the JO Coordination Points 2014, were reported       lll1llll1l1II               and the main nationalities of the apprehended migrants were Albanian, Syri an and Turkish. Additionally, 14 persons were arrest ed for being involved in smuggling activities and 3 st olen vehicles were detected. At the Moldovan-Ukrainian and Ukrainian-Moldovan border , a tot al of 105 incidents involving the det ection of 189 persons were reported within the operational area of the JO Coordin ation Points 201 5. The highest number of incidents was reported from the                                                                                             I Most persons were reported fo r overstaying (75 incidents). In addition, 54 incidents relat ed to persons being refu sed entry while 52 incidents relat ed t o other types of incidents. The main nat ionalities of the detect ed persons were Moldovan (101) and Russian (54). The number of illegal border -crossings record ed at this bord er section was ve7 low (6 Moldovans and 1 Russian) and all irregular migrants were apprehended within the 111111■                                    11111111■- During the reportin g period , 23 irregular migrants were apprehended and 4 facilitat ors were arrested within the operational area of the JO Coordination Points 2014. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonian- Serbian border ranked first in terms of migrant apprehensions, followed by the Moldovan-Ukrainian border and the Albanian-Montenegrin border. The main nationalities of the apprehended migrants were Albanian (6), Moldovan (6) and Syrian (6). 1 This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and the /CJ Opin ion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. 4/21

LIMITED                                                                             Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 1.2. Operational aim The operational aim of the Joint Operation Coordination Points was to establish a system for the exchange of information related early detection of recent, actual and future illegal migration trends towards the EU through the territory of the third country . Furthermore, the establishment and exchange of common best practices improved practical cooperation between the competent authorities involved in controlling of irregular migration flows and to tackle other cross-border crime. 1.3. Period of implementation and operational areas The joint operation was implemented during the period 08 April - 16 December 2014. The deployment periods and operational areas were as follow : 1/ Land border between the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia: Commencement                 8 April 2014 Termination                   16 December 2014 2/ Land border between Moldova and Ukraine: Commencement                 1 July 2014 Termination                   31 July 2014 3/ Land border between Albania and Montenegro: Commencement                 8 Jui 2014 Termin ation                  2 September 201 4 1.4. Participants The j oint operation was host ed by the Form er Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania, Ukraine and Moldova wi th participation of 12 MSs and SACs, namely Au stria, Croatia, Est onia, Finland, France, Hungary, Netherlands, Lat via, Poland , Romania, Slovenia and Switzerland. Each MS parti cipate wi th one authority. Rega rdin g the number and profiles of the experts deployed within the j oint operation, there were 32 advanced level document offi cers and 5 st olen vehicles detection offi cers. 1.5. Financial information Final budget : EURO 230,000 .00 Tot al commitment: EURO 242,599.15 with 31 numbers of SFD issued Payment consumed: EURO 165,247.00 consumption 91.88 % (consumed budget"100/committed fund s (EURO 179,856. 93) with 28 fin al payment issued until 12. 01 .2015) 5/21

LIMITED                                                                                                Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 2.          Achievement of objectives Enhance border security / Enhance efficiency of border security The objective has been achieved. During the implementation of the joint operation a significant number of document and stolen vehicle experts from twelve Member States have been deployed as Observers to Third Countries, namely to Albania, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Moldova and Ukraine. They were used in most efficient way supporting the Third Countries national authorities in performing border -; checks at selected BCPs. During the implementation period of the JO Coordination Points 2014, a total of': 23 irregular migrants were apprehended: 13 persons were detected at the                                for abuse of travel documents; 11 persons were involved in t he smuggling of goods; 4 stolen vehicles were detected                                                            (1)). The deployment of document experts and stolen vehicle experts at the BCPs where the joint operation was implemented , proved to be very beneficial not only in strengthening the border control system at the BCPs by supporting the local authorities with specialised staff, but also in enhancing the exchange of expertise between the deployed EU experts and the local officers, which further enriched the knowledge of both parties (local officers and EU experts). Enhance exchange of information / Enhance efficiency of the exchange of information The objective has been partially achieved. The insertion of data into JORA system was in many cases in timely fashion and accurate, but there were also cases when