2009 Annual Risk Analysis Report - Part 1
(Except for the Executive Summary on page 3) * ** FRONTEX LIBERTAS SECURITAS JUSTTTTA European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States oft he European Union Annual Risk Assessment 2009 Risk Analysis Unit Reference: R022 (Rev. 1) Copy Number: Warsaw, 26 March 2009
Document saved on 06/04/09 2 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
The number of persons detected staying illegally also increased across Member States, by 13% based on data provided by 27 Member State The number of refusals of entry decreased by 17% over the same period, mostly due to a reduction in regular traffic of third country nationals as a result of the introduction of more stringent visa requirements in new Schengen Member States. Although there is no precise estimate on the extent of trafficking in human beings across the EU external border, recent reports suggest that the phenomenon is on the increase. The economic differences between Member States and third countries will remain the main driver for illegal migration towards the EU. While local and temporary political and/or humanitarian crises have important impact on regional migration flows, they appear to have limited influence on illegal migration to the EU . the flow of illegal migrants to the EU will continue to be governed by factors beyond Member States' control. Nevertheless, and notwithstanding the growing uncertainties linked with the global economic recession, a slowdown of the increase in the flow of illegal migrants to the EU is expected in 2010. This trend is anticipated from the reduction of the overall air passenger flows, the weak labour demand, the lower asylum recognition rates and the introduction of strengthened border control measures like the VIS. This assum tion will, however, not be verifiable because estimates on the undetected flow of In 2010, Member States would benefit most from operational cooperation at the external borders areas with currently high detections of ille al border crossin border where migrants' life is also most at ris At the air borders the focus should be on those airports combinin rge numbers of non-EU passengers with particular emphasis on assessing the entry crite 1 showing large numbers of detections for illegal stay in the EU. In general, Member States would benefit from increased operational cooperation tackling trafficking in human beings, visa issues, and contributing to the investigation of cross-border crimes. With its growing operational experiences and increased risk analysis capacities, Frontex should increasingly contribute to EU border management policies. Justification 4 3 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
(This page has been intentionally left blank for double-sided printing) 4 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
Table of contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................. 3 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 7 2. Methodology .................................................................................................................... 8 3. Situation at the external borders .................................................................................. 11 3.1. Detections of illegal border crossing ........................................................................ 11 3.2. Refusals of entry ...................................................................................................... 17 3.3. Illegal stay ............................... .. ... ........... ............. ....... ... ... ....................................... 22 3.4. Asylum applications ............................................ ................... .................. ................ 25 3.5. Detections of false documents ................................................................................. 28 3.6. Detections of facilitators ........................................................................................... 32 3. 7. Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 34 4. Illegal migration routes to the EU ................................................................................. 36 4.1. West African route ................................................................................................... 36 4.2. Western Mediterranean route .............. .. ..................... .. ...... ..................................... 37 4.3. Central Mediterranean route .................................................................................... 38 4.4. Eastern Mediterranean route ................................................................................... 42 4.5. Western Balkan route .............................................................................................. 44 4.6. Eastern European route ........................................................................................... 45 4.7. Air routes .............. ........... .................................................... ..... ............. .. ......... ....... 47 5. Trafficking in human beings ......................................................................................... 50 6. Environmental scan ....................................................................................................... 52 6.1. Illegal migration to the EU as a part of international migration system .......... ........ .. 52 6.2. Economic downturn and Member States .... ............................................................. 53 6.3. Economic downturn and third countries ................................................................... 56 6.4. Geopolitical factors .................................................................................................. 58 6.5. Legal factors ............................................................................................................ 61 7. Outlook for 2010 ............................................................................................................ 66 8. Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 72 9. Annexes .......................................................................................................................... 77 5 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
(This page has been intentionally left blank for double-sided printing) 6 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
1. Introduction Frontex' Annual Risk Assessment (ARA) 2009 has been developed in view of the planning of the coordination of operational activities at the external borders of the EU in 2010. The ARA combines an assessment of threats and vulnerabilities at the EU external borders, weighing their impact and consequences so that the Agency is better equipped to balance and prioritise the allocation of resources against identified risks. Frontex' operational activities aim at strengthening border security by ensuring the coordination of Member States' actions in the implementation of Community measures relating to the management of the external borders. The coordination of operational activities also contributes to better allocation of Member States' resources and protection of the area of freedom, security and justice. The ARA 2009 concentrates on the current scope of Frontex operational activities, which is mainly limited to illegal migration at the external borders of the EU and the Schengen Associated Countries. As the concept of integrated border management recommends, border management should however cover all security threats present at the external borders. A full chapter is devoted to the phenomenon of trafficking in human beings (THB) with which Frontex was tasked with in the EU action plan (2005/C 311/01 )on best practices, standards and procedures for combating and preventing THB. The assessment is developed in the following sequence: (1) a description of the situation as reported by Member States through a set of six indicators on illegal migration, (2) an analysis of the dynamic at play along the main routes of illegal migration to the EU (3) an scan through the factors most likely to influence illegal migration to the EU in the near future, where the emphasis is placed on the impact of the economic crisis, (4) a description of the situation regarding THB, (5) and recommendations derived from the previous chapters. Frontex Risk Analysis Unit would like to thank all FRAN members and in particular the staff in Member States for their efforts in providing data and information, as well as Europol which for the first time contributed to the ARA 2009, and colleagues at Frontex involved in the preparation of the report. 7 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
