Malta opposing Frontex rules on rescue and disembarkation

Malta joins EU Mediterranean states opposing provisions of proposed border rules on rescue and disembarkation

Six EU Mediterranean states - Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta, France and Spain - have voiced opposition to a proposed Frontex Sea Borders Regulation on migrants' rescue at sea and their disembarkation, because international law already "deals amply with [these] matters".

Originally the 2010 rules adopted by the European Council were annulled by the EU's Court of Justice on a procedural matter.

But according to Italian state agency ANSA, the six states are believed to be opposing Article 9 of the proposed replacement law because they would be obliged to rescue migrants on boats in the absence of a distress call.

The rule would require that even in the absence of a distress call, rescues are carried out if the boat carrying the migrants is likely not to make it to its final destination, if it is carrying too many people or does not have enough fuel, water, or food, and if the passengers require urgent medical assistance, if there are pregnant women or children, and if there are dead passengers.

Additionally, Article 10 has attracted disagreement over where disembarkation, after a rescue operation, has to take place. Malta in the past opposed new protocols on safety at sea rules, forcing it to take in migrants rescued inside its search and rescue zone, even if there is a nearer port where they could be taken to.

But a document from the six states makes it difficult to understand what they want on disembarkation rules. They say disembarkation in Frontex operations must be set out in a Frontex operational plan "in accordance with international law and relevant bilateral agreements which comply with international law."

The latter would suggest that bilateral agreements in force between countries and North African states, such as that between Spain and Western African states, are not affected.

Two months ago, Italy and Malta were engaged in a stand-off over the 102 migrants rescued by the oil tanker Salamis. The Salamis refused to return the migrants to Libya and instead of sailing to Italy as it was ordered to, it demand to take the migrants to its intended destination in Malta. Malta opposed entry to the boat, and eventually Italy allowed the migrants to be disembarked.

Earlier this week, Opposition leader Simon Busuttil criticised the government for deciding to bring in 150 migrants rescued from the sea when their boat capsized, claiming the migrants should have been taken to the port closest to the point of rescue, in Lampedusa.

avatar
The EU wants to pick illegal immigrants from all the Mediterranean and dump them in the Mediterranean members without allowing them to proceed to other countries. They want to make us an illegal immigrants open centre as had been stated by Frattini. Out of the EU is the only way to save opurselves and our country for our future generations.
avatar
Was anyone in any doubt that Simon Busuttil will criticise the Government come rain or shine, even at the cost of inconsistency. We are now used to his childish tactics - a spoilt child who stamps his feet because he lost out. Why does he not join the Government and the people of Malta on one solid coherent front to protect Malta's interests on such matters as immigration. He criticised the government for attempted pushbacks. Yesterday France sent back a family of Kosovos for entering France illegally (please note the word illegal not irregular as the PN is now trying to portray - it is not me who is using the word illegal but Euronews and BBC World). Why can't we do the same for the masses that are running around in Malta after their asylum cases have been finally decided against them. That is international law. After all, in GONZIPN times they sent planeloads to Egypt and Tunisia back. So if Gonzi was legally correct to do so, why can't the PL do likewise? Where was Simon Busuttil then and where is he now to defend OUR interests.