the exchange of information was unsatisfactory because of the delays in the incident reporting and/or because of the unproper filling up of information to JORA Template. Identify possible risks and threats The objective has been partially achieved. The data collected during the operational period was primarily quantitative and consisted mainly in statistical data reported t hrough JORA. The lack of debriefing experts deployed within the operationa l area, as well as due to lack of intelligence officers appointed by the host member states hindered t he data collection process and limited access to information regarding routes and modi operandi used by irregular migrants to reach the EU. Focused on media monitoring, as well as communication with the Local Coordinators and t he EU experts deployed in the area, were employed to fill the intelligence gaps regarding irregular migratory flows affecting the operational area, but the resultant information remained limited . 3.       Link to other Frontex activities and best practices JO Focal Points 2014 Land The EU experts deployed in the area were acting as a contact persons for t he Guest Officers deployed in other Frontex coordinated operations as well as for the hosting third countries authorities. The support given from Joint Operation Focal Points 2014 Land was highly appreciated and proved to be a useful tool in case of information exchange. High level of cooperation and exchange of information between involved partners were expressed by all stakeholders concerned. Useful practical link between local coordinators was initiated during the common local coordinators meeting, which was held in Warsaw on June 2014 . Local coordinators of JO Focal Points Land and JO 2 Only the operational results linked to irregular migration and cross-border crime were included here 6/21

LIMITED                                                                             Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 Coordination Points had a chance to meet each other and discuss about the cooperation during the implementation of the operational activity. 4.      Assessment of joint operational activities 4. 1. Supporting Response 4. 1 . 1.  Operational concept Assessment of implementation of the operational concept in accordance to Operational Plan According to the Operational plan, activities during the JO Coordination points 2014 should enhance the operational cooperation between Member States and Third Countries involved. In order to facilitate operational cooperation, Frontex ensured coordination of actions implemented by Third Countries. Activities implemented wi thin the framework of the operation promoted European border management standards and facilitated exchange of experiences and expertise in Integrated Border Management. Coordination Points were established at the Border Crossing Points between Third Countries and deployed EU experts acted as observers at Coordination Points. EU experts were also acting as contact persons, both for guest officers deployed in other Frontex coordinated operations and their national authorities as well as for the involved Third countries law enforcement agencies. Based on request formulated by the local authorities, EU experts provided practical field training to staff concerned. Based on the above mentioned and the operational results gained during the implementation of the joint operation , the number of incidents involving the deployed EU experts, it is justified to consider that operational concept was implemented according to the operational plan. 4. 1. 2.   Operational results The JO Coordination Points 2014 was implemented during the period of 8 Apri l - 16 December 2014 with t he aim of establishing a system for the exchange of information related to the early detection of illegal migration flows towards the EU th rough the territories of third countri es. Furthermore, the est ablishment and exchange of best practices should improve practical cooperation between the competent authorities involved in tackling of illegal migration and other cross-border crime. The collection of operational information from all participants and sources involved shou ld have support risk assessments that underpinned operational activities, thus contributing to the implementation of the Integrated Border Management standards in ord er to benefit all st akeholders. During the implementation of the JO Coordination Points 2014, the following operational results were reported: 15 illegal border-crossing incidents occurred involving the apprehension of 19 irregular migrants 2 facilitation incidents occurred involving the apprehension of 4 irregular migrants and the arrest of 4 facilitators 15 falsification incidents occurred involving the detection of 22 irregular migrants 74 other incidents occurred involving the detection of 22 persons 53 overstay incidents occurred involving the detection of 106 persons (overstayers) 1 prevention of departure incident occurred involving the detection of 5 persons 8 readmission incidents occurred involving the readmission of 12 persons 215 refusal of entry incidents occurred involving 525 persons 12 smuggling of good incidents occurred involving the apprehension/arrest of 17 persons 4 stolen vehicle incidents occurred involving the apprehension of 4 persons 7/21