2. Methodology Data collection plan The backbone of the ARA 2009 is the Member States' monthly statistics provided within the framework of the Frontex Risk Analysis Network (FRAN). This regular data collection exercise was launched in September 2007 and refined through 2008. Thanks to the FRAN members' efforts, a much larger statistical coverage was achieved in 2008 concerning six key indicators on illegal migration: detections of illegal border crossing, refusals of entry, detections of illegal stay, asylum applications, detections of facilitators, and detections of forged documents. Member States were not addressed specific questions for this assessment. Rather, Member States' bi-monthly analytical reports and incidents reports collected regularly through the FRAN, and Member States contributions to several Tailored Risk Analyses conducted in 2008 have been important sources of information especially when analysing routes and modi operandi. Evaluation reports of the Frontex coordinated Joint Operations in 2008 were also used. Open sources information, that is, reports issued by governmental agencies, international and non-governmental organisations as well as official EU reports, such as the Commission's reports on third countries, and main stream news agencies were exploited, especially when outlining the main push and pull factors for illegal migration to the EU . The outlook for 2010 was based on the analysis of the state of play regarding illegal migration at the external borders of the EU, push and pull factors as well as factors impacting routes and modi operandi. Statistics were collected by Frontex from the national border control authorities by border types- land, air and sea-and for land borders by borders sections with neighbouring third countries. For illegal border crossing, detections at the air borders were not included because of the different reporting practices of Member States. Cases of illegal border crossing at the air border being limited this omission does not affect the overall analysis and for a description of the situation at the air borders, refusals of entry are a better indicator. The data collected by FRAN is compiled and analysed every quarter. Priority is given to the use of the data for management purpose and its rapid sharing among Member States' border control authorities. Member States' data processed by Frontex is not meant to be official statistics, and thus may vary from data finally published officially by national authorities. In the course of 2008, some FRAN Members updated their statistics for 2007. These updates have been taken into account in this document, and thus the data presented here sometimes differ from the data presented in the previous Annual Risk Assessment. EUROPOL contributed for the first time to the ARA 2009, by providing information on facilitated illegal migration and trafficking in human beings. Quality of the available data Like other law enforcement indicators, variations of the administrative data related to border control (detections of illegal border crossing and refusals of entry) depend on several factors, in this case on the one hand of the efforts to detect migrants and the other hand on the flow of illegal migrants to the EU. Increased detections of illegal border crossing might be due to an increase flow of illegal migrants and/or to more resources made available to detect migrants. In extreme cases, it might happen that increased detections are due to increased resources allocated, while the flow of migrants actually decreased because migrants are deterred to cross. Thus, explaining the reasons behind statistical variation is not easy without estimates on the actual flow of migrants (detected and undetected) and the resources available at the border 8 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
Justification 4 (staff and equipment). This le suffers exc the border ille all Conservative estimates of the stock of illegal migrants within the EU vary between three and six million, according to the latest results of Clandestino, an EU sponsored project implemented by the ICMPD, but other estimates indicate eight million illegal migrants, of which 80% inside the Schengen area and half of them having entered legally. However, there is currently no estimate for the annual flow of illegal migrants crossing the border illegally. Information on the total resources for border control authorities at the national level and their allocation is known only partially through answers provided by Member States within the Schengen evaluation mechanism or to the External Borders Fund. Without systematic collection of information on resources for border control and on estimates of illegal migration flow, it is not possible to assess the performance and impact of the border controls put in place, and the analysis of the situation at the EU external borders is limited to the description of the administrative data provided by Member States. As highlighted in the Schengen Catalogue, the quantity of passenger flow is an important factor to be taken into account for the allocation of border control resources. However, regular flows of passengers across the EU external borders are currently not recorded systematically. The Commission, in its communication related to the new tool for integrated European Border Management Strategy, estimated the regular flow of passengers across the external EU border (in and out movements of EU citizens and third country nationals) to range from 300 million based on travellers' overnight stays, to 880 million based on Member States' own estimates derived from samples. Most external border crossings take place at the airports, with Eurostat estimating at about 271 million the number of passengers from non-EU flights, follow by land and sea border crossings (no estimates available). The quantity and place of the issued EU visas would also contribute to refine the profile of the third country passengers flow. However this information, collected within the Council Visa Working Party, is not immediately available for risk analysis, and thus was not used in this document. At the other side of the spectrum of border management indicators, statistics on 1 readmission, a strong deterrent for illegal migration, is collected by CIREFl , but results for 2008 are not yet available and could thus not be analysed in relation to detected flows of illegal border crossing. 1 Centre for Information, Discussion and Exchange on the Crossing of Frontiers and Immigration 9 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
Table 1: 2008 Indicator factsheet Total in 2008 Per cent change Indicators (for 27 Member States compared to 2007 and 2 associated countries) Detections of Illegal Border +24 per cent 174,800 Crossing* (comparison for 27 MS) -17 per cent Refusals of Entry 129,500 (comparison for 28 MS) +13 per cent Detections of Illegal Stay 411,800 (comparison for 27 MS) +17 per cent Asylum Applications 248,200 (comparison for 28 MS) Detections of Persons using Forged +16 per cent 20,700 Documents (comparison for 25 MS) -18 per cent Detections of Forged Documents 24 ,500 (comparison for 20 MS) -9 per cent Facilitators 9,200 (comparison for 23 MS) * Limited to detections at the land and sea borders. Source: FRAN data as of 9 March 2009 10 of 80 Annual Risk Assessment 2009
