On 12 June, Advocate General Ćapeta advised the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to grant the Syrian family's appeal against Frontex (WS and others v. Frontex C-679/23). This is a landmark case in which a Syrian family brought a claim for damages against Frontex for its role in the family's illegal pushback.
Today, Advocate General Ćapeta advised the CJEU to set aside the judgment under appeal and refer the case back to the General Court. The General Court had rejected the Syrian family's claim at first instance. If the CJEU follows this opinion, the General Court will have to rule on the case again. The Advocate Generals opinion makes clear that Frontex has a responsibility to ensure human rights at Europe's external borders.
The opinion of the Advocate General is not binding. It is an independent and impartial opinion, intended to assist the Court in its judgment. The CJEU can therefore choose whether or not to follow this opinion. The CJEU will rule in several months time.
Case of great European significance
The CJEU heard the case in the Grand Chamber on 4 February this year. By hearing the Grand Chamber, the Court endorsed the importance of the case. The case may set an important precedent. The Court will rule on Frontex's responsibility to respect human rights before, during and after border operations. The outcome of the case may also have implications for how Frontex and other EU institutions handle their monitoring and reporting duties in the future, as well as their obligations to take effective action against human rights violations.
The case takes place against the backdrop of ongoing and large-scale pushback along Europe's external borders, a practice systematically used by European member states to deny asylum seekers access to Europe. As the "eyes and ears" of the European Union, Frontex plays a crucial role in monitoring human rights, but this case calls into question whether that responsibility is actually being met.
Background
The Syrian family was deported to Turkey by means of an unlawful return operation in October 2016, shortly after their arrival in Greece and before they could apply for asylum. This deportation should not have taken place because the authorities had not issued a return decision on the Syrian family. This made the family victims of a so-called pushback. It denied them the right to seek asylum. In doing so, Frontex also violated the fundamental prohibition of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning asylum seekers or refugees to a country where they fear persecution or risk inhumane treatment. During the return operation, which was part of a joint operation by Frontex and the Greek authorities, the family, including children, were separated and escorted by border guards. This violated children's rights.
This is the first claim for damages brought against Frontex before the CJEU for its role in pushback operations, which are illegal and in violation of fundamental rights.
The Syrian family is being represented by Marieke van Eik, Lisa-Marie Komp and Flip Schüller of Prakken d'Oliveira, together with former Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston who is working pro bono with the legal team. Furthermore, the case is supported by the Dutch Council for Refugees, Stichting Democratie en Media and BKB.
Previously
- Grand Chamber hearing at the EU Court of Justice on Frontex’s role in illegal pushbacks
- Appeal lodged before CJEU in the action for damages against EU agency Frontex for their role in illegal pushback
- Frontex not accountable because Member States bear sole liabilty
- Judgment in court case against EU agency Frontex about illegal pushbacks
- EU agency Frontex sued over illegal pushbacks
- EU agency Frontex charged with illegal pushbacks