LIMITED                                                                               Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 4. 1. 3.   Operational coordination structures Due the specific character of the activity (similar to JO Focal Points Land), JO Coordination points 2014 did not have an operational structure similar to other land border operations. ICC or LCCs were not established within the joint operation, neither deployment of Frontex Operational Coordinators at the operational area. Command and control of the EU experts remained with the competent national authority of the host TC. Communication flow of the operational activity followed the standard practise and was channelled directly from CP to FSC. The Local coordinators from respective CPs were responsible of daily based JORA reporting. Furthermore, communication , information and reporting flow at Frontex level were channelled via the FSC which was a practical solution in order to facilitate uniform, permanent and interlinked communication for all actors involved . 4. 1.4.    Resources deployed According to the operational plan, activities implemented during the joint operation were focused on border checks . The deployment of EU experts at the operational area was firstly meant to support third countries authorities in performing border checks in general. However, as in all Frontex coordinated activities, the EU experts assisted local staff not only in the verification of travel documents, but also in the verification of other documents of individuals, vehicles or other entities. Based on the request formulated by the local authorities, EU experts provided practical field training to staff host authority staff members concerned. The EU experts deployed within the joint operation were experienced professionals. They had the skills and capacity needed to perform their duties according to the requirements of EBGT profiles (Advanced Level document experts and Stolen Vehicle Experts) and provisions of the operational plan . The added value of implementation of the j oint operation was that most of the EU experts had already parti cipated on Frontex operational activities several times. Russian language skills should be highlighted as an added value especially at the operational area of Moldova and Ukraine. Deployed EU experts with the Ru ssian language skills were highly appreciat ed by the hosting authoriti es and enhanced the effecti veness of the Frontex presence. 4.2. Situational Awareness 4.2.1.     Threats and Risks, modus operandi and trends identified 4. 2. 1. 1. Albanian-Montenegrin [borde~                                                                      Commented [A2]: The blanked out parts contain detailed info rmation regarding the operational area. Its disclosure would expose law enforcement offici als' patrolling the area and harm the course of future and ongoin g operati ons, and thus fac ilitate irregular mi gration. Therefore , public security During the peri od under analysis 3 incidents were reported f rom the                        : 1 illegal border -              will be affected. In light of th e above, the text is not crossing incident occurred involving the apprehension of 2 irregular Syri an migrants; 1 refusal of entry was                  disclosed pursuant to the exception laid down in t he fi rst indent of Article 4(1)( a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 relating issued involving 1 Greek national, and the reason for refusal was ' A - no valid travel documents' ; while 1                   to the protec ti on of the public interest as regards public other incident occurred involving 1 Albanian national who presented an Albanian passport at the border                         security. control. This passport was t hen seized by Albanian offi cers because it was not valid. During the period under review, 15 incidents involving the detection of 19 persons were reported from the BCP Murriqan. Most of these incidents were related to refusals of entry and they were primarily associated with Belarusian nationals (6) who were refused entry for reason 'C - no valid visa or residence permit' , as well with EU citizens (4). who were refused entry for reason 'A- no valid travel documents'. One smuggling of goods incident was reported , involving the arrest of 2 Albanian smugglers and the seizure of 1 712 .5 grams of marijuana during the period of analysis . 8/21

LIMITED                                                                                                           Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 Additionally, 1 stolen vehicle incident was reported from the smuggler and the seizure of a Volkswagen Golf IV (stolen) . The data reported in FRAN indicates that the number of illegal border-crossings detected at the ~ lbaniarl___                                              Commented [A3]: The blanked out parts contain detailed information regarding the modus operandi of criminal Montenegrin4 border during the first 11 months of 2014 (236) 5 , increased by approximately 38% compared networks. Its disclosure would jeopardize the work of law to the corresponding period of 2013 . Nearly all apprehended migrants (218) were detected between BCPs                                                     enforcement officials and harm the course of future and and very few (3) were detected at BCP. The main nationalities of the apprehended migrants were Syrian                                                      ongoing operations , and thus facilitate irregular migration. Therefore, public security will be affected. In light of the (91 ), Eritrean (46) , Albanian (32), Somali (30) and Congolese (10). Roughly 12%of the apprehended migrants                                              above, the text is not disclosed pursuant to the exception were migrants from Western Balkan countries, while the other 88%were travelling as secondary movements                                                     laid down in the first indent of Article 4(1 )(a) of Regulation No 1049/ 2001 relating to the protection of the public interest from Greece . as regards public security. Most of the irregular migratory pressure exerted during the first 11 months of 2014, at the Albanian- Montenegrin border, was recorded during the months of January and from April to June. This represents a change in the seasonal patterns, compared to 2013 , when the highest pressure was recorded in the months of August and September and it can be attributed to the fluctuations in the number of migrants travelling on the eastern Mediterranean route, which are reverberating across the Western Balkan region. 