Humanitarians or Smugglers? European Union border securitisation and the criminalisation of humanitarian aid and acts of solidarity with migrants

本研究将探讨围绕2002年便利指令的国内解释的模糊性是否促进了欧盟（EU）对移民和难民的团结的刑事定罪。这是一个重要的问题，需要详细的学术调查。在整个欧盟，随着边境安全措施的实施，人权维护者（包括人道主义从业人员、活动人士或其他协助移民的民间社会行为者）面临刑事指控和被拘留的案件越来越多。这种明显的“团结移民的犯罪化”在不同的国家背景下采取了不同的形式，在某种意义上，似乎与非法移民本身的犯罪化有关。针对人权捍卫者帮助移徙者的刑事案件并非孤立发生。欧盟国家越来越多地利用拘留设施来关押移民，同时减少投入到主动搜救（SAR）的资源。尽管受到欧洲人权法院、人权事务委员会和其他人权监督机构越来越多的审查（见Khlaifia等人诉意大利，2016年关于反对移民拘留的声明或A.S.等人诉意大利，2021年关于对治外法权义务的审查），但此类关切仍在继续。具有象征意义的案例表明，这些边境安全政策对那些帮助移民的人的工作产生了恶劣的影响。2015年，丹麦hrd Lisbeth Zornig因驾驶一家叙利亚难民过桥前往瑞典而被判犯有人口走私罪（Zornig, 2016）。2017年，法国农民塞德里克·埃鲁（Cedric Herrou）因在家中接待寻求庇护者而被指控“协助非法入境”，但上诉法院于2020年宣告他无罪。在匈牙利，欧洲法院（ECJ）认定，将援助寻求庇护者定为犯罪的“阻止索罗斯”法违反了欧盟法律（见欧盟委员会诉匈牙利，2021年）。在有争议的地中海路线上，政治家和FRONTEX边境管理官员将民间社会活动的存在标记为非正常移民增加的一个牵引因素，并将人道主义救援与人口走私混为一谈（Franko, 2021）。在希腊，这种高度政治化叙述的影响可以从针对国际应急响应中心（ERCI）成员的案件中观察到，该成员于2018年因涉嫌人口走私、间谍活动、洗钱和加入犯罪网络而被捕，在审前拘留了几个月（人权高专办，2021年）。意大利也发生了类似的案件，分别于2022年和2019年扣押了Iuventa号的船只并逮捕了船员（见ECCHR，2022年和HRW， 2019年）。为了分析团结的刑事化，本研究项目将包括两个不同的分析阶段，并考虑三个案例研究国家：法国，希腊，意大利。第一阶段包括对国内立法进行理论分析，根据国内立法，声援移民的行为与国际人权义务和其他相关国际法律框架（如难民法和国际海洋法）相对照。随后将进入第二阶段，包括与人权捍卫者进行定性的关键线人访谈。第一阶段的目标是确定相互冲突的法律框架的不确定性，使各国能够将援助移徙者定为刑事犯罪。第二阶段旨在了解这种法律不确定性对人权捍卫者开展工作能力的影响，强调任何可感知的风险和潜在的隐藏威慑作用。

This research will address the question of whether ambiguity around the domestic interpretationof the 2002 Facilitation Directive has promoted the criminalisation of solidarity with migrantsand refugees in the European Union (EU). This is an important issue which requires detailedacademic investigation. Across the EU, cases of human rights defenders (HRDs) (includinghumanitarian practitioners activists, or other civil society actors assisting migrants) facingcriminal charges and being detained are increasing alongside border securitisation measures.This apparent 'criminalisation of solidarity' with migrants has taken different forms acrossnational contexts and, in a sense, appears to be interrelated with the criminalisation of irregularmigration itself. Criminal cases against HRDs aiding migrants do not occur in isolation. EU Statesare increasingly utilising detention facilities to hold migrants while simultaneously decreasingthe resources invested in pro-active search and rescue (SAR). Despite growing scrutiny by theEuropean Court of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee, and other human rightsmonitoring bodies (see Khlaifia and others v. Italy, 2016 for a statement against migrantdetention or A.S. and others v Italy, 2021 for a review of extraterritorial obligations), suchconcerns continue. Emblematic cases demonstrate the nefarious impact of these bordersecuritisation policies on the work of those aiding migrants. In 2015, Lisbeth Zornig, a DanishHRD was found guilty of human smuggling for driving a family of Syrian refugees across a bridgeto Sweden (Zornig, 2016). In France, farmer Cedric Herrou was charged in 2017 with 'facilitatingirregular entry' for hosting asylum seekers in his home, before being acquitted by a Court ofAppeals in 2020 (Amnesty International, 2020). In Hungary, the 'Stop Soros' law criminalisingassistance to asylum seekers was found by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to be in breach ofEU law (see European Commission v Hungary, 2021). Along the contested Mediterranean routes,politicians and FRONTEX border management officials have labelled the presence of civil societySAR activities as a pull-factor for increased irregular migration and have conflated humanitarianrescue with human smuggling (Franko, 2021). In Greece, the impact of this highly politicisednarrative can be observed in the case against the members of Emergency Response CentreInternational (ERCI), who spent several months in pre-trial detention after being arrested in 2018on charges of human smuggling, espionage, money laundering, and membership of a criminalnetwork (OHCHR, 2021). Similar cases have also occurred in Italy, with the seizure of vesselsand arrests of crew members of the Iuventa in 2022 and the Sea Watch in 2019 (see ECCHR,2022 and HRW, 2019). To analyse and contextualise the criminalisation of solidarity, thisresearch project will consist of two distinct analytical phases and consider three case studycountries: France, Greece, Italy. The first phase consists of a doctrinal analysis contrastingdomestic legislation under which acts of solidarity with migrants are criminalised withinternational human rights obligations and other relevant international legal frameworks, suchas refugee law and international law of the sea. This will be followed by a second phase,consisting of qualitative key informant (KI) interviews with HRDs. The objective of the first phaseis to identify the uncertainty around the conflicting legal frameworks allowing States tocriminalise assistance to migrants. The second phase seeks to understand the consequences ofthis legal uncertainty on the ability of HRDs to conduct their work, highlighting any perceivedrisks and potential hidden deterrent effect.