Advanced

Fundamental Rights Outside of the EU – Implications of Frontex Multi-actor Operations Beyond the External Borders

Modaber, Yashar LU (2019) JURM02 20191
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The European Border and Coast Guard (EBCG), consisting of the EU agency of Frontex and the Union member states, has the mandate to perform missions relating to border management beyond the territory of said states. Its staff may act in the territory of third countries and on the high seas, which raises the question of what the implications are in respect to the obligations which the EU fundamental rights regime imposes on the public entities during their operations. The purpose of this thesis is therefore to evaluate the impact of the multi-actor operations pertaining to the territorial scope of fundamental human rights.

By examining the relevant legislation concerning border management, rights-sensitive situations pursuant to the... (More)
The European Border and Coast Guard (EBCG), consisting of the EU agency of Frontex and the Union member states, has the mandate to perform missions relating to border management beyond the territory of said states. Its staff may act in the territory of third countries and on the high seas, which raises the question of what the implications are in respect to the obligations which the EU fundamental rights regime imposes on the public entities during their operations. The purpose of this thesis is therefore to evaluate the impact of the multi-actor operations pertaining to the territorial scope of fundamental human rights.

By examining the relevant legislation concerning border management, rights-sensitive situations pursuant to the operations the EBCG may engage in are identified, serving as a basis for outlining concrete fundamental human rights. The sources of the rights are interlinked through the EU legal order, where its Treaties and Charter of fundamental rights (the Charter) adhere to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Particular fundamental rights, principally at the least dually protected due to their codification at both the Union and international level, are subsequent to their deduction from the situations identified assessed in the light of both the overarching legal framework on fundamental rights, and secondary EU law.

The conclusion reached is that the territorial scope of the material rights in question is not confined to intra-Union events. Instead, it may reach to confer rights on individuals beyond the external borders of the member states. The conditions deciding on the scope differs depending on what instrument a contested right stems from. Pursuant to EU law, the fundamental rights regime tracks any action which are the result of duties deriving from the legal order itself. Therefore, spatial circumstances do not necessarily restrict individuals from enjoying the fundamental rights. The ECHR is interpreted as awarding individuals the genuine enjoyment of rights outside the contracting states’ borders where they are subject to control of any of those states. The conventional human rights have, as opposed to those deriving from the Union’s legal system, through the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) been expressly held to inhere an extraterritorial scope.

The lead interpreter of EU law, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), exerts great influence over the understanding of the EU legal system. Due to Treaty-provisions and rules in the Charter, the CJEU, in its interpretation of the material rights corresponding to Convention-rights, is bound by the same meaning and scope which the ECHR is found to have by its adjudicator. Thus, as the Charter may only provide for the higher protection of rights, the differentiation between EU fundamental rights and rights flowing from the ECHR is, for the sake of the extraterritorial scope of the former, peripheral. However, despite the link between them, the different instruments do not necessarily bind the same actors; the Charter is binding on the EU, including its agencies, and the ECHR puts duties on third countries. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Den europeiska gräns- och kustbevakningen (EBCG), bestående av EU-byrån
Frontex samt medlemsstaterna, har mandat att genomföra gränsförvaltningsrelaterade uppdrag som sträcker sig bortom nämnda staters territorium. Dess personal får handla på tredje länders territorium samt på det fria havet, vilket väcker frågan om vad följderna är vad rör förpliktelserna EU:s regelverk kring grundläggande rättigheter ålägger de offentliga organen under deras insatser. Syftet med denna uppsats är därför att bedöma den verkan mångaktörsinsatser har vad gäller den territoriella räckvidden av grundläggande mänskliga rättigheter.

Genom att undersöka lagstiftningen på området rörande gränsförvaltning
möjliggörs identifieringen av rättighetsträngande... (More)
Den europeiska gräns- och kustbevakningen (EBCG), bestående av EU-byrån
Frontex samt medlemsstaterna, har mandat att genomföra gränsförvaltningsrelaterade uppdrag som sträcker sig bortom nämnda staters territorium. Dess personal får handla på tredje länders territorium samt på det fria havet, vilket väcker frågan om vad följderna är vad rör förpliktelserna EU:s regelverk kring grundläggande rättigheter ålägger de offentliga organen under deras insatser. Syftet med denna uppsats är därför att bedöma den verkan mångaktörsinsatser har vad gäller den territoriella räckvidden av grundläggande mänskliga rättigheter.

Genom att undersöka lagstiftningen på området rörande gränsförvaltning
möjliggörs identifieringen av rättighetsträngande situationer uppkomna som en följd av EBCG:s verksamhet, vilket utgör grunden för utmålningen av konkreta grundläggande mänskliga rättigheter. Rättigheternas källor är
sammanlänkande genom EU:s rättsordning, vars fördrag samt rättighetsstadga hänför sig till Europakonventionen (EKMR). Särskilda grundläggande rättigheter åtnjuter huvudsakligen juridiskt skydd i dubbel bemärkelse på grund av deras kodifikation på både Unionsnivå samt på internationell nivå. Efter deras härledning ur de identifierade situationerna bedöms de i ljuset av både den övergripande rättsliga ramen för grundläggande rättigheter, samt Unionens sekundärrätt.