4.2.1.2. The Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonian-Serbian ~orde "'- - - - - -~                                                   Commented [A4]: The blanked out parts contain detailed information regarding the operational area. Its disclosure would expose law enforcement officials' patrolling the area and harm the course of future and ongoing operations, and thus facilitate irregular migration. Therefore, public security During the reporting period , 276 incidents involving the detection of 583 persons were reported from the                                                  will be affected. In light of the above , the text is not . Nearly 78% of these persons were refused entry (456 persons), while 31 persons were                                              disclosed pursuant to the exception laid down in the first indent of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 1049 / 2001 relating reported for overstaying and 22 persons were reported for falsification of documents. to the protection of the public interest as regards public The refusal of entry incidents were primarily linked to Serbian nationals (319) and the main reasons for                                                   security. refusing entry were 'E - no appropriate documentation justifying the purpose and conditions of stay' (191) and 'I - threat to public policy, internal security, public health or the international relations ' (64). Belarusian nationals (64) ranked second in t erms of the number of refusals of entry and all were refused entry for reason 'C - no valid visa or residence permit '. Roughly two thirds of the persons reported fo r overst aying during the operational period originat ed f rom West ern Balkan countries or from EU member st ates neighbouring the West ern Balkan region: Serbi an nationals (1 5) ranked first , followed by nationals from Bosnia- Herzegovina (5) and f rom Albania (2) . Most of the persons det ect ed for overstaying at                                             were subject to penalties (i. e. these persons were fi ned and banned for t wo years from entering the form er Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) . With regard t o abuse of travel documents reported from                                     I           I , nea rly 55% of the detected persons were nationals of third countries outside the West ern Balkan region, while the other 45% were nationals from third countri es neighbouring the form er Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (count ri es within the West ern Balkan region). Syrians (9) were chi efly reported for the falsifica tion of t ravel documents, Commented [AS]: Th e blanked out parts conta in detailed information rega rding the modus operandi of criminal netwo rks. Its disclosure would j eopardize the work of law e nforcement officials and harm the course of fu t ure and ongoing ope rati ons, and thus facilitate irregular migration. Therefore, public security will be affected. In light of the above, the tex t is not disclosed pursuant to the exception laid down in the first i ndent of Arti cle 4(1 )( a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 relating to the protection of the public interest as regards public security. During the reporting period, 8 illegal bord er -crossing incidents were reported i nvolving he apprehension of 10 irregular migrants. Most of the apprehended migrants (6 Albanians, 1                                                      Commented [A6]: The blanked out parts contain detailed information rega rding the operati onal area. Its di sclosure Serbian and 1 Somali) were det ected on entry from Serbia to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, would expose law enforcement officials' patrolling the area while the others (2 Turks) were detected on exit from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to Serbia.                                                 and harm the course of future and ongoing operations, and thus facilitate irregular migration. Therefore , public security will be affected. In light of the above, the text is not disclosed pursuant to the exception laid down in the first 3 This desig nat ion is without prej udice to positions on status, and is in line with UN SCR 1244 and the /CJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration indent of Article 4(1 )(a) of Regulation No 1049 / 2001 relating of independence.                                                                                                                                           to the protection of the public interest as regards public security. 5 FRAN data (WB-RAN): Illegal border-crossings between BCPs (/ BC- 1A) and ill egal border-crossings at BCP (fBC-18) reported by the Albanian and Montenegrin authorities at the Albanian-Montenegrin border. 9/21

LIMITED                                                                                                      Joint Operation Coordination Points 2014 FRONTEX EVALUATION REPORT 2014 [with reference to cross border crime related incidents , during the implementation period of the JO                                                   Commented [A7]: The blanked out parts contain detailed information regarding the modus operandi of criminal Coordination Points 2014, the                                [reported ]10 smuggling of goods incidents involving the arrest networks. Its disclosure would jeopardize the work of law of 14 smugglers (5 former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonian nationals, 4 Albanians, 2 Polish, 2 Serbians and                                             enforcement officials and harm the course of future and 1 Kosovar) and the seizure of 45 800 grams of marijuana, 5 320 cigarettes, 700 grams of gold jewelleries                                              ongoing operations, and thus facilitate irregular migration. Therefore, public security will be affected. In light of the and two 7.62 mm bullets . Additionally, 3 stolen vehicle incidents occurred involving the arrest of 3 smugglers                                        above, the text is not disclosed pursuant to the exception (1 former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonian national, 1 Polish and 1 Serbian). They were detected on entry                                              laid down in the first indent of Article 4(1 )(a) of Regulation No 1049/ 2001 relating to the protection of the public interest from Serbia by police officers from the as regards public security. According to data reported in FRAN 6 , during the period January-November 2014, the highest migratory Commented [AS]: The blanked out parts contain detailed pressure from all border sections inside the Western Balkan region was recorded at the former Yugoslav                                                 information regarding the operational area. Its disclosure Republic of Macedonian-Serbian border which reported a total of 3 312 irregular migrants detected for                                                  would expose law enforcement officials ' patrolling the area and harm the course of future and ongoing operations , and illegal-border-crossing. Nearly 98% of the migrants were travelling as secondary movements from Bulgaria thus facilitate irregular migration. Therefore , public security and Greece while the other 2% were nationals of Western Balkan countries.                                                                              will be affected. In light of the above, the text is not Most of the migrants apprehended at the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonian-Serbian border attempted                                                disclosed pursuant to the exception laid down in the first indent of Article 4(1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/ 2001 relating to cross the border illegally between BCPs, while very few tried at BCPs. Roughly 98%of the detections were                                            to the protection of the public interest as regards public made by the Serbian authorities, while the other 2% were made by the former Yugoslav Republic of                                                       security. Macedonia authorities. Taking into account the precipitous increase in the number of irregular migrants trav elling on the eastern Mediterranean route recorded during 2014, compared to 2013 , and the fact that the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonian-Serbian border represented the main transit point used by migrants linked to secondary movements to travel across the Western Balkan region, we might expect that the migratory pressured at this border section will remain high in 2015. 4.2. 1. 3.  Moldovan-Ukrainian and Ukrainian-Moldovan border During the reportin g peri od, 105 incidents involving the det ection of 189 persons were reported within t he operational area of t he JO Coordin ation Points 2014 at t he Mold ovan-Ukrainian border . The highest number of incidents was reported from t he Most of the det ected persons were reported because of overst aying (75), followed by refusal of entry (54) and by other (52 ). The main nationalities of the det ect ed persons were Moldovan (101) and Russian (54) . The number of illegal border -crossings recorded at this border section was very low (6 Moldovans and Russian) , and all the irregular migrants were apprehended within t he operational area of the ~               peri od under analysis, 7 incidents, involving the det ection of 7 persons, were report ed from the -             : 4 other incidents occurred involving 4 Moldovan nationals who were refused exit primarily for not having valid travel documents while 2 incidents of overstaying were reported involving 1 Bulgari an and 1 Ukrainian. During the period under review, 46 incidents, involving the detection of 46 persons, were reported from the : 44 other incidents occurred involving 44 Moldovan nationals who were refused exit primarily for not having valid travel documents. In addition , 2 refusal of entry incidents were reported involving 2 6 lllega/ border-crossings between BCPs (IBC- 1A) and illegal border-crossings at BCP (IBC-1B) repor ted by the fo rm er Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Serbian authorit ies at the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia n-Serbian border. 10/2 1