Slutsatsen är att den territoriella räckvidden av de materiella rättigheterna ifråga inte är begränsad till händelser inom unionen, utan kan sträcka sig bortom medlemsstaternas yttre gränser och omfatta individer utanför dessa. De, för räckvidden avgörande villkoren skiljer sig åt beroende på vad för lag de omstridda rättigheterna har sitt ursprung ur. Enligt EU-rätten spårar ramverket kring de grundläggande rättigheterna varje handling som är en följd av de åtaganden som härrör från unionsrätten i sig. Rumsliga förutsättningar förhindrar därför nödvändigtvis inte individer från att åtnjuta de grundläggande rättigheterna. EKMR har bedömts tillskriva individer skydd för rättigheterna trots deras fysiska frånvaro i en kontraktsstat, villkorat att de är under en sådan stats kontroll. I motsats till de unionsrättsliga mänskliga rättigheterna, har de som härstammar från EKMR genom Europadomstolens praxis uttryckligen ansetts inneha extraterritoriell räckvidd.

EU-domstolen, som är den ledande instansen gällande tolkningen av EU-rätt, utövar ett stort inflytande över förståelsen av unionens rättssystem. Domstolen är i sin tolkning av de materiella rättigheter som har en motsvarighet i EKMR, med anledning av bestämmelserna i fördragen och rättighetsstadgan bunden av samma innebörd och räckvidd som de konventionsenliga rättigheterna tillskrivs av Europadomstolen. Eftersom rättighetsstadgan endast kan tillhandahålla ett högre skydd för rättigheterna, har således åtskiljandet av rättigheter med ursprung ur EU-rätt och ur EKMR en mindre inverkan på bestämmandet av den extraterritoriella räckvidden av unionsrättsliga rättigheter. De olika rättighetskällorna förbinder dock inte nödvändigtvis samma aktörer, trots sammanlänkandet mellan dem; rättighetsstadgan förpliktigar EU, inklusive dess byråer medan EKMR ålägger tredje länder förpliktelser. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Modaber, Yashar LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM02 20191
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
EU law, Frontex, EBCG, Border management, Fundamental rights
language
English
id
8991460
date added to LUP
2019-09-10 09:37:25
date last changed
2019-09-10 09:37:25
@misc{8991460,
  abstract     = {The European Border and Coast Guard (EBCG), consisting of the EU agency of Frontex and the Union member states, has the mandate to perform missions relating to border management beyond the territory of said states. Its staff may act in the territory of third countries and on the high seas, which raises the question of what the implications are in respect to the obligations which the EU fundamental rights regime imposes on the public entities during their operations. The purpose of this thesis is therefore to evaluate the impact of the multi-actor operations pertaining to the territorial scope of fundamental human rights.

By examining the relevant legislation concerning border management, rights-sensitive situations pursuant to the operations the EBCG may engage in are identified, serving as a basis for outlining concrete fundamental human rights. The sources of the rights are interlinked through the EU legal order, where its Treaties and Charter of fundamental rights (the Charter) adhere to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Particular fundamental rights, principally at the least dually protected due to their codification at both the Union and international level, are subsequent to their deduction from the situations identified assessed in the light of both the overarching legal framework on fundamental rights, and secondary EU law.

The conclusion reached is that the territorial scope of the material rights in question is not confined to intra-Union events. Instead, it may reach to confer rights on individuals beyond the external borders of the member states. The conditions deciding on the scope differs depending on what instrument a contested right stems from. Pursuant to EU law, the fundamental rights regime tracks any action which are the result of duties deriving from the legal order itself. Therefore, spatial circumstances do not necessarily restrict individuals from enjoying the fundamental rights. The ECHR is interpreted as awarding individuals the genuine enjoyment of rights outside the contracting states’ borders where they are subject to control of any of those states. The conventional human rights have, as opposed to those deriving from the Union’s legal system, through the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) been expressly held to inhere an extraterritorial scope. 

The lead interpreter of EU law, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), exerts great influence over the understanding of the EU legal system. Due to Treaty-provisions and rules in the Charter, the CJEU, in its interpretation of the material rights corresponding to Convention-rights, is bound by the same meaning and scope which the ECHR is found to have by its adjudicator. Thus, as the Charter may only provide for the higher protection of rights, the differentiation between EU fundamental rights and rights flowing from the ECHR is, for the sake of the extraterritorial scope of the former, peripheral. However, despite the link between them, the different instruments do not necessarily bind the same actors; the Charter is binding on the EU, including its agencies, and the ECHR puts duties on third countries.},
  author       = {Modaber, Yashar},
  keyword      = {EU law,Frontex,EBCG,Border management,Fundamental rights},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Fundamental Rights Outside of the EU – Implications of Frontex Multi-actor Operations Beyond the External Borders},
  year         = {2019